"We ARE the People" "Awareness of Individual Rights" "Honesty" "Respect Personal Opinions"
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Pencils Kill People
Self Defense laws
So the question here is "When is it legally excusable for someone to use deadly force against another?". When I hear this questions I immediately think of self defense laws that have been practiced in thousands of court cases all over the country. This seems to be the only fair reason for someone to use lethal force. I would consider that it is best that when people are defending themselves that they use a non-lethal weapon but not every situation has a non-lethal weapon available. For example, some people carry pepper spray and security guards can carry a taser. If they were attacked and used these weapons there would be no question that they were not trying to kill the person. If you happen to be a person that does not feel threatened you may not carry any kind of weapon and in the event that you are attacked you grab the closest weapon in sight to defend yourself like a knife, or baseball bat. When you defended yourself you may accidentally kill the person. I believe this is fair under the circumstances that you intended to defend yourself and did not mean to kill the person.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57406291/video-shows-zimmerman-with-cops-dad-speaks-out/
Under the circumstances that Trayvon Martin was shot by George Zimmerman, I don't believe this was an act of self defense.
Martin, 17 year old walking home from convenient store |
Also, now that I have read more into this case, I can see that George Zimmerman was the neighborhood watchman, but he has a record for violence. In July, 15th 2005 He was charged with battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting an officer with violence during a friend's underage drinking arrest. Obviously, he is not the angel that some are trying to state that he is.
Zimmerman arrested in 2005 for battery on a peace officer. |
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/20/george-zimmerman-s-911-call-before-trayvon-martin-s-death-audio.html
Apparently Martin was on the phone with his girlfriend who told him to run away from Zimmerman because Martin knew he was being followed. Zimmerman decided to take the law into his own hands and shoot Martin without any sign of force. Zimmerman should not be carrying a weapon just because he is a neighborhood watchman. Yes he had a license to carry it but he used it in an act of murder not self defense. He is a vigilante and should suffer the consequences for using excessive and lethal force on an innocent minor. I believe that lethal force should only be used in the act of self defense and lethal only by accident (not intentionally killing the person when defending yourself). It is a shame when aggressors like Zimmerman try to use this defense to hide their actions because they want some kind of empowerment or recognition because they feel they deserve it. I believe Self defense is the only reason to use lethal force but in cases like this it is not applicable.
Friday, March 23, 2012
FIRE ARMS POLICY
I feel that a good firearms law should grant the freedoms afforded to our citizens in The Constitutions but at the same time treat those who use their firearms against another with the greatest level. I struggle with the Idea of people walking around "strapt," but I am a firm believer that our first ten amendments are sacred and the second affords people the right to bear arms. Also because there are subcultures in America where guns are woven into their Identity and a father teaching a son how to shoot and hunt is a coming of age "ceremony" for allot of adolescent males. I do not believe that anyone has the right to take that identity away from them. I absolutely believe that every person with a gun should always have the duty to retreat in any circumstance before they use their weapon. And any kind of incident when another human being kills another should always be investigated with suspicion. There would be no "make my day" laws and if you murder an unarmed innocent person(whether he looks suspicious to you or not) you will pay the price. Gun owners would have a "DUTY" to protect life. That would mean that if an accident happens they are still liable for the death that was caused by their doing and their firearm.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Our Empire
A group is its own worst enemy
I really think that overall our group came together and did a great job on our presentation. I would rate myself an 6 or 7 on our presentation. I feel that I did enough research to not only be able to present my part but I was also able to answer questions from the audience. I like our group dynamics and don’t think I would change much. I do worry sometimes about how our group is affected by one members absence but when they are in class they add to our group and came through on the presentation. Showing up and on time would be rated 10. Doing fair share of work and responding to emails would be rated 9 and conflict and being present in the group would be rated 8.
Here’s a link to a site that I think really does a good job at coming up with rules for an effective group. http://cte.uwaterloo.ca/teaching_resources/tips/teamwork_skills.html Communication is one of the most important rules of working in a group, Individual responsibility and accountability as well as Management and organization.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Midterm Reflection
When given this midterm assignment I almost freaked out because I feared that only half of our group would do their part and the other half would fall short. I thought for sure that I would have to compensate for someone who didn't do their work. So I studied every aspect of the death penalty and did 3 blogs to make sure I had enough info on it. This is a reflection of my obsessiveness and my lack of faith in others. When we got up to do our presentation everyone did great and taught me a lesson in life to have a little faith in my fellow students.
Since I did put so much into making sure everything was covered I of course put my contribution at a 10 but I didn't need to because of my fellow country men and women-ALL HAIL OUR SUPREME EMPEROR.
I don't think I would like to remove anyone I would like a couple of them to pick up the slack and get more involved but I believe that if these persons tried harder and showed some initiative they could be a valuable asset to this great nation of ours.
A. I believe our group needs to improve when it comes to showing up and doing the work I believe we rate at a 5.
B.I believe that some members need to start doing their fair share we rate at a 6.
C. When we are their we are on time 9.
D. I believe we communicate pretty good 8.
E We haven't really had much conflict. 8.
F. I believe that our group needs to work on not being distracted and paying attention fully to our nation state game. 3.
I feel that in need to be less overbearing to foster unity in our group.
Five rules for having an effective group:
1. Communication! Communication! Communication!
2. Be focused on the project at hand.
3. Compromise is vital.
4. Respect everyone's point of view
5. "Fortune Favours The Bold" Think outside the box
http://www.netplaces.com/managing-people/work-group-dynamics/effective-teamwork.htm
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Should it stay or should it go??
The ultimate price
Death is the ultimate price u can pay, sometimes when a crime is carried out that is so horrendous capital punishment is the only option. The first death penalty laws date as far back as the eighteenth century from the code of King Hammurabi of
http://youtu.be/TVMho2cP1NE
http://youtu.be/v3Afr-zI8Ys
FOR OR AGAINST?
Since being given this midterm assignment I have been researching Capital Punishment all week. Most people have a passionate belief whether they are for or against it. I am going to try to be as objective as I possible can in this blog. First from what I have gathered people who are for capital punishment for the most part believe:
- A person who has committed a crime like killing or raping another person should be given death penalty, which is as severe punishment as the act. It is said that when a criminal is given a capital punishment, it dissuades others in the society from committing such serious crimes. They would refrain from such crimes due to fear of losing their lives. This would definitely help in reducing crime rate in society.
- If a criminal is jailed, he may again commit the same crime after being released from prison. Giving him capital punishment would make sure that the society is safe from being attacked by criminals. It seems to be an appropriate punishment for serial killers and for those who continue to commit crimes even after serving imprisonment.
- Some believe that instead of announcing life imprisonment for the convicts, where they would have to live a futile life behind closed bars, it is better to kill them. It is said that imprisoning someone is more expensive than executing him. Rather than spending on a person who may again commit terrifying crime, it is better to put him to death.
- Capital punishment is equated as revenge for pain and suffering that the criminal inflicted on the victim. Some people strongly believe that a person who has taken the life of another person does not have a right to live. Sentencing such a criminal can give relief to the family members of the victim that their loved one has obtained justice.
- It is also important for the safety of fellow prison inmates and guards, as people who commit horrifying crimes like murder are believed to have a violent personality and may, in future, attack someone during imprisonment. These reasons emphasize the importance of capital punishment for the betterment of human society. However, there is another section of people who believe that it is an immoral and unethical act of violence.
- If we execute a person, what is the difference between us and the criminal who has committed the horrifying crime of killing another individual.
- Capital punishment is not always just and appropriate. Usually, it has been seen that poor people have to succumb to death penalty as they cannot afford good lawyers to defend their stance. There are very rare cases of rich people being pronounced capital punishment. Also, an individual from minority communities are more likely to be given death penalty.
- Every human being is entitled to receive a second chance in life. Putting a convict behind bars is always a logical option than killing him, as there is a chance that he may improve. People who have served life sentences are reported to have bettered their earlier ways of living and have made worthwhile contribution to the society.
- There is also a chance that an individual is innocent and is wrongly charged for a crime he has never committed. There have been cases where individuals were released after being given death sentence, because they were proved innocent. There are also cases where a person's innocence was proved after he was put to death. Hence, it is best to avoid executing a person.
- It is reported that there is no relation between capital punishment and crime rate i.e giving death penalty does not decrease crime rate in the society. Crimes are prevalent in countries where capital punishment exists and also where it has been abolished.
- The estimated cost of keeping all prisoners currently on death row in California is about 143 million dollars a year. To keep those same prisoners in prison for life without possibility of parole would be about 11.5 million a year, saving the state roughly 131.5 million dollars annually.
Capital Punishment...an eye for an eye
So I ask the question... Why is capital punishment wrong? Because it violates our constitutional rights? If you have taken another persons life, why should you be able to continue living out yours.... especially with all the amenities, with the exception of walking the streets? If you have taken the life of another person and are found guilty by a jury of your peers, then you should be condemned. As far as I am concerned there is no rehabilitation for these convicted of capital offenses. Why should we continue to provide for these people for the rest of their natural life?
Currently there are 34 states that employ the death penalty. One of the largest issues aside from Constitution rights is the cost of putting someone to death. With the lengthy appeal processes and what it costs to try a death penalty case many critics believe it is less expensive to house the convict for the duration. The average cost to convict in a death penalty case ranges from one to three million dollars currently, and the life sentence carries a significantly lower price tag.
The facts are the facts and everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter.... however if your loved ones life was taken.... how would you think justice would be appropriately served? click here to view fact sheets on the death penalty
Is the Death Penalty Necessary?!!
Mahatma Ghandi |
“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind”
Some argue "Absolutely" and others "Absolutely Not". In my research I could not find a definite answer. I believe this topic is far more complicated than the black and white thinking, this falls in the gray area. An example the Fifth Amendment, which the Court believes strongly implies that the Framers did not intend to prevent the use of capital punishment. The 5th Amendment guarantees that no one shall be deprived of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." One could argue that the court is not depriving one of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. That the person themselves did that when they committed the punishable crime. You could also argue that the criminal was given a fair due process of law, which resulted in a sentence to death. "Supporters of the death penalty, however, assert that there are some crimes which are such an affront to human decency and to the norms of society that an individual who commits them surrenders his or her right to live."
This brings us to the 14th Amendment: Rights Guaranteed Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process and Equal Protection. The equal application of the law. People are making the argument that this amendment is being broken by the unfair application of the death penalty. Two people can commit the same crime and their fate lies in the hands of the prosecutor not the law.
People argue that the lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment. They maintain the opinion that evil should not be returned with state-sanctioned evil. "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.-Mahatma Gandhi
In this nation's ongoing effort to strike the appropriate balance between liberty and order, the death penalty forces each of us to consider fundamental questions about nature of political society, the rights and responsibilities of individuals and the extent of governmental power.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
BAD PLAN FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD
Recently in
http://youtu.be/LVb29M5zBAs
LIST OF EXONERATED MEN! HOW MANY INNOCENT HAVE DIED?
My first thought after seeing this was "how many innocent people have "We The People murdered?" No justice system is ever perfect, that is why the finality of Capital Punishment scares me. I absolutely believe that some people deserve nothing but death for their crimes, but not at the cost of innocent lives. Vladimer Lenin was once said to remark "better 100 innocent men die than one guilty man go free." A perfect reflection of the state for which his Bolshevik revolution would create The Soviet Union. Growing up as a child in the 1980's I am old enough to remember the threat of Communism and I was told by my parents that it and all of its policies were "EVIL" and they were the antithesis to the American way. I was told that while life isn't fair I lived in one of the most free and fair societies in the world. I was led to believe that I lived in a country that believed in civil rights, that believed that an innocent life was important. I was led to believe that I lived in a society opposed to the ideology of Vladimir Lenin. I was led to believe that I lived in a country that believed better to not put a hundred guilty men to death than murder one innocent man. Why did my parents lie to me?
Saturday, March 10, 2012
History of Capital Punishment
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/part-i-history-death-penalty#EarlyDeathPenaltyLaws
- Mental Illness and Intellectual Disability
In 1986, the Supreme Court banned the execution of insane persons and required an adversarial process for determining mental competency in Ford v. Wainwright (477 U.S. 399). In Penry v. Lynaugh (492 U.S. 584 (1989)), the Court held that executing persons with "mental retardation" was not a violation of the Eighth Amendment. However, in 2002 in Atkins v. Virginia, (536 U.S. 304), the Court held that a national consensus had evolved against the execution of the "mentally retarded" and concluded that such a punishment violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. - Race
Race became the focus of the criminal justice debate when the Supreme Court held in Batson v. Kentucky (476 U.S. 79 (1986)) that a prosecutor who strikes a disproportionate number of citizens of the same race in selecting a jury is required to rebut the inference of discrimination by showing neutral reasons for the strikes.Race was again in the forefront when the Supreme Court decided the 1987 case, McCleskey v. Kemp (481 U.S. 279). McCleskey argued that there was racial discrimination in the application of Georgia's death penalty, by presenting a statistical analysis showing a pattern of racial disparities in death sentences, based on the race of the victim. The Supreme Court held, however, that racial disparities would not be recognized as a constitutional violation of "equal protection of the law" unless intentional racial discrimination against the defendant could be shown. - Juveniles
In the late 1980s, the Supreme Court decided three cases regarding the constitutionality of executing juvenile offenders. In 1988, in Thompson v. Oklahoma (487 U.S. 815), four Justices held that the execution of offenders aged fifteen and younger at the time of their crimes was unconstitutional. The fifth vote was Justice O'Connor's concurrence, which restricted Thompson only to states without a specific minimum age limit in their death penalty statute. The combined effect of the opinions by the four Justices and Justice O'Connor in Thompson is that no state without a minimum age in its death penalty statute can execute someone who was under sixteen at the time of the crime.The following year, the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the death penalty for crimes committed at age sixteen or seventeen. (Stanford v. Kentucky, and Wilkins v. Missouri (collectively, 492 U.S. 361)). At present, 19 states with the death penalty bar the execution of anyone under 18 at the time of his or her crime.In 1992, the United States ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 6(5) of this international human rights doctrine requires that the death penalty not be used on those who committed their crimes when they were below the age of 18. However, in doing so but the U.S. reserved the right to execute juvenile offenders. The United States is the only country with an outstanding reservation to this Article. International reaction has been highly critical of this reservation, and ten countries have filed formal objections to the U.S. reservation.In March 2005, Roper v. Simmons, the United States Supreme Court declared the practice of executing defendants whose crimes were committed as juveniles unconstitutional in Roper v. Simmons.The Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of executing someone who claimed actual innocence inHerrera v. Collins (506 U.S. 390 (1993)). Although the Court left open the possibility that the Constitution bars the execution of someone who conclusively demonstrates that he or she is actually innocent, the Court noted that such cases would be very rare. The Court held that, in the absence of other constitutional violations, new evidence of innocence is no reason for federal courts to order a new trial. The Court also held that an innocent inmate could seek to prevent his execution through the clemency process, which, historically, has been "the 'fail safe' in our justice system." Herrera was not granted clemency, and was executed in 1993.Since Herrera, concern regarding the possibility of executing the innocent has grown. Currently, over 115 people in 25 states have been released from death row because of innocence since 1973. In November, 1998 Northwestern University held the first-ever National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty, in Chicago, Illinois. The Conference, which drew nationwide attention, brought together 30 of these wrongfully convicted inmates who were exonerated and released from death row. Many of these cases were discovered not as the result of the justice system, but instead as the result of new scientific techniques, investigations by journalism students, and the work of volunteer attorneys. These resources are not available to the typical death row inmate.In January 2000, after Illinois had released 13 innocent inmates from death row in the same time that it had executed 12 people, Illinois Governor George Ryan declared a moratorium on executions and appointed a blue-ribbon Commission on Capital Punishment to study the issue.Support for the death penalty has fluctuated throughout the century. According to Gallup surveys, in 1936 61% of Americans favored the death penalty for persons convicted of murder. Support reached an all-time low of 42% in 1966. Throughout the 70s and 80s, the percentage of Americans in favor of the death penalty increased steadily, culminating in an 80% approval rating in 1994. A May 2004 Gallup Poll found that a growing number of Americans support a sentence of life without parole rather than the death penalty for those convicted of murder. Gallup found that 46% of respondents favor life imprisonment over the death penalty, up from 44% in May 2003. During that same time frame, support for capital punishment as an alternative fell from 53% to 50%. The poll also revealed a growing skepticism that the death penalty deters crime, with 62% of those polled saying that it is not a deterrent. These percentages are a dramatic shift from the responses given to this same question in 1991, when 51% of Americans believed the death penalty deterred crime and only 41% believed it did not. Only 55% of those polled responded that they believed the death penalty is implemented fairly, down from 60% in 2003. When not offered an alternative sentence, 71% supported the death penalty and 26% opposed. The overall support is about the same as that reported in 2002, but down from the 80% support in 1994. (Gallup Poll News Service, June 2, 2004). (See also, DPIC's report, Sentencing for Life: American's Embrace Alternatives to the Death Penatly)In the 1970s, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), representing more then 10 million conservative Christians and 47 denominations, and the Moral Majority, were among the Christian groups supporting the death penalty. NAE's successor, the Christian Coalition, also supports the death penalty. Today, Fundamentalist and Pentecostal churches support the death penalty, typically on biblical grounds, specifically citing the Old Testament. (Bedau, 1997). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regards the question as a matter to be decided solely by the process of civil law, and thus neither promotes nor opposes capital punishment.Although traditionally also a supporter of capital punishment, the Roman Catholic Church now oppose the death penalty. In addition, most Protestant denominations, including Baptists, Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and the United Church of Christ, oppose the death penalty. During the 1960s, religious activists worked to abolish the death penalty, and continue to do so today.In recent years, and in the wake of a recent appeal by Pope John Paul II to end the death penalty, religious organizations around the nation have issued statements opposing the death penalty. Complete texts of many of these statements can be found at www.deathpenaltyreligious.org.
8 U.S.C. 1342 | Murder related to the smuggling of aliens. |
18 U.S.C. 32-34 | Destruction of aircraft, motor vehicles, or related facilities resulting in death. |
18 U.S.C. 36 | Murder committed during a drug-related drive-by shooting. |
18 U.S.C. 37 | Murder committed at an airport serving international civil aviation. |
18 U.S.C. 115(b)(3) [by cross-reference to 18 U.S.C. 1111] | Retaliatory murder of a member of the immediate family of law enforcement officials. |
18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 245, 247 | Civil rights offenses resulting in death. |
18 U.S.C. 351 [by cross-reference to 18 U.S.C. 1111] | Murder of a member of Congress, an important executive official, or a Supreme Court Justice. |
18 U.S.C. 794 | Espionage. |
18 U.S.C. 844(d), (f), (i) | Death resulting from offenses involving transportation of explosives, destruction of |
18 U.S.C. 924(i) | Murder committed by the use of a firearm during a crime of violence or a drug-trafficking crime. |
18 U.S.C. 930 | Murder committed in a Federal Government facility. |
18 U.S.C. 1091 | Genocide. |
18 U.S.C. 1111 | First-degree murder. |
18 U.S.C. 1114 | Murder of a Federal judge or law enforcement official. |
18 U.S.C. 1116 | Murder of a foreign official. |
18 U.S.C. 1118 | Murder by a Federal prisoner. |
18 U.S.C. 1119 | Murder of a U.S. national in a foreign country. |
18 U.S.C. | Murder by an escaped Federal prisoner already sentenced to life imprisonment. |
18 U.S.C. 1121 | Murder of a State or local law enforcement official or other person aiding in a Federal investigation; murder of a State correctional officer. |
18 U.S.C. 1201 | Murder during a kidnapping. |
18 U.S.C. 1203 | Murder during a hostage taking. |
18 U.S.C. 1503 | Murder of a court officer or juror. |
18 U.S.C. 1512 | Murder with the intent of preventing testimony by a witness, victim, or informant. |
18 U.S.C. 1513 | Retaliatory murder of a witness, victim, or informant. |
18 U.S.C. 1716 | Mailing of injurious articles with intent to kill or resulting in death. |
18 U.S.C. 1751 [by cross-reference to 18 U.S.C. 1111] | Assassination or kidnapping resulting in the death of the President or Vice President. |
18 U.S.C. 1958 | Murder for hire. |
18 U.S.C. 1959 | Murder involved in a racketeering offense. |
18 U.S.C. 1992 | Willful wrecking of a train resulting in death. |
18 U.S.C. 2113 | Bank-robbery-related murder or kidnapping. |
18 U.S.C. 2119 | Murder related to a carjacking. |
18 U.S.C. 2245 | Murder related to rape or child molestation. |
18 U.S.C. 2251 | Murder related to sexual exploitation of children. |
18 U.S.C. 2280 | Murder committed during an offense against maritime navigation. |
18 U.S.C. 2281 | Murder committed during an offense against a maritime fixed platform. |
18 U.S.C. 2332 | Terrorist murder of a U.S. national in another country. |
18 U.S.C. 2332a | Murder by the use of a weapon of mass destruction. |
18 U.S.C. 2340 | Murder involving torture. |
18 U.S.C. 2381 | Treason. |
21 U.S.C. 848(e) | Murder related to a continuing criminal enterprise or related murder of a Federal, State, or local law enforcement officer. |
49 U.S.C. 1472-1473 | Death resulting from aircraft hijacking. |