This video speaks about Justice and how when crime is being taken place, if there isn't any proof of the mensrea or the guilt of mind nothing can happen. Also, when people get punished for crime that's not crime. For Example, marijuana use, acid, or heroin. I feel like they need to be focus more on the killing and other crimes being taking place. marijuana, people smoke that everyday that's something cops shouldn't worry about so much because so many people does it. I also liked when he said make sure your punishment fit your crime. I know a few people in jail for major crimes doing time I think shouldnt be happening I just feel like the police should look more into justice crime and the killings and robberys being taken place instead of minor crime. T123
Right, some crimes do need the right punishment, but things shouldnt be classified as crimes if nothing really bad happen alot of people just need help and throwing them in jail isnt helpful. Hoopz123
I agree with T123's statement when it comes to the punishment fitting the crime. I also believe that cops need to focus more on the serious crimes instead of trying to sniff out drugs. According to the Uniform Crime Report, less than half of violent crimes are committed, one reason being that people do not want to cooperate with the police. Maybe that's because of the image they put out there for being so tough on petty crimes? BadWolf123
First off, im glad he expained the word "Rea", or guilty mind and where it first originted from. I now have a better undrsatnding of it in the world of criminal justice. I agree on the fact that the punishment shall fit the crime. At some points the criminal justice system needs to see if there really is a crime,or did the person really mean to do it. If theres no proof theres no conviction. Hoopz123
I do agree with this comment but I know that certain crimes should be subjected to the right punishment and yes police have been so concentrated on minor stuff like weed and heroin and other drugs of the sort but yet the police seem to be more fixated on working those types of cases instead of crimes of people getting killed. Wrestler123
I do agree that if a person commits a crime and has no proof of doing such a crude act against the law, then there should be no conviction to be put upon this person. yet if there is proof of the person doing the crude act then the punishment that would seem fit should be put upon this person. wrestler123
i agree also if theres no proof, how do we know if it happened... was there video proof? anybody and everybody can lie... i think it would be more fair if there was legit information or legit proof.
this video does a good on describe on the whole men's rea or guilty mind and yes everybody would agree that if a person commits a crime and there is not evidence to prove so then that person should be set free upon the public but yet how I see it, that person could be watch for further investigation because a crime could be committed by this person at anytime or place but yet the police may pay no attention to this individual because they are so focused on dealing with the weed or heroin situation in the U.S. wrestler123
i agree in our country the cops focus on drug related crimes or writing tickets or anything drug related, id rather see our forces bring down the rapists or murders than worry about people doing drugs. i would feel more safe with the killers or rapists off the streets than somebody smoking weed in their car or their house, i dont promote drugs but who cares if they do it its their choice theyre not hurting anyone else. if our forces would focus on other major crimes it would make the world a better place simple as that. alot more people would feel more safe as well. half the time you cant get proff that some id a crime unless theres video proof just because someone says they did it doesnt mean its true.
I find it interesting that when most criminals accused of a crime, they even have the opportunity for a plea deal for most crimes. For example, if a criminal pleads guilty to a serious crime and shows some remorse, there is a likelihood of that criminal getting a lesser sentence. I like how he brings up the fact that police are arresting and processing people for petty crimes such as smoking marijuana. I agree with that the punishment should fit the crime, but what about for smoking pot? I believe that the punishment of being jailed does not fit this crime. I have friends that cannot get a job, just because they were caught with a joint or having residue. Employers look at your misdemeanors and automatically deny you for such petty crimes. Another example would be that a criminal’s friend is found guilty of manslaughter since he was present during the murder that his friend committed, even if he did not participate. BadWolf123
BadWolf123, I Agree with you completely about the plea deal crap for most crimes, I had a female subject enter my job with intent to steal, even brought burglary in with her (empty purse, and pliers). She was charged with Retail Theft as well as 3 counts of burglary and was offered a plea deal even though this was her 3rd offense of the same therefore making it a felony automatically. I also agree that jail time for smoking doesn't fit the crime as there are more things that we should be worried about, and not spending tax dollars on incarcerating someone of a petty crime as such. BarneyFife123
I agree. I think that people that get caught smoking should not go to jail. I think if anything fine them and tell them to have a nice day. If they are selling to minors then maybe send them to jail but only if its a bad drug. Where both the people were in that manslaughter case I think it should be the one who actually killed them not the one who was just standing there. How can you get in trouble while just standing there. HRT123
What I got from this video is pretty much that Men's Rea is a person's awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is criminal, the mental element. I learned that the word Men's Rea dates back to England around 1600 when Judges pretty much had to hold that an act alone could not create criminal liability unless it was accompanied by a guilty state of mind and that the degree of Men's Rea depended on the type of crime. I thought it was pretty interesting so I looked more into the term and found that Men's Rea is used in almost all statutes state that a person act knowingly, purposely, or recklessly. BarneyFife123
I think mens rea is kind of a dumb thing. Most likely if a person commits a crime, they mean to commit the crime. I do not know how hard it would be in court to use this but I think it would be an easier way to get a nice sentence. A lot of people could pretend like they didn't mean it when in fact they did. When he was talking about the 14 year old being raped and the dad shooting the rapist in the back of the head, according to this he should have gotten longer time since he meant to do it. I personally believe is that is wasn't that bad since the dude was a rapist but there are laws out there for a reason. I think this happens to everyone but not everyone really cares. Ya they will have a guilty mind most likely but that doesn't mean you give them less of a sentence. HRT123
I agree on you that the 14 year father should have gotten more time for the simple fact that he had killed the rapist took things into his own hands instead of letting the law take care of it. I say he did it in retaliation so therefore he meant to do it,he should have at least got charged with manslaughter I think. Secret'A'123
Mens rea might not be as dumb as you may think. Hypothetically, let’s say you and someone you know get into a fight. In that fight, you throw a punch which causes your buddy to fall and hit his head on a large rock. The blow to the head ultimately kills him. Without the mens rea concept, you would immediately be arrested and later successfully prosecuted for murder. Was it murder? Not really, it was an accident and that is why we have mens rea, to protect people from accidents. Mens rea saved you from a murder conviction and instead got you the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter. ISP123
I learned from his video that Men Rae "guilty mind" is the intention of knowledge wrongdoing that takes part of a crime. I believe that if you do the crime that the punishment should fit the crime. I really don't agree with the whole Men Rae because like everyone else is saying anyone could lie and say that they didn't mean to do it. I mean it was clear that they 14 year father meant to do it. For 1 he went to where he knew they were going to bring the guy out and than executed him like really but he didn't mean to do it I totally disagree with that one. I believe he did it out of anger and and he planned it he should have gotten more time. Secret'A'123
the 14 year old kids father shooting the guy on the street, i think he meant to do it for sure and i also think that the court knew he meant to do it. However after what had happened to his son his state of mind was more than likely not in the right place and couldnt have been thinking straight. I will say that if anything like that happened to my son i would probably do the same thing that this man did and take whatever punishment comes my way.USA123
I also agree I like this video because it shows you people can be wrongly prosecuted in cases if they don’t get looked at individually. Also that people should see why that person would have of committed that crime in the first place. Though that father did it out of rage if he didn’t have if son raped he probably would have just went golfing or something. Conservation123
I completely agree with what your saying the father had to have planned the whole thing out there is no way someone can just "accidently" shot someone in the back of the head I believe his punishment was wrong and more time should of been added on honestly. Scorpio 123
The gentleman in the video briefly discusses mens rea, or as it would be translated to today, guilty mind. When prosecuting a person, a prosecutor must first prove to the jury the actus reus, that the defendant actually committed the act. Next, the prosecutor must then prove to the jury that the defendant actually meant, or intended, to commit the crime. This is mens rea. Mens rea can actually be broken up into different categories. First, there is intent. If I find the milkman sleeping with my wife and I pull out a gun, tell him that I’m going to kill him, and shoot him, then I had the intent to kill him. The next category is knowingly. Let’s say I instead pulled out a knife and stabbed the milkman because of my anger and he later died. I may not have intended to kill him but mens rea is still satisfied because I knew, or should have known, that stabbing him posed the definite risk of death or serious bodily harm. The next category is recklessly. Let’s say I get drunk and decide to drive home. On my way home I hit the milkman with my car and kill him. Mens rea is satisfied because although I did not intend to kill him and I didn’t know that driving drunk would kill him, it was reckless of me to get behind the wheel in my intoxicated state. The last category is negligent. Negligent does not apply to criminal cases, only civil cases so I won’t discuss it here. ISP123
What i learned from this video is that mens rea is if a person intentionaly commited a crime. The father that shot the man who raped his son deffinatly should have gotten alot more time. He went to a place where he knew the man would be brought by and shot him in the head. There are certain cases where i think mensrea is acceptable but in most its not. Dabster123
I think the father had every right to do what he did. Yes, it could have been handled much differently but my parents would do the same for me and I would do the same for my kids. rogir123
I think that it is amazing how far we have come from back in the day when if you did something wrong you were punished severely reguardless of whether you ment to do wrong or not....so we learned on the video Mens Rea "Guilty mind" is a term that is used to decide whether or not you ment to commit a crime or if you only commited the crime because the situation you were put in caused you to do so for example if someone breaks into your home and you hear them and go to check it out and you stop dead in your tracks because you see the intruder and the intruder sees you and they point the gun at you and threated to killl you and your family but unknown to them your standing right next to where you keep your gun and before they shoot you quickly without thinking shoot them without the intention of killing them the cops shortly arrive and find the person dead in your home but later it is decided that you are not gulity because it is self defense if mens rea wasnt taken into consideration you might have been serving sometime so yeah mens rea is a great thing that they take into account TeAma123
I agree with the concept of mens rea, or guilty mind. It is easy to commit a crime against society without realizing it. We have all caught ourselves speeding at some point or another, obviously it was unintentional, but it is still a crime. In situations of more serious crimes it is easier to see why we need the concept of mens rea. If someone is killed in a dispute, mens rea can determine the actually charges. If the act was committed with intention to kill it will be determined a murder, using the concept of mens rea we can determine whether the intention was there or not and provide a more appropriate response. Check123
The video definitely had some interesting points to it. Its digging a little bit deeper into the penal code than what we normally would see on the cover. He is talking about crimes being committed and then if they were meant to be committed or how those criminal acts should be punished. He told the story about the robbers going in and robbing a store and the guy behind the counter shoots one robber and the other robber is being tried for murder. Robber 2 didnt commit the shooting but the question in mind is, was the death his fault? Like the guy said back in history we used to go with an eye for an eye and the punishment fits the crime and now we have come so far that other factors outside the actual crime are being taken into consideration. Crimes now are not just black and white... there is a gray area in there that we have to look at when sentencing. USA123
This video is very intesting about Mens Rea and guilty mind. Like you commit the crime but did you mean too. I like how he brought up the example with the guys boy being raped and the dad killing that guy, which he deserved and know we now he cant commit crimes again also that he was only giving three months in house arrest from it. Just a little time to simmer down. I like how Mens Rea is used in every individual case being looked at so someone cant be punished more than others. Which an example that he showed it should play a different cause because if you kill my dog I'm going to hunt you down they can say whatever Guilt mind thing they wont, but if you kill my dog your dead. Conservation123
I find it interesting that the punishments now are more lenient than those 400 years ago. I believe that it should still be "eye for an eye" in almost every situation. Today there is so much tolerance for certain people and sentences can be too harsh, like years of prison for marijuana charges, or not harsh enough, like the sixteen year old that was recently driving intoxicated and killed four people. I also believe that the "eye for an eye" rule could be overridden with the example in the video. A man killed his son's rapist and I do think he was just in doing so. I couldn't imagine my children being tortured like that and having to deal with that hardship for the rest of their lives. House arrest is a good punishment for the father rather than prison because his son needs him there. Outside factors really do play a part in someone's sentence so I believe in a little of both.
I would definitely have to believe that punishment now a days is less severe then punishment back in the day! If anyone knows about the Witch craft and them hanging everyone because they thought they all had an illness would know that punishment is way different. People that sell drugs are getting more time then rapist junkies choose to use drugs . I couldn't even imagine how the father of that boy felt but It is wrong and he shot that man he should of gotten at least a year in jail I mean yeah the man did horrible things to his son but you have to abide by the law and the dad killed that man point blank. Scorpio 123
I agree with you completely. Although they might not always get more time, drug abusers seem to get punished way harsher proportionally for their crimes than people who commit violent heinous crimes. The father was a perfect example. He committed a crime. He knew he was committing a crime and went through with it anyway. His mindset as a father was not wrong by any stretch but we still have laws and we still have to abide by them. vhammer123
I found this video incredibly interesting. I liked how he compared modern justice to ancient justice and explained that because of mens rea, today we are almost more concerned about how to punish the person correctly than we are about weather they are guilty. The story he told about the father who shot the guy that harmed his child baffled me. I can completely understand what the father was thinking when he killed the man. I would feel the same way, although I would let the courts punish him. It is amazing to me however that he got off with that light of punishment for his crime, and he did commit a crime. I think that he should have gotten at least some prison time. Like I said I understand his feelings and mindset but if I were to try to get revenge on someone like that I would expect to go to prison afterwards and face my punishment. I also like how he ended the video. I think that he was very honest and I agree with what he said. All in all I liked this video and the speaker was very honest and informative. vhammer123
This video speaks about Justice and how when crime is being taken place, if there isn't any proof of the mensrea or the guilt of mind nothing can happen. Also, when people get punished for crime that's not crime. For Example, marijuana use, acid, or heroin. I feel like they need to be focus more on the killing and other crimes being taking place. marijuana, people smoke that everyday that's something cops shouldn't worry about so much because so many people does it. I also liked when he said make sure your punishment fit your crime. I know a few people in jail for major crimes doing time I think shouldnt be happening I just feel like the police should look more into justice crime and the killings and robberys being taken place instead of minor crime. T123
ReplyDeleteRight, some crimes do need the right punishment, but things shouldnt be classified as crimes if nothing really bad happen alot of people just need help and throwing them in jail isnt helpful. Hoopz123
DeleteI agree with T123's statement when it comes to the punishment fitting the crime. I also believe that cops need to focus more on the serious crimes instead of trying to sniff out drugs. According to the Uniform Crime Report, less than half of violent crimes are committed, one reason being that people do not want to cooperate with the police. Maybe that's because of the image they put out there for being so tough on petty crimes? BadWolf123
DeleteFirst off, im glad he expained the word "Rea", or guilty mind and where it first originted from. I now have a better undrsatnding of it in the world of criminal justice. I agree on the fact that the punishment shall fit the crime. At some points the criminal justice system needs to see if there really is a crime,or did the person really mean to do it. If theres no proof theres no conviction. Hoopz123
ReplyDeleteI do agree with this comment but I know that certain crimes should be subjected to the right punishment and yes police have been so concentrated on minor stuff like weed and heroin and other drugs of the sort but yet the police seem to be more fixated on working those types of cases instead of crimes of people getting killed.
DeleteWrestler123
I do agree that if a person commits a crime and has no proof of doing such a crude act against the law, then there should be no conviction to be put upon this person. yet if there is proof of the person doing the crude act then the punishment that would seem fit should be put upon this person.
Deletewrestler123
i agree also if theres no proof, how do we know if it happened... was there video proof? anybody and everybody can lie... i think it would be more fair if there was legit information or legit proof.
Deletesnakebite123
this video does a good on describe on the whole men's rea or guilty mind and yes everybody would agree that if a person commits a crime and there is not evidence to prove so then that person should be set free upon the public but yet how I see it, that person could be watch for further investigation because a crime could be committed by this person at anytime or place but yet the police may pay no attention to this individual because they are so focused on dealing with the weed or heroin situation in the U.S.
ReplyDeletewrestler123
i agree in our country the cops focus on drug related crimes or writing tickets or anything drug related, id rather see our forces bring down the rapists or murders than worry about people doing drugs. i would feel more safe with the killers or rapists off the streets than somebody smoking weed in their car or their house, i dont promote drugs but who cares if they do it its their choice theyre not hurting anyone else. if our forces would focus on other major crimes it would make the world a better place simple as that. alot more people would feel more safe as well. half the time you cant get proff that some id a crime unless theres video proof just because someone says they did it doesnt mean its true.
ReplyDeletesnakebite123
I find it interesting that when most criminals accused of a crime, they even have the opportunity for a plea deal for most crimes. For example, if a criminal pleads guilty to a serious crime and shows some remorse, there is a likelihood of that criminal getting a lesser sentence. I like how he brings up the fact that police are arresting and processing people for petty crimes such as smoking marijuana. I agree with that the punishment should fit the crime, but what about for smoking pot? I believe that the punishment of being jailed does not fit this crime. I have friends that cannot get a job, just because they were caught with a joint or having residue. Employers look at your misdemeanors and automatically deny you for such petty crimes. Another example would be that a criminal’s friend is found guilty of manslaughter since he was present during the murder that his friend committed, even if he did not participate. BadWolf123
ReplyDeleteBadWolf123, I Agree with you completely about the plea deal crap for most crimes, I had a female subject enter my job with intent to steal, even brought burglary in with her (empty purse, and pliers). She was charged with Retail Theft as well as 3 counts of burglary and was offered a plea deal even though this was her 3rd offense of the same therefore making it a felony automatically. I also agree that jail time for smoking doesn't fit the crime as there are more things that we should be worried about, and not spending tax dollars on incarcerating someone of a petty crime as such. BarneyFife123
DeleteI agree. I think that people that get caught smoking should not go to jail. I think if anything fine them and tell them to have a nice day. If they are selling to minors then maybe send them to jail but only if its a bad drug. Where both the people were in that manslaughter case I think it should be the one who actually killed them not the one who was just standing there. How can you get in trouble while just standing there. HRT123
DeleteWhat I got from this video is pretty much that Men's Rea is a person's awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is criminal, the mental element. I learned that the word Men's Rea dates back to England around 1600 when Judges pretty much had to hold that an act alone could not create criminal liability unless it was accompanied by a guilty state of mind and that the degree of Men's Rea depended on the type of crime. I thought it was pretty interesting so I looked more into the term and found that Men's Rea is used in almost all statutes state that a person act knowingly, purposely, or recklessly. BarneyFife123
ReplyDeleteI think mens rea is kind of a dumb thing. Most likely if a person commits a crime, they mean to commit the crime. I do not know how hard it would be in court to use this but I think it would be an easier way to get a nice sentence. A lot of people could pretend like they didn't mean it when in fact they did. When he was talking about the 14 year old being raped and the dad shooting the rapist in the back of the head, according to this he should have gotten longer time since he meant to do it. I personally believe is that is wasn't that bad since the dude was a rapist but there are laws out there for a reason. I think this happens to everyone but not everyone really cares. Ya they will have a guilty mind most likely but that doesn't mean you give them less of a sentence. HRT123
ReplyDeleteI agree on you that the 14 year father should have gotten more time for the simple fact that he had killed the rapist took things into his own hands instead of letting the law take care of it. I say he did it in retaliation so therefore he meant to do it,he should have at least got charged with manslaughter I think. Secret'A'123
DeleteMens rea might not be as dumb as you may think. Hypothetically, let’s say you and someone you know get into a fight. In that fight, you throw a punch which causes your buddy to fall and hit his head on a large rock. The blow to the head ultimately kills him. Without the mens rea concept, you would immediately be arrested and later successfully prosecuted for murder. Was it murder? Not really, it was an accident and that is why we have mens rea, to protect people from accidents. Mens rea saved you from a murder conviction and instead got you the lesser charge of involuntary manslaughter.
DeleteISP123
I learned from his video that Men Rae "guilty mind" is the intention of knowledge wrongdoing that takes part of a crime. I believe that if you do the crime that the punishment should fit the crime. I really don't agree with the whole Men Rae because like everyone else is saying anyone could lie and say that they didn't mean to do it. I mean it was clear that they 14 year father meant to do it. For 1 he went to where he knew they were going to bring the guy out and than executed him like really but he didn't mean to do it I totally disagree with that one. I believe he did it out of anger and and he planned it he should have gotten more time. Secret'A'123
ReplyDeletethe 14 year old kids father shooting the guy on the street, i think he meant to do it for sure and i also think that the court knew he meant to do it. However after what had happened to his son his state of mind was more than likely not in the right place and couldnt have been thinking straight. I will say that if anything like that happened to my son i would probably do the same thing that this man did and take whatever punishment comes my way.USA123
DeleteI also agree I like this video because it shows you people can be wrongly prosecuted in cases if they don’t get looked at individually. Also that people should see why that person would have of committed that crime in the first place. Though that father did it out of rage if he didn’t have if son raped he probably would have just went golfing or something. Conservation123
DeleteI completely agree with what your saying the father had to have planned the whole thing out there is no way someone can just "accidently" shot someone in the back of the head I believe his punishment was wrong and more time should of been added on honestly. Scorpio 123
DeleteThe gentleman in the video briefly discusses mens rea, or as it would be translated to today, guilty mind. When prosecuting a person, a prosecutor must first prove to the jury the actus reus, that the defendant actually committed the act. Next, the prosecutor must then prove to the jury that the defendant actually meant, or intended, to commit the crime. This is mens rea. Mens rea can actually be broken up into different categories. First, there is intent. If I find the milkman sleeping with my wife and I pull out a gun, tell him that I’m going to kill him, and shoot him, then I had the intent to kill him. The next category is knowingly. Let’s say I instead pulled out a knife and stabbed the milkman because of my anger and he later died. I may not have intended to kill him but mens rea is still satisfied because I knew, or should have known, that stabbing him posed the definite risk of death or serious bodily harm. The next category is recklessly. Let’s say I get drunk and decide to drive home. On my way home I hit the milkman with my car and kill him. Mens rea is satisfied because although I did not intend to kill him and I didn’t know that driving drunk would kill him, it was reckless of me to get behind the wheel in my intoxicated state. The last category is negligent. Negligent does not apply to criminal cases, only civil cases so I won’t discuss it here.
ReplyDeleteISP123
What i learned from this video is that mens rea is if a person intentionaly commited a crime. The father that shot the man who raped his son deffinatly should have gotten alot more time. He went to a place where he knew the man would be brought by and shot him in the head. There are certain cases where i think mensrea is acceptable but in most its not. Dabster123
ReplyDeleteI think the father had every right to do what he did. Yes, it could have been handled much differently but my parents would do the same for me and I would do the same for my kids.
Deleterogir123
I think that it is amazing how far we have come from back in the day when if you did something wrong you were punished severely reguardless of whether you ment to do wrong or not....so we learned on the video Mens Rea "Guilty mind" is a term that is used to decide whether or not you ment to commit a crime or if you only commited the crime because the situation you were put in caused you to do so for example if someone breaks into your home and you hear them and go to check it out and you stop dead in your tracks because you see the intruder and the intruder sees you and they point the gun at you and threated to killl you and your family but unknown to them your standing right next to where you keep your gun and before they shoot you quickly without thinking shoot them without the intention of killing them the cops shortly arrive and find the person dead in your home but later it is decided that you are not gulity because it is self defense if mens rea wasnt taken into consideration you might have been serving sometime so yeah mens rea is a great thing that they take into account
ReplyDeleteTeAma123
I agree with the concept of mens rea, or guilty mind. It is easy to commit a crime against society without realizing it. We have all caught ourselves speeding at some point or another, obviously it was unintentional, but it is still a crime. In situations of more serious crimes it is easier to see why we need the concept of mens rea. If someone is killed in a dispute, mens rea can determine the actually charges. If the act was committed with intention to kill it will be determined a murder, using the concept of mens rea we can determine whether the intention was there or not and provide a more appropriate response. Check123
ReplyDeleteThe video definitely had some interesting points to it. Its digging a little bit deeper into the penal code than what we normally would see on the cover. He is talking about crimes being committed and then if they were meant to be committed or how those criminal acts should be punished. He told the story about the robbers going in and robbing a store and the guy behind the counter shoots one robber and the other robber is being tried for murder. Robber 2 didnt commit the shooting but the question in mind is, was the death his fault? Like the guy said back in history we used to go with an eye for an eye and the punishment fits the crime and now we have come so far that other factors outside the actual crime are being taken into consideration. Crimes now are not just black and white... there is a gray area in there that we have to look at when sentencing. USA123
ReplyDeleteThis video is very intesting about Mens Rea and guilty mind. Like you commit the crime but did you mean too. I like how he brought up the example with the guys boy being raped and the dad killing that guy, which he deserved and know we now he cant commit crimes again also that he was only giving three months in house arrest from it. Just a little time to simmer down. I like how Mens Rea is used in every individual case being looked at so someone cant be punished more than others. Which an example that he showed it should play a different cause because if you kill my dog I'm going to hunt you down they can say whatever Guilt mind thing they wont, but if you kill my dog your dead. Conservation123
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that the punishments now are more lenient than those 400 years ago. I believe that it should still be "eye for an eye" in almost every situation. Today there is so much tolerance for certain people and sentences can be too harsh, like years of prison for marijuana charges, or not harsh enough, like the sixteen year old that was recently driving intoxicated and killed four people. I also believe that the "eye for an eye" rule could be overridden with the example in the video. A man killed his son's rapist and I do think he was just in doing so. I couldn't imagine my children being tortured like that and having to deal with that hardship for the rest of their lives. House arrest is a good punishment for the father rather than prison because his son needs him there. Outside factors really do play a part in someone's sentence so I believe in a little of both.
ReplyDeleterogir123
ReplyDeleteI would definitely have to believe that punishment now a days is less severe then punishment back in the day! If anyone knows about the Witch craft and them hanging everyone because they thought they all had an illness would know that punishment is way different. People that sell drugs are getting more time then rapist junkies choose to use drugs . I couldn't even imagine how the father of that boy felt but It is wrong and he shot that man he should of gotten at least a year in jail I mean yeah the man did horrible things to his son but you have to abide by the law and the dad killed that man point blank. Scorpio 123
ReplyDeleteI agree with you completely. Although they might not always get more time, drug abusers seem to get punished way harsher proportionally for their crimes than people who commit violent heinous crimes. The father was a perfect example. He committed a crime. He knew he was committing a crime and went through with it anyway. His mindset as a father was not wrong by any stretch but we still have laws and we still have to abide by them. vhammer123
DeleteI found this video incredibly interesting. I liked how he compared modern justice to ancient justice and explained that because of mens rea, today we are almost more concerned about how to punish the person correctly than we are about weather they are guilty. The story he told about the father who shot the guy that harmed his child baffled me. I can completely understand what the father was thinking when he killed the man. I would feel the same way, although I would let the courts punish him. It is amazing to me however that he got off with that light of punishment for his crime, and he did commit a crime. I think that he should have gotten at least some prison time. Like I said I understand his feelings and mindset but if I were to try to get revenge on someone like that I would expect to go to prison afterwards and face my punishment. I also like how he ended the video. I think that he was very honest and I agree with what he said. All in all I liked this video and the speaker was very honest and informative. vhammer123
ReplyDelete