Describe Law, Sin & Crime.

Part 1 Understanding the differences between natural law, biblical law, and human law can be confusing at first; therefore, a few definitions and a brief discussion of each will be a helpful start to this assignment. First, natural law is God’s revealed truth about morality outside of Scripture (the Bible). He “established the laws of heaven and earth” (Jeremiah 33:25, NIV). It is not a code of law, but rather moral principles that are applied universally. These are objective, transcendent moral truths. God created humanity in His image (Genesis 1:27) with an innate moral sense. We were made to know God and to have a relationship with him. When humans decided to act immorally (this is what sin is), God gave them biblical laws to help restrain immorality, to magnify the human condition. You will find over 600 biblical laws in the first five books of the Bible (sometimes referred to as the Torah, the Pentateuch, or the Laws of Moses). These laws were instructions that point to the ideal. Humans, as well, set up their own rules to regulate the actions of those who they govern (these rules are our written laws). Murder, for example, is an immoral act that violates natural law, biblical law, and human law, but some immoral acts (sins) do not violate human law. Thus, human law does not necessarily define morality. To assess whether a behavior is moral or not, evaluate the act, which includes the motive, the consequences, and the character of the actor. Natural law applies to all people and provides the foundation for a standard of morality on which all human law ought to be based. The law (human law) indicates the minimum level of our moral obligation to society. It provides the boundaries for moral (acceptable) behavior (not our moral beliefs). Therefore, a behavior is considered a crime when essential elements (harm, legality, actus reus, mens rea, causation, concurrence, and punishment) are present. (Defined in your textbook are these seven elements of a crime.)For this assignment, you will be studying a criminal act from a legal and a moral position. Find a crime or a court case that interests you and has taken place within the last 30 days. (Crimes or court cases that have occurred more than 30 days ago will not be accepted. Place a link to the article or court case at the bottom of your paper.)The following Websites may help you in your search: •http://crimedaily.com •https://www.crimeonline.com•https://www.oxygen.com•https://www.huffpost.com/news/crime•https://truecrimedaily.com•https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/us-crime•http://www.investigationdiscovery.com/crimefeed•https://www.crimetraveller.org•https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts•https://news.google.com/search?q=crime&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en.1.First, provide a concise description of the crime. (What happened?) In your explanation, identify and discuss the seven elements of a crime (i.e., harm, legality, actus reus, mens rea, causation, concurrence, and punishment) as they specifically pertain to your crime. (If some of these essential elements are not present, discuss their absence).2.Second, since the suspect or defendant’s behavior in the crime that you have selected was deemed criminal, we know that this person violated some level of moral responsibility to society. You are to discuss why the suspect or defendant’s behavior was morally wrong. The following information may help guide your discussion. When morally assessing a behavior, we are to consider the rationale for the act. What conceivable motive did the suspect or defendant have for this crime? (Since you do not know what the defendant was thinking, this will be a reasonable guess.) Base your moral assessment on facts, not opinion. (Moral truths are not matters of personal perspectives, but rather inferences based on facts. Moral assessments are objective, based on facts, not subjective, based on feelings.) Next, give thought to the consequences (the harm) of the violation. (Perhaps there was an infringement of someone’s unalienable rights or constitutional rights.) Lastly, consider the applicability of the law to the behavior. Perhaps you do not believe the behavior was morally wrong, but rather the law was unjustified. (An unjustifiable law could be one that forces someone to do something that violates their religious beliefs. An example would be a law that forces a doctor to perform abortions.)Discussion Board Forum Requirements. Discussion Board assignments have a split structure. In the first week that the forum is assigned, you are to respond to the discussion prompt. (This is called a thread.) In the following week, you must post two (2) replies to your classmates’ threads in the forum. First-week thread – In your response, support your views with the required readings and study materials for this week, or other scholarly sources to support your statements. Include four (4) in-text citations for this assignment. Your response must be formatted using 12 pt. Times New Roman font, with a 400-word minimum/425-word maximum. (No Title page or Reference page). Some examples of the formatting for in-text citations are: (Bohm & Haley, 2018), (Fischer, 2016), and (Venturo, 2018). When you complete this response, first, upload the file to the SafeAssign dropbox and, second, copy and paste this same response into the discussion forum. Part 2 Congratulations! You were just informed that you are the new Police Chief in a rather large city where an officer-involved shooting occurred less than one year ago. Your officer shot and killed an unarmed man, but the officer was acquitted of all charges in the shooting. Since the verdict was announced, there has been an uptick in crime in your city. You were made aware of the incident before you were hired, and you were told that the Department is now engaging in “de-policing” – departing from proactive policing – because of the anti-cop hostility in the community. Before you even had a chance to put your coffee mug on your new desk, your administrative assistant runs into your office yelling, “they’re here!” You find out that a protest march is underway with numerous reporters working their way through the melee. Your community has lost trust in your Police Department and the courts, and they are demanding that you do something. Community leaders make their way into your office. You pause a moment – and then say, “Good to see you. You saved me a phone call. Come, let’s sit down and discuss what we can do to help our community.”Based on this scenario, respond to the following questions:1.As a Police Chief and a servant of God, you need to help restore order to your community. What do you need to discuss with these community leaders?2.As a leader, you are aware that your officers need guidance. a.First, you need to understand what is causing this “de-policing” effect. What are possible causes for your officers to engage in de-policing? (See “The Assailant Study – Mindsets and Behaviors” (FBI, 2016). [https://www.valorforblue.org/Documents/Clearinghouse/FBI-The_Assailant_%20Study_Mindsets_and_Behaviors.pdf]b.Second, consider the following research findings: When police officers deliberately engage with citizens in a considerate, supportive, or comforting manner, this is called procedural justice. Officers are to act with dignity, which means they are to be polite and show respect to those who are subject to their police authority. Officers demonstrate trustworthiness by “showing care and concern for the citizen’s and society’s well-being” (Mastrofski, Jonathan-Zamir, Moyal & Willis, 2015).