Law and Order Clip
4. Law and Order is a popular television series that gives a vivid representation of all different types of legal cases. In this clip, an 18 year old boy is on trial for murdering the owner of a Chinese restaurant. The owner was delivering food to an apartment that turned out to be empty, while the boy and his friends plotted to kill him. I found this clip especially interesting because it discusses the Death Penalty, which is an extremely controversial topic in society today. The jury is trying to decide if the 18 year old boy is too young to be killed, even though he committed such a horrible crime. At the end of the episode, the verdict turns out to be the Death Penalty even though the boy had just turned 18 only a few days ago. The boy's lawyer tries to argue that the boy is so young and still has the opportunity to change and become a better person in 20 years or so. Even if that were true, it is impossible for him to ever take back what he did to his victim, and all the lives he ruined because of it. His action will always be a representation of who he is and what type of character he has.
I personally do not agree with the Death Penalty and I find it to be hypercritical. This video proves that even the youngest most innocent people have the ability to do horrible and irreversible things. Shows like Law and Order depict all different types of crimes and the consequences people receive for committing them. This episode was especially important because the Death Penalty was indeed granted to an 18 year old boy.
#1: I wonder what could cause someone, especially a young teenager, to kill another. There are many sociological reasons that could push that limit, such as socialization as violent (as can happen with members of gangs). Another important part of reaching that level would be to personalize who is being killed. One the other hand, what can cause a jury of randomly chosen people to decide to kill another? They have less individual responsibility, and all the debating to reach a uniform verdict would allow any naysayers to be won over by the crowd, or even just another individual. The ritual and elaborate actions that accompany the jury would also make the choice easier as they would mask the details and goriness of killing someone.
ReplyDelete#4 I completely agree with you. So what if the boy is 18. He is now considered an adult and should get charged the same way an adult would. There is something is all those TV shows that always makes me watch to the end and I don't get why because its always about really harsh crimes people have committed.
ReplyDelete