$2 million was chosen because it was impossible to determine how much of the damage the snowboarder was responsible for.
Due to the snowboarder's joint and several liability for the injury, the skier may recover $2 million from the snowboarder. According to the doctrine of joint and several liability, each defendant will be held jointly and severally liable for any harm that the plaintiff suffers as a result of two or more tortious acts acting together to cause. This means that the plaintiff may seek payment from any defendant for the full amount of his damages. The doctrine holds true even when each tortfeasor took different steps and acted on their own. Here, the skier's right to reasonable care was violated by both the snowboarder and a resort employee.
The skier's disability was actually caused by both of the tortfeasors' actions because without either of them, his leg would not have become permanently disabled. Because the disability was a direct result of the snowboarder's act, that act was the proximate cause of the skier's disability. The extent of the harm was unpredictable, so it doesn't matter; the tortfeasor must treat the victim as he finds him. The skier can therefore sue the snowboarder for the full $2 million.
Learn more about " snowboarder's " to visit here;
https://brainly.com/question/149121
#SPJ4
Complete Question -
What amount of damages can the skier recover from the snowboarder for his permanent disability?
A $1 million, because the jurisdiction follows comparative contribution rules.
B $2 million, because it was not possible to identify the portion of the injury that the snowboarder caused.
C Nothing for his permanent disability, because the skier has not met his burden of proof as to the amount of damages that the snowboarder caused.
D Nothing for his permanent disability, because the injury inflicted by the snowboarder, by itself, would not have caused the disability.
Can you use law of cosines for SSS?
Yes, the law of cosines can be used for SSS, or side-side-side, triangles.
The law of cosines states that c^2 = a^2 + b^2 - 2abcos(C), where c is the length of the side opposite angle C, and a and b are the lengths of the other two sides.
For an SSS triangle, all three sides are known, so the law of cosines can be used to find one of the angles. The equation can be rearranged to solve for cos(C), and then the inverse cosine function can be used to find the measure of angle C.
Once one angle is known, the law of cosines can be used again to find another angle, and then the third angle can be found using the fact that the sum of the angles in a triangle is 180 degrees.
Learn more about SSS triangle here;
https://brainly.com/question/30108158#
#SPJ11
Yes, you can use the Law of Cosines for SSS (side-side-side) triangles. The Law of Cosines is a formula that relates the lengths of the sides of a triangle to the cosine of one of its angles.
It is given by the equation:
c² = a² + b² - 2abcosC
Where a, b, and c are the lengths of the sides of the triangle, and C is the angle opposite side c.
In an SSS triangle, you know the lengths of all three sides, but you do not know any of the angles. You can use the Law of Cosines to find one of the angles, and then use the Law of Sines or the Law of Cosines again to find the other two angles.
For example, if you have an SSS triangle with sides of length 5, 6, and 7, you can use the Law of Cosines to find one of the angles:
7² = 5² + 6² - 2(5)(6)cosC
49 = 25 + 36 - 60cosC
-12 = -60cosC
cosC = 0.2
C = cos⁻¹(0.2) ≈ 78.46°
Once you have found one of the angles, you can use the Law of Sines or the Law of Cosines again to find the other two angles.
Learn more about "Law of Cosines " here:
https://brainly.com/question/17289163
#SPJ11
What is Kant's Retributivist theory of punishment?
Kant's Retributivist theory of punishment is a philosophical theory that believes in the idea that punishment should be imposed on a person who commits a crime, as a way of ensuring justice. According to this theory, punishment is not meant to deter or rehabilitate the offender, but rather to serve as retribution for the harm they caused.
In Kant's view, punishment should be proportional to the crime committed, and should be imposed on the offender regardless of the potential consequences or benefits of the punishment. This is in contrast to other theories of punishment, such as utilitarianism, which focuses on the potential benefits of punishment, such as deterring future crime or rehabilitating the offender.
It is based on the idea that individuals have moral responsibility for their actions, and that punishment is a way of holding them accountable for their wrongdoing. It is also based on the principle of respect for persons, which holds that individuals should be treated as ends in themselves, and not simply as means to an end.
Overall, Kant's Retributivist theory of punishment is a deontological theory, which means that it is based on the idea that certain actions are inherently right or wrong, regardless of their consequences.
For more such questions on Kant's theory.
https://brainly.com/question/4608993
#SPJ11
A woman needs to understand better the regulations that control the flow of water in the river on her private property. To be sure that she is following the federal regulations, she should consult members of which branch of the US government?
Executive branch
The woman should consult the members of Executive Branch of the US government to understand better the federal regulations which controls the flow of water in river on her private property.
Regulations of water is a part of the department of Environmental Protection and agencies which comes under the executive branch of the US government which is commonly known as The White House.
The basic structure of regulating the water in the US was established by "The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 1948" which was amended and evolved as "The Clean Water Act, 1972". It recognizes both public and private rights.
To know more about Environmental Protection, click here: brainly.com/question/28147164
#SPJ4
which principle did justice brandeis argue was included in the fourth amendment?
Answer:
Due Process
Explanation:
who interprets what the constitution says, and how?
The Supreme Court is the final and highest authority who interprets what the constitution.
The Supreme Court being the vertex of the judicial system of a country, it has the power to interpret the constitution in such a manner that it does not contravene the basic structure of the constitution. It sets out the core values in the peoples life, and Courts have the right to interpret the constitutional meaning, as well as the meaning of any laws passed by the congress. The judicial authorities expound the laws and policies of the government and simplify it by abiding such laws in various cases. Textualism, originalism, and perceiving are the three main types of constitutional interpretation that act as a living document.
To know more about "Supreme Court" visit-
brainly.com/question/12848156
#SPJ4
which level of government has the most power in a confederation?
The state or local government is preeminent in a confederation. The national government can only exercise powers delegated to it by the states. Most confederations have given local governments the authority to overturn a federal statute inside their limits.
the governments of the states
The Articles of Confederation established a Nation that was "a league of goodwill and permanent unity," yet the Articles gave most of the authority to the state governments, with little allocated to the central government.
A confederation is a group of sovereign nations that form a government. The independent states provide the central government autonomy. Power is held by each individual state, whose representatives convene to handle the group's requirements.
Learn more about government
https://brainly.com/question/8561829
#SPJ4
How did the Constitution framers view the presidency?
The framers of the U.S. Constitution viewed the presidency as an important and powerful office but believed it required checks and balances from other branches of government to limit potential abuses and safeguard the liberties of the American people.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution recognized the need for a strong executive branch, but they also understood the potential dangers of concentrated power. They believed that by establishing a system of checks and balances, with each branch of government having the ability to limit the powers of the others, they could prevent any one branch from becoming too dominant.
The presidency was designed to be an independent and co-equal branch of government, with the power to execute the laws and act as the armed forces commander-in-chief.
To know more about U.S. Constitution, visit:
https://brainly.com/question/14453917
#SPJ4
A cyber ______ is a hacker whose intention is the exploitation of a target computer or network to create a serious impact, such as the crippling of a communications network or the sabotage of a business or organization.
O virusO terroristO magistrateO informant
A cyber terrorist is a hacker whose intention is the exploitation of a target computer or network to create a serious impact, such as the crippling of a communications network or the sabotage of a business or organization.
A cyber terrorist is a hacker or a group of hackers who use their technical skills to cause widespread harm through digital means, often with the goal of advancing a political or ideological agenda.
They typically target critical infrastructure, such as power grids, financial systems, or government networks, with the intention of causing chaos, panic, or physical harm.
Cyber terrorism can take many forms, including website defacement, denial of service attacks, data breaches, and the spread of malicious software. The impact of cyber terrorism can be far-reaching and devastating, affecting not only the target organizations but also the public at large, who may rely on the services provided by these organizations.
To know more about cyber terrorist here:
https://brainly.com/question/25025601
#SPJ4
which branch of the government appoints justices to the u.s. supreme court?
Answer:
Executive Branch
Explanation:
Hope it helps:)
Three men agreed to rob a restaurant in a nearby town and bought pistols, ski masks, and gloves for that purpose. Prior to entering the restaurant, the man who was to be the lookout had a change of heart and wanted to call off the robbery. The other two men refused so the lookout threw down his gun and went to the nearby bus station to catch a bus back to his home. The remaining two men went into the restaurant and robbed it and it patrons. A patrol car happened by as they were leaving, and one of the men seized one of the customers as as hostage. In the exchange of gunfire with the police, a police officer and the hostage were killed. Both men escaped initially, but one of them was later captured and charged with robbery and murder. However, because of illegal police conduct in connection with his arrest and subsequent confession, all evidence connecting him with the charged crimes was suppressed and the charges dismissed.
If the lookout is also arrested and charged with rude,r which of the following is his strongest defense?
He had withdrawn from the plan before the two others began the robbery that led to the killings. The lookout will not be guilty of murder if he withdrew from the plan before the robbery and killings took place. At common law, each person who took part in the planning of a crime was criminally liable for the crime of conspiracy and for each offense committed in furtherance of the conspiracy. However, if one of the conspirators "withdrew" from the criminal effort before the substantive crimes occurred, he was not liable for the subsequent crimes. To successfully withdraw, the actor must notify all members of the conspiracy that he has withdrawn; this must be done in time for them to have an opportunity to abandon the planned crimes. The facts in the question clearly indicate that he had withdrawn. (A) is not as good an answer as (C) because,
if the lookout had not withdrawn, he would be guilty of murder under a felony murder theory.
His strongest argument is that he withdrew. (B) is wrong because it is no defense to a charge
of murder that the actor did not physically participate. The lookout would be guilty if he had
not withdrawn, even without physical participation. (D) is wrong because, if the theory of the prosecutor's murder charge was that the lookout was a conspirator and is liable for all crimes committed in furtherance of the conspiracy, it would make no difference whether the other conspirators are being prosecuted. (All persons must be acquitted for this defense to be effective.)
The strongest defense for the lookout is that he had withdrawn from the plan before the two others began the robbery that led to the killings, and he had notified all members of the conspiracy that he had withdrawn in time for them to abandon the planned crimes.
The lookout's strongest defense is that he backed out of the scheme before the two others started the heist that led to the killings, and he told all members of the conspiracy that he had backed out in time for them to cease the intended crimes. This defense is based on the common law principle that anyone who participates in the planning of a crime is criminally liable for the crime of conspiracy as well as any offense committed in furtherance of the conspiracy, but anyone who withdraws before the substantive crimes occur is not liable for the subsequent crimes.
For such more question on defense:
https://brainly.com/question/30673507
#SPJ4
The Supreme Court is the highest law in the land and is part of the ? branch of the government.
The Supreme Court is the highest law in the land and is part of the the judicial branch of the government.
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and the only branch of the federal judiciary that the Constitution expressly mandates.
US States. The Supreme Court serves as the final arbiter of law, upholding the promise of equal justice under the law for all Americans. In doing so, it also serves as the Constitution's protector and interpreter.
The Chief Justice of the United States sits on the Supreme Court, together with whichever many Associate Justices Congress deems appropriate.
Eight Associate Justices make up the present roster. The President of the United States has the authority to appoint Justices, and such decisions are made with the advice and agreement of the Senate.
To know more about Supreme Court, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/12848156
#SPJ4
How do the Texas and U.S. constitutions approach the issue of impeachment?
Answer:
It's easier to impeach an individual in Texas than in the national government. In recent years, most proposed constitutional amendments have been approved.
Explanation:
I hope it helps:)
Answer:
It is easier to impeach an individual in Texas than in the national government.
Explanation:
Impeachment in Texas is a little different than it is in Washington, D.C. If the Texas Legislature wants to remove a governor or other elected official, the first step is basically the same as it is in the federal system. The Texas House of Representatives holds the power of impeachment, just as the U.S. House does. By a majority vote, the legislators can impeach the official, a step that’s comparable to an indictment in a criminal court.
I hope this helps and have a wonderful day!
fill the Blank?the two most important inventory-based questions answered by the typical inventory model are ______.
The two most important inventory-based questions answered by the typical inventory model are quantity being produced and time taken to produce the said quantity.
An inventory model may be taken into interpretation as the model of managing the stocks of raw materials, work-in-process, as well as the finished goods, wherein a system of efficient management related to them is laid out. Time taken for inventory management, and the quantity availability for the inventory at a given time, are the critical questions under this model.
Learn more about inventory model here:
https://brainly.com/question/17204189
#SPJ4
What is the meaning of chattel slavery?
The term chattel slavery refers to the ownership and servitude of human beings and their offspring.
People were treated as property under this form of slavery, which might be bought, traded, or handed down through the generations. It is described as the ownership and servitude of human beings and their offspring. Under this slavery, enslaved persons were treated as the legal property of their owners, who had complete control over their lives and labour and did not regard them as possessing any inherent rights or autonomy.
Slaves were generally thought of as nothing more than a cheap workforce that could be traded like any other commodity in order to boost the wealth of their owners. Human emotions and life were not considered. Up until the Civil War, it was the most prevalent type of slavery in the Americas. A significant turning point in the fight for racial equality and human rights was the elimination of this practise.
Read more about chattel slavery on:
https://brainly.com/question/30553296
#SPJ4
a drawback in the use of patents to protect inventorsâ rights is that they
The change in technology and the time-consuming process are the biggest drawbacks involved in the use of patents to protect the rights of an inventor.
The patents may be taken into assumption as the intellectual property that are held by the inventor who creates them. Moreover, the patents are also granted only to those who create something which is unique and might not have any social interests involved. Thus, getting patents may become time-consuming, and even the technologies might change by the time patents are granted.
Learn more about patents here:
https://brainly.com/question/29638730
#SPJ4
What Happened to Jeffrey Dahmer's Apartment Building?
Jeffrey Dahmer's apartment building, located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, was demolished in 1992. After Dahmer was arrested for the murder of 17 people, the landlord of the building decided it was best to tear it down. The landlord, landlord's lawyer, and the police department all agreed that it was the best course of action.
After Jeffrey Dahmer's arrest in 1991, the apartment building where he committed his crimes became a focal point for media attention and public curiosity. Eventually, the building at 924 North 25th Street in Milwaukee, Wisconsin was demolished in 1992. The lot where the building once stood remained vacant for many years until a new apartment building was constructed on the site in 2018. This new building has no association with Dahmer or his crimes.
For more such questions on Jeffrey Dahmer.
https://brainly.com/question/30086384#
#SPJ11
Is looting during a protest the result of a group of people in society who feel like there is no other way to get the attention of those in power, OR is it an excuse for those already inclined to commit criminal activity to steal with little fear of punishment?
Answer:
The effect of the looting is evident on small and big businesses as well as the economy, increasing unemployment and making it difficult for businesses to recover from their losses. However, there are ripple effects which are not as clear. These include those on the health sector, and by extension the vaccine roll out.
Explanation:
The effect of the looting is evident on small and big businesses as well as the economy, increasing unemployment and making it difficult for businesses to recover from their losses. However, there are ripple effects which are not as clear. These include those on the health sector, and by extension the vaccine roll out.
Which of the following is true regarding Harry's assertion that the statute of frauds is not satisfied because Rebecca did not sign the document?
A. Harry is correct.
B. Harry is incorrect because he is the one being sued, and he signed the document.
C. Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the selling price was referenced.
D. Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the type of subject matter involved was referenced.
E. Harry is incorrect because the statute of frauds did not require her signature so long as the parties were clearly identified.
Answer:
Harry is incorrect because he is the one being sued, and he signed the document.
What does a blood spatter analyst?
A blood splatter analyst may be referred to or taken into general understanding as the person who is responsible for making the analysis related to the blood at a crime spot.
An analyst who deals in interpreting the results of blood splatter is the one who is also responsible for making a detailed report of the blood splattered at a criminal spot, and the same is in relation to a situation in which the blood must have splattered at the spot. Thus, the significance of an analyst has already been aforementioned.
Learn more about an analyst here:
https://brainly.com/question/1882609
#SPJ4
Complete question
What does a blood splatter analyst do?
Question 6 (1 point)
What kind of theory would you MOST likely learn about if you were studying
environmental criminology?
constitutional theory
chemical theory
theory of deviant places
Olabeling theory
The kind of theory that you would most likely learn if you were studying environmental criminology is C. theory of deviant places
What is the theory of deviant places ?The theory of deviant places is one of the most commonly studied theories in environmental criminology. This theory suggests that crime is not only caused by individual factors, but also by the physical and social characteristics of the environment in which crimes occur.
This theory helps researchers and policymakers understand how the environment can contribute to criminal behavior and guide them in developing solutions to reduce crime in these areas.
Find out more on the theory of deviant places at https://brainly.com/question/14699433
#SPJ1
how can politicians and interest groups influence the rule-making process?
The politicians and the interest groups can influence the rule-making process by using the power and unity that they have to spread their messages to a larger group of audience, and get them together in support of their beliefs and ideologies.
The rule-making process is a part of the reactions that the society has towards the decisions that are to exist in the social and legal systems of the society. Moreover, it is also to be assumed that politicians and interest groups have a larger audience reach, which helps them to influence the rule-making process.
Learn more about rule-making process here:
https://brainly.com/question/28265106
#SPJ4
what is lange v. california?
Lange v. California is a 1948 United States Supreme Court case that found that a state can constitutionally require that private citizens who receive a court order to move their property may not refuse to do so.
It is a legal case that was heard by the Supreme Court of the United States. The case involved a dispute over whether or not a police officer had the right to enter a person's home without a warrant if they believed that the person was destroying evidence.
The case was decided in 2021 and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Lange, stating that police officers cannot enter a person's home without a warrant, even if they believe that the person is destroying evidence. The Court held that the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, requires police officers to obtain a warrant before entering a person's home and the requirement for police officers to obtain a warrant before entering a person's home.
For more such questions on Lange.
https://brainly.com/question/17329865#
#SPJ11
What are the 13th 14th and 15th Amendments of the Constitution?
The 13th amendment deals with slavery, the 14th with people's status and the 15th with the right to vote.
The amendments can be described as -
13th Amendment - According to the amendment, neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist within the United States or anywhere else under their jurisdiction, unless it is used as a punishment for a crime for which the party has been lawfully convicted. Lincoln and other leaders came to the conclusion that the only way to formally abolish slavery was to change the Constitution. In all regions of the United States, slavery was permanently outlawed by this Amendment. The amendment prohibited not only slavery but also peonage and forced servitude.
14th Amendment - All people who are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and who were born or naturalised there are citizens of both the nation and the state in which they currently reside. No state shall enact or carry out any legislation that restricts the rights or privileges of US citizens; no state shall rob anybody of their life, liberty, or property without due process of law; and no state shall refuse to any person within its borders the equal protection of the laws.
15th Amendment - The federal government or any state cannot restrict or deny a citizen of the United States their right to vote due to their race, colour, or national origin. the past was a slave post. Men of African American descent are eligible to vote under this. The original United States Constitution did not specifically mention the right of citizens to vote, and only white men were allowed to cast ballots. Two constitutional changes changed that.
Read more about the 13th amendment on:
https://brainly.com/question/20336789
#SPJ4
Who were the Sunset Strip serial killers?
The "Sunset Strip Killers" were a pair of serial killers who committed a series of murders in Los Angeles in 1980.
The killers, Douglas Clark and Carol Bundy, were both involved in the sex industry and had a history of violence and criminal activity prior to their murder spree.
Clark and Bundy met in 1980 and began a romantic relationship. They soon began a killing spree that lasted for several months, during which they targeted young women in the Sunset Strip area of Los Angeles.
Their first known victim was a woman named Karen Jones, whom they abducted, sexually assaulted, and murdered. They went on to kill several more women before they were eventually caught and arrested.
Clark was convicted of six counts of murder, while Bundy was convicted of two counts. Both were sentenced to death, but Bundy's sentence was later commuted to life in prison without parole. Clark remains on death row in California.
The Sunset Strip Killers case was notable for its sensational nature, with Clark and Bundy's lurid and violent crimes capturing widespread media attention.
To know more about serial killers here:
https://brainly.com/question/7306918
#SPJ4
the interstate commerce act of 1887 and the sherman antitrust act of 1890 were passed by congress to_____
Answer: the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 in the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 were passed by Congress to control business practices that limit competition.
Explanation: this is the answer, because these two acts attacked monopolies that hurt certain competitions, and that disturbed the flow of business. It was used to break down some of the biggest businesses during the gilded age.
you are a state legislator in charge of revitalizing a major city within your state.
in which of the following scenarios might you use the concepts laid out by the gravity model to assist with decision making?
choosing another city in the state with which to link up by building a new high speed railway
The correct option is (4) Choosing another city in the state with which to link up by building a new high speed railway.
Being an state legislator in charge of revitalizing, Choosing another city in the state with which to link up by building a new high speed railway. tis can be said a Gravity modeling can be used to analyze the potential benefits of connecting two cities with a new high-speed train.
The model can be used to estimate how much the two cities could benefit from the railroad based on their current level of trade, population and distance from each other. This would help in deciding which city to connect with in order to maximize the economic benefits of the new railroad.
Full Question:
you are a state legislator in charge of revitalizing a major city within your state. In which of the following scenarios might you use the concepts laid out by the gravity model to assist with decision making?
Assessing the potential impact of a new business or industry on the local economy.Estimating the potential benefits of implementing programs to promote tourism in the city.Estimating the potential impacts of proposed changes to the city’s zoning and development regulations.Choosing another city in the state with which to link up by building a new high speed railway.To know more about state legislator:
brainly.com/question/24315255
#SPJ4
true/false. no cause or reason needs to be given by the lawyer to excuse a prospective juror when using a peremptory challenge, and peremptory challenges are unlimited (the lawyer may use as many as he/she wishes) during voir dire.
No cause or reason needs to be given by the lawyer to excuse a prospective juror when using a peremptory challenge, and peremptory challenges are unlimited during voir dire. This statement is true.
A lawyer does not need a justification to utilize a peremptory challenge to excuse a potential juror. Such challenges empower each party to exclude jurors who are otherwise eligible but appear to favor the opposite party.
Peremptory challenges, on the other hand, cannot be used to disqualify jurors on the grounds of race or class. Lawyers are limited to a certain number of peremptory challenges, which varies by state and based on the nature of the case (a misdemeanor, felony, or death penalty trial).
The prosecution and defense take turns defending their challenges for cause during the "striking a jury" procedure. The juror will be removed from the jury panel if the judge allows the challenge.
To know more about peremptory challenge:
https://brainly.com/question/27035549
#SPJ4
in the discrimination court case described by crenshaw in the video, which intersectional identities were highlighted as the focus of the argument?
Out of the given options, it is to be said that the race and gender of individuals were the intersectional identities were highlighted as the argument's focus as described by Crenshaw in the discrimination court case. Therefore, the option D holds true.
There have been numerous court cases which have revolved around the topic of discrimination in the society against the groups as well as individuals. One such case was also described by Crenshaw, wherein he mentioned the racial and sexual intersectional identities being taken as the focus of the argument.
Learn more about court case here:
https://brainly.com/question/13557795
#SPJ4
Complete question
In the discrimination court case described by Crenshaw, which intersectional identities were highlighted as the focus of the argument? Select an answer and submit.
A Gender + Social Class
b Ability Race
c Immigration status + Sexuality
d Race + Gender
Which of the following groups would benefit the most from receiving subsidies? A. Governments B. International organizations such as the WTO C. Domestic
Out of the given choices of alternatives, it may be stated that the domestic producers fall under the group that would get the maximum benefits of receiving any subsidies. Therefore, the option C holds true.
The subsidies are to be held as the grants received from an organization for the purpose of falling under the bracket of beneficial purposes. The domestic producers receive subsidies as the government wants to promote the in-house production that also helps in boosting the GDP of their country.
Learn more about subsidies here:
https://brainly.com/question/30628698
#SPJ4
Complete question
Which of the following groups would benefit the most from receiving subsidies?
A. Governments
B. International organizations such as the WTO
C. Domestic producers
D. Importers
E. Foreign competitors
The assumption that criminal acts injure not just individuals, but society as a whole is fundamental to which of the following laws?
a. criminal law
b. administrative law
c. civil law
d. procedural law
The assumption that criminal acts injure not just individuals, but society as a whole is fundamental of criminal law.
Hence, the correct option is A.
Criminal law is a body of law that defines criminal offences, includes the apprehension, charging and trial of the accused person. It punishes convicts by imprisonment, capital punishment or penalties. The prosecution is liable to prove each crime beyond reasonable doubt of the convict. Crime may be committed against a person or a society, but its impact remain in the society fundamentally. The criminal mindset can influence the society to do illegal activities that can harm individuals and society as a whole. Punishment is used as a preventive manner against crime so that people become petrified by law should not commit such crimes again.
To know more about "criminal law" visit-
brainly.com/question/23687268
#SPJ4