Solution-Describe the retributive school of thought on

Question 1: Describe the Retributive school of thought on punishment

Question 2: Describe the Rehabilitative school of thought on punishment

Question 3: Which is more effective or just? (Hint - there is no good answer to this. Just describe your thoughts. (5 points, extra credit).

Identify the legal issues in each of the eight case studies : Identify the legal issues in each of the eight case studies and b. Using numerous examples from the case studies, explain what you have learned about people

Describe one observation from your courtroom visit that does : describe one observation from your courtroom visit that does, or does not, match with Biblical principles. Use a verse to support your argument.

Are there any practical solutions you can think : The Staples Approach posits that the current economy in Canada is dominated by the service sector. Is this a positive or negative thing?

What mix of taxes and revenue sources do you think is best : What are your opinions on these two types of revenue sources for governments? Should governments be relying on "sin" taxes or municipal violations for their

Describe the retributive school of thought on punishment : Describe the Retributive school of thought on punishment - Describe the Rehabilitative school of thought on punishment

How does canada manage and accommodate diverse interests : Reflect on the impact of multiculturalism and diversity on Canadian politics and governance. How does Canada manage and accommodate diverse interests

How many electoral votes are necessary to win a presidential : Briefly explain how the electoral college works. How many electoral votes are necessary to win a presidential election? Do you think the electoral college

Discuss the exclusionary rule : Discuss the exclusionary rule. Should courts continue to recognize the rule as it concerns the admission of evidence?

Are multinational corporations the tools of states : Which view better explains the world as we see it today? Defend your position with contemporary or historical facts