The Bill of Rights 1689, also known as the Bill of Rights 1688,[nb 2] is a landmark Act in the constitutional law of England that sets out certain basic civil rights and clarifies who would be next to inherit the Crown. It received the Royal Assent on 16 December 1689 and is a restatement in statutory form of the Declaration of Right presented by the Convention Parliament to William III and Mary II in February 1689, inviting them to become joint sovereigns of England. The Bill of Rights lays down limits on the powers of the monarch and sets out the rights of Parliament, including the requirement for regular parliaments, free elections, and freedom of speech in Parliament.[3] It sets out certain rights of individuals including the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment and confirmed that "Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law". It also includes no right of taxation without Parliament's agreement. Furthermore, the Bill of Rights described and condemned several misdeeds of James II of England.[
Answer:
Juan
Explanation:
because he killed people just for trying to stop his sons from fighting. All sibilings fight it's a part of life
Answer:
Yes, I feel as thou people who are found guilty of a heinous act need to be viable to capital punishment. I say this because the long term affect a crime like that can have on someone. It can cause serious damage and resault in self harm or worse for the victim/ victims familys. There is a never ending line of heinous crimes but being viable for capital sentencing may help stop that line.
Explanation:
Hope This Helps
Have A Great Day
~Zero~
This is only 5 points but... I think that death penalty should continue as a form of punishment because if someone did something horrible (for example killing many people) they should be punished and jail time is not enough. - Brooke
