Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
Is there any rational basis for the distinction which criminal law draws between acts and omissions? How consistently is the distinction maintained?
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Mon Jun 19 2006
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
Is there any rational basis for the distinction which criminal law draws between acts and omissions? How consistently is the distinction maintained? "I will punish you as your deeds deserve", the Lord says in the Bible.1 God told Adam to keep away of eating from the tree. Adam was disobedient and ate of the tree. Adam was removed from heaven as a consequence of his disobedience. God told the devil to bow in front of Adam. The devil refused to do so. The devil was cursed as a consequence of his disobedience. To make it simple. The conduct of Adam the English legal system would call an act. The conduct of the devil the English legal system would call an omission. It is perfectly clear and well established to punish people for their deeds. But why punish people for things they have done not? Are we not all omitting to...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 149,430 others
