Comparing 'Times To Assert American Values And Rough Justice'

When a writer presents an argument in a piece of writing, readers want to hear facts that support said argument. The readers want hard evidence and facts to support whatever you are trying to get them to believe in. In “Rough Justice”, by Alejandro Reyes and in “Time to Assert American Values” the authors described what happened to Michael Fay and give their opinion on the matter. In the article, “Rough Justice” by Alejandro Reyes, the author uses logos and unbiased writing to have the most sufficient and relevant argument.

It is common knowledge that crime exists all over the world and that justice and punishment may vary in different countries and societies. However, how justice and punishment is enforced in a society and globally is not common knowledge. Global justice refers to the belief that the world is unjust; while social justice, in a manner of speaking, refers to the fair treatment of everyone in a society.(“Social Justice”). Both social and global justice value human rights, remove inequality, and holds people accountable for fair practices.(“Social Justice”). If someone commits the same crime as another person, for example, they should receive the same punishment. That is what most people would be inclined to believe, but in the reading “The Moral Ambivalence of Crime in an Unjust Society” by Jeffrey Reiman, crime and justice is reviewed and defined in an uncommon way. Reiman discusses justice in a society where a crime was committed against him and his wife.

The Justice System is a topic that has stirred up a lot of controversy throughout time. Is it fair or is it not? Throughout hundreds of years, people have been treated justly and unjustly by this system. In this paper, I will only be discussing my opinion on America’s justice system. However, there are many other Justice Systems that I will not get to discuss. America’s Justice System is made up of 3 parts. The Law Enforcement, the Adjudication, and the Correction. The Justice System was created to control crime and punish those who commit illegal actions. Without this system, our country would crumble and fall. Although it has been unfair on numerous occasions, we still should respect the law.

Economic status is a relevant aspect in the experience of punishment. To an individual who sternly believes that the American justice system entitles every person to the same standard of due process, the previously mentioned idea is blasphemous. Unfortunately, the concept is false. The American justice system does not equally accommodate the needs of criminals placed on trial. Class is relevant in the experience of punishment only because economic inequality is barely recognized in the formulation and carrying out of prison sentences. The foundation of this unjust punishment is laid down at the trial, where disadvantaged individuals find themselves the victims of stereotypes, poor legal representation and haphazard verdicts. Once imprisoned, lower class criminals become immersed in an environment which mimics the troubled circumstances that originally led them to commit crime. Having received an ineffective sentence, convicts return to their poor communities and are expected to reintegrate into society without proper treatment.

When you present an argument in a piece of writing, readers want to hear facts that support said argument. The readers want hard evidence and facts to support whatever you are trying to get them to believe in. In “Rough Justice”, by Alejandro Reyes and in “Time to Assert American Values” the authors described what happened to Michael Fay and give their opinion on the matter. In the article, “Rough Justice” by Alejandro Reyes, the author uses logos and unbiased writing to have the most sufficient and relevant argument.

Michael Fay, caned for vandalism and was beaten in Singapore. This incident sparked a debate whether it was right or wrong. “Tough Justice” and “ Time to Assert American Values” was two articles that express their thoughts about the Michael Fay incident. After carefully analyzing the two texts, the reader realizes that the article “Rough Justice” has the most relevant and sufficient article to support it because the way the author uses logical appeals and facts.

Several themes emerge from the course Frontier Justice that match well with the major themes in Lawrence Friedman’s, seminal work, Crime and Punishment in American History. His main thesis is that judgements about crime and what to do about it come from a specific time and place. Part of his work addresses the history of criminal justice in which he calls, the history of power. He identifies the relationship between crime, criminal justice and American culture. When one looks at the frontier West and its dynamics, one can see how those in power bent and at times broke the law in order to achieve their aims. Culture played an important role in many part of the West which was a far different culture than the one found in the East. This different culture resulted from the dynamics of Westward expansion and had dramatic role in shaping the West. Certainly, the frontier West can be described as both a time and place.

The reader realizes the the article, “Rough Justice,” is the most relevant and sufficient article to support it because of the way of the author's strategies he/she uses throughout the text. The writer uses comments from a variety of reliable people from different places. For example, “The U.S. government, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. media took the opportunity to ridicule us, saying the sentence was too severe” (Reyes 181). Most quotes that are also explained emphasizes the comments from other credible people by demonstrating it from their perspectives.

Structural injustice in the criminal system can occur due to an individual’s implicit bias affecting their discretionary actions; however, the central question rests in who bears the moral responsibility of this injustice? In my opinion, individuals and sovereign institutions share the moral responsibility for the structural injustice that results when implicit bias influences discretionary actions in the criminal justice system, but the greater responsibility is vested in officials with authority who possess the capability to prevent future inequities. In support of my position, I will explore why individuals do not bear all the blame, why sovereign institutions are more accountable, and I will address the counterargument that the

Most Americans harbor the assumption that their criminal equity framework is reasonable and blind. Inside that from the earlier hallucination, a presumption is made that no individual might ever be sentenced for a wrongdoing that he or she didn't submit (Huff, 2002; Marquis, 2005). The possibility that a free native could be unfairly sentenced to jail or executed by the State is oppositely contradicted to the idea of prudent treatment expected in the United States.

“That’s why the whole country is in chaos: drugs, violence, unemployment and homelessness” (Reyes 181). “Rough Justice” by Alejandro Reyes talks about how the caning of Michael Fey was a well-made decision. However, “Time to Assert American Values” published by the New York Times argues that the government of Singapore’s decision of using a caning method of punishment was immoral. After carefully analyzing the two texts, the reader realizes that “Rough Justice” has the most relevant and sufficient evidence to support it because of the way the author uses empirical, logical, and anecdotal evidence.

One man’s definition of justice may not resemble what others believe. It has been shown throughout the history of the United States that justice is a flexible term. When the colonist came over to America they believed they were just in conquering the Native Americans, however, the Native Americans believed they too were just when they fought back against the colonist, killing their women and children. The African slaves rose up and fought for the rights that were stripped away by the colonist, yet the Colonist believed that since the slaves did not believe in their God this behavior is acceptable. In the short story, “Cruelty the Human Heart”, the author O’Neil De Noux reveals to us Nathan Grey’s distorted view of justice; showing

Matt Taibbi’s “The Divide” uses facts to contradict the American idea of a fair justice system. Taibbi presents us with an unsteadily statistics: while poverty increases, crime decreases, and the jail population has increased 600% since 1991. Moreover, Taibbi states in which while many are being prosecuted, others are not. On the surface, our justice system may seem quintessential. However, Taibbi reveals a more biased American court than one may expect.

These fluctuations in criminal justice policies are not just in local governing bodies; these changes are an effort to adapt to a new technologically based modern age, and that goal of adaptation radiates to all ends of the earth, thereby having a global reach. As all societies, and populations of people alter and change, and belief systems ebb and flow, the rules and laws that govern such people must change with them. It is imperative that a governing system stay current, for without an ever-changing system of behavioral structure then those societies race faster toward

Q1. According to the text, the American criminal justice system is fundamentally based upon the philosophy of retribution rather than rehabilitation. Americans have had their anger against criminal behavior fueled by law-and-order political rhetoric; prisons are big 'business' in America; and the primary ideological model for dealing with crime is taking criminals off the street, rather than reducing the number of criminals through effective social policies. Victim's rights are conceptualized as a zero-sum game which can only be won by severely punishing the guilty. The emphasis on retribution over rehabilitation is why America still has the death penalty, in contrast to the other major Western industrialized democracies.