9.1: The government should not attempt to influence individuals’ diets in such a way as the government does not have the right to control our persons. This law would not prohibit individuals from consuming these beverages (as that prohibition is not constitutional) but it would make significant effort into coercing individuals into altering their lifestyle in the direction the government wants them to. Individuals should be allowed to make their own decisions regarding how much food and drink they consume.

9.2: Even under the assumption that criminal behavior is at least partly physiologically determined, we cannot call into question the reliance on legal punishment to deter crime. There are still those instances in which legal punishment does deter crime. Thus it is partly successful. Dugan should have received a longer sentence since the community should be protected from individuals who are likely to reoffend. However, there are many issues with the death penalty for me to come to the conclusion that that is warranted in this (or any) case.

9.3: Considering that obscenity is not constitutionally protected speech I would agree that violent portrayals of women may constitute sex discrimination. While the agenda behind them might be different there is a possibility that it serves that purpose. I would be wary of a local law that prohibits pornographic portrayals of women due to the fact that there is no clear link that they lead to sex discrimination.

9.4: I would not restrict the sale of violent video games to juveniles as there is no definitive evidence that they lead to more violence. However, I do believe that parents have the right to know what their children are consuming. Thus I do believe that warning signs and labels should be made to inform individuals of the level of violence portrayed.

9.5: It makes sense to hold Gupta accountable for his actions (not necessarily prison time). This serves as an example for others who might think of committing a seminal discretion.

9.6: Suicide bombers serve as an example how international violence can be difficult to control with the law. It extends borders and it is used as a coercion tactic that is difficult to control due to the fact that those that are engaged in it have a belief system that makes the practice highly desirable. As such, law cannot control it successfully. The successful suicide bombers cannot be held accountable for their actions, and those that are unsuccessful are already prepared to die, thus any prison sentence would be insignificant for them and would not serve as a deterrent for them.