Should We Deem Murder To Be Ok

Humans are drawn to acts of a primal nature. Raw, passionate, and vastly entertaining; primal instincts have always been at the root of human behavior. Archeologists say that the first humans were found with spearheads embedded in their ribcage. Mankind’s curiosity will always be sparked by the thought of bloodshed. Just look at the entertainment we as a species hold most dear; violent action films, movies about war, videogames based solely on the concept of killing the opponent, the list in never-ending. The fascination around violent acts is understandable. Since the invention of society, the act of killing another human has been frowned upon by the rest of society. The contrast of the acts of violence to the norms of everyday life are hard

Decisions are the basis of human history, advancement, and modern society. Important decisions often cause a conflict within a person as he or she attempts to make a choice based on what he or she believes is right, as well as what he or she believes is wise. Throughout life and society, people find themselves at a crossroads of beliefs or thoughts with the justification of murder. This is due to the dissonance illustrated when they have mixed feelings with the idea that killing another human is wrong, although it seemingly appears unavoidable in certain situations. This inevitability is what justifies murder in the first place. These mixed feelings create a cognitive dissonance that impacts society in a detrimental

Homicide always will be an aspect of life, whether it is in the 16th century, 21st century or in the future. At times of extreme stress, people may turn to murder as an outlet of a greater problem they cannot fix or control. Presently, homicide has a greater value in society due to popular culture references through the media such as television, film and writing; society constantly has homicide and murder in the subconscious. In David M. Buss’ findings in The Murderer Next Door: Why the Mind is Designed to Kill,

As a result, those who support executions think it can be effective against violent crimes. Also, the author's thesis states whether televising capital punishment should be televised. It's stirring up a debate between the pro-execution and con-execution in the U.S. Those who are pro-executions believe that criminals deserve to be executed and televised due to their crime. However, those who are con-executions believe it’s horrific and inhumane to be televised. They think it’s unnecessary and uncivilized to televise it because of their crime. All in all, the pro-execution and con-execution can’t come to an agreement and continue to stir up a debate. Furthermore, Zachery Shemtob is responding to individuals who see televising executions as barbaric. Even though executions can be barbaric it has potential in decreasing crime rates if it was televised. The author the let the readers to acknowledge more about executions by using his expertise in the criminal justice field. Zachery tries to convince his audience that capital punishment should be televised by using different types of evidence such as examples, and

Then two decades later, in 1993, the capital punishment statutes had been reinstated and performing executions, once again striking the thing criminals fear most, death (Tucker). During the 1990s as more states began to reinstate capital punishment statutes, murder rates began to plummet. They went from 9.6 people per 100,000 in 1993 dropping to 7.7 in 1996 and as low as 6.4 in 1999, which was the lowest rate since 1966. In other words, as the author observed during his study of the forty year period, homicide rates have risen when the rate of execution went down and as the execution rates had risen, the rate of homicides had decreased (Tucker). Not only does the death penalty engender an aversion amongst criminals and people who are considering performing heinous actions, it additionally promotes a positive influence towards themselves and others around. The mandate of capital punishment establishes the attitude of abhorrence toward criminals, and causes people to think about what they are doing because of the possible consequences. With people believing that living the criminal life is not the best of decisions, they are deterred away from making the decision of performing the crime (Caldwell 598).

murder in many occasions. As we take a deeper look inside the motivations behind these

One report by Bernie DeGroat says that watching horror movies can cause effects such as “inability to sleep through the night after exposure” to the graphic movie (DeGroat, par 3). After seeing the movie Jaws, one person said that the thing that scared him the most wasn’t the shark “or actual deaths that was frightening, but the blood” (DeGroat, par 9). According to the Greek philosopher Aristotle, people that watch horror movies are more prone to releasing their negative emotions, also called catharsis. Although, studies have shown that Aristotle is completely wrong, horror movies actually make people more aggressive than they were before watching the movie. Therefore, why would everyone crave horror movies when really they make us more

In modern society’s media we find solace in the idea that heroes are able to save the day, whether they have some unexplainable powers or are your average pedestrian that does an act of heroism so extraordinary that it has to be covered. When these acts are performed, whether they are in movies or in our own reality, the question is presented whether or not the action was morally just or not. A form of media that truly represents said moral question is Andre Dubus’ “Killings.” For the father of Frank Fowler, Matt, the idea of killing Richard Strout is justified because of the actions committed onto his son. To analyze the killing of Richard Strout one must first assess why Strout deserved to die.

The allure of crime for the general public is the deviant behavior itself. Crime brings about multiple questions that crime dramas answer. Why would a person commit such a crime? Why was that person a victim? What are the surrounding circumstances? These are questions arise for most violent crimes in society, but in the news media not much is reported as the police must keep investigations under wraps. Resulting in an area of intrigue between the action and the courtroom that primarily focuses on the action itself and the extenuating circumstances of the action. This is where television dramas fill the void by quenching the public’s thirst for insight into the social taboo of violent Mala Prohibita crimes. In order to do this though cable companies have to make the crime shows

If we examine some arguments presented from both sides, opponents of the capital punishment claim that executing someone is nothing more than an immoral, state-authorized killing which undervalues the human life and destroys our respect for our government which itself says that killing is wrong. But the supporters of the death penalty think that certain murderers

Defining evil is something we all want to do. We search for the answers to why people do sinister things. As young kids, we grow up watching horror films and wondering what motivates the killer. As young adults, we watch documentaries on serial killers and shows on Investigation Discovery that give us glimpses into the minds of killers. Where are their morals? Why is vengeance wrong? We ask ourselves. In Stephen De Wijze text, “Defining Evil” Wijze core thought is the moral effect evil acts have upon us.

With time violence may become such a commonplace that even seemingly sane people will see no problem murdering a store clerk, opening fire on someone that cut them off on the highway, or killing a disobedient child. "A society that chooses violent death as a solution to a social problem gives official sanction to a climate of violence." (Prejean, 57)

I think that there are times when killing is justified. If that were not so then we would never go to war or have a police department. I believe that the only justifiable reason for killing would be to protect either yourself our others. When we go to war we go to war to protect ourselves or others we do not go to war just to kill. When we had the revolutionary war we were standing up for ourselves against the English. When ww2 started we did not fight for either side until we were attacked and then it was justifiable because we were protecting ourselves.

From an early age, children are taught that murder is morally wrong. In today’s complex society that is impeded by unsettling periods of civil unrest, it is an expectation for everyone to acknowledge and accept that murder is one of the worst crimes individuals can commit. Perhaps it can be said that the death penalty is one of our legal system’s biggest contradictions of itself, as, if someone commits murder (or another heinous crime of that caliber), such ‘murderers’ will, in states that have capital punishment laws, be sent to Death Row and ultimately murdered in order to prevent potential future crimes by such perpetrators. I believe that the death penalty is wrong not only as it is immoral to take a life, but also, such ineffective laws waste money and do not deter crime.

Society today is comprised of many different races, ethnicities and minds that think differently and similarly on various topics. The interpretation of homicide is a topic that may be considered to be a universally accepted social more. A common misconception of homicide is that it is used similarly to murder but homicide is general in scope than murder. Murder is a form of homicide that constitutes a criminal act. There are also other forms of homicide that do not comprise of criminal acts. Homicides of this nature are regarded as justifiable or excusable. An example of a justifiable homicide is when an individual is in peril they may out of self-defence