Criminology

Question 1: Report on why RICO has been criticized and in turn (in your defended view) what are its biggest strength and its biggest weakness? 

The past 30 years have marked a genuine revolution of the criminal law in the United States. Most revolutions have dominated the federal jurisdiction where a fecund growth in the number of people committing delinquencies increased rapidly. At the incumbent stages of changes, amendments were focused on societal felonies and, to some extent, decadence. Under these auspices, the acts prioritized pilfering, rape, and manslaughter as capital offenses. However, further push for the revolution culminated into an inclusion of delinquencies that are merely a creation of the law served in the pot of ‘public good’. It is unfortunate that criminal law in the modern society toes such lines and instead has become a utility tool that ignores outrightly its moral obligations. As Anderson Jackson point out, the current laws consider criminality as the incapacity to take actions that obey legally enforced duties while other acts interdict comportments undertaken devoid of any guilty motive. The RICO has been rated by its critics to match the profile of the described criminal law that has undergone a similar revolution process.

Despite the documented adjustments in the criminal law, the alleged delinquency rate remains high, stimulating further constitutional needs to address the situation. As a result, the enigma of the federal crime has received massive support from political proponents and state officials. The due process followed in expanding the role of the state government in pinpointing and suing felonious conducts has seen the enforcing body develop into an intimidating sentence facility and detention contraption. In addition, offenses and ultimate punishments are indiscriminate, replicating neither momentousness nor detriment (if any) instigated to victims. At the core of the development of these federal criminal law protocols is the RICO. Given the reputation of federal law enforcers and historical deviance of the criminal acts from their original purposes, critics do not hesitate to draw a parallel to the case of RICO. In its metamorphosis, the RICO has become an easy tool that federal officials use to prosecute business persons. For instance, Giuliani prosecuted Milken and in the process gain popularity to win the first mayoral elections of the New City seat. Thus, the RICO is criticized because of its popular misuse by the federal government and the fact that it has equally diverged from its original intent.

Nonetheless, the RICO’s major strength is rooted in its ownership of a private bar committee and a special review unit within the docket of justice that supports its prosecutions . The cases prosecuted under the RICO are founded on substantial evidence since most of its investigations are handled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. However, the RICO tends to prosecute several federal cases and is greatly associated with the federal government despite its purported misuse by the body. The skewed relation between the RICO and federal officials constitutes its major weakness. To this effect, Rehnquist, former Chief Justice, expressed his concerns on the matter.

Question 4: It has been said by some that the "War on Drugs" is the same as the "War on Terror.” Do you agree or disagree with that statement and specifically why?

A closer look at the operating principles between terrorism and drug dealings reveal that both activities are based on and driven by financial motives. For instance, the boundary between acts of terror and vicious exploitation are becoming imprecise. Terror perpetrators undertake their actions guised as ideologies, posing factual and omnipresent menace to the security. In turn, drugs fund most of these terror activities and hence motivate and drive terror in all its forms (Rosenthal, 2008). The correlation cited in this case renders the two activities liable to eradication in equal measure. Thus, I concur that the war on drugs and that on terror are one and the same thing since it can end positively if the two are fought at once.

Cross-border smuggling of drugs and international terrorist acts carried out by local hostile groups share common attributes. The fight against the two, as a result, demands antagonistic drug and terror policies that are operated in tandem and coordinated from a centrally located body in order to deal with related coercions meritoriously. Existence of the link implies that all forces must be pulled together if it should be terminated. The war declared against the two vices, therefore, is aimed at weakening relations by focusing on a single goal since divided attention would result in a proliferation of either of the two. Additionally, the scope of the operation and the fact that both are outlaw activities give perpetrators a unique window to conspire against law enforcement bodies so that they expand their criminal survival cycle. Mutual positions shared by both drug dealers and terrorists have compacted their relationship to the extent that they safeguard each other from the claws of justice. Furthermore, the groups indulge in similar criminal activities and are mostly obligated to function in remote parts of the society, thus interacting even more frequently. These attributes make it reasonably meek to run cracks down on both groups at once, making the fight against them similar.

To conclude, both organizations have at their disposal tangible and intangible resources. For instance, drug trafficking groups have provided significant sums of money to terror groups who give them unlimited access to weapons for protection of their merchandise. It is imperative to note that the resources cited in this mutual collaboration are not short-term. Hence, the two organizations can sustain each other, while at the same time avoiding the authorities. Fighting the war on terror is similar to fighting the war on drugs, but viewing both as one and combining forces is the first step to thoroughly combating them. Thus, it is admissible that the ‘War on Terror' is the same as the ‘War on Drugs’ since crippling one would result in the pitfall of the other.

This is a short example of dissertation works writers from PrimeDissertations.com create for their clients. Personally, this one needed to be done in form of questions/answers. If you want to buy dissertations online and receive excellently written one work then follow the site I have mentioned earlier.