Answer:
to get to the other side!!!
Answer:
terry v. ohio
Explanation:
Terry v. Ohio, in 1968, was a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not in violation when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."
A & C, terrorists have political goals and thrive to impact the public. They don’t harm others just to hurt them without any reason.
Since this is an appellate court, all cases have already been heard, so it cannot be a court of first instance
Answer:
The answer is: Stage 6 of "Reflective Reasoning"
Explanation:
The Reflective Judgment Model is used in order to describe how people from adolescence going to adulthood develop <u>"reasoning." </u>This framework consists of<em> 7 stages</em>. These stages are categorized under three kinds of thinking<em> (Pre-Reflective Reasoning, Quasi-Reflective Reasoning and Reflective Reasoning). </em>
The situation above falls under "Stage 6 of Reflective Reasoning." Under this stage,<u><em> "reflective thinking"</em></u> is considered. So, people in this stage know that<em> knowledge is not certain nor absolute,</em> thus they try to compare their opinion with others. Just like Carole and Juan above, even though they have opposing views, Carole understands Juan's opinion.
Thus, this explains the answer.
