Punishment like almost everything else has a purpose. Punishment has six purposes and most sentences that are handed out to offenders are a mixture of several of these. Deterrence is an aim of punishment. With deterrence it is hoped that the punishment will dishearten the person from repeating the crime. It is even hoped that the fear of a punishment will stop other people from perpetrating crimes. Reform is an aim of punishment. With reform punishment should not only stop people from continuing to commit crimes, but should help them to turn into responsible members of society. Protection is an aim of punishment. Punishment by locking someone up is a way of protecting society from the anti-social behaviour of some people. Particular types of punishment also attempt to protect the offender as well as society. Reparation is an aim of punishment. If someone disobeys the law they must be prepared to make amends, in other words, compensate the victim or the society in some way. Retribution is an aim of punishment. Retribution is based on the idea of an eye for an eye. If an individual has done something wrong they should be given a punishment that is suitable for the crime they committed. Vindication is an aim of punishment. Vindication suggests that for people to live together the law must be respected and viewed as being fair. At present capital punishment is not applied
The albatross is described to be "a Christian soul" and it was acclaimed at great lengths: "We hailed it in God's name." The mariner and the crew are extremely delighted to see something alive amidst the escalating ice
Crime and Punishment The albatross "At length did cross an Albatross." Against the darkening grey fog, the bird glided across in pure white. It stood out in contrast. It was made to be something celestial. Destined to come, it was able to proceed through fog that would have usually delayed the travels of any creature. Despite unideal conditions it proceeded through an unclear phase of mist. The bird was a "Christian soul" as they "hailed it in God's name." It was a messenger of God, a disciple and follower of Christianity. Being an omen of good luck, it heightened our spirits and eradicateed all our doubts. The majesty of the albatross is seen during day as it flies and follows. While at night it shimmers a white glow, a genuine coat of radiance. Despite its grandeur and beauty, its time was certain to come. Just as it had been destined to come, it had been destined to go. With one random, unmotivated action, the bolt of a cross-bow whizzed into the albatross sending it into eternal sleep. It was no other than the mariner himself who had shot the albatross. What about this description would make its killing akin to murder? To sacrilege. The albatross is described to be "a Christian soul" and it was acclaimed at great lengths: "We hailed it in God's name." The mariner and the crew are extremely delighted to see something alive amidst the escalating ice that
Capital Punishment - Justice or Murder? - Joe should never be set free, after 20 years of his life sentence, to go on and murder again
Capital Punishment : Justice or Murder? Chris Baguley "Joe should never be set free, after 20 years of his life sentence, to go on and murder again" Capital Punishment is argued about throughout the world. It is disputed as to whether it is humane or, alternatively, if it protects innocent lives. Capital Punishment is the lawful sentence of death pronounced by the courts for a variety of serious crimes. Some countries do not have this punishment, such as Britain. However, eighty-nine countries are able to use Capital Punishment as a sentence. It is disputed as to whether or not this is too harsh. Through examination of the questionnaire, which I carried out, I discovered that seven out of the twenty people I asked believed in Capital Punishment. Out of the thirteen people who disagreed or did not know if they agreed with Capital Punishment, all agreed it was either inhumane or not an issue people should be able to decide on. Out of twenty people eleven decided, "a life for a life," is fair. Everyone agreed that our justice system in Britain is wrong and should be changed. Sixteen people said that the most humane form of Capital punishment is the gas chamber. A majority also felt that bringing the death penalty back into force in Britain would help prevent various crimes. These people all shared the same opinion, that criminals on death row should be given the choice of
Our aim of for both questions is to explore the guilty conduct required of each defendant before s/he can be convicted of a criminal offence.
In order to address the two problems set out in this assignment, it is necessary firstly to identify the key issues that arise from the questions. Our aim of for both questions is to explore the guilty conduct required of each defendant before s/he can be convicted of a criminal offence. The accused must be proved to have brought about a prohibited situation (through an act or omission) and must be proved to have done so in a manner indicating guilt or blameworthiness. Under the law of England and Wales, there must be a coincidence of AR and MR in a point of law and time1. These two elements of a criminal offence are conventionally labelled Actus Reus and Mens Rea. When discussing below, the liability of the each defendant, I will only be considering the actus reus (AR) of the crime. The elements of the crime may not be easily identified because there are several contributory causes of a result. The chain of causation can be broken by an intervening act, which must be in the nature of a voluntary act, but the chain cannot be broken by further actions or by an omission. Furthermore, the abnormality of the victim does not break the chain of causation despite the fact that his reactions were not foreseeable. I shall be addressing these issues in detail when considering the liability of each defendant, looking in terms of both the prosecution and defense. * * * * * * * * * * *
The three main theories that will be discussed in this essay will stem from the Materialism perspective, the Idealism perspective and the Dualism perspective. The materialists' beliefs are opposed to the idea that there is a life after death
An undeniable statement by all, philosophers or not, is that our earthly life will one day cease to exist and every living individual will one day meet their death. A simple definition of death would be the complete annihilation of one self, where the life or awareness one would feel in their brief life would be no more. Basically, the opposite to life. However, even the definition of death may be open to argument by many. Some may believe that death is not the end of life or not the opposite of life. Some may believe that we do live on through the passing on of our genes or through stories being told about you after the process of death. Some may believe that we are reincarnated after our soul leaves the body. Some may believe that the soul is an eternal entity and never stops living. All of these are however open to argument. There is not even factual proof that a soul even exists so how would it be possible for such an entity to hold so much value in this argument. The three main theories that will be discussed in this essay will stem from the Materialism perspective, the Idealism perspective and the Dualism perspective. The materialists' beliefs are opposed to the idea that there is a life after death and the other theories support the idea of a life after death. I shall also discuss in this essay the possibilities of reincarnation and if it possible to have more than
In This Essay I will explain Buddhists and Christians views on life after death. I will explain why they believe in the afterlife through reincarnation (Buddhists) and resurrection (Christians).
INTRODUCTION In This Essay I will explain Buddhists and Christians views on life after death. I will explain why they believe in the afterlife through reincarnation (Buddhists) and resurrection (Christians). The 3 main views on life after death come from 3 different groups, Secular (non-religious views), Sacred (religious views), and finally humanist views (people who believe only in the human ability). Most people only have one of these two beliefs on life after death. Firstly "...Death is the annihilation of the conscience..." This is trying to get through that there is nothing after death it is the end. The second is "...death is the passage of the mind or soul to another place or dimension..." This means there is an afterlife your soul ends up in a new body or in another dimension (i.e. paradise). PART 1 Firstly I will explain what happens at a Christians funeral. Often when a Christian is near death a priest and rubs the cross on to the person's forehead. The priest does this to comfort the dying person and let them know their sins have been forgiven, This is also usually the time when they have their last communion. Christian funerals are usually sad events although they're maybe a party to celebrate the person's life afterwards. The deceased is usually dressed in the clothes they have requested (before they died!) or that their family has chosen for them. Once
Essay: how does Peter Medak gain the viewers sympathy for Derek Bentley in the film Let Him Have It? The word bias means that the view of one person is distorted,
Media Coursework Let Him Have It! Essay: how does Peter Medak gain the viewer's sympathy for Derek Bentley in the film "Let Him Have It?" The word bias means that the view of one person is distorted, in the way that it is one-sided viewpoint. Peter Medak used this to gain the viewers sympathy this can be achieve by sudden cuts to the persons face looking down or another shot which seems like they know they are going to get it trouble. Peter Medak uses this technique for Derek by the way camera shots, music, lighting and what the Derek says and does. These points will be my main focus during this essay. I believe that Peter Medak wanted to make this because he wanted to show that Derek's punishment was unfair and he was wrongly hung this was an injustice. I also think Peter Medak used this film to show how wrong capital punishment was and how this lad to an innocent man being killed as it wasn't Derek who pulled the trigger and killed the police man also because Craig was only 16, he could not be punished and that was also an in justice. There was much speculation over the fact that two wrongs don't make a right and that people ponder the idea that if some one was killed the person who committed the crime should also be killed this works out to be unfair as if they had done nothing wrong where as on the other hand if Derek was imprisoned they could appeal the conviction
Introduction: I have been given a data set containing 240 data items containing information relating to driving tests. My aim is to investigate what factors influence a successful outcome from different fields contained in the data sheet: * Gender of the Driver * Number of 1hr lessons * Number of minor of mistakes * The driving instructor Most of the fields shall be investigated to see if there is any pattern connected with successful drivers apart from. * The Day and Time the test was taken out Initial Analysis: The Initial Analysis of the entire data set shows that there is: * 116 Male drivers. * 124-Females > 60 Learners for Instructor A > 100 Learners for Instructor B > 40 Learners for Instructor C > 40 Learners for Instructor D The Mean number of: * Minor mistakes are 16.78 * 1Hour Lessons is 23.03 Hypothesis One: For this data set Men on average made fewer minor mistakes than women in their driving test. Planning: In order to investigate this hypothesis I will take a random sample of 30 male drivers and 30 female drivers. And compare the number of minor mistakes they made in their driving test. To make this comparison I will construct box and whisker diagrams. Sampling: To get random samples from the data set so I can keep this a reliable investigation by using the box and whisker diagrams I shall- Use Microsoft Excel, to begin I will number
Let's Give murderers What they Deserve - the Death penalty.Explain the arguments for and against, and where the views of your chosen religion fit in.
Religion and Criminal Justice Lets Give murderers What they Deserve - the Death penalty. Explain the arguments for and against, and where the views of your chosen religion fit in. 'Whosoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed' Genesis 9:6 There are many arguments both for and against capital punishment. Some people argue for capital punishment, and often quote the verse above. Others argue against it, and say things like 'What if an innocent person is killed?', which has happened a number of times. I do believe that society should be kept safe, and murderers should be given what they deserve - the death penalty, but only if there is conclusive evidence that the suspect did actually commit the murder. Even though I hold this belief, most other Christians would disagree with me, and say that prisoners should be given a chance to reform. However, I think that if someone has committed a crime serious enough to warrant being put to death, they probably will already be so 'hardened', that they wouldn't be able to reform. In addition to the above, the following verse from the bible supports capital punishment: 'Anyone who hits a person and kills him must be put to death.' Exodus 21:12 The bible is ambiguous when it come to capital punishment. Some parts speak out in favour of it, and others against it, which is why so many Christians have so many
Capital Punishment A strong case can be made in principle for and against capital punishment. The argument in favor is based on justice and the nature of a moral community, which requires that each person respect the life and liberty of others. Those who commit vicious crimes destroy the basis on which a moral community rests and forfeit their rights to citizenship and even to life itself. The argument against is based on love and the nature of an ideal community in which forgiveness and the hope for redemption are guiding aims. Protection of the innocent requires that criminals be isolated, perhaps permanently. Just punishment is appropriate, but love never gives up even on those who show no love. The most compelling argument against capital punishment, however, is based on its actual administration in our society: the risk of killing an innocent person, disproportionate infliction on the poor and minorities, weakness of the deterrence argument, failure to recognize that destructive life histories of criminals may have damaged their humanity to the point that it is unfair to hold them fully accountable for their wrongdoing, and so on. Life imprisonment without parole serves the same purposes as capital punishment at less cost without the practical disadvantages and injustices of its actual practice. Churches should call for an immediate moratorium and work for the