WWII 2.0

Increasingly people are worried about how Trump's victory could be copied in Europe and how it bring about a new world balance. These fears are well grounded with Brexit and the recent Italian referendum signaling more and more countries trying to break from the EU. More worryingly CNN recently interviewed Marine le-Pen from France's National Front ,who said that Trump's victory would help her nationalist platform and "as a sign of hope". Unfortunately many this increasing nationalism as a repeat of the rise of Fascism in WWII and that have led a few to even predict a repeat and a WWIII. However, I do not think that such fears are well founded due to two very potent weapons, globalization, and nuclear weapons. It has set the stakes for confrontation so high and with no real winners that any sabre rattling would be just that. Insults and tweets and phone calls but no action because we rely on each other so much in the global economy and war wipes out everyone.

Baze v. Rees (2008)

The case I researched for my Law and Society Project was Baze v. Rees. It was a case that took place in Kentucky that addressed lethal injection. 

Ralph Baze shot and killed two police officers. He tried to argue it was self defense but ended up on death row. He decided to try and change the policy for lethal injection by claiming that it violated the eight amendment, banning the use of cruel and unusual punishment.

With the lethal injection cocktail there are three parts. An anesthetic, a paralytic and then a final injection that induces cardiac arrest. If the anesthetic doesn't work completely for whatever reason, the inmate will be in excruciating pain.

This case was so important because it was the first time the Supreme Court really considered changing the policy. In the end they decided that Kentucky's lethal injection cocktail was within the parameters for the eight amendment so it was not violated. The inmates failed to present evidence that showed flaws in the administration of the drug. It was 7-2 against Baze. 

Nixon v. United States

In my Law and Society paper, I wrote about Nixon v. the United States. This case taught me a lot about the effects and consequences of lying. Nixon was suspected in taking part in the break in the Democratic National Committee offices at the Watergate Hotel. After long testimonies and questionings, the judge requested to see the White House tapes. When he listened to it, he discovered a 18.5 minute gap on it, resulting in Nixon becoming guilty. This case had a great effect on the citizens of the United States and others countries: some started to become more cautious with the government, and when choosing executive officials, while other countries withdrew relations because of their sudden mistrust in the United States government.

A Trump President: I care less than I thought I would

During his campaign, despite having some valid political views, (not all but some) I absolutely could not agree with Donald Trump’s social views. He said things that were blatantly sexist, racist, and outright offensive to just about everyone (or at least it should have been). However, despite a few days of being seriously bummed out that this was to be the face I see for the next four years (at least), I have started accepting it. It wasn't just time that gave me this new opinion, but Trump himself. He has started changing some of his policies and started appealing more towards the other side of the country, distancing himself from the more negative aspects of his campaign (not entirely but somewhat). To my understanding, Trump is no longer interested in persecuting Hilary Clinton, he is interested in entitlement reform which he was not for during his campaign, he is no longer opposed to gay marriage, he wants to honor NATO agreements, and he has moved his stance on deportation from deporting all illegal immigrants, to only the criminal immigrants. I still don't approve of him as a president, but for the sake of a united country, I will support him so long as he stays on the path of  understanding and tolerance.

ON A SIDE NOTE

"You should review not on the "who and what did they involve" but the legal concepts that are relevant to each. "

There were not a small number of questions related to the "Who and what did they involve" on the test today so...

I'm just saying.

Case Studies

Something I have personally taken away from the hours of watching and taking notes on documentary is how the legal system works. We watched an ungodly amount of case studies and for what? In my opinion what I learned from all of this is a real understanding of the legal system. Instead of looking at books about the legal system and how it functions we took cases that a peculiar defense or appeal. I gained an understanding of how to really work the system. In the end it all comes down to a jury. If you can convince a jury that you did not commit the crime beyond reasonable doubt then you can beat the legal system. Looking at cases like Andrea Yates and Aflluenza, also gave us insight into crazy defenses. These cases showed us that you can use anything for a defense as long as it convinces a jury. Our legal system is based all of how convincing you can be. And for cases like OJ, the jury was just much easier to convince so he got off easier. These case studies have opened my eyes to how the legal system functions and  how flawed our system is.

As the semester comes to an end we can look back to everything we talked about like cases like the "Twinkies defense" and breath taking like the Andrea Yates, I believe that it is very sad to know that a mother killed all of her 5 kids. I think that she should have not been trusted to stay home alone with her kids knowing that she had problems and didn't know what she was doing. In my opinion the husband should've also been help responsible he noticed that she was having trouble and yet he didn't look for more ways to help her. He blames her but it's also his fault for not taking precautions especially because they had been in a mental institution a few days before because of the same problem.

News Networks Ignoring Real News

Throughout the election cycle, I (and I'm sure many others) became increasingly aware of the constant media attention that the Presidential election was getting. As important as the election for POTUS is, a lot of other issues were ignored by the TV News Networks. Certain networks have even admitted to ignoring other issues to cover the election, which I feel is absurd. Yes, the public needs to be informed on the election to make an educated vote, but this shouldn't leave out other important world issues. People were constantly being informed about Donald Trump's newest vulgar claims or updated on Hilary Clinton's emails, but what about the recent coup attempt in Turkey? Or Midway Atoll, the island in the pacific ocean that's being buried by plastic trash that ended up in the ocean? As important as our own country is, we need to also be thinking about the rest of the world. A majority of American's are uneducated about the problems going on across the globe, and this election cycle the news networks didn't help this issue.