Condemnation Technique

In accordance with his view, I believe that Jimmy’s family are “permitted” to carry the desires because it only seems “fair” for them if the wrongdoer is brought to justice in proportion to the harm he caused. Under this situation, wrongdoers can symbolically receive their suffering as a message. Nevertheless, it is difficult for people to act out their retributive hatreds and Murphy supports this idea with three justifications. The first reason is that “it is impossible to get even”. Undeniably, we are unable to calculate a proper equivalent. For example, in the case of Jimmy, if the parents wish to get even, they might propose to execute the killer themselves, which is acknowledged as morally wrong and would not be approved under the law. The second reason is that “it is too costly to get even”. Just as the example above, if Jimmy’s parents in fact have killed Jake with their hands, they will pay a price for their passion like going to jail. The third reason Murphy brings up is that “moral decency imposes constraints” which has been explained in the above case (Murphy, 104). In agreement with Murphy’s theories, I believe that retributive hatred is a proper response to certain wrongdoings and I recommend it to Jimmy’s family. However, every coin has two sides. We, as human beings who emphasize on rationality, should not be blindly led by this

Ch. 12) It is ironic that one of the thieves is not okay with shooting a man, but is okay with letting a man drown. He does not want to bear the guilt of murder, even though he is still murdering a man by letting him drown.

When the two brothers left town with their truck pickup what the cop dint realize is that the two brothers were drunk and were even carrying with them wine which they continued drinking as they drove off. Their judgment was impaired and because the cop was still following them so he may arrest them and humiliate them further therefore it’s the same reason the brothers decided to revenge or even do anything that would possibly retaliate since they had nothing else left for them to evade arrest.

In his often cited essay, “The Formation of In-Groups,” Gordon Allport offers his theory on how the groups with which one identifies directly influence the development of one’s individual identity. An “in-group” is a group where members share common traits such as societal status, religion, values or sexual orientation. All the members are alike in some way and that similarity unites them as a group. Allport suggests that one belongs to many in-groups throughout his or her lifetime. Individuals are born into some in-groups, such as one’s family, race or socio-economic level; this Allport terms as an “ascribed status”. People also obtain “achieved status” in a group such as one’s circle

”(137) From this quote it helps us understand that he was okay with going to jail but he does not want his two younger brothers to be taken

In addition, the second and the third technique Sykes and Matza discuss is the denial of injury and the denial of the victim. Denial of injury is the idea that people who commit delinquent behaviors do not injure anyone and therefore believes they should not be punished. On the other hand, denial of the victim is putting the blame on the victim rather than offender. An example from the song that supports these techniques is when the man continues to walk down the street and a man creeps up behind him and puts a gun to his head. The man that crept up to him says “give me all you got, I want your money, not your life.” Therefore, the reason I chose this verse was because if the man successfully committed the act, he might have thought to himself “why should I feel guilty if I did not harm anyone?” For instance, if he would have been a heartless man he would have just shot him since he was walking alone and not tell him he wanted his money and not his life. Furthermore, the fourth and the fifth technique Sykes and Matza analyze is the condemnation of the condemners and the appeal to higher loyalties. In the condemnation of the condemner’s technique, offenders believe it is okay to break the law because those running societies are corrupt. On the other hand, the appeal to higher loyalties technique is when offenders deflect blame for criminal behavior by claiming loyalty to a perceived higher goal. These two techniques can be combined using the example when the

There are many ways to decide what makes a man guilty. In an ethical sense, there is more to guilt than just committing the crime. In Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland, the reader is presented with a moral dilemma: is Theodore Wieland guilty of murdering his wife and children, even though he claims that the command came from God, or is Carwin guilty because of his history of using persuasive voices, even though his role in the Wieland family’s murder is questionable? To answer these questions, one must consider what determines guilt, such as responsibility, motives, consequences, and the act itself. No matter which view is taken on what determines a man’s guilt, it can be concluded that

The fourth category, condemnation of the condemners, is a type of neutralization often seen in politics. It justifies the acting party’s actions

According to the theory, a person may be close to others in proximity yet does not conform completely to the system and maintains their own customs and norms. As a result, a division arises in society between “the stranger” and other of different social groups who view this nonconformity as dangerous, threatening, and suspicious. The stranger may also have different expectations placed upon them than other groups in society. This divide that separates the stranger and society is compared to a veil, like that of Du Bois. Both theories discuss a “sense of otherness” that Individuals may experience in Society (Appelrouth & Edles, 2016, p. 289). The sense of otherness produces a strain in how members may act and view the world around them.

Second, he could deny injury, which means he does not see his actions as harmful. Third, he may deny there was a victim. In short, the victim had it coming or deserved it. Fourth, he could condemn the condemners. For example, he may blame the legal system and accuse it of being the real criminals. Fifth, he could appeal to higher loyalties. In short, adhering to the loyalties of a small group rather than the society at large.

The swindlers, also known as bootleggers set up 100,000’s of illegal ‘speakeasies’ in Chicago alone and worked along the lines of “intimidation, blackmail”, bribery and homicide. These businesses, often hidden in basements, office buildings, and anywhere that could be found became straightforward for customers to lay hands on hard liquor. On the other hand, the Bootleggers smuggled liquor from oversees and Canada, stole it from government warehouses, and produced their own. The bootlegging business had become so extensive that the laws were flagrantly violated by gangsters, commoners and even sly government officials who had formed “corrupt alliances” with the mobsters, hence making it impossible to prevent immense quantities of liquor from entering the country.

Two-Bit was well supported by the gang. Dally supported him in one incidence where Two-Bit was “breaking’ out the windows in the School building.” Dally knew that Two-Bit committed the crime but he took the blame, a quote is “took the sentence without batting’ an eye or even denying’ it.”

We as humans tend to relate to those that are similar to us, and tend to alienate those that we deem as different than us. Whether it is by race, gender, culture, or religion, it is something that is almost always present in human interactions, and often times can be completely subconscious. In our textbook Interpersonal Communication by Kory Floyd, an ingroup is defined as “A group of people with whom one identifies.” An outgroup is conversely defined as “A group of people whom one does not identify.” Henri Tajfel first coined this terminology while he was working to devise his social identity theory. These ideas of classifying people into ingroups and outgroups can lead to many

Imagine a drug that could cure diseases but the drug is illegal and people that need the drug are unable to get it without being arrested. What if a child could be seizure free but the drug to cure the seizures was illegal. What about a drug that could increase revenue for the economy and decrease crime. This drug is marijuana and it has been illegal in the United States since 1930. Marijuana should be legalized in all fifty states for recreational and medicinal purposes. Legalizing marijuana will increase revenue, decrease drug related crimes, and assist chronically ill patients.

Two Individuals With One Label In society, there are unwritten rules in which an individual should act and it is assumed that you are to follow them. When followed, theses rules label an individual as normal. Individuals that are unable to do so are then deemed as an outsider or a stranger by the society. These individuals stand out from their communities and are seen as having something wrong with them.