Answer:
Yes, I believe it should, and here’s why. When somebody takes, they could say anything, in any language, in any tone of voice. This can offend someone greatly, cheer them , up, or not effect them at all. There have been endless amount of times when it has offended someone, so dearly that they might have done something to severely harm other people, property, or really anything. This should be taken into account during prosecution, because this can also be included as a threat. Now, there are certain limitations as to what can be considered a threat in the USA, but there are loopholes. Things you can say that will be considered NOT a threat, and overlooked, though still causing someone to do something horrendous. That communication should be used to defend someone, even if it isn’t the worst thing in the world, that person wouldn’t have done anything if that hadn’t been said, whatever that may be. You could make a law, or reinforce the current one about threats, to prevent anything like this happening, or stopping it happening further.
Hope This Helped!
Answer:
The battle resulted in the 1765 Treaty of Allahabad, in which the Mughal Emperor surrendered sovereignty of Bengal to the British. Lord Robert Clive, the victor at the Plassey, became the first governor of Bengal. Losses: British East India Company, fewer than 1,000 casualties of 8,000; Indian states, 6,000 of 35,000
Explanation:
sorry if my answer is wrong
What was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court regarding the New Deal? NIRA. 7. What role did Eleanor ... What do you think Roosevelt thought about economic conservatism? not a good policy in the times ...Answer:
Explanation:
What was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court regarding the New Deal? NIRA. 7. What role did Eleanor ... What do you think Roosevelt thought about economic conservatism? not a good policy in the times ...
Answer:
The size of the empire made it hard to defend.
