This is a great question with various for and against points so i shall just give you a few that come to mind.
FOR
-conditions can be below to basic living standards, which is immoral and a violation of human rights
-People wouldn't voluntarily pay money to maintain the living conditions of convicts due to the atrocities of their crime.
-Statistics support the fact 'it doesn't work' as rehabilitation is in the minority
-it does not reduce crime rate in the slightest
-corruption
AGAINST
-what is the question suggesting should happen to convicts instead?
-wrongfully convicted
apologies im running out of time, so i can write appropriate against. hope this helps though
Answer:
i would say a military career :) sorry if it's not right
Explanation:
Answer:
Should Nucor have acted promptly to prevent such behavior?
Answer: Check explanation.
Explanation:
Great!, Before delving into the solution to the question let us define JURISDICTION. Jurisdiction is the power to make judgement. However, there there are boundaries to jurisdiction in courts. So, let us answer the question.
(a). Pat wants to sue his next-door neighbor Dorothy, claiming that Dorothy promised to sell him the house next door: since both party, that is , Pat and Dorothy are not representing any federal body, there case should be in the STATE COURT.
(b). Paula should bring the case to the STATE COURT IN DALLAS.
(c). Since the land is in Ohio, Phil should file a lawsuit in Ohio court .
(d). This is a federal case and Pete should file his case under federal jurisdiction.
