Outline
THESIS STATEMENT: Individuals who are found guilty of vehicular manslaughter should be sentenced to a minimum of ten years in prison
I: Introduction
i. Definition of vehicular manslaughter ii. Causes of vehicular manslaughter iii. Sentences for various charges if found guilty
II: Body
i. The punishments for vehicular homicide according to different states ii. Common penalties if found guilty iii. Why these penalties are not sufficient enough iv. Arguments against justifiable homicide
v. Why vehicle manslaughter victims get few years in prison vi. the problem of issuing a less stiff sentence to the offenders vii. Opposing arguments against the thesis statement viii. weighing between preventive measures and strict laws in solving the problem of vehicular homicide
III: Conclusion
i. Restatement of the thesis statement ii. Concluding remarks on why we need to issue more than ten years of sentences to offenders of vehicular manslaughter
Individuals who are found guilty of vehicular manslaughter should serve not less than ten years in jail
Vehicular homicide is an offense that, in general, encompasses the death of a person other than the driver due to criminal, recklessness or deadly operation of a vehicle. When the vehicular homicide is unintentional, one is convicted of vehicular manslaughter or reckless assault. Vehicular manslaughter occurs when a person carelessly causes the death of another individual using of any kind of motor
The first section is for the mandatory minimum sentence of life in prison for first and second-degree murder and treason. The second section deals with firearms offences. The third section of mandatory minimum sentences address repeat offenders in seven distinct categories, which involve impaired driving and possession of unauthorized weapons (Canada, 2013). The last category of MMS in Canada deals with hybrid offences. These were implemented in the Canadian legislation in 1995. If an offender commits a crime that has been determined to result in a mandatory minimum sentence within the Canadian Legislation, the judge must implement that sentence no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors are. Due to this sentencing legislation, many innocent people are serving time in prison due to a false conviction and the lack of judicial discretion in their individual case. Even though mandatory minimum sentences offer more costs then rewards, some politicians, community members and victims of crime still support it due to the proposed retributive and deterrent effects. There have been many cases and arguments against mandatory minimum sentences especially due to the fact that it restricts the judge’s discretion during the sentencing process. These will be discussed in more depth throughout this paper.
The criminal justice system plays a fundamental role in achieving justice, as the system aims to protect all members of the community fairly and equally. However, in the criminal case of R v Loveridge, it is evident that the justice system fails to apply the law to equally balance the needs of the victims and the community. In this case, the offender Kieran Loveridge pleaded guilty to five counts of offences; three charges of common assault, one charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and one charge of manslaughter by an unlawful and dangerous act, the victim being Thomas Kelly, Loveridge received 4 years’ non-parole for manslaughter, Loveridge’s total effective sentence therefore is 7 years and 2 months with an effective
Furthermore, throughout sentencing and punishment various legal and non-legal measures have been implemented to ensure that sentences for those convicted are appropriate and effective to enable rehabilitation and reintegration into society and provide the community with a sense of justice and security. The provision of statutory and judicial guidelines means that limits are placed on a judge’s discretion when sentencing, thus ensuring sentencing consistency. These guidelines were established in relation to the case R v. Jurisic (1998). The defendant Jurisic, pleaded guilty to three charges of dangerous driving occasioning in grievous bodily harm. He was found under the influence of cocaine on one of these charges. He was sentences to 18 months home detention, lost his driver’s licence for one year and was put on a good behaviour bond for two years. This was through to be lenient and was appealed by the DPP. The appeal was upheld and the sentence was replaced by two years imprisonment and two years disqualification of his driver’s
Capital Punishment, also known as the Death Penalty, has been a part of the United State’s justice system for the majority of the country’s existence. Today, 31 out of the 50 states still recognize the death penalty as a viable option when dealing with high profile crimes, most notably murder and sexual assault. While many people argue that the death penalty should be made illegal, there is also widespread support in favor of keeping the death penalty, leaving the nation divided on the issue. Both sides of the argument possess valid evidence that supports their claims, but in the end, the arguments in favor of the death penalty are noticeably stronger. The death penalty is an appropriate sentence that should continue to be allowed in the
1. The American city was changed drastically in the first half of the 20th century with the beginnings of the industrial revolution and the ongoing flow of foreigners into an already crowded United States.
Research paper outline CAREER RESEARCH OUTLINE Use this outline template with the following main topics. I. Thesis/Introduction A. What is this paper about? 1.
Your claim or thesis statement is the most important part of your argumentative essay. It is the sentence where you state your main argument and outline how you will prove it. There are many ways to structure a thesis statement, but we will work on one specific model: counter-claim-reasons (CCR). Here is an example:
More than two centuries ago, the death penalty was commonplace in the United States, but today it is becoming increasingly rare. In the article “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?”, Diann Rust-Tierney argues that it should be abolished, and Joshua Marquis argues that it should not be abolished. Although the death penalty is prone to error and discrimination, the death penalty should not be abolished because several studies show that the death penalty has a clear deterrent effect, and we need capital punishment for those certain cases in which a killer is beyond redemption.
One of the many reason victim’s right advocates are for truth in sentencing laws is because “with probation, indeterminate sentencing, parole, and good time, the average time spent in prison by someone who wrongfully takes a human life is 7 years”
The Act intends to answer the needs of increased severity in punishment regarding the one punch hits. In order to successfully apply this, the Act proposes amendments to the Sentencing Act that would impose mandatory minimum sentences for ‘one punch’ manslaughter cases in circumstances where an offender knew that the victim was not expecting the punch or strike, and died as a result of the blow. The bill alters the Sentencing Act to accommodate a statutory least non-parole period sentence of 10 years for homicide including horrible brutality and murder by single punch or strike where the Director of Public Prosecutions has pulled out to the court of an aim to look for the burden of the statutory least sentence if the charged is discovered liable and where extraordinary circumstances, as accommodated in the bill, don 't exist.
It is difficult to imagine a time in history when criminals were able to commit severe crimes and go unpunished or be punished by the law in a lenient manner. How is that someone could unjustly put an end to someone else’s life and be sentenced to prison for seven years, maybe ten. That term sounds like a lengthy time but in my view a person who inflicts harm on another individual should be punished in a more severely way. The wonderful thing about the legal system in this country is that it can change whether it is repealed, amended, or a new law or sets of laws are created. The fact that the ability to propose a law is not solemnly reserved to the government makes our legal system quite remarkable. We have the ability to create a change
In the United Staes, over 69% of all murderers are single case casualties; of these, the death penalty is only prescribed in 11% of the cases that came to trial. Of the remaining 89% the convicted murderer is eligible for parole after eight and ha lf years. The average sentence for manslaughter is 20 to 35 years in a maximum security prison with at least one third of the sentence served before the criminal is eligible for parole (Thompson 121). These
The death penalty has been a controversial topic among society for ages. An issue often brought up when discussing the legality of capital punishment is wrongful convictions. Advocates of the death penalty say that, while wrongful convictions are an issue, those few cases do not outweigh the need for lawful execution of felons who are, without a doubt, guilty. On the other hand, the opponents argue that the death penalty is wrong from both a legal and moral standpoint, an ineffective form of punishment, and should, ultimately, be outlawed. With both advocates and challengers constantly debating on this topic, the death penalty and wrongful convictions continue to be hot buttons issues for Americans and people throughout the world.
The Supreme Court case, R v Murray[4], states that the appellant pleaded not guilty to one charge of murder – where the appellant was found guilty of manslaughter – where, although the appellant intended to kill the deceased, he was only criminally responsible for manslaughter because of provocation under section 304[5] - where the appellant was sentenced to nine years imprisonment under section 161B[6] - where there was a declaration that the applicant had been convicted of a serious violence offence. Where the case R v McDougall and Collas[7] was applied as a precedent to the final decision of the case.
Four major issues in capital punishment are debated, most aspects of which were touched upon by Seton Hall’s panel discussion on the death penalty. The first issue stands as deterrence. A major purpose of criminal punishment is to conclude future criminal conduct. The deterrence theory suggests that a rational person will avoid criminal behavior if the severity of the punishment outweighs the benefits of the illegal conduct. It is believed that fear of death “deters” people from committing a crime. Most criminals would think twice before committing murder if they knew their own lives were at stake. When attached to certain crimes, the penalty of death exerts a positive moral influence, placing a stigma on certain crimes like manslaughter, which results in attitudes of horror to such acts.