Answer: True
Explanation: The Supreme Court admitted that it is haphazard to treat similar things differently and that mandatory death penalty statutes eliminated this problem, but also reckless to treat two different things the same way. In essence, to impose the same penalty on all convicted murderers, even though all defendants
are different, is just as capricious as imposing a penalty randomly.
To relieve this problem, some sentencing guidelines became necessary. This gave rise to the guided discretion statutes that set standards for juries and judges to
use when deciding whether to impose the death penalty. The Court reasoned that, guided discretion statutes struck a reasonable balance between giving the jury some discretion and allowing it to consider the defendant's background and character and the circumstances surrounding the crime.
Answer: As a male, I would not have been motivated to leave England for this environment because I would have thought of the possibility of fatal outcomes that would cause loss of life to me and my family over any opportunities of financial gains available in the colonies.
Explanation: The availability of any opportunities in the Chesapeake colonies would not have motivated me anymore once I had got to know about the fatal conditions there. The reason I would have chosen to stay back in England and take care of myself and my family would be the vulnerability to death prevalent in the Chesapeake colonies.
Answer:
Not exactly because you dont have to be exactly skillled to earn a living many people that have no little to no skills still a decent amount to be a living.
Explanation:
