Capital Punishment Essays (570 words) - Penology, Criminal Justice

Capital Punishment When turning on the television, radio, or simply reading the local newspaper, one is overwhelmed with news of arrests, murders, homicides, serial killers, and other serious crimes. It is rare not to go through a day in this world and not hear of these things. Still, some government officials in our country seem a bit uncertain about what steps to take in order to minimize the actions of serious or potential offenders. Not only is it committing a crime, but also today, it is ending ones life, either physically or in a prison cell. This is a risk one is taking when he decides to stab someone with a knife or pull a trigger, but is it really up to our justice system to decide one's fate? There are many issues that address this question of capital punishment such as religion, the effect on society, restitution being denied, the possible "wrongly accused", and the rights of the convicted. But how often do these concepts creep into the publics mind when it hears of our "fair and trusty" government taking away someone's breathing rights? The bible states, "Thou shall not kill," and this being a sin should have to be corrected within oneself. On the other hand, it also states, "Don't judge others personal convictions." It is a government's responsibility to punish people that disobey the law to keep the world in order, but is it their right to take their lives away? It is a Christian's responsibility to point out to those who sin that they do so and this country, trusting in God as it says it does, should do just that. Some people think that restitution is granted when one is sentenced to the death penalty. However, if a loved one is murdered and his family feels justice in having the murderer go through the same, is it not considered equally wrong? Forgiving and forgetting are entirely out of the question, but one should consider the concept of regret and remorse. Just as one feels terrible when wrongfully drives through their neighbors yard, surely a murderer may feel the same. One is only human and no one can expect any more. A mistake is a mistake, no matter whom it may harm or what destruction it may cause. There's always the chance of the innocent being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A handful of evidence from a strong lawyer could sentence someone to life in prison, and even the death penalty. One could be spending and ending his life in captivity for simply walking down the wrong street on the wrong day. Should he have to serve the time that's not rightfully his and take the needle that shouldn't prick his skin? It's a small fault in the justice system that is not easy to overcome, but that's someone's life, and not knowing the truth could be devastating. Abraham Lincoln declared, "All men are created equal." This statement of truth has obviously been left out of consideration in the court room. Everyone deserves a second chance because they are all capable of reformation. The offender should have the chance to go back into the world and prove himself honorable. If solving corruption with immorality is the world's remedy for reconciliation, then why not chop off the thief's hand? "An eye for an eye" was the justice of the past. It is now a modern world based on logic and transformation. Should a government commit a crime to justify another? If capital punishment was solely based on punishing the wrongdoers, there would be no one left to inject the needle or pull the lever on.

The eNotes Blog The Tempest With a Twist and the Nobel inLiterature

The Tempest With a Twist and the Nobel inLiterature One of the reasons for the endurance of the works of William Shakespeare is their ability to be adapted in many different ways. Romeo and Juliet has been set in during the Civil War and in Chicagos ganglands of the 1920s. The Comedy of Errors got the 1970s disco treatment. Richard III was once produced with all the characters in black leather. Now The Tempest is getting a new twist. Helen Mirren has taken on the traditionally male role of Prospero, the powerful magician. Filmmaker Julie Taymor  says she changed the character from Prospero to Prospera  because she wanted Mirren for the role. IMDB offers this summary of the new film: Going back to the 16th or 17th century, women practicing the magical arts of alchemy were often convicted of witchcraft. In Taymors  version, Prospera  is usurped by her brother and sent off with her four-year daughter on a ship. She ends up on an island; its a tabula rasa: no society, so the mother figure becomes a father figure to Miranda. This leads to the power struggle and balance between Caliban and Prospera; a struggle not about brawn, but about intellect. The movie will be in wide release on December 10, 2010.   You can watch the trailer here. In other news, the Nobel Prize in Literature was awarded to Peruvian  novelist, playwright, essayist and cultural critic Mario Vargas Llosa. Llosas works  span over forty years, from   The Time of the Hero (1963),   to The Bad Girl (2007). He is one of the most acclaimed writers in the Spanish-speaking world and a tireless activist who has braved violence for his political positions. Llosa also ran for president. A man of humility, it is reported that Llosa believed the call from the Nobel committee was a joke when he picked up the phone. He nearly hung up, but the caller managed to convince the author that he indeed had won.