Ashford 6: – Week 5 – Discussion 1

Retributive Justice and Mandatory Life Imprisonment for Juvenile Offenders

  

In Chapter 5 of the textbook, the author examines retributive justice   from the standpoint of the means of punishment (Section 5.2). He calls   attention to the length of prison sentences and, in particular, the issue of   mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders.

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court declared laws that require judges to   impose life-without-parole sentences for juveniles to be in violation of the   Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments.” The   decision (Miller v. Alabama) was a 5-4 split   in the Court – which is typical of many such decisions that apply the cruel   and unusual punishment provision.

Your initial post must analyze the retributive justice issues of   mandatory, life-without-parole sentences. Consider the facts of Miller v. Alabama: Defendant Miller, a 14-year old   boy, with an accomplice beat the victim with a baseball bat and set his   trailer on fire with the victim inside. Defendant Miller was tried as an   adult for capital murder while committing arson.

Is a mandatory, life-without-parole sentence just in such   circumstances? Remember that “just” may or may not be the same as   “constitutional.” Summarize both the pros and the cons of your answer to   this question, and critically evaluate these pros and cons, applying   principles of retributive justice discussed in the text. Your evaluation must   respond to the pros and cons, giving persuasive reasons why you agree with   some and disagree with some.

Your initial post should be at least 300 words in length. Support   your claims with examples from at least two of the required resources for   this discussion, and properly cite any references. Respond to at least two of   your classmates’ posts by Day 7 whose viewpoints are different from yours.   Each peer response must be at least 125 words. Stimulate critical thinking by   contrasting your perspective with your classmate’s and explaining yours, or   by asking your classmate a question and explaining why your question is   significant.

This assignment gives you the opportunity to explore ethical perspectives in film. In 500-600 words, please consider the three primary ethical schools we have explored in the class: virtue ethics, teleological, and deontological ethics. Choose a film, and then identify the primary school of thought that is best reflected in the film. This activity aligns with module outcomes 1, 3 and 5.Content Requirements:Specifically refer to at least two scenes in the film as evidence for the school of thought that is best reflected in the film.Quote dialogue from the film and provide some context for the scenes you’re discussing and analyzing.Remember to discuss why the other two schools may not strictly apply to the film. Or perhaps you can argue that the two other schools are present in some of the decisions or actions of some minor characters, but they do not necessarily dominate the film.Speculate as to why a specific ethical school dominates this film. Does the topic lend itself to the particular ethical view? Does the setting or historical period of the film lend itself to a certain ethical view? Has the director stated or implied what was ethically important when he or she made the film?Read and quote from 2 movie reviews and your readings to help clarify or support any of your ideas.Writing Requirements: Develop an interesting introduction which includes an evident thesis.Logically organize your ideas, ensuring that there are transitions between each paragraph.Use proper grammar and syntaxUse detail, dialogue , and description to support your ideas.Use direct quotations from the movie review and your readings, using APA citation style

This course uses the American Psychological Association (APA) format for scholarly writing.  References and citations must adhere to the proper format for all written work presented including essays, discussion postings, and essay exams. Online tips for using APA style may be found at the

Hello

I would like you to write a report about the experiment and follow instructions and requirements to do so. read the manual carefully and requirement instructions.

Report to be assembled in the following order:

(1) Cover Page
(2) Abstract
(3) Results

(4) Conclusions

(5) Worksheet

(6) Sample Calculations including uncertainty analysis

(7) Datasheet.

i attached the manual Lab and data sheet and instructions.

  

Week 3 – Discussion

93 93 unread replies. 109 109 replies. 

Your initial discussion thread is due on Day 3 (Thursday) and you have until Day 7 (Monday) to respond to your classmates. Your grade will reflect both the quality of your initial post and the depth of your responses. Refer to the Discussion Forum Grading Rubric under the Settings icon above for guidance on how your discussion will be evaluated.

  

Currrent   Business Problems: Case Studies: Lehman Brothers, British Petroleum,   Monsanto, Merck, …

  

This discussion assignment   requires you to submit at least four posts: an initial post, two reply   posts to fellow students in threads other than your own, and a revised post.

  

Prepare: In your first post in this discussion, you will identify   and apply one ethical theory of your choosing to a current problem in   business, also of your choosing. Start by reviewing your notes on the Week   One course material and your completed work for Week One. Then, choose one of   the three ethical theories—i.e., utilitarianism, deontology, or virtue   ethics—on the basis of your thoughtfully considered preference in general and   independent of the business problem that you will select here. Keep in mind   that you will employ this ethical theory for supporting your position not   only for this discussion, but also for this week’s assignment and the Final   Project.

To prepare for your selection of   the current problem in business, look at the list of required articles and   multimedia which are divided in the six case-categories as follows: Banking (Lehman Brothers) Environment (BP) GMOs (Monsanto) Pharmaceuticals (Merck) Gender Discrimination (Goodyear) Factory Farms (Perdue)

Choose the case-category that you   find the most interesting and note that each category also corresponds to one   particular case. Please choose carefully because your choice for this   discussion will establish the case that will be central to your argumentative   essay this week as well as your Final Project in Week Five. It is recommended   that you leaf through all the required resources indicated for the possible   case-categories that you identify as possible contenders before making your   final choice.

  

Reflect: Once you have selected your ethical theory and your case   category, articulate the characteristics of the economic system (or   combination of both systems) that serves as the setting for the case   presented in the case category sources. Given this context, examine how the   nation’s laws affect the operations of the business.

Next, identify the characteristics   of your chosen ethical theory and its notion of the moral good. For the   latter, you will need to review again the PowerPoint that was introduced in   Week One, which is also listed in this week’s Required Resources and it is   titled The Moral Good in Three Traditional Ethical Theories. Then, think how   you would apply the ethical theory to the specific problem presented in the   case category sources.

  

Write: Start your post by (a) identifying the issue or problem   that you want to address in the case that you have selected and providing an   impartial presentation of the controversy, (b) articulating briefly the   characteristics of the economic system that serves as the setting, and (c)   examining the laws that affect the operations of the business.

The following illustration should   help. Consider, for example, the case of Uber that we examined in Week Two.   If the California decision establishes a precedent for similar claims, then   Uber would have to do business as an employer and not merely as a service   that pairs consumers with ride sharing services by means of a unique phone   app. Accordingly, the law would require Uber to reimburse its drivers for   certain costs and perhaps offer benefits. Take in consideration, then, the   legal setting for the case that you have chosen. Does the case take place in   the United States or another country? What are the laws that are relevant to   the problem under examination? Keep in mind that all laws are constraints on   our actions, whether those by individuals or corporations. The relevant laws,   then, will be (a) any laws that present not only a constraint on the   company’s operations, (b) any laws that are being violated by the corporation,   or (c) any laws that unfairly limit the goods and services that can be   offered to and are demanded by consumers.

In a second paragraph, formulate a   sentence that presents the moral position that you want to defend in regard   to the issue or problem introduced in the previous paragraph.

In the same paragraph, present the   ethical theory that you choose to employ. Your choices are utilitarianism,   deontology, and virtue ethics, and the necessary material is included in the   required readings and media. Make sure to identify the characteristics of the   ethical theory, and include in-text citations and full references in APA form   at the end of the post. Once you have done this, apply the ethical theory to   your selected case by explaining how it lends itself to the moral position   that you are defending.

 

Revise: Read the feedback provided by your professor to your   initial post, either directly to you or to your fellow students. Use this as   an opportunity to learn from your professor, especially with regard to the   best ways to apply the course material and your research to your analysis. On   the basis of what you have learned in this process, post a revision of your   initial post that applies the additional knowledge that you have gained.

Remember that your grade depends   on the quality of your initial and revised responses, not just on the   submission of an attempt at improvement. It is thus to your advantage to post   the best initial post you can and then to also improve that best effort as   much as you can through revision. Taking this process seriously will help you   develop the skills you need to do well on the final project.

 

Requirements for Your Initial   Post: Your initial post should be at least 400 words        in length and have citations and references in APA notation. It should        address the prompt in its entirety. This means that you should not split        your response to the prompt in multiple posts. Your examination should        be both thorough and succinct. This is a combination that demands time        and thought, so give yourself sufficient time to draft and revise. Please be advised that until you post, you will not        see what your fellow students are posting. Once you submit your post,        you will be able to view the posts from your other classmates. You can        then proceed to reply to at least two different threads based on the        required material for this discussion. Your list of references for your initial post should        include the videos and the other required reading material pertaining to        your chosen subject heading, as well as the ethics, economic, and law        components of Weeks One and Two, the Instructor Guidance, and any other        announcements presented to you by your professor. In addition, your        references should include any other sources that you consult to inform        yourself about your chosen case category (but not Wikipedia or similar        sources). Your initial post for this discussion should be        submitted no later than the end of Thursday (11:59 pm, U.S. Mountain        time).

 

Requirements for Replies to Other   Threads: At least two of the four posts required should be in        the form of replies to fellow classmates in threads other than your own. Each of your replies should be at least 200 words        and informed by the required course material. As such, the replies        must have citations and references in APA notation. Your list of        references for each reply should include all of the course material that        has informed your reply, in addition to any research that you have        obtained on your own. Your replies should focus on the specific examination        presented by your fellow student and these should include an examination        of whether or not the characteristics of the ethical theory and/or        economic system were identified well, and whether or not their application        and analysis were also carried out successfully. Providing such an        examination is not an attack on your fellow student but an attempt to        work together with your fellow student toward the better understanding        of the ethical theories employed, as well as their application.

 

Requirements for Revising   your Initial Post: Submit a revision of your initial post by either        replying to your own post, or to the feedback provided to you by your        professor. There is no minimum word requirement for your revised        initial post. But you should always explain the reasons for revising        your post so that it is clear what you are doing. If you are revising        only a few words, or an ethical theory, you should avoidsubmitting a        post with vague language such as: “another ethical theory works better        here” or “I now understand how to do the analysis.” It is important to        recognize that no one can read your mind so you need to provide the        setting for your revision (Why? What prompted it? What course material        informed you?). Your revised initial post is your chance to correct        any oversights or errors in your initial post, or show your improved        understanding of the material and its applications to the case at hand.        You may, for example, come to the realization that another ethical theory        is better than the one that you initially chose. Accordingly, your        revision should indicate that you chose another ethical theory and an        explanation why you find the replacement more suitable. You may also        find the need to revise any relevant portions of your analysis. Or, you        might have realized that your conclusion did not take into account        important factors necessary for your evaluation of the situation. You should maximize the improvement of your initial        post by employing your professor’s feedback as a guide. Keep in mind that you may not always receive direct        feedback from your professor. But your professor will have submitted        feedback in the discussion to other posts. So read your professor’s        feedback whether it is addressed to you directly or to other fellow        students. This will give you much to think about and apply to your own        post. If your professor or a fellow classmate responds to        your revised initial post, and on this basis, you find good reason to        submit yet another revision, then by all means do so. The more you        improve your initial post, the more you will benefit both in terms of        your learning and most likely your grade.