Children Penalties Essay Example for Free

Children Penalties Essay All through America it seems that juvenile children are committing extremely severe crimes. Fellow classmates and teachers are being murdered by juveniles as young as eleven and thirteen. As a result of this, a major issue has been raised, should children who commit a serious crime face the penalties as and adult? Do these kids know what they are doing? And more importantly do they know the consequences of their actions. The points that Im going to be outlining are children dont know/ know the consequences of their actions, harsh punishment has little effect, youths are more mature so they know the consequences of their actions, the notion of justice, children may not have been given adequate role modals, youths should be given harsh punishments so others will not copy them, children grow up with guns and its the shooters responsibility not the weapon used. Those who believe that juveniles should receive adult penalties for serious crimes often claim that the young children are not fully aware of the crime they commit and destruction that will affect the victims of the crime. For example in a shooting at Jonesboro, where an eleven and thirteen year old shot dead four school girls and a teacher, critics distinguished that the attack wasnt committed at the spur of the moment or under the immediate influence of strong emotion. Instead they claim that the killings were highly planned and vigilantly carried out. The two juvenile killers were noted to supplied themselves with a gate away vehicle, wore camouflage clothing, selected a high vantage point form which to shoot, lured their innocent victims out by trigging a fire alarm and waited for the school doors to automatically lock before opening fire. (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 2) The opposing view is that children in their opinion are unable to grasp the consequences of their actions. A child who kills very probably doesnt realize the finality of death and so does not fully understand what he/she has done when they take someones life. Correspondingly, it is claimed that children are unlikely to be deterred for a crime because they are terrified of a cruel punishment. According to this line of disagreement most children are impulsive and have a naive idea in  their own immortality. This means that children are unlikely to think about possible punishments prior to committing a serious crime and are unlikely to be able to even envision penalties like life in jail being applied to them. This point was made by child psychiatrist William Licamele, who claimed, At age 11 or 12 kid are normally self-absorbed, self centered, magical, they dont think anything can happen to them, there is going to be no retribution (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 4) This meaning that the threat of harsh punishment will not prevent them from committing a crime. Thus, it has been argued that applying adult penalties to children who commit serious crimes will have little to no deterrent effect. On the other hand, juveniles should receive adult punishments; fully premeditated murders (like the Jonesboro have been said to be) are no different just because juveniles have committed them. This point questions weather or not the young offenders are adequately aware of the cost of their actions to be held legally liable for them. Mr. Gerard Henderson, executive director of Sydney institute, has summed up this point of arrangement. He claims, I certainly know what I was doing when I was 13 and 11. I suspect that Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden (shooters at Jonesboro) also know what they were doing (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 2) Mr. Gerard Henderson also claims, Those days it is increasingly accepted that most children mature relatively early and that, in an intellectual and recreational sense. Most are relatively independent by 16 (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 2) This indicates that youth are more mature and so its argued that they are more capable of appreciating the consequences of their actions than children in the past years. Focusing on the punishment of these so called more mature youths is shortsighted, as the cause of the crime committed is probably outside the control of the children. According to this line argument, the general public is more likely to be able to prevent these crimes from occurring if they can  discover why they are happening, rather than focusing on the punishment of the individual offender. This suggests that children who commit serious crimes are most likely victims of developments of society or inside their own families that they are not responsible for. E.g. same authorities have suggested that martial breakdown, the disintegration of extended family and families were both parents work may all be factors contributing to child crime. (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 4) Many people say that it doesnt matter that a child committed the crime, but that the damaged he/she caused to the victim is the same no matter the age of the perpetrator. Mitchell Weight, whose wife was one of the five killed at Jonesboro claimed, It doesnt matter that those were boys. Their age has nothing to do with the fact that they murdered my wife and four others (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 3) Those who say that the crime and the damage should remain the same despite the age of the offender seem to mean that the punishment should be that same. This argument is based on the notion of justice. Those who affect serious harm to others should be given a proportionately serve penalty for their crimes. Children may have committed a crime that has caused serious harm due to having had luck of guidance and emotional support. The child may suffer from feelings of desertion, alienation and damaged self-esteem. Which can encourage them to lush out at others. Such children may not have been given adequate role modals to help them cope with whatever hardship they will encounter in their lives. Children who lush out at others and become juvenile offenders should receive comparable penalties to adult crimes so that other young people will not copy them. This point was put by Mr. Gerard Henderson, he argued and said that, The Jonesboro shooting was but the most recent in a wave of schoolyard murders where boys or young men have murdered students and teachers. Who is to say the soft treatment of one young murderer will not encourage another? (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 3) Societies such as the United States where guns are broadly accepted and where  even young children are trained in the use of guns, are giving young offenders a mean of turning their teenage anger and resentment into homicide. If guns were not so widely available then most of the school shootings would have never happened, the child with the sense of grievance would have expressed it in a form such as fighting, truancy or disobedience in class. It has been claimed that children trained from an early age in the use of guns may be desensitized to potentially grave consequences. Children introduced to guns at an early age may simple regard guns as one more toy. Although guns are widely available that opposing view is that you cant blame the availability of weapons for any crime committed using them. A local in Jonesboro stated, You lay a gun on the table and a hundred years from now the gun will still be there, unless someone touches it (Mclnerney, J, 1994: page 4) This argument is saying that the responsibility for the shooting rests with the shooter, not the weapon. I personally believe that it depends on the offender, weather it was committed from a strong emotion or a planned slaughter. Either way they should first go into a program to help them. But if it was a planned slaughter, at the same time of being in a program they should get punished as an adult so they know that they cant get away with it and no one else hopefully will not copy what they have done. The issues that I have covered in this essay are that children dont know/know what they have done, harsh punishment doesnt work well, youths have grown up a lot more quickly, if they harm someone the offender should get the equal amount of punishment, they have has no good role modals, soft treatment will make other youths copy the offenders crime, guns are part if the youths life from a young age and its not the weapons responsibility of the crime that they have committed. Bibliography: Mclnerney, J, 1994 www.echoed.com.au/protected/outlines1/issues.htm Echo Education Services

The Pearl by John Stienbeck Movie versus Novel Essay -- essays researc

In the novel The Pearl the author, John Steinbeck, writes about a man named Kino who finds a â€Å"Great Pearl† and how greed consumes him and the people around him with murderous feelings towards the beholder of the pearl. A movie was later adapted from the book in 1947 that exhibited many similar characteristics as the book. However, although the book and the movie are very much a like they are also quite different. In the novel, the main character, Kino, goes out to find a pearl in hopes of getting money to pay the doctor to treat Coyotito, his son, who has been bitten by a scorpion. Kino discovers the biggest pearl anyone has ever seen, and believes the pearl will bring nothing but good for him and his family. The pearl does change the lives of Kino, his wife Juana, and Coyotito, but not in the way he had hoped. When the people in La Paz find out about Kino’s pearl, he is visited by a greedy priest and doctor, the deceitful pearl buyers try to scam him into selling it to them for less than it’s worth, and the pearl was almost stolen twice. Kino kills the second thief in self-defense...

Othello’s Tragedy

Marlene Romo Professor Williams English 1B 4 December, 2011 Othello’s Tragic Fall According to Aristotle, a tragedy must include the downfall of the tragic hero brought upon by his hamartia, in other words his weakness or flaw. It must also be comprised of the hero’s peripetia, where when he once had it all, it is now all lost. After the peripetia, the anagnorises follows; this is where the hero attributes his downfall to his weakness or flaw. The hero must be noble both in birth as well as in stature and according to Aristotle in the end of the play the audience must experience catharsis by encountering feelings of pity and fear.Even though Shakespeare’s Othello does include most of the requirements of an Aristotelian Tragedy it lacks a few elements, such as a hamartia and an anagnorises as well as catharsis. Othello’s downfall is not brought upon himself instead Iago’s manipulation is the cause, therefore the play does not fulfill Aristotleâ€℠¢s standards of a Tragedy. Although the audience fails to experience catharsis at the end of the play, Othello does help the audience come to the realization that cruel and manipulative people such as Iago exist in today’s society.While those who consider Othello to be a tragedy might argue that Othello’s hamartia is being naive, others may attribute Desdemona’s death to Iago’s manipulation of Othello. The fact that Iago was able to manipulate not only Othello but Roderigo, Cassio, Emilia and even Desdemona proves that he is extremely persuasive and thus Iago can be held accountable for Desdemona’s death. Since it is Iago who influences Othello into killing Desdemona that means Othello does not have a hamartia but instead confirms that Iago is very manipulative.Iago slowly but skillfully begins to implant doubt into Othello, for example when they see Cassio walking out of Desdemona’s room: Iago: Ha! I like not that. Othello: What dost thou s ay? Iago: Nothing, my lord: or if—I know not what. Othello: Was not that Cassio parted from my wife Iago: Cassio, my lord! No, sure, I cannot think it, That he would steal away so guilty-like,   Seeing you coming. Othello: I do believe 'twas he. (III. iii. 35-42) Iago makes Othello believe Desdemona is being unfaithful to him with Cassio, because he is constantly suggesting this.After some time Othello begins to believe every word Iago tells him and eventually ends up doubting his wife’s fidelity which results in her death. Desdemona dies and Othello finds himself losing everything but it is not due to hamartia it is due to Iago’s cruel manipulation of the mind. Othello listens to everything Iago says to him and believes it to be true for example when Iago says to Othello â€Å"But he that filches from me my good name and makes me poor indeed. Robs me of that which not enriches him† (III. iii 72-74) Here one can be a witness to Iago’s master mani pulation.Iago is saying: Othello, Cassio is robbing you of your reputation and that is immoral not only because he wants you to lose your respect and is only doing this to hurt you, but because he will not receive any personal gain and yet is still determined to go through with it . Iago does this throughout most of the play, he instills ideas into Othello’s mind and does it with the intention of hurting him, therefore Othello does not have a tragic flaw that causes his downfall but instead Iago is the one who brings Othello down with his manipulation.Since Othello does not have a hamartia anagnorises does not take place. Othello’s downfall is attributed to Iago’s manipulation not to Othello’s flaw. Even though it is Othello who suffocates Desdemona to death, this would never have happened if it weren’t for Iago’s manipulation. Othello cannot help but feel partially responsible for the death of Desdemona but he is aware of Iago’s crue l influence on him. When Othello has killed Desdemona and Emilia explains to him the way Iago got a hold of the handkerchief Othello says â€Å"Are there no stones in heaven But what serves for the thunder? Precious villain! † (V. ii. 241-242). Here Othello is finally able to see Iago as the villain that he is, and he asks heaven why it will not strike him dead. Othello never feels fully responsible for Desdemona’s death, he knows he is partially to blame but he also recognizes Iago as a villain so therefore anagnorises does not take place. Othello is not the only one who views Iago as a villain after Emilia’s confession so does Lodovico and the rest.After Iago is brought to the room as a prisoner Lodovico says to Othello: â€Å"O thou Othello, that was once so good, Fall’n in the practice of a cursed slave† (V, ii, 300-301). Lodovico is aware that Othello’s drastic change was brought upon by Iago’s evil manipulation and attributes De sdemona’s death to him. Everyone in the room realizes that Iago was not the â€Å"honest†( V. ii. 161) person they believed him to be, not only did they now realize he was a villain but they also became aware of all the people he manipulated, such as Othello, Roderigo, Cassio, Desdemona, and Emilia.Despite the fact that catharsis does not take place, the audience does experience fear toward the end of the play. The audience experiences fear because they become aware of the existence of men like that of Iago, in society. Dramatic irony is what allows the audience to witness Iago’s malicious plans. Iago is pure evil and unlike the characters in the play the audience is aware of this throughout the play. As the play progresses the audience gradually becomes more and more aware of Iago’s cruelty.The audience cannot help but come to the realization that men like Iago do exist in the real world. Marvin Rosenberg, Shakespearean scholar and a UC Berkeley professo r points this out in his essay, when speaking of Iago he says â€Å"he evokes our fear, because we know that wicked men do exist† (Rosenberg157). Rosenberg states that the audience fears to encounter people like Iago because he seemed so trustworthy and yet he was able to manipulate everyone he wanted to and was almost able to get away with murder.Rosenberg argues in his essay titled â€Å"In Defense of Iago† that Shakespeare’s purpose in writing this play was to enlighten the audience in the ways of thinking of a mischievous man. Rosenberg believes that Shakespeare wanted the audience to know how an evil man’s â€Å"twisted emotions work† (Rosenberg 157). Even though the audience fails to experience catharsis, good comes from the play because now the audience has been exposed to the evil of man and can go about living life without being too naive. Shakespeare’s Othello is not a tragedy under Aristotle’s standards.First of all Othello does not have a hamartia. Secondly, it is because he does not have a hamartia that he does not experience anagnorises. And lastly the audience does not experience catharsis. Othello cannot be considered a tragedy under Aristotle’s conditions but despite this, the play if effective when it comes to opening the eyes of the audience to the existence of people like Iago. After being exposed to the play the audience is now more capable of distinguishing an honorable person from a dishonest one.Once the audience becomes aware of the malicious acts of Iago they will question the motives of others and this will help them separate the truly honest people from those who are strategically manipulative. Works Cited Crowther, John, ed. â€Å"No Fear Othello. † SparkNotes. com. SparkNotes LLC. 2005. Web. 11 Nov. 2011. Rosenberg, Marvin. â€Å"In Defense of Iago. † Shakespeare Quarterly 6. 2 (1955): 145-158. Jstor. Web. 27 Nov. 2011. Shakespeare, William Othello,the Moor of V enice. Literature:An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama and Writing. Eds. X. J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. 6th Compact e. New York: Longman, 2010. 912-1012. Print.

Political Aspects of the Classical Age of Greece

This is a brief introduction to the Classical Age in Greece, a period that followed the Archaic Age and lasted through the creation of a Greek empire, by Alexander the Great. The Classical Age was characterized by most of the cultural wonders that we associate with ancient Greece. It corresponds with the period of the height of democracy, the flowering of Greek tragedy, and the architectural marvels at Athens. The Classical Age of Greece begins either with with the fall of the Athenian tyrant Hippias, son of Peisistratos/Pisistratus, in 510 B.C., or the Persian Wars, which the Greeks fought against the Persians in Greece and Asia Minor from 490-479 B.C. When you think of the movie 300, youre thinking of one of the battles fought during the Persian Wars. Solon, Peisistratus, Cleisthenes, and the Rise of Democracy When the Greeks adopted democracy it wasnt an overnight affair or a question of throwing out monarchs. The process developed and changed over time. The Classical Age of Greece ends with the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. Besides war and conquest, in the Classical period, the Greeks produced great literature, poetry, philosophy, drama, and art. This was the time when the genre of history was first established. It also produced the institution we know of as Athenian democracy. Alexander the Great Profile The Macedonians Philip and Alexander put an end to the power of the individual city-states at the same time they spread the culture of the Greeks all the way to the Indian Sea. Rise of Democracy One unique contribution of the Greeks, democracy lasted beyond the Classical period and had its roots in the earlier time, but it still characterized the Classical age. During the era before the Classical Age, in what is sometimes called the Archaic Age, Athens and Sparta had followed different paths. Sparta had two kings and an oligarchic government while Athens had instituted democracy. Etymology of Oligarchy oligos few arche rule Etymology of Democracy demos the people of a country krateo rule A Spartan woman had the right to own property, whereas, in Athens, she had few freedoms. In Sparta, men and women served the state; in Athens, they served the Oikos household/family. Etymology of Economy Economy oikos home nomos custom, usage, ordinance Men were trained in Sparta to be laconic warriors and in Athens to be public speakers. Persian Wars Despite an almost endless series of differences, the Hellenes from Sparta, Athens, and elsewhere fought together against the monarchical Persian Empire. In 479 they repelled the numerically mightier Persian force from the Greek mainland. Peloponnesian and Delian Alliances For the next few decades after the end of the Persian Wars, relations between the 2 major poleis city-states deteriorated. The Spartans, who had earlier been the unquestioned leaders of the Greeks, suspected Athens (a new naval power) of trying to take control of all of Greece. Most of the poleis on the Peloponnese allied with Sparta. Athens was at the head of the poleis in the Delian League. Its members were along the coast of the Aegean Sea and on islands in it. The Delian League initially had been formed against the Persian Empire, but finding it lucrative, Athens transformed it into its own empire. Pericles, the foremost statesman of Athens from 461-429, introduced payment for public offices so more of the population than just the rich could hold them. Pericles initiated the building of the Parthenon, which was supervised by the famed Athenian sculptor Pheidias. Drama and philosophy flourished. Peloponnesian War and Its Aftermath Tensions between the Peloponnesian and Delian alliances mounted. The Peloponnesian War broke out in 431 and lasted for 27 years. Pericles, along with many others, died of plague early in the war. Even after the end of the Peloponnesian War, which Athens lost, Thebes, Sparta, and Athens continued to take turns as the dominant Greek power. Instead of one of them becoming the clear leader, they dissipated their strength and fell prey to the empire-building Macedonian king Phillip II and his son Alexander the Great. Historians of the Archaic and Classical Period HerodotusPlutarchStraboPausaniasThucydidesDiodorus SiculusXenophonDemosthenesAeschinesNeposJustin Historians of the Period When Greece Was Dominated by the Macedonians DiodorusJustinThucydidesArrian fragments of Arrian found in PhotiusDemosthenesAeschinesPlutarch