The Separation Of Violence And The Implementation Of The Law

The modern day legal system has caused a curious discourse regarding the separation of violence and the implementation of the law. Robert Cover proposes that the legal interpretation of the law, coercion, and violence, are not as separate as many might believe. In fact, he argues that they overlap to the point where they become indistinguishable from one another. I will briefly discuss the relationship between law and violence according to Robert Cover to show that he does not believe the two concepts are mutually exclusive. I will then address the idea of capital punishment as both a physical and legal violence done by the law and will continue by discussing sites of legal violence with the problem of mass incarceration. Legal violence is

This essay will ultimately contend that the Sentencing Amendment (Coward 's Punch Manslaughter and Other Matters) Act 2014 is an ill-founded initiative made by legislators, giving the impression of a powerful Government without truly reducing the violence. Using a close reading of each provision of the legislation in unison with extrinsic materials, this piece will outline the efficacy, necessity and likely impacts of the Act.

Every civilized society makes laws that protect its values, and society expects from every single person to obey to these laws. Whenever a person from this society breaks one of those laws, the rulers of the society punish him or her either by putting the person behind bars, whipping him or her, or exiling the person. A great debate has been raging since human society started. Some say that depriving a wrongdoer from his or her freedom is the best way to deter him or her from breaking the law again; some prefer corporal punishment. In this essay "Bring Back Flogging," the author Jeff Jacoby argues effectively that flogging can be a successful alternative to the prison that the U.S. uses for every offensive. The

A review was conducted from the Law and society Association, American society of criminology and the Criminal Justice sciences Academy and it revealed that a big majority concluded that capital punishment was not a deterrent to homicide. More than 80 percent of those interrogated believe that the survey doesn’t hold up the effect of deterrence for the death penalty. Other criminologists suggest that more homicides are caused due to the fact that there is death penalty. The outcome of brutalization argues that the rates of homicides will increase because of the example served by state executions.

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Even as the clearest evidence has vindicated this policy, opponents of tough criminal justice laws deny its efficacy. Instead, a competing idea has grown up to explain violence among us. And with that idea has grown up a new policy to combat crime. This policy seeks to displace tough punishment of the guilty. Indeed it does not even address itself directly to those who commit crimes. Rather it addresses a tool that criminals, as well as millions of law-abiding citizens sometimes use. When infact the government says they only prosecute

The use of force in the criminal justice fields can be seen as a daily routine because this force by the criminal enforcement officials can save people’s life or they can wrongly interpret by people who witness the use of force. For decades, a very debatable topic people and criminal enforcement agents had fought was the fact that if the use of force by the criminal enforcement officials good for the society or it can be used as a violation of the citizen’s rights. A factor that the people who are against this idea of the criminal enforcement use their force in their duty, is that they don’t realize that as a criminal enforcement officer deal with problems every day dealing with someone’s health from a menace or even the officer’s own health.

Crime and punishment is a large part of society today as well as the most ignored. Robert Ferguson’s book, Inferno: An Anatomy of American Punishment describes the topic of crime and punishments in the American justice system. In his explanation, Ferguson also goes into detail on the topic of the “Punishment Regime.” The punishment regime can be described as a legal process to which a person in society is punished. The groups that part of the punishment regime include jurors, police officers, prosecutors, judges, and correctional officers. All the members of the punishment regime have a specific job in administrating a punishment to an individual. The main focus in this essay will be how the punishment regime has administered punishment in

For the past decades capital punishment has been one of the most hotly contested political issues in America, but this debate is definitely a complicated one. Capital punishment is a legal, practical, philosophical, social, political, but also a moral question. The notion of deterrence has been at the very center of the practical debate over the question of capital punishment. Most of us assume that we execute murderers primarily because we

Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Interpersonal Conflicts In this essay, I analyze The Seville Statement of Violence, and discuss the false belief that conflict is embedded into human nature through violence and aggression, along with the counter arguments against this. Instead, I concur that conflict is a social construction. I then discuss how the solution to conflict is through the path of forgiveness and reconciliation. Considering Gary Hawk's Transcending Transgression: Forgiveness and Reconciliation, I discuss the differences between the two words and explain the value of forgiving and reconciling with an offender in the face of conflict.

The adversarial process protects people from harm and violence because of how the system itself is set up. Thus, the law cannot hurt the plaintiffs and defendants more than it can help them because there is an entire process that includes jurors, lawyers, and witnesses who ensure one person does not have too much power to harm them in the first place. Think of the law as a contract between the people and the government on how to live together. If we break a law, we are accepting the consequences that are made to protect the general public. The law is actually supposed to help solve the inequality and violence that happen in our modern world. For example, someone who ends up in the court system is usually believed to have violated someone else’s rights or broken rules in which we agree to live by in this society. The judge, lawyers, and members from the community help decide whether or not the defendant receives any penalties. We need the system to aid the community, therefore when we find an inequality or loophole in the system, we work as a community to change it.

It is discussed as “resentment between those neighborhoods that receive the special attention of community policing and those that do not” (Patterson, 1995). Community policing isn’t efficient in many cities because it requires foot patrol, which was cycled out of policing in the past because of cost effectiveness. For example, a large city such as Portland, Oregon, would have to add 200 officers to its already large force of 750 to ensure they are doing community policing correctly, and “the shrinking tax base in cities and public demands for leaner government allow little room for the expansion need to make community policing effective.” (Patterson, 1995). Even as there are cultural and economic changes, law enforcement agencies continue to implement some parts of community

The law is essentially a contract between the people and the government on how to live together. If we break a law, we are accepting the consequences that are made to protect the general public. Moreover, the law being classified as being violent is an overstatement. The law is actually supposed to help solve the inequality and violence that happen in our modern world. If the law was violent, we could say that it was justified violence. Isn’t there an entire process that we go through before convicting someone? Don’t we as a society believe that one is innocent until proven guilty? In what way should the person feel that the law is being violent towards them? Someone who ends up in the court system is usually

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.

This essay will consider what legal punishment is; it will draw a distinction between the two main categories.[3] It will focus on utilitarianism