1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
vampirchik [111]
2 years ago
14

Hi PLEASE HELP ASAP.!! so back in pro-life month, my teacher and I had a little argument over something literally so silly. It w

as about whether ted Bundy did or didn't deserve the death penalty. I said, "frick yes". Well, I didn't actually say that, but I did make my point come across, which was that he did deserve to die. She failed me bc she disagreed. Now, I have to write a debate essay, I need at least 10 reasons why he did deserve it. I literally wrote one back in February with like 15 reasons but she said I need to re-write that and use different reasons. Can anyone help me with that? Like, (as if it wasn't obvious) why did he deserve the chair?
Law
1 answer:
lapo4ka [179]2 years ago
3 0

There are several reasons why Ted Bundy deserved the death penalty. He killed a lot of people

<h3>Reasons why the death penalty was an adequate punishment for Ted Bundy:</h3>
  • He killed a lot of people in the society.
  • He was a predator.
  • He raped people.
  • He was a kidnapper
  • He had no mercy for the people he attacked.
  • He was jailed, he escaped from Jail and still killed again.
  • If granted parole in years later, someone like him would still atatck innocents again.
  • It was the good that the society got rid of him. People like him would always be a danger to other good people.
  • The people that he killed did not deserve to die also. He was only made to tast his own medicine.

Read more on the death penalty here: brainly.com/question/509558

You might be interested in
The judeo Christian God changes true or false give reasons for your answer​
vekshin1

Answer:

The term "Judeo Christian" first appears in a letter from Alexander McCaul which is dated October 17, 1821. The term in this case referred to Jewish converts to Christianity. The term was similarly used by Joseph Wolff in 1829, in reference to a type of church that would observe some Jewish traditions in order to convert Jews. Mark Silk states in the early 19th century the term was "most widely used (in French as well as English) to refer to the early followers of Jesus who opposed" the wishes of Paul the Apostle and wanted "to restrict the message of Jesus to Jews and who insisted on maintaining Jewish law and ritual".

Explanation:

hope this helps

let me know if I’m correct

8 0
3 years ago
For 100 points, what are Wilbur Soot's rules, and, who is LUNA!?
scoray [572]

Answer:

sorry i do not know number one.

Brandon Luna

He has handled over 5000 criminal cases as a former Deputy District Attorney and now offers his experience to you as a Criminal Defense Attorney. He started Luna Law to help good people who have made a mistake navigate through the confusing and often scary criminal justice system.

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What is the difference between a consent for the release of information form and a criminal justice consent for the release of i
rjkz [21]
Idk I am sorry I would help you if I would know
5 0
3 years ago
If the research participant is a minor (under the age of 18), which of the following must occur before
podryga [215]

The following must occur before an <u>underage individual</u> can participate in the research study:

  • the parent/legal guardian must give permission for the minor to participate.
  • the minor must agree to participate in the research.

<h3>What is a research study?</h3>

This refers to the systematic, rigorous and critical investigation that aims to answer questions.

Any research participant that is above 18 years is considered a non-minor and can participate in any kind of research study without seeking consent from guardians/parents.

Read more about research study

brainly.com/question/968894

#SPJ1

4 0
2 years ago
in marbury v. madison, the supreme court established a principle that would eventually be used by all courts to
maks197457 [2]

Answer:

in marbury v. madison, the supreme court established a principle that would eventually be used by all courts to

Judicial review

3 0
1 year ago
Other questions:
  • Who determines whether an individual can act as an expert witness?
    8·1 answer
  • You are driving in traffic on a road with two or more lanes in each direction. You should A: Avoid driving in someone else's bli
    5·1 answer
  • The Egg-Centric Newspaper publishes an article about Professor F.S.T. Amendment, a distinguished constitutional law professor at
    9·1 answer
  • Write three sentences contrasting the Federalist and Anti-Federalist viewpoints on separation of powers in the Constitution.
    14·2 answers
  • No defined policy on refugees existed in Canada until the late
    10·2 answers
  • 1.The possession of blank is considered a separate felony by most jurisdictions in the United States
    13·2 answers
  • Which of the following is true concerning criminal law and tort law
    8·1 answer
  • Which of the following terms is not recognized in Canadian law?
    14·2 answers
  • Do you think a member of Congress should be a delegate (based votes on what the voters specifically want) or a trustee (elected
    14·1 answer
  • write a paragraph on your opinion of the correctional system. Do you feel it should be altered or changed?​
    10·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!