Are current criminal laws enough to address the need for justice in Washington DC/Chicago?

With recent events exploding in today's media it is evident that current laws are not only incapable of serving justice, but pose an important question, how do we stop these heinous crimes from happening in the first place?  Last Monday a civilian contractor and military veteran, Aaron Alexis, went on a shooting rampage at the U.S. command complex.  The incident left 13 people dead, including the gunman who ended the massacre by shooting himself.  With valid access to the naval base, the shooting was displayed around the U.S. as the horrific violence was portrayed in our Nations Capital.  What shocked the nation the most was the randomness and ability of the crime.  This contractor had everything at his dispense in order to fulfill this crime.  He had a gun, access to the base, and plenty of other things to help him carry out this rampage. But why is it so easy for crimes like this to occur?

It's because the law does not do enough to stop crimes from happening.  Also highlighted in the news this week was a gang related shooting in which one of their victims was a three-year-old boy.  Chicago has been proclaimed as one of the deadliest cities in the world.  With death rates higher than that in the war in Afghanistan, we question how our government can let this senseless violence occur in our own country. With our rights to be free we not only get to choose how to live our life but become susceptible to death.  We can not gain justice when hundreds of murder are occurring in our nation.  We can not get justice when criminals kill themselves along with their victims, leaving no motives in their wake.  But justice would not be necessary if we took more measures in our legislative branch in order to limit violence.

Harvard Justice 2

Utilitarianism is the ethical theory that all actions should be directed towards achieving the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.  This means that if a larger quantity of people benefit in a situation then they will be favored.  Although this is widely accepted in our culture, its terms do not morally fit into place in all situations.  As proposed in the video, if you were to kill just one fat guy as opposed to 5 people, what would you do? Here, more people agreed to let the 5 people die.  The utilitarian theory doesn't apply here because it is not right to involve an innocent person into the situation, that being the fat man.  Although it may help more people, which is great, it can hurt others and that is key when looking at this theory. 

Harvard Justice 1

From the scenarios presented in this video, it's evident that morals drive human decision making.  But what exactly is the right thing to do?  In a consequential standpoint, the ends justifies the means.  It would be better to kill one person and save 5 others. This is unfair if this person was innocent and had no involvement in the situation. But if they are already involved I feel that the actions are acceptable.

What Does Justice Look Like in Syria?

With recent events in Syria many people all over the country are looking for answers on what to do next.  On August 21, 2013 the Syrian government, under the regime of Bashar al-Assad, gassed to deaths thousands of people in their quaint suburbs.  Among the dead were hundreds of children.  There is no question that the events of this day were horrific and disturbing.  But more than this useless killing was the means by which Syria killed these people.  Chemical weaponry was the main component used to murder these innocent people.  By doing this Syria has violated the basic rules of warfare and have induced international chaos of how justice should be served in Syria.

Addressing the nation on September 10, 2013 President Barack Obama suggested ideas to the people of the United States on how the situation in Syria should be dealt with.  Obama stated that he, "will not put American boots on the ground in Syria."  Many Americans do not want to start another war, rather, "this would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective."  However I do not agree with this statement.  Although I feel that Syria needs to pay for their actions, I do not think the answer is more violence.  This will prove nothing.  What would we be showing to the world by killing people for the reason of killing people.  There has to be another way to create justice in Syria, whether it be disarming them of chemical weapons or countless other ideas.  America itself cannot take justice into their own hands.  Justice is necessary in Syria but how far are we, as human beings, willing to go to make sure it happens?

http://www.npr.org/2013/09/10/221186456/transcript-president-obamas-address-to-the-nation-on-syria