I think you are talking about a tyranny a goverment who treat people unfair with his/her power
Buildup of armaments in preparation for war
Represents justice because both r getting the same treatment
If I were the coach....
To me this would be a hard decision to make. The football team, the school, and the community would be affected by this decision if you choose to take Robbie out (and most likely lose the game) or if you keep Robbie in (and most likely win the game). Because as a football coach or any leader in general I would try to be a good example to kids and not support bad behavior, if Robbie's actions go against my philosophy as a coach and my team rules, I would take him out of the game. Though this choice might come with an outcome of losing the game, this experience should teach the football players that I won't reward bad behavior.
The ruling in Weeks, however, was limited to the federal government. That changed with the Supreme Court's landmark 1961 decision in Mapp v<span>. </span>Ohio<span>. ... In 1961, citing the </span>ACLU's<span> arguments, the Supreme Court reversed </span>Mapp's<span> conviction and adopted the exclusionary rule as a national standard.</span>
