2 passages left on 27 & reflection trade by water

Lit.:
IEW ex 21, 22
ARE Note taking + exc 2

Algebra 2:
7-5
7-6

Biology :

Logic:

in 55 BC Caesar was busy preparing for his invasion of Britain. simply increasing
his fame by being the first to cross, Caesar was prepared to make the crossing when
events along the Rhine intervened.
Even while Caesar was in Luca meeting with Pompey and Crassus, word began to arrive
of Germanic crossings of the Rhine. The Usipetes and Tenchteri tribes, both in a
state of perpetual war with the powerful Suevi, began looking for safer land across
the river.
1.C
2.C
3.D
4.D
5.C
6.D
7.B
8.C
9.B
10.D
11.D
12.A
13.C
14.A
15.C
16.C
17. A
18. A
19. D
20. D
21. D
22. B
23. B
24. D
25. C
26. B
27. A
28. C
29. D
30. B
31. C
32. B
33. D
34. B
35. D
36. A
37. B
38. C
39. B
40. A

1 Caesar crossed the Rhine River in 55 BC to fight what foe? A) the

Britons B) the Greeks C) the Spaniards D) the Germans

2020

3 A) invading Britain B) becoming consul C) rebuilding Corinth D)

crossing the Rubicon
Latin II
1 B
2 D
3 C
4 A
5 D
6 D
7 B
8 B
9 A
10 C
11 D
12 A
13 C
14 B
15 B
16 D
17 A
18 C
19 A
20 C
21 B
22 A
23 D
24 c
25 c
26 a
27 c
28 c
29 b
30 b
31 c
32 d
33 a
34 a
35 c
36 b
37 b
38 d
39 d
40 c

The phrase "crossing the Rubicon" is an idiom meaning "passing the point of no
return." 1] Its meaning comes from an allusion to Julius Caesar's crossing of the
Rubicon in early January 49 BC.
The exact date is unknown.
His crossing of the river sparked Caesar's civil war, which ultimately led to
Caesar becoming dictator for life

1.Flaccus, who had said goodbye to his son, returned to Rime

2.He wrote a letter, which he sent to his wife at once

3.flaccus told Scintilla all that had happened at Rome

4.Horātia met the postman who gave her the letter

5.Scintilla, to whom Horātia handed over the letter, read it through quickly

6.Her mother told Horātia what (those things which) Flaccus had written

7.Horātia explained the whole thing to the friends with whom she was playing

8.The friends, whose parents wanted to know the facts, told them all that they had
heard

9.So in a short time all the people of Venusia had learnt all that Flaccus had
written

1.Magister, cui Flaccus argentum dederat, Quīntum in nāvem vocāvit

2.Nāvis, quam nautae solverant, portū lentē prōcēssit (perfect)

3.Quintus ad duōs viātōrēs accedebat, quī in puppe stābant

4.alter viātor, cum quō Quintus colloquium faciēbat, Puteolōs iter faciēbat

5. Alter, cuius parentēs in Graeciā habitābant, domum redībat

alea iacta est

Let me start with defining  the terms that will be used often in the debate
what I mean by innocent which will be also used equivalently with the term victim,
is that one is free from Guilt or blame . innocent of crime of offense
I am not arguing about the “peccatum originale” which is the original sin that all
humans have.
What I mean by Perpetrator is that person who commits a crime or does something
that is wrong or evil (where in wrong or evil stands on the standard of
Demonic,Instrumental,Idealistic, stupid evil and also relays hard on the theodicy
the 3 types of evilness which all includes moral, physical and metaphysical

we all know Code of Hammurabi.  we all read together last semester This code used
in the Babylonian kingdom says 'an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth'. It follows
the Taglio (탈리오) Law, which states that criminals must be returned for what they
have done.
In the old days, From the indiscriminate and unlimited revenge, it was possible to
prevent it from spreading into a bigger fight by restricting the law to allow only
the same degree of retaliation as the harm suffered by the victim.
Of course, stealing or fraud is not punished by death. The death penalty is imposed
only in the case of a heinous (헤이너스) crime that kills another person either
mentally or physiclay. It seems like a very natural and weak punishment to return
his actions to the person who committed such a terrible crime.

If the death penalty is not carried out, the perpetrator will live his life in
prison. In the first few years, you may reflect on your actions. However, in most
cases, after being locked up for 5 or 10 years, a different mind arises. There is a
44.5% chance of inflicting secondary harm on the victim's family or the family of
an innocent perpetrator.

When such secondary harm occurs to victims who are already physically and mentally
weak, is a society that fears that the victims will be harmed again is really a
proper society?
Let's move on to the next one. In the case of Korea, in a survey asking about the
abolition of the death penalty in 2012, 69.9% were against abolition. In the same
survey conducted in 205, 65.2% were against the abolition. More than half of the
population believes that the death penalty should be retained.

Abolishing the death penalty while ignoring public opinion is not a big problem in
itself. However, when the law is enforced ignoring this opinion, it can have a
great influence on the legal consciousness of the nation and the United States. At
worst, people may not trust the law itself.
.
.
There is a juvenile law that allows minors to avoid punishment even if they commit
a crime. Is it because of this? Between 2016 and 2020, the crime rate of juvenile
lawmakers increased by 58%.

In addition, even if the electronic anklets attached to sex offenders are damaged,
the punishment is very weak. So, "accidentally", the number of re-laws for those
attaching electronic anklets increased from 17 in 2011 to 62 in 2015.

o you know Kang Ho-soon, who is famous for being a serial killer? It is said that
he, who killed 10 innocent citizens, was afraid of the death penalty and constantly
asked the prison guards about the possibility of execution.
It is true that there is no objective data on whether or not crime can actually be
reduced. But that doesn't change the fact that weak laws increase crime. It is also
true that executions give fear to criminals.

According to the data provided by the Ministry of Justice of Korea, it is said that
the amount of money spent per year per criminal is about 1.6 million won. If they
go to prison at the age of 40 and come out of the company in their 80s, it will
cost about 64 million won. And of course, this money is our tax. Indeed, why do we
have to pay for their living expenses with the taxes we have shed blood and sweat?

Bean rice in prison is a thing of the past. Currently, food in prison is getting
better day by day to respect the human rights of criminals. They say prison food is
much tastier and more nutritious than actual military service.
Can't the tax money that goes into them be used for better things?

Yes, You might think that it goes against the morality but Is is really moral to
put your loved one in danger moral?  this murder was done in the case of justice
and fulfilled the command of God which was love your neibour, is’nt it?
The human rights of criminals are of course important. But does it really care
about everyone's human rights when the victim is not even guaranteed safety?

Is is right to protect a perpetrator and risk other life for the right of one?

The abolition of the death penalty will contribute to strengthening the general
public's awareness that human life is respected and not to be killed recklessly.
Violent crime will also be reduced.