Russ Shafer-Landau provides us with two separate arguments about the death penalty in his academic book The Ethical Life, fundamental readings in ethics and moral problems. In the first argument, Justifying Legal Punishment, Igor Primoratz gives us substantive reasoning that opts favorably toward the necessity of the death penalty. Contrasting Primoratz, Stephen Nathanson, through An Eye for an Eye, provides us with an argument that hopes to show us that capital punishment, like murder, is also immoral and therefore, unjust. By the end of this essay, I intend to show that while capital punishment may not be the easy choice for a consequence and punishment to murder, it is, however, the necessary one.
SHOULD THE DOUBLE JEOPARDY RULE BE RETAINED? The rule of double jeopardy stands different within each individual state throughout Australia. Dating back in common law to the sixteenth century, the basic guideline to double jeopardy prohibits abuse of process through disallowing prosecution for the same or substantially similar offences in a case after an acquittal. (Austlii [1], 2016)
In Michael Levin’s “The Case for Torture”, he uses many cases of emotional appeal to persuade the reader that torture is necessary in extreme cases. There are many terms/statements that stick with the reader throughout the essay so that they will have more attachment to what is being said. Levin is particularly leaning to an audience based in the United States because he uses an allusion to reference an event that happened within the states and will better relate to the people that were impacted by it. The emotional appeals used in this essay are used for the purpose of persuading the reader to agree that in extreme instances torture is necessary and the United States should begin considering it as a tactic for future cases of extremity. One major eye catching factor of this essay is the repetitive use of words that imply certain stigmas.
Trial Decision This trial of President Harry S Truman attempts to malign him as a war criminal after the role he played in dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As Commander in Chief during World War II, President Truman made the final decision in whether the atomic bombs should or should not be dropped to put an end to Japanese resistance and bring the second world war to a close. It is being called into question whether the Japanese’s unwillingness to surrender called for such a severe response from the United States.
A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment.
In Michael Levin's The Case for Torture, Levin provides an argument in which he discusses the significance of inflicting torture to perpetrators as a way of punishment. In his argument, he dispenses a critical approach into what he believes justifies torture in certain situations. Torture is assumed to be banned in our culture and the thought of it takes society back to the brutal ages. He argues that societies that are enlightened reject torture and the authoritative figure that engage in its application risk the displeasure of the United States. In his perspective, he provides instances in which wrongdoers put the lives of innocent people at risk and discusses the aspect of death and idealism.
“In countries with a properly functioning legal system, the mob continues to exist, but it is rarely called upon to mete out capital punishment. The right to take human life belongs to the state. Not so in societies where weak courts and poor law enforcement are combined with intractable structural injustices. “In our present day society we as Americans have the cognitive dissonance that what the courts say are final, but also hold to the fact that the majority’s opinion rules.
The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.
There is space for arguments to determine to what extent torture can be accepted as the right choice of action and to what extent this is not applicable. One of the core features of this essay is that here
With millions of criminal convictions a year, more than two million people may end up behind bars(Gross). According to Samuel Gross reporter for The Washington Post, writes that also “even one percent amounts to tens of thousands of tragic [wrongful conviction] errors”(Gross). Citizens who are wrongfully convicted are incarcerated for a crime he or she did not commit. Many police officers, prosecutors, and judges are responsible for the verdict that puts innocents into prison. To be able to get exonerated many wait over a decade just to get there case looked at, not many are able to have the opportunity of getting out.
Annotated Bibliography Draft Student name : Haider Zafaryab Student number: 2360526 Thesis Statement : Capital Punishment is a very controversial topic around the globe. I believe that it does more harm than good and breeds violence in society. Source 1: Radelet, M. L., & Akers, R. L. (1996).
What is the “Due Process?” The due process is a fair Treatment through the normal Judicial system, especially as a citizen’s entitlement It respect all legal rights that are balances the power of law of land and protects the individual person. What does it do?
The Nuremberg Trials began three years later after the most relevant Nazi authorities were convicted of war crimes for four judges, who took legal decisions that previewed sterilization policies and ethnic cleansing in Hitler 's Germany. Judgement at Nuremberg, based on the real Case Katzenberger, is a demonstration of the efforts of a judge at the tribunal to determine how the defendants, and even also the German themselves, could have been involved in the Holocaust’s atrocities. Judgment at Nuremberg is a representation of the first trial, that is mainly based on justice principles and international law, of the country leaders that pursued threatening battles and were involved in crimes against humanity. This film is an overview of real events that highlights the conflict between morality enclosing both the behaviour of the defendants and the process of providing them with justice (Teach With Movies, 2015). These processes offered the opportunity of enhancing the debate between positivism and natural law, highlighting that the position taken would have significant consequences
Is the Genocide Convention an Adequate Tool to Prevent Future Genocides? Genocide and its prevention are critical and controversial topics for a long time. Though the word ‘genocide’ has not been used from a long time, but the act of genocide is a very old phenomenon. Among the important issues genocide is one of the serious topics for international communities to prevent it. So, the genocide convention is one of the possible and adequate tools which is created by the international community to prevent the future genocides as in the genocide convention of 1048, it has been declared as a crime to commit genocide, which contains some certain acts(Ferencz).
ABSTRACT “The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses.” Malcolm X
