Unformatted text preview: terrorists is no different than the malice of the domestic offenders committing murder in the United States. The conclusion of the argument is that laws are being passed to prosecute domestic offenders but not against terrorists. The premise does support the conclusion. The malice is no different than that of a domestic offender and there are not many court battles to prosecute the terrorists that are in other countries. The argument is deductively valid. There are terrorists that are in hostile countries that are not being prosecuted and there are terrorists that get caught and will be taken to court for prosecution. There are countries that harbor terrorists that are planning attacks but will not help the United States to prosecute the terrorists. The premise is true because there is no difference in the malice of terrorists and the domestic murderer....
View Full Document
- Spring '09
- american government, U.S. state, President of the United States, Law of the United States