Do you think the punishment fits the crime?  Why or why not?  Should cultural and religious beliefs factor into justice?

I really don't think that the punishment fits the crime. Getting the death penalty for making an anti-Islam film is really going over board in my opinion, I mean if people don't like the video then don't watch it. Cultural and religious beliefs shouldn't factor into justice because people have different beliefs and it'd be even more difficult to decide a punishment.

In your own words, what is restorative justice?  How does it work?  Do you think it is something we should practice here at SPHS?

Basically restorative justice is having a person, who did something wrong, (in this case vandalism) own up to what they did and clean up the mess they made. In the article, John went back to the taco shop he spray painted, apologized to the owner and fixed the problem he had caused. I guess it wouldn't be a bad idea to try and practice restorative justice at the South Portland High School. It seemed to work out pretty well for that guy John in the article, so maybe it would help for us to practice at the high school. How ever I don't think that anyone one in our school has given us a reason to practice restorative justice, but I guess just to be sure, practicing this would be an ok idea.

 Which side do you agree with? Why?

     I think that justice is something that was created by our population, but could never truly exist. In most comments from those who say there is justice the statement "what goes around comes around" is said in many forms. I don't think these people understand that a lot of the time that doesn't happen, criminals are smart and can get away without any punishment. We can try to create and enforce justice, but we can't do that if we don't even know the meaning of it. "I don't understand how a man can kill his baby, and then do less than four years in prison. Yet, another man can rob a store with a toy gun, and get nearly a life sentence." This was posted by someone who doesn't believe that justice exists and they are right. For some reason the punishment never really fits the crime, like it is said to. Therefore I do not think that justice really exists, unless we can truly understand fairness.

Do you think searches should be conducted based on a drug-sniffing dog?  Why or why not?


     In my opinion searches shouldn't be fully based on drug-sniffing dogs, mainly because the dogs not always right. It says in the article that only a 12% success rate for dogs in a controlled setting, meaning that the other 88% isn't a success. I think that the police need evidence of drugs before they bring in the drug-sniffing dogs, so that way the searches are based off a bit of both.

  In my opinion Batman should kill the Joker, obviously nothing else is working. The Joker escapes jail, Batman catches him and puts him back in and then the cycle repeats itself. ". . . he killed the second Robin. . . killed Lieutenant Sarah Essen." So it's pretty clear that the Joker's got some issues and after killing so many, it's oblivious that nothings going to change, therefore Batman should just kill him.