What Is Murder Wrong

Mr. smith on october 23,2015 mr. smith (victim) i have evidence that u killed the defendent mr.holland and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth now put your right hand on the bibe and lets get started. now i going to be asking u some questions like how it happend but the passage quot that u was “waking u screaming”the old man said, he was scared something would come get him or some and, it was like he was painicking. there was a dripping from the roof and he thought the police would here the sound bc he had hidden the body under the wood floor.and the the police was still searching and they could’t find nothing then the victim was scared at the moment. Mr.smith was acting like he was insane.

Imagine that you are taking a brief walk at night with your dog or by yourself and suddenly feel suffocated. The next thing you know, you have become the next victim of a gruesome sexual attack. However, you could never tell your tale because, at the lowest point of this heinous ordeal, you realize that your rapist will now turn into your murderer. This is the case of the Hillside Strangler, a story of two cousins, Angelo Buono and Kenneth Bianchi, and the brutal crimes they were charged with.

This fellow is a danger to the people in the community. This poor elderly man misunderstood Billy. Just because Billy was agitated, that doesn’t give him the right to ruthlessly punch the unfortunate old man. The final reason is Billy committed murder.

In “38 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police” heard and witness a woman getting murdered. The citizens do too little to help the victim. The majority of residents do nothing to help the victim. When the residents finally did something, it was too late. Martin Ginsberg’s “38 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police” argues that society has moral apathy.

Killing people is a horrible thing to do, even if they did thoughtlessly murder a whole family in the middle of the night. It makes you just as bad as a killer then they

Some victims of violent crimes were in the hands of mentally ill or handicapped people. These mentally ill people that kill, do not usually kill out of a lack of moral grounding or "evil". These people typically either do not understand right from wrong or are unable to comprehend the possible outcomes the murder may have on themselves or others around them. Although most mentally ill people do not end up on death row, receiving instead long sentencing or treatment, the number of people who have been executed that were unknowingly mentally ill or had similar faulty thinking, and a potential for rehabilitation cannot be known. Also, capital punishment may normalize or rationalize murder.

According to Hinman (5), just punishment is the one that happens to those who are proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. This is important because capital punishment is irreversible and hence only the guilty should be executed. However, there are many cases of innocent people who have been sentenced to death only to have their appeals granted at the last minute, or worse, denied and executed. It is on these grounds that Bedau (2007) argues against the death penalty because it is unjust and unfair. About unfairness, he goes on to add that racial and economic discrimination are also a factor to consider when meting out capital punishment.

Flowers offers two reasons as to why Michelle Carter should be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter: She “actively encouraged” him to kill himself knowing that her boyfriend was emotionally unstable and confined in her and told him to “get back in” after he got out of the car filled with carbon monoxide seeking her guidance (3). Furthermore, Flowers presents counterarguments that seek Carter should not do time in prison: for example, Flowers claims that the reason Conrad Roy ultimately killed himself was because her words “get back in”, were “the proximate cause of his death” (3). In the end, Flowers concludes by saying Michelle Carter should “pay for her dark act,

This concept is similar to stealing a candy bar from a convenient store then feeling guilty and the breaking and entering the same store when it is closed to put it back. Neither murder nor putting other to death is morally right. Understandably the fact of having cereal killers off this planet for good is no inconvenience for us but who are we to decide when another human is to die. This argument also refuses touch on the scenarios of war, self-defence, and abortion. These are all instances that can be considered murder and according to Primoratz murder is murder and that is an inexcusable offence.

The topic of capital punishment presents a test of values. The arguments in support of and opposition to the death penalty are complex. In the end, this is a question of an individual’s values and morals. The topic requires careful thought to reach a reasoned position. Both sides of the argument are defensible.

Killing another seems very unjustifiable, which might be the case but when someone takes another 's life and sent to prison, death row or capital punishment is needed to put that person were they belong. People like that deserve to die because of their mistake of killing another and it deters other people to not kill others, showing them what would happen. In the case of Capital Punishment, Hunting for Sport, or George and Lennie, killing is a justifiable act. In the case of capital punishment killing is justified and needs to be done. For example, “Some crimes are so inherently evil they demand strict penalties up to and including death”(McClatchy).

First of all he stalked this old man for a week, and watched him as he slept. Second he kills the old man because he believes that the mans heart beating will wake up the neighbors. Someone 's heart can not beat so loud that the neighbors can hear it. His sanity wasn 't in tack because to believe that someone in another house can hear someone 's heart beat is insane. Third killing the old man due to his heart beating loudly is a poor excuse to kill someone.

Also, if society does not sentence an offender to death, they are an accomplice to that crime (Avaliani, 2004). Criminals that kill should suffer the same fate as their victims. The punishment should,

In the article Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn 't Call Police, author Martin Gansberg recalls the events that occurred on the night of March 13, 1964. "38 respectful, law abiding citizens" (120) stood idle as Kitty Genovese was hunted down on three separate occasions and murdered. Not once was an attempt made to alert authorities, an action that may have resulted in Kitty 's life being spared. When questioned, the spectators had a multitude of excuses for why they had not notified authorities, some of which included, "I didn 't want to get involved," (122) and even, "I was tired" (123). This article demonstrates the violence of this time period and the unwillingness of humans to assist those in need.

They do not think that they vote for a fellow human being to be killed. Death penalty and the egoistic mindset humans have is proof that humanity is starting to fade. It needs to be pointed out that the public support of death penalty has a huge effect on either it will stay or not. In conclusion, I would like to add that we are all humans and we should be treated that way.