The four defendants, members of the Speluncean Society, are on trial for the crime of murder. In early May of 4299 the four defendants, in company with Roger Whetmore, entered into the interior of a limestone cavern of the type found in Central Plateau of this landslide occurred. While in the cave heavy boulders fell and completely blocked the only known opening of the cave. While waiting for a rescue team to come they settled themselves near the obstructed opening. The rescue was a difficult one, and as a result of many obstacles, such as landslides, that occurred ten workmen engaged in helping to clear the entrance were killed. It wasn’t until the thirty-second day after the men entered into the cave that the rescue was successful. During the time that the men were trapped in the cave, it was known that there were no animals or vegetable matter in which they could feast on to survive, and anxiety about dying of starvation started to settle in the back of the men’s minds.
On the twentieth day of their imprisonment the men remembered that they had access to a portable wireless machine, which they could send and receive messages from those outside. They were notified by the engineers in charge that it would take ten more days till they could rescue the men. After this notification they asked to talk to medical personnel and informed them of their food predicament and conditions, and asked if they would be able to survive the next ten days on the rations they had taken with them. The medical personnel informed them that there was little possibility of survival. After eight hours of receiving this information Whetmore asked the medical personnel if they would survive for ten days if they consumed the flesh of one of the men trapped ...
... middle of paper ...
...er wish existed and blame it on that they were in a state of nature? Where do we draw the line on the timeline of when it is okay to kill a man to save your own self from hunger pains? Letting one person get away with murder opens up the flood gates for the very thing we are trying to prevent which is the wilful killing of another. “Through words and other actions, we build ourselves in a world that is building us.” Letting these men get away with the action of murder builds into us and the world that it is okay to kill a man in order to save your own life. It teaches us that if we value our life higher than others we can take what we “need” from them and not pay for the consequences of our actions.
If we let these men off with murder we are resorting to the ways of animals. We are a civilized society and have built it upon morals and laws to keep preserving life.
His innate caution took hold, and he drew back to examine it at greater length. Wary of what he saw, he circled the batholith and then climbed to the ridge behind it from which he could look down upon the roof. What he saw from there left him dry-mouthed and jittery. The gigantic upthrust was obviously a part of a much older range, one that had weathered and worn, suffered from shock and twisting until finally this tower of granite had been violently upthrust, leaving it standing, a shaky ruin among younger and sturdier peaks. In the process the rock had been shattered and driven by mighty forces until it had become a miners horror. Wetherton stared, fascinated by the prospect. With enormous wealth here for the taking, every ounce must be taken at the risk of his life” (L’Amour 149-150). The mountain contained at the time’s worth thousands and thousands of dollars worth of gold, and during the old west thousands of dollars would bring a person a long ways. Since there was so much gold presented to Wetherton in one spot, greed got the best of him, having the mindset of “one more day” of mining and there being so much and the gold being very concentrated, the trap of
Christopher Columbus is a mythical hero or in other words, not a true hero. The story of Christopher Columbus is part of the many myths of Western civilization. Also the story of Christopher Columbus represents the power of those that are privileged and in most cases white European men that have written this mythical history. Zinn (2009 exposes the truth about Columbus through eyes of the people who were there when he had arrived which were the Native Indians (p.481). Columbus had kept a personal journal for his voyage to describe the people and the journey. What was evident throughout his journal was the Native Americans were very nice, gentle and kind hearted people (Zinn, 2009, 481). As Zinn suggests Columbus spoke of the Native Americans as” they are the best people in the world and
Others weep for the ones lost. They then got prison clothes that were ridiculously fitted. They made exchanges and went to a new barracks in the “gypsies’ camp.” They waited in the mud for a long time. They were permitted to another barracks, with a gypsy in charge of them.
In 1492, Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue, which started a huge push by European nations to gain power and wealth, mainly in the way of building Empires in the New World. This was called the Age of Exploration and lasted from the late 15th to the early 17th century. Spain, under King Ferdinand II of Aragon, was the first nation to do this. Juan Ponce de León was a conquistador and one of the earlier voyagers to the New World in the European Age of Exploration, he accomplished several notable things in his life, but overall and looking in hindsight he is seen as a failure when compared to other conquistadors.
In today’s society, the killing of humans and animals usually means a jail term, and seeing someone die is not something people go and see for fun. Violence was glorified in Rome hundreds of years ago. All the crimes they committed were condoned, accepted and glorified.
Take into consideration that the Constitution states that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can not be taken away without due process. The offenders committing the brutal, heinous crimes have not applied this right to the victims of their crimes. Why should the government take their rights into consideration when the victims rights meant so little to them? People always put forth the idea that killing is wrong in any sense, yet they don’t want to punish the people that commit the crimes. If a person is so uncompassionate for human life and not care what happens; are sick enough to harm someone else, they should also pay the price with their lives.
This sounds very bad but based on the circumstance they were in it doesn’t make sense to give these men the death penalty. The law is not a valid factor in this case because a circumstance like this was not even thought of when the rules were being made. Therefore the law should not even be considered.
guilty of murder and sentence them to death; does that not make murderers out of us? Is the
Many people who are against capital punishment are only thinking of the criminal and how cruel it is for them. But, shouldn't we think of the families that are broken apart now because of the merciless acts of these criminals. Think of Susan Smith, how she knowingly drove her car off into a lake with her two children strapped to the seats. Think of how they must have felt as the cold water started to fill the cabin of the car, and then ultimately drown them. Barbaric is exactly the word I would use to describe her actions. But yet, the jury rejected the death penalty and chose a life sentence instead. Mr. Smith, the father of the two children, broken up from the ruling said "Me and my family are disappointed that the death penalty was not the verdict, but it wasn't our choice. They returned a verdict they thought w...
Mass Murderers and Serial Killers are nothing new to today’s society. These vicious killers are all violent, brutal monsters and have an abnormal urge to kill. What gives people these urges to kill? What motivates them to keep killing? Do these killers get satisfaction from killing? Is there a difference between mass murderers and serial killers or are they the same. How do they choose their victims and what are some of their characteristics? These questions and many more are reasons why I was eager to write my paper on mass murderers and serial killers. However, the most interesting and sought after questions are the ones that have always been controversial. One example is; what goes on inside the mind of a killer? In this paper I will try to develop a better understanding of these driven killers and their motives.
It has been said that there is no greater way to understand the law than to analyze different cases pertaining to legal philosophy and there is no better way to understand legal philosophy than to see how these different theories contradict one another. A famous legal case “the case of the Speluncean Explorers,” Harvard Law Review, 62 (4) (1948- 1949) pp.616-645, written by Lon L. Fuller describes an allegory of a group of spelunkers in the Commonwealth of Newgarth. Fuller uses various opinions written by fictional judges in order to illustrate a combination of various theories about the nature of law and legal reasoning. The purpose of this paper will thus be to critically assess and develop an argument pertaining to one of the judge’s opinions and to further explain why this judge’s decision is most persuasive. Justice Foster is said to illustrate the alter-ego role of Fuller, representing the natural school of jurisprudence. In determining whether the convictions of the murder of Roger Whetmore should be overturned, Justice Foster presents two main aggressive arguments on the basis of natural law. First, the defendants were in a state of nature at the time of the killing, and thus the laws of nature would apply to them. Second, Foster creates a compelling argument stating that although the statute could be applied to the men, the focus of the statute would not be
The story begins when the five individuals, all members of the Speluncean Society, are trapped in a limestone cavern as a result of a cave-in. Rescue operations commenced once the individuals did not return from the exploration. On the twentieth day of this debacle, radio communications were established and all five explorers discovered that they would not be able to survive if one individual is not consumed as food. A pair of dice was used to determine who would be consumed. Roger Whitmore, who proposed this cannibalistic idea in the first place, decided to withho...
Despite their moral justification for the murder, the act is unethical. The societal belief is that retribution should not be taken outside of the law and the taking of someone 's life for any reason is wrong. It didn 't matter if Mr. Freeman deserved it for what he had done or that the courts had failed to properly make sure he served his time, no violence against him should be
Epstein, Edmund L. The Ordeal of Stephen Dedalus. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois U P, 1971.
People believe if you are willing to committed murder then in return you should receive what you give. Its one of the golden rules of life, an eye for an eye If you will. Then on the other side of the argument some think taking a man 's life should never be in the hands of others. No one should lose their lives no matter the crime they have committed even if its as heinous as kill another person. Both sides of the argument have valid points but a decision has to be made on what is just and what isn