<u>Answer:
</u>
Deterrence was a primary purpose of executions in colonial American that is much less important today.
<u>Explanation:
</u>
- No one, in today's date, is subject to execution merely for exhibiting deterrence against any action planned by the government or its subordinate authorities.
- Rather, citizens are provided with the freedom to deter by giving them certain rights like the right to speech, right to assemble peacefully, etc.
- Moreover, it is also true that the display of extreme deterrence is not usual these days.
Hello! I would say the correct answer here is B. False.
As these topics are highly debatable and have many different viewpoints varied by factors such as upbringing, location, and life experience, they cannot be entirely solved. Eliminating these issues and falling under one standard would represent a utopian and realistically unachievable world. Without the world’s diversity the whole world would be “in uniform” (one of my favorite phrases from The Great Gatsby) and the creativity and culture would cease to exist. So, since these issues are unable to be resolved, empirical research is not applicable in a solution to them.
I hope this helps! :)
If the results of a experiment do not support the hypothesis this does not necessarily mean that the experiment was a failure or that the hypothesis was wrong, but simply that the test that was conducted did not find results that were significant and also showed that the "null hypothesis" was incorrect. Therefore, if a hypothesis is shown to be inaccurate by a particular experiment the issue might need further experimentation because it could be wrong or it could not, but this does not mean the experiment was a failure. In fact proving a hypothesis can be informative for conducting further experiments to conclude what caused the phenomena if not the original hypothesis.
<span>The U.S. wanted to avoid going around South America and insure less time for U.S. Naval ships to travel and protect U.S. possessions around the world.</span>
