The Second Amendment Prohibited Citizens Under The Age Of Eighteen

Once the District Court closed the case of sentencing Jones life imprisoned before appeals on a case that could have violated Jones right as a citizen. The Supreme Court reenacts the case by reversing the Government’s firm action of convicting Jones for

Gun control is one of the most debated about topic today in America; between news outlet, the public, and politicians. As some politicians look to resolve the gun control issues, with banning them, imposing more restriction to sellers, buyers and owner; some people and politicians consider the second amendment to be relic and should be removed from the constitution. History has shown us time and time again even through all the violence and chaos in the world and America, that there is a reason for the creation of the second amendment. From history of America independence in 1776 to the ratification of the bill of right in 1791 the 2nd amendment still remains relevant form it creation, to modern times, and the protection of America’s future; for the freedom of its inhabitants and citizens. The once influential 20th century thinker George Santayana once said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”. Looking back into ancient history, the history of second amendment, recent and current history we can find clues that will support the relevance of the 2nd amendment. We will also define the second amendment and try to find solutions to our current problems from what our forefathers had say.

The second amendment of United States constitution said “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. This amendment was embraced on December 15, 1791, taking in consideration that American citizens have a natural right to self-defense and they can help to accomplish the following purposes:

Throughout the riveting and eye-opening memoir, Just Mercy, by influential lawyer Bryan Stevenson readers are given a real insight on the predominance of racial minorities on crime sentencings. He opens up on the taboo topics of prejudice and sentencing the poor and weak simply because it’s convenient. This is re-affirmed through New York Times article by Shaila Dewan, “Court by Court, Lawyers Fight Policies that Fall Heavily on the Poor,” where she point blank states “[the justice system] is waging a guerilla campaign to reserve what they consider unconstitutional practices that penalize the poor.” In addition to both of these sources, the video “Keeping the Poor Out of Jail” by Kassie Bracken and Jessica Naudziunas, two Harvard law school students, upholds the same beliefs about inequality as they take on local justice systems and current policies targeting the poor. Although the fourteenth amendment states no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws poverty remains to be an exception to some degree. Those living in poverty lack the same equality as the rest of the US, not being given fair chances in trials or overly punished for their lack of resources. There needs to be an improvement in our justice system so we can eliminate the injustice on the impoverished, whether it be a more involved state-provided lawyer or an adequate, unbiased, and

The second half of Bryan Stevenson’s book, Just Mercy, brought successful conclusions to the stories that were introduced in the first half. Stevenson also introduced multiple new cases that displayed just how much his little law firm in Alabama has grown and changed the United States’ judicial system for the better. Stevenson mentioned that he had won a historic hearing that life-without-parole sentences for all children are unconstitutional, which changed the lives of many children and how they are treated today by courts in the United States. While he has saved many people from their wrongful convictions, their lives are never the same and the time they lost in prison can never be returned. This is why Stevenson started a fight that

Are some lives worth more than others? Are some lives worthy to be considered lives at all? Bryan Stevenson aims to answer that in his book Just Mercy. In it, he explores the American justice system and its systemic prejudice, whether it’s based on race, income, or gender. Stevenson is a lawyer who founded the Equal Justice Initiative (EJI), an Alabama-based nonprofit that aims to defend those who have been unfairly represented or unjustly imprisoned, and Just Mercy is a compilation of some of the cases he encountered during his time. Just Mercy is a collection of redemption and corruption--almost everyone he represents in the story finds their freedom from the unnecessarily harsh sentences they were given. In every other chapter he details the stories of multiple people punished by the legal system, including women and children. It is notable that throughout these chapters Stevenson emphasizes real, human connections with his clients to shine light on how distant and unjust the prison system is. In a system where these people are given subhuman treatment, Stevenson reaffirms their inherent dignity and cares for them. This has a profound effect on them and the people around them, seen especially in the cases of Charlie (Chapter 6), Joe Sullivan (Chapter 14), and Avery Jenkins (Chapter 10).

In the book Eligible for Execution: The Story of the Daryl Atkins Case, the author Thomas G. Walker, a Professor of Political Science at Emory University provides a thought provoking analysis of the case Atkins vs. the commonwealth of Virginia. Walker has written his book is such a way that piques his reader’s interest and grabs the attention. He begins with a basic detailed summary of the case at hand, the murder of Eric Michael Nesbitt. The defendant, Daryl Renard Atkins is described as a body-abled young man who unfortunately did not have an opportunity to experience a close family relationship. His parents divorced at the age of 9 which acted as a milestone in his life. He struggled to complete his school and struggled with maintaining

Almost every day, we hear about justice being served upon criminals and we, as a society, feel a sense of relief that another threat to the public has been sentenced to a term in prison, where they will no longer pose a risk to the world at large. However, there are very rare occasions where the integrity of the justice system gets skewed and people who should not have been convicted are made to serve heavy prison sentences. When word of this judicial misstep reaches the public, there is social outcry, and we begin to question the judicial system for committing such a serious faux pas.

A broken; crooked Justice System is a sad but unforgotten tale of our nation. “Just Mercy” tells the everyday motif of an innocent person wrongfully convicted to death until new DNA evidence has been brought up. Even the states that still sentence people to capital punishment have botched people’s lives and cleared them of all charges years after their execution. “Just Mercy,” personalizes the struggle and hardship minorities face every day while dealing with injustice in the story of one lawyer Bryan Stevenson.

Supreme Court ruling Graham v. Florida (2010) banned the use of life without parole for juveniles who committed non-homicide crimes, and Roper v. Simmons (2005) abolished the use of the death penalty for juvenile offenders. They both argued that these sentences violated the 8th Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. While these landmark cases made great strides for the rights of minors passing through the criminal justice system, they are just the first steps in creating a juvenile justice system that takes into consideration the vast differences between adolescents and adults. Using sociological (Butler, 2010) and legal (Harvard Law Review, 2010) documents, this essay will explicate why the next such step to be taken is

This paper is aimed at raising questions on the TED talk’s subjects of injustice and how we are priming some kids for college and others for prison. Bryan Stevenson talks on the topics of injustice and poverty stating that there is a correlation between the two and he also talks about reforming our justice system which would lead to changing some very crucial amendments within our constitutional rights. The questions I raise to his statements are as follows, one… considering that the biggest statistic for the death of young black males under the age of 20 is other black males does a societal change need to be made? Two, in regards to changing the way our justice system works, would you be ok with allowing people like Charles Manson, Richard Ramirez, and other psychopaths to roam freely after 20 years without the death penalty. Three, would you be willing to get rid of the 4th and 5th amendments as well as the exclusionary rule in exchange for a blanket allowance of all truthful evidence? Now in regards to Alice Goffman and her speech on College vs Prison I felt a sense of urgency to state “good, but what are the solutions?” or what do you propose we do as a society to keep our youth out of prison and get them on the track to success? Ms. Goffman’s statements were geared more towards pointing the finger rather than offering a viable solution to the problem.

The tragic case of Larry and Brandon is a compelling story. It is a reality that stunned the city of Oxnard California when a 14-year-old boy named Brandon McInerney fatally shot a fellow classmate, Larry King, twice in the back of the head. The incident occurred in a computer lab where Brandon ran off after committing the crime. As a result of his actions Brandon McInerney was tried as an adult and was sentenced to 21 years in prison with no chance of parole. He will be released at the age of 39. Now the underlying question is was Brandon’s sentence a just resolution or should he have received more or less years in prison. The truth is that I believe Brandon’s verdict was a fair and just punishment,

White was shocked to hear that his execution date was drawing closer because White thought that he was in appeal process. Stevenson petition both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court to delay White’s execution because his former attorney missed appeals and the failed to procedures (Death Penalty Information Center, 2015). Mr. White’s case is an example how important an adequate representation in a capital punishment trial is to the defendant’s

Although inmates may not have full Constitutional rights while incarcerated, they are entitled to basic human rights, freedom and dignity. U.S. penal systems have been reformed at the beginning of the 1960’s. The reason for this reformation is to prevent inhumane treatment, provide inmates with religious freedom, and due process (Smith, 2010). The U.S. Supreme Court

In Stephen Bright’s article, “The Death Penalty as the Answer to Crime: Costly, Counterproductive, and Corrupting” Bright asserts that capital punishment does not work because it is racially biased, the quality of the lawyers and attorneys supplied by the state to poor defendants is unfair, and that the law system currently in place does not accomplish its true goals. Bright defends his claim with logos and ethos by examining the opinions of judges and district attorneys, and by describing experience within the fields of human rights and law himself in order to persuade the reader to take up more cases for those on death row. Given the language used in this article Bright is writing to an audience with intermediate to professional experience within the field of law, and a willingness to adopt a new idea on the constitutionality behind the death penalty.