<h3>C
reating a method of capital punishment that would actually deter people from committing murder.</h3>
Explanation:
Numerous studies have shown that imposing capital punishment or harsh punishments does not actually deter people from committing crimes. Studies have shown that states imposing such punishments still have high criminal rate than those states that do not.
Televising executions would only create a lobby for more controversies and futile discussions on the morality of capital punishment. Human rights activists strongly disagree of commercializing such events on grounds of human moral rights. They also believe that a state does not have the right to execute an individual.
It is believed that capital punishments are imposed very rarely and only to those individuals who have committed heinous crimes. However, if we look into past incidences, the verdict has been used unfairly and partially. The power to impose such verdict also raises the question on the sovereign authority of a state by many critics. Critics argue that states should not have to right to determine the lives of the people.
fighting for the country is saving it. or they want to make sure there family can be as safe as possible and that's how they do it. :) plz make me brainlyist
The correct answer for this question is this one: "c. structural unemployment." If an individual who cannot find a job because his or her job skills have become obsolete this is an example of structural unemployment. It is <span>a form of </span>unemployment<span> caused by a mismatch between the skills that workers in the economy can offer, and the skills demanded of workers by employers</span>
The first three and I geuss they probably need money too
