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!
The correct answer to the question is C
Crisis in
Latin America became a source of disagreement between Reagan and Congress.
To add, <span>The </span>Latin American<span> debt </span>crisis<span> was a financial </span>crisis<span> that originated in the early 1980s (and for some
countries starting in the 1970s), often known as the "lost decade",
when </span>Latin American<span> countries
reached a point where their foreign debt exceeded their earning power and they
were not able to repay it.</span>
Four main reasons why the U.S was unprepared for war with Britain were that 1) the Continental Army was wildly undertrained 2) the British Army had far more men 3) the Colonists lacked money for war supplies, and 4) the colonists lacked and meaningful military alliances.
"<span>Women in America had fewer rights than French women after the revolution" might be a plausible argument, but it should be noted that the French Revolution amounted in far more internal deaths than the American Revolution, making it hard to argue that it was more liberating.</span>
