According to what is expressed in the fragment, it can be inferred that the purpose of the sentence is to clarify that laws are created to modify human behavior.
<h3>What is a law?</h3>
A law is a term to refer to a norm or rule of society that citizens must comply with in order to live in harmony with others.
Laws are one of the oldest social tools in the world because they guarantee that citizens have a more controlled behavior with respect to others. Additionally, this provides them with some obligations that they must fulfill to belong to the social group.
According to the above, it can be inferred that the fragment refers to the fact that laws are an adequate tool to modify human behavior according to the needs of society.
Learn more about law in: brainly.com/question/6590381
#SPJ1
Answer: its to protect people its like saying a cop pulls up on you and instead of giving u a ticket he but you in jail for murder. it to protect people from going to jail.
Explanation:
the purpose of the 8th Admendent is to protect the people from harsh punishments
Answer:
Imprisonment is not the only way to rehabilitate a person who violated the law, since there are alternative penalties to prison, such as fines, bonds, jobs and collaborations in non-profit social entities and victim reparation systems. In all these cases, the defendant receives a penalty, but this is not the prison but an alternative to it, which still puts him at a disadvantage compared to the rest of society as a result of his non-compliance of the law, but due to the low severity of the crime, the defendant does not deserve a prison sentence.
In Palko v. Connecticut (1937), the Supreme Court had to decide whether "due process of law" means states must obey the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment
<u>Explanation:
</u>
The observation of the Supreme Court is that the convict cannot be punished two times for the same offense. It is simple and very clear that the convict cannot be punished under the fourth and fifth amendments for same offense.
In this particular case, the prosecution has charged Frank Palko for first-degree murder and the court has given a decree as life imprisonment. But the actual nature crime amounts to second-degree murder.
So, the state of Connecticut appealed against this judgment and it has been proved that offense made by Frank Palko amounts to second-degree murder and the death penalty is awarded to convict. The Supreme Court's main decision in Palko vs Connecticut was Palko was the victim of unconstitutional double jeopardy.
