Read the questions below and click "comments" to respond here in a well-written paragraph ofat leastfive sentences.
48 comments:
Anonymous
said...
1.23 I think the police the cops should follow the rules no matter what because being unethical means that criminals shouldn't have to follow the rules. I think if they have no proof that they are doing a crime then no they shouldn't break the law but if they are being ethical then they could just watch the criminal. I think they shouldn't be able to entrap suspects because it's cruel. I think if everbody has to follow the laws so should the police. espcially when catching criminal.
1.*30 Of course law enforcement or federal agents should follow the rules instead of going outside the law to apprehend suspected criminals. If they go outside the law its a crime so there fore they are criminals themselves. When law enforcement set up criminals for failure they are going to fail obviously which proves nothing. I think its wrong and pointless to go outside the law to set up and catch a criminal.
3-2-11 #3 I don't really agree that cops should always be ethical about criminals by any means. I suppose that the police have the right to follow suspected criminals, I mean if the cops suspect any trouble I think that they have the right to be snoopy and watch what the person is doing but not pull them over or get them in trouble if they are actually not doing anything wrong. I don't think that the police should do whatever it takes to get a confession, if the person doesn't want to confess they aren't going to confess. I also think that the law can be broken by the police to make sure someone gets brought to justice, but only for certain crimes like if anyone else is in danger, not by stupid silly crimes like some stealing a pack of gum at 7-11.
1.4 It is not ethical to convict suspected criminals for any mean. The police should only follow the ones that are a suspect of a big crime. They should try to do all possible to get a confession from the criminal. If not the crime could happen again. The law should never be broken just to get a criminal thats why there is laws.
1.24 The police should not have to follow the rules, because sometimes you have to break the rules to catch a criminal. Yes, they should be able to follow the suspected criminals to catch them doing something. YEs, they should be able to entrap suspected criminals. They should be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions from suspected criminals, as long as it's safe for them. Yes, the law can be broken to make sure that suspected criminals are brought to justice. All in all I think that for suspected criminals law enforces can do whatever they need to get suspected criminals caught.
1.7 Yes the police should have to follow the rules to convict suspected criminals. I do think they should be able to follow them if they suspect something as long as they follow the rules. I think they shouldn't be able to entrap them cause that's just strait up wrong! I think they should do what ever it takes to get them to confess, even if they need to bend the rules just a little. All in all, the law shouldn't be able to break the rule unless in extream like if someones life's in danger.
1.#16 i believe that police officers shouldn't be able to commit criminals by setting them up. My opinion is that it is unfair to set up people to catch them to do something wrong. A law enforcement officials should not be able to entrap suspected criminals because they also have a life they could check in on them but not follow them. A police officers should not do what ever it takes to get any confessions from the convicted/ suspected criminal(s). The law should not be able to break the laws to make sure that the suspected criminals are brought to justice, because they never know if they break the wrong law.
1.08- The police sometimes have to break the rules to catch a criminal. The police should be able to follow a suspected criminal to make sure they are not committing a crime but the police should not be able to harass the suspected criminal because they do not know for sure that they did it. Law enforcement should not be able to set traps for suspected criminals because that is not fair to the person if they didn't ever commit a crime. They should not be able to do whatever it takes to get a confession even though that is the only way they could get a confession. The law sometimes has to be broken to catch a criminal in the act even though it might not be the right thing to do.
1.21- I think it is only fair for the police to follow the rules to catch a criminal because they punish others for not doing so. I think that it should not be allowed to starve someone for answers. It could be allowed sometimes to trap criminals in the process of a crime, because only then will it not have the issue of saying they have no proof that they have the right criminal.In conclusion,I think if the police yell at others for breaking the law they shouldn't be giving the freedom to break the law to bring others to jail because they broke the law, how does that make any sense.
1.10 I think it is ethical to convict suspected criminals because we don't know if they are the person who did it so if we didn't they could get away with the crime they committed. the police should be able to do illegal things to catch the criminals because a cop isnt going to do anything to bad because there a cop so police should not always have to act ethically.
1.17 I don't think its ethical because maybe someone framed them. I think they should be able to chase them because they are only doing there job. I think they should be able to entrap suspects. They should be able to do what ever it takes to get suspects to confess. The law shouldn't be broken just to catch suspects. In conclusion The law should be able to do what ever they want to catch a dangerous suspect.
1.#16 i believe that police officers shouldn't be able to commit criminals by setting them up. My opinion is that it is unfair to set up people to catch them to do something wrong. A law enforcement officials should not be able to entrap suspected criminals because they also have a life they could check in on them but not follow them. A police officers should not do what ever it takes to get any confessions from the convicted/ suspected criminal(s). The law should not be able to break the laws to make sure that the suspected criminals are brought to justice, because they never know if they break the wrong law. In conclusion, I believe that criminals shouldn't be followed to be convicted, and officers shouldn't break the law to put the convicted criminal away.
1. 9 I think that the police should have to fallow the rules. i also think that they should be able to fallow the criminals. The criminals should be watched and police should be able to test them. If they do not pass the test then they should go to jail they are not safe. if they do pass then leave them alone In conclusion police should watch criminals and test them but they need to fallow the law and not break it.
1.18 I believe that if you are a police officer that you should go with the law when you are trying to catch a creminal. If a criminal is on probation then i think you can follow them to keep watch; but other then that then a cop is a stocker and citisense get locked up for that. I believe the police should go under the law when catching a criminal because if they don't they are being a criminal there selfs. I think the only time the law should be broken to catch a criminal is if there was a tererist attack. Tererists will kill millions of people so we need to take action but other then that the police should be under the law. I believe its not ethical to convct suspected criminals by any means.
P.1 #29 I think cops should break the rules to catch a criminal, but only sometimes. I think they should a criminal never changes and in Eric's case he killed people. Therefore I think they should watch him when he's with any girl. Just because Eric wasn't convicted he still did it so they should follow him for a couple years and if nothing happens then they need to leave him alone. The law should be able to try to catch the criminal in way as long as it's not hurting them. Police should do whatever it takes to get a confessions as long as it's legal and they're not hurting anyone. The law should break the law to get justice for certain things; such as killing, rape, and threatening to kill someone. In conclusion, the law should do anything it takes to get someone who did a MAJOR crime the justice they need. Rather than someone who did something minor.
1. #26 I think that criminals should be able just to live their lives. I don't think that it's very fair to set the criminal up for failer. That's wrong i think that they should just do whatever and if they happen to do something bad again then they can get caught and go back to jail. But if they set up a trap and they make it so that it was ll a trick i don't think that should happen. But at the same time if they are given a test and they do fail it that clearly shows that they are not ready to be in the real world.It just proves a point in which if capable and given the task they will go do it and not feel any remorse or guilt. In the end i think that Police should obey the same rules as any one else and they should Do their job and only do what right, and what fair!
1.08- I agree with number 23 that the police should always follow the rules but at the same time sometimes they have to break the rules in order to catch a criminal.
1. #14 I do not think that it is wrong to convict suspected criminals, as long as they are actually guilty. I think that police should be able to set up things to catch them in other crimes because that way, they know that they are guilty, and criminals. I also think that they should be able to do whatever it takes to get the truth out of the criminal. I do not think that the law should be broken, just to bring the criminals to justice, because if they brake the law, they won't be any better than the criminals. So as you can see, this is what I think of these questions!
1-20 I think that it is not ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. It is not fair for criminals to always be followed even if they have changed, the police may catch them doing something that may look like something when it really is not what it looks like and get into trouble and then since they are already a criminal people and the police would not believe that they didn't do anything wrong. I do though agree that they are allowed to follow unconvited and convicted criminals only if they suspect that they did something or are doing something illegal. I think that the police should only be allowed to have a limit to what they are allowed to do to get a confession out of the suspected criminals because if they are not going to confess then it is unfair to threaten or doing whatever it is that they do just to get a confession out of someone. I believe that the law is always broke to get certain criminals depending on what the crime is. In conclusion I think it is wrong to follow criminals because they have been convicted of a crime before.
1-#27.I do not think its ethical for cops to try and convict people evan if they are a suspect. The reason for my statement is because i think everyone is innocent until they find full evidence for that certain suspect.I don't think police should be able to follow people around evan if they think that they are going to commit a crime, i personally think thats an invasion of privacy.I don't think that cops should be able to entrap people in cells or in their cops cars or any where because they don't have any evidence that,that specific person has committed any crime. The police should not be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions.Sometimes a person has not committed a crime but then sometimes they could have one their just to stubborn to tell the cops. But police officers have no right to hit you beat you or do any thing else that their not suppose to do because i think everyone should have their own rights to everything.I personally,don't think its right to break the law just to get a criminal brought to justice.I think every criminal should have their rights to trial and prove if their a criminal or if their innocent.
1. #14 Dear #23 I also think that the police should follow the rules no matter what because if they don't, then that doesn't make them any better than the criminals.
1.#16 to #23 I agree that the police the cops should follow the rules no matter what because being unethical means that criminals shouldn't have to follow the rules. Also that they shouldn't be forced to do what they don't want to if the police don't have to either.
1.08- I agree with number 4 that it isn't ethical to convict a suspected criminal but at the same time even though it isn't ethical sometimes you have to convict them because you know they did it.
1.6 No i dont think so because they already did there time sooo y would they have to suffer anymore.? NOOOO that wrong i mean like if someone like eric poole who likes to kill but if they just trap them its just wrong. Personally i dont think they should b able to because one of my family members was a convict and i would hate for law enforcements to follow him around. I think this whole situation is messed up point blank period. I disagree with this whole situation. A law shouldnt be broken period... soo no if they caught him once then they shouldnt follow them and try to bust them on one little thing. What they did to eric was messed up i would b really mad but... then again eric is doing something wrong sooo there is a purrpose .
1.5 i think in some cases there should be a drug bust or some thing like that.i don't think that they cant get other criminals.I think that you cant trap criminals.I know its not right to hold some thing from a suspect.Well law is not ment to be broken but they cops don't care.
1.#27. Number 18 i agree with you because i think no cops should be able to think their above the law their just like everyone else and need to follow the rules to.
1/1 I think that it's ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. The police should be able to follow suspected but not going to the extent of selling and all that. Suspected is not caught. If its illegal for the convicts to do it then why should cops be able to. The law should never be broken by the people who enforce it.
1. 30 to #3 obviously you have never been in trouble so you would think cops should be able to do what they want to catch a criminal. Even a judge would say its unethical to bend the rules to apprehend any criminal so your answer is in my opinion written with no knowledge of the legal justice system. :)
1. 14 Dear #26 I somewhat agree with you, and somewhat disagree because I do think that the police should be able to catch the criminal because that's how they know that they are guilty. I agree, though, because I can see where you're coming from.
1.29 I think police should be able to do whatever they want. A lot of lifes would be saved if this was the case. One Literary example is Lori should would be alive if Proctors plan would have worked. In conclusion police should be allowed to do whatever
1.19 I think that it is not ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. No, I think that the police should not be able to follow suspected but not convicted criminals to catch them committing other crimes because there not doing nothing but they were with the person that got caught. Yes, law enforcement officers should be able to entrap suspected criminals. Yes, the police should be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions from suspected criminals. No, the law can never be broken by the police to make sure that suspected criminals.
48 comments:
1.23
I think the police the cops should follow the rules no matter what because being unethical means that criminals shouldn't have to follow the rules. I think if they have no proof that they are doing a crime then no they shouldn't break the law but if they are being ethical then they could just watch the criminal. I think they shouldn't be able to entrap suspects because it's cruel. I think if everbody has to follow the laws so should the police. espcially when catching criminal.
1.*30 Of course law enforcement or federal agents should follow the rules instead of going outside the law to apprehend suspected criminals. If they go outside the law its a crime so there fore they are criminals themselves. When law enforcement set up criminals for failure they are going to fail obviously which proves nothing. I think its wrong and pointless to go outside the law to set up and catch a criminal.
3-2-11
#3
I don't really agree that cops should always be ethical about criminals by any means. I suppose that the police have the right to follow suspected criminals, I mean if the cops suspect any trouble I think that they have the right to be snoopy and watch what the person is doing but not pull them over or get them in trouble if they are actually not doing anything wrong. I don't think that the police should do whatever it takes to get a confession, if the person doesn't want to confess they aren't going to confess. I also think that the law can be broken by the police to make sure someone gets brought to justice, but only for certain crimes like if anyone else is in danger, not by stupid silly crimes like some stealing a pack of gum at 7-11.
1.4
It is not ethical to convict suspected criminals for any mean. The police should only follow the ones that are a suspect of a big crime. They should try to do all possible to get a confession from the criminal. If not the crime could happen again. The law should never be broken just to get a criminal thats why there is laws.
1.24
The police should not have to follow the rules, because sometimes you have to break the rules to catch a criminal. Yes, they should be able to follow the suspected criminals to catch them doing something. YEs, they should be able to entrap suspected criminals. They should be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions from suspected criminals, as long as it's safe for them. Yes, the law can be broken to make sure that suspected criminals are brought to justice. All in all I think that for suspected criminals law enforces can do whatever they need to get suspected criminals caught.
1.7
Yes the police should have to follow the rules to convict suspected criminals. I do think they should be able to follow them if they suspect something as long as they follow the rules. I think they shouldn't be able to entrap them cause that's just strait up wrong! I think they should do what ever it takes to get them to confess, even if they need to bend the rules just a little. All in all, the law shouldn't be able to break the rule unless in extream like if someones life's in danger.
1.#16
i believe that police officers shouldn't be able to commit criminals by setting them up. My opinion is that it is unfair to set up people to catch them to do something wrong. A law enforcement officials should not be able to entrap suspected criminals because they also have a life they could check in on them but not follow them. A police officers should not do what ever it takes to get any confessions from the convicted/ suspected criminal(s). The law should not be able to break the laws to make sure that the suspected criminals are brought to justice, because they never know if they break the wrong law.
1.08- The police sometimes have to break the rules to catch a criminal. The police should be able to follow a suspected criminal to make sure they are not committing a crime but the police should not be able to harass the suspected criminal because they do not know for sure that they did it. Law enforcement should not be able to set traps for suspected criminals because that is not fair to the person if they didn't ever commit a crime. They should not be able to do whatever it takes to get a confession even though that is the only way they could get a confession. The law sometimes has to be broken to catch a criminal in the act even though it might not be the right thing to do.
1.21-
I think it is only fair for the police to follow the rules to catch a criminal because they punish others for not doing so. I think that it should not be allowed to starve someone for answers. It could be allowed sometimes to trap criminals in the process of a crime, because only then will it not have the issue of saying they have no proof that they have the right criminal.In conclusion,I think if the police yell at others for breaking the law they shouldn't be giving the freedom to break the law to bring others to jail because they broke the law, how does that make any sense.
1.10
I think it is ethical to convict suspected criminals because we don't know if they are the person who did it so if we didn't they could get away with the crime they committed. the police should be able to do illegal things to catch the criminals because a cop isnt going to do anything to bad because there a cop so police should not always have to act ethically.
1.17
I don't think its ethical because maybe someone framed them. I think they should be able to chase them because they are only doing there job. I think they should be able to entrap suspects. They should be able to do what ever it takes to get suspects to confess. The law shouldn't be broken just to catch suspects. In conclusion The law should be able to do what ever they want to catch a dangerous suspect.
1.#16
i believe that police officers shouldn't be able to commit criminals by setting them up. My opinion is that it is unfair to set up people to catch them to do something wrong. A law enforcement officials should not be able to entrap suspected criminals because they also have a life they could check in on them but not follow them. A police officers should not do what ever it takes to get any confessions from the convicted/ suspected criminal(s). The law should not be able to break the laws to make sure that the suspected criminals are brought to justice, because they never know if they break the wrong law. In conclusion, I believe that criminals shouldn't be followed to be convicted, and officers shouldn't break the law to put the convicted criminal away.
1. 3
I totally agree with number 23.
1. 9
I think that the police should have to fallow the rules. i also think that they should be able to fallow the criminals. The criminals should be watched and police should be able to test them. If they do not pass the test then they should go to jail they are not safe. if they do pass then leave them alone In conclusion police should watch criminals and test them but they need to fallow the law and not break it.
1.17
I agree with you 1.23 police should have to follow rules to catch suspects
1.18 I believe that if you are a police officer that you should go with the law when you are trying to catch a creminal. If a criminal is on probation then i think you can follow them to keep watch; but other then that then a cop is a stocker and citisense get locked up for that. I believe the police should go under the law when catching a criminal because if they don't they are being a criminal there selfs. I think the only time the law should be broken to catch a criminal is if there was a tererist attack. Tererists will kill millions of people so we need to take action but other then that the police should be under the law. I believe its not ethical to convct suspected criminals by any means.
P.1 #29
I think cops should break the rules to catch a criminal, but only sometimes. I think they should a criminal never changes and in Eric's case he killed people. Therefore I think they should watch him when he's with any girl. Just because Eric wasn't convicted he still did it so they should follow him for a couple years and if nothing happens then they need to leave him alone. The law should be able to try to catch the criminal in way as long as it's not hurting them. Police should do whatever it takes to get a confessions as long as it's legal and they're not hurting anyone. The law should break the law to get justice for certain things; such as killing, rape, and threatening to kill someone. In conclusion, the law should do anything it takes to get someone who did a MAJOR crime the justice they need. Rather than someone who did something minor.
1. #26 I think that criminals should be able just to live their lives. I don't think that it's very fair to set the criminal up for failer. That's wrong i think that they should just do whatever and if they happen to do something bad again then they can get caught and go back to jail. But if they set up a trap and they make it so that it was ll a trick i don't think that should happen. But at the same time if they are given a test and they do fail it that clearly shows that they are not ready to be in the real world.It just proves a point in which if capable and given the task they will go do it and not feel any remorse or guilt. In the end i think that Police should obey the same rules as any one else and they should Do their job and only do what right, and what fair!
1.7 i agree that they should follow the rules to convict a criminal
1.4
1. 3
number 24, the police SHOULD follow the rules to a certain extent.
1.08- I agree with number 23 that the police should always follow the rules but at the same time sometimes they have to break the rules in order to catch a criminal.
1. #14
I do not think that it is wrong to convict suspected criminals, as long as they are actually guilty. I think that police should be able to set up things to catch them in other crimes because that way, they know that they are guilty, and criminals. I also think that they should be able to do whatever it takes to get the truth out of the criminal. I do not think that the law should be broken, just to bring the criminals to justice, because if they brake the law, they won't be any better than the criminals. So as you can see, this is what I think of these questions!
1.7
to #23
I agree with you because it is very unethical to break the law.
1.#16
To #21
I agree that it is only fair for the police to follow the rules to catch the convicted. Also they shouldn't starve them either.
1.24
I agree with you #8 police do not always have to break the law but, sometimes they do.
1-20
I think that it is not ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. It is not fair for criminals to always be followed even if they have changed, the police may catch them doing something that may look like something when it really is not what it looks like and get into trouble and then since they are already a criminal people and the police would not believe that they didn't do anything wrong. I do though agree that they are allowed to follow unconvited and convicted criminals only if they suspect that they did something or are doing something illegal. I think that the police should only be allowed to have a limit to what they are allowed to do to get a confession out of the suspected criminals because if they are not going to confess then it is unfair to threaten or doing whatever it is that they do just to get a confession out of someone. I believe that the law is always broke to get certain criminals depending on what the crime is. In conclusion I think it is wrong to follow criminals because they have been convicted of a crime before.
1-#27.I do not think its ethical for cops to try and convict people evan if they are a suspect. The reason for my statement is because i think everyone is innocent until they find full evidence for that certain suspect.I don't think police should be able to follow people around evan if they think that they are going to commit a crime, i personally think thats an invasion of privacy.I don't think that cops should be able to entrap people in cells or in their cops cars or any where because they don't have any evidence that,that specific person has committed any crime. The police should not be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions.Sometimes a person has not committed a crime but then sometimes they could have one their just to stubborn to tell the cops. But police officers have no right to hit you beat you or do any thing else that their not suppose to do because i think everyone should have their own rights to everything.I personally,don't think its right to break the law just to get a criminal brought to justice.I think every criminal should have their rights to trial and prove if their a criminal or if their innocent.
1.17
I agree 1.7 it is fair that the police should have to follow the law to catch people because we have to follow the law too.
1.24
#29 I agree with you
1. #14
Dear #23
I also think that the police should follow the rules no matter what because if they don't, then that doesn't make them any better than the criminals.
1.23 good job 27 you made some really good points.
1.#27. Number 23 i agree with you because i think all police and law officers should have to follow the laws like everyone else.
1.#16
to #23
I agree that the police the cops should follow the rules no matter what because being unethical means that criminals shouldn't have to follow the rules. Also that they shouldn't be forced to do what they don't want to if the police don't have to either.
1.7
to #16
I agree with you because it is unfair to set someone up to make them do something they would normally not do.
1.08- I agree with number 4 that it isn't ethical to convict a suspected criminal but at the same time even though it isn't ethical sometimes you have to convict them because you know they did it.
1.6
No i dont think so because they already did there time sooo y would they have to suffer anymore.? NOOOO that wrong i mean like if someone like eric poole who likes to kill but if they just trap them its just wrong. Personally i dont think they should b able to because one of my family members was a convict and i would hate for law enforcements to follow him around. I think this whole situation is messed up point blank period. I disagree with this whole situation. A law shouldnt be broken period... soo no if they caught him once then they shouldnt follow them and try to bust them on one little thing. What they did to eric was messed up i would b really mad but... then again eric is doing something wrong sooo there is a purrpose .
1.5 i think in some cases there should be a drug bust or some thing like that.i don't think that they cant get other criminals.I think that you cant trap criminals.I know its not right to hold some thing from a suspect.Well law is not ment to be broken but they cops don't care.
1. 9
I disagree with 8 because the should fallow the laws
1.#27. Number 18 i agree with you because i think no cops should be able to think their above the law their just like everyone else and need to follow the rules to.
1/1
I think that it's ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. The police should be able to follow suspected but not going to the extent of selling and all that. Suspected is not caught. If its illegal for the convicts to do it then why should cops be able to. The law should never be broken by the people who enforce it.
P.1 #23
#23 They should but then again there are some crimes that are worth breaking the laws for.
1. 30 to #3 obviously you have never been in trouble so you would think cops should be able to do what they want to catch a criminal. Even a judge would say its unethical to bend the rules to apprehend any criminal so your answer is in my opinion written with no knowledge of the legal justice system. :)
1. 14
Dear #26
I somewhat agree with you, and somewhat disagree because I do think that the police should be able to catch the criminal because that's how they know that they are guilty. I agree, though, because I can see where you're coming from.
to 1.5 from 1.1
i agree because drugs are bad and they should just catch them with in the law
P.1 #29
#8 I agree with you they should be able to do what they want.
1.29 I think police should be able to do whatever they want. A lot of lifes would be saved if this was the case. One Literary example is Lori should would be alive if Proctors plan would have worked. In conclusion police should be allowed to do whatever
1.1 to 1.23
I think they should not go past what the people have follow.
1.19
I think that it is not ethical to convict suspected criminals by any means. No, I think that the police should not be able to follow suspected but not convicted criminals to catch them committing other crimes because there not doing nothing but they were with the person that got caught. Yes, law enforcement officers should be able to entrap suspected criminals. Yes, the police should be able to do whatever it takes to get confessions from suspected criminals. No, the law can never be broken by the police to make sure that suspected criminals.
Post a Comment