All questions are worth 20 points:
1. In which ways can elder abuse legislation infringe on individual rights and self-determination? How can legislation effectively balance the preservation of individual rights and the protection of older or vulnerable adults against neglect and abuse? Justify your answer.
2. Discuss some of the factors that contribute to the underreporting of child abuse, especially with children who are developmentally disabled.
3. Identify and explain the four classifications of serial killers. How do serial killers differ from mass murderers or spree murderers?
4. Describe the four classes of hate crime offenders typified by McDevitt and colleagues (2002) by giving an example of each.
5. Despite other countries taking a relatively tough stance on hate speech, American jurisprudence has leaned heavily on free speech as opposed to speech regulation resulting in protection of hate speech under the First Amendment. Imminent lawless action is a standard established in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) limiting freedom of speech when the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely. Do you feel that this standard protects potential victims of hate speech and possible violence? Do you believe that the guarantee of freedom of speech is a sound or just public policy? Explain your reasoning.
IN YOUR OWN WORDS DO NOT GOOGLE ITS ON WHAT YOU HAVE GATHERED IN THIS LESSON
Each question is worth 20 points:
1. How does elder abuse legislation violate individual rights and self-determination? How can legislation effectively balance the protection of individual rights while also protecting older or vulnerable persons from neglect and abuse? Justify your response.
2. Discuss some of the reasons that contribute to child abuse underreporting, particularly among developmentally impaired children.
3. Recognize and explain the four types of serial killers. What distinguishes serial killers from mass murderers or spree killers?
4. Give an example of each of the four types of hate crime offenders described by McDevitt and colleagues (2002).
5. Despite other countries taking a relatively tough stance on hate speech, American jurisprudence has leaned heavily
