Kari is hired by the most notorious family known to date… Yavich, a family that takes pride in ruling over others, even certain parts of government.

Jade like Kari; is also hired by a well known family… but they are not known by the wider public well enough to be totally feared. And in any case this is how they would prefer to be noticed. They are the Шатия Alkulstik (Alkulstik Gang).

The target is carrying something of very great importance to both families, but only one of them will retrieve it… and have the honors of eliminating the target.

Who will it be?

Chapter 1

The Target

2007, Kikino, Moscow, Russia

'Your target is here…' A man said dressed in a very expensive business suit, he was Russian and he smoked very heavily.

'Is that all?' Kari the hired assassin asked, politely, but at the same time with some degree of disgust towards the man.

'No. You are to kill this highly classified family member and bring back proof that he has been eliminated… we preferably want to see a photograph of the corpse.'

'That's not a problem at all… however, I'll need half of my payment now.' The man, a member of the Yavich family signaled another to come forth. He held a small silver briefcase… then he slowly placed it on the coffee table on their immediate right.

'As promised, your fifty thousand euro collateral… the other half will be waiting for you once you have the object in your possession. And your one million euros upon seeing the corpse will be presented immediately in cash.'

'Well, you can expect to see me in two days time. This job requires careful planning… and it also calls for being very observant.'

The man wondered why she said what she did.

'Why did you say that?'

'We all do respect, but do you really think that I'll be the only one being sent after such a highly sought after family member?' The man laughed, and put his hand up to his mouth while he coughed, Kari could tell that his lungs were very badly damaged.

'Point taken… but the fact of the matter is that you should just do the job at hand. From what we've heard you're supposed to be the best there is.' Kari laughed as she took up the briefcase.

'That maybe what you heard, but there's one more out there that's practically equal to me and my style, but that's a another subject for another day.'

The two men walked Kari to the front door of Yavich's residence. Before she could get out of the mansion, he said his final words.

'Ms. Kari?' She stopped and look at him. "If you screw this up, my neck will be on the line… therefore your neck will be on the line as well."

'Mr. Yavich, you seem to be uncertain about your choice in offering me the job. You still have time to change your mind about me.'

'No, no… I'm just saying.'

'Okay, well I can assure you that I'll have the job done.'

All throughout the novel Hawthorne discusses the idea of sin and redemption. Hester is shown to be the least sinful of the three people because she is redeemed by the fact that she must wear the scarlet letter for the rest of her life if she is to remain in the Puritan town because she committed the sin of adultery. Dimmesdale is more sinful than Hester because it takes him so long to confess his sin to the town. Dimmesdale is cowardly because he is afraid of the townspeople and of what they may do to him for his sin. He is also naïve because he fears the town more than he fears God even though he is a minister in Puritan times. Although Dimmesdale is a coward for not confessing his sin until he is close to the end he still shows remorse by lashing himself for his sin of adultery, and by helping Hester and Pearl by aiding Hester in persuading the Governor to let her keep Pearl. In addition, both Hester and Dimmesdale have the constant reminder of their sin because of Pearl who forces the issue upon them by always asking questions like what the scarlet letter stands for and if Dimmesdale will ever stand on the scaffold with her and her mother during the day in front of the town. Dimmesdale believes he has a reason to hide his sin; if he were to confess his sin the town may lose all hope of good, and may have became overrun by sin and evil.

Chillingworth, however, comes into the town and from the moment that he sees his wife has cheated on him he declares that he will seek revenge on the man that shares her sin. When Chillingworth suspects Dimmesdale he moves in with him, under the pretense of being his physician, and begins giving Dimmesdale different herbs and “medicines” to “help” with Dimmesdale’s health. While Chillingworth is living with Dimmesdale, he asks many personal questions to try to find out if Dimmesdale is the one that he is seeking. Chillingworth becomes a “leech” and begins sucking the life out of the poor minister. At one point in the novel Chillingworth looks at Dimmesdale’s chest and does a devilish dance at the sight. Chillingworth’s vengeance becomes an obsession and drives him to make Dimmesdale’s health get worse faster by giving him the so-called medicine, and by making Dimmesdale feel so guilty that it drives him insane. Chillingworth tries to play God by deciding who should be punished, and ends up turning into the “Black Man,” or the Devil.

Hester and Dimmesdale committed a sin that did not intentionally hurt anyone but their own souls, but Chillingworth committed a sin that was purposefully hurting another human being physically and emotionally. Sins of passion are not on the same magnitude as sins of vengeance. Murder and adultery are not on the same level. Hester and Dimmesdale both showed remorse for their sins. Hester and Dimmesdale were both punished by society and both punished themselves. Chillingworth did not feel that he ever did anything wrong even though his sins were worse that those of the person he sought revenge upon. Chillingworth was never punished by society or and he never sought repentance. Chillingworth was the guiltiest sinner in the Scarlet Letter.

When you look at their percentages, it does not add up. What truth are they hiding? First off certain gun lobbyists' who act like Nazi's have to protect their attitudes/status and more importantly the bottom line. They protect gun culture/lifestyle and the profits from the economic support it gets from its members. What do you do when something/someone threatens your income; you destroy it by any means possible. Therefore, via ads propaganda, a threat and so on is non-stop.

Reality check here, say you commit a crime and now you find yourself in prison were you learn how brutal life is there. You lived in a structured environment and find that you now have friends there who have your back. You get out and find that the American middle class hates you. Find a job, it is hard if not impossible, as you have a criminal record and cannot be trusted. You find yourself unable to pay bills and obtaining a place that does a credit check on you makes it impossible to get an apartment.

So now, you are looking around you and all you see are the arrogant self-centered people out there that view you as scum. You see that these people in reality are no better than you but have all the things you can never have results in bitter resentment. Nevertheless, you are not alone in this plight, so find yourself with low self-esteem but need, and want a place to belong. Therefore, a gang is born which gives you a family, and status. It gives you self-respect, status, and a means of having. It is true otherwise; gangs would not exist in the first place. Oh, there are those select few in the same situation who manage to obtain things in life but those are few and far in-between, the ones on Oprah like shows.

Now certain gun organizations that act like Nazis say laws do not work, then why have them. The shooting of someone who is trespassing on someone's front law. Is not considered a crime, but the reality is someone was murdered. In Texas, it is okay to murder and praised as heroes for doing so. Texas the state that has no gun laws to speak of; has a huge population in its prisons and a lot of crime. Look at mainland china for example a country that has serious laws that can put you in prison for almost anything yet the united states has four times as many prisoners in jail and a population that is four times that of the states. it is only common sense then that the U.S. has four times the crime rate. What do you mean laws do not work; you only say that so you can be a hero and murder someone.

Gangs are there because the justice system is setup that way. The ones who enforce the law voted in. People are voted in instead of being appointed. Therefore, when those attitudes are enforced regardless do not complain, it is what you wanted. It maintains the cycle of crime and only perpetuates it by putting down those in that lifestyle and alienates them. The thought of having people in place people with no political agendas would not occur to you. Governments have a duty is to serve the community/public not to serve the specialty groups with the ability to remove the agents of the law, when things do not go their way. You start with the Swiss crime rates; you have no idea what you are talking about

.

According to the editors, the establishment of prisons was to fulfill four purposes: deter crime, provide the community with retribution, reform the criminal (or deviant), and incapacitate dangerous criminals.

Punishment in the Time of Aristotle and Plato

The law on homicide dates back to around 620 B.C. In Athens, the Greek city-state that has been the most documented, the types of punishment they inflicted was mostly in the form of retribution. A criminal could be stoned to death, thrown off a cliff or bound to a stake and left to suffer a slow death. The Athenians also punished criminals in material ways by confiscating their assets and destroying their home.

Plato argued that correction should be the primary focus, not retribution. He wrote that criminal acts are done out of ignorance and that perpetrators should be taught to act according to law and what is acceptable in civilization. Plato's ideas didn't take hold until the European Middle Ages.

Disagreement with Religious Doctrine in the 12th and 13th Centuries

Christians experienced widespread dissent during this time and many people who spoke against the accepted religious doctrine were imprisoned for "heretical depravity." These criminals were only executed in extreme cases, but most commonly they would be convicted and imprisoned for life. Joan of Arc is a famous and well-known example of this time and was burned at the stake.

Corporal Punishment

Whipping was the most common early form of corporal (bodily) punishment, and was considered the least severe. The floggings were usually carried out publicly when added an element of shame to the punishment. Moving up in severity was burning the prisoner's skin with a hot-iron brand. The mark left behind was sometime an image incorporated into the city's coat of arms, or the mark of a king or judge. It also served as an identifier for repeat offenders. The most severe form of corporal punishment was mutilation, such as a cut in the cheek, removing of hands, blinding or, most commonly, cutting off an ear.

Punishment Theater

Much of the retribution and punishment for prisoners was doled out in publicly staged events. The death penalty was a well-staged performance that was created to deter crime and justify the punishment. Public officials, court officers and religious leaders all attending a death imposed by the court. Some towns increased the event's drama by marching the condemned prisoner through the town in a long procession to the staging area. The appeal of the public executions waned around the 18th century.

Convicts Imported to America as Slaves

About 50,000 British convicts were shipped to America between 1718 and 1776. Most were condemned for vagrancy but most were convicted of grand larceny. These convicts were mostly males in their 20s and were sold for a third the price of an African slave. The most frequent destinations for these convicts was Maryland and Virginia.

This history of prisons and how we view the purpose of incarceration is a fascinating study is social science that spans all of civilization. The Oxford book gives a comprehensive look that anyone interested in the history of prisons and punishment will appreciate.

The Thin Man is centered around the murder of a woman named Julia Wolf. A girl named Dorothy Wynant approaches Nick in a speakeasy, asking after her father, the inventor Clyde Wynant, whom Nick was once friends with. Nick and his wife, Nora, then become involved with the entire Wynant family and their associations with the murder of Wolf, Clyde's secretary. Nick, Nora, and the reader are introduced to many colorful characters and potential suspects, including John Nunheim, a police informant who flees his apartment upon being questioned by Nick and police Lieutenant Guild. The story turns, as Nunheim is later found dead. Clyde's ex-wife, Mimi, has remarried to a man named Jorgensen. Jorgensen is later discovered to be a man named Victor Rosewater, who once accused Clyde of stealing an invention and threatened to kill Clyde and his family. Jorgensen is also discovered to have another wife in another city, making him guilty of bigamy-not an affair the investigators are terribly concerned with originally, but a crime nonetheless. Another crime not even mentioned is the consumption of alcohol, as the story takes place during Prohibition. All of the characters are guilty of drinking. The most surprising crime, however, is not discovered until the very end of the novel. The police continue to cross suspects off of their list, while the remaining ones incriminate themselves further and further. Following Nick's continual hinting to do so, the police finally search the workshop of Clyde Wynant for information on the Wolf murder, and on Clyde's whereabouts, as he hasn't been physically seen over the course of the story. After ransacking the shop, the cops find nothing, and decide to dig up the floor. Upon this, the police discover the bones and clothing of a man hidden under the cement. The cops and others who gathered are stunned and oblivious as to who the dead man could be. Nick solves the case, however, by noting the continual absence of Clyde, and the motives of Clyde's attorney, Macaulay. In the case of Clyde's death, Macaulay is to be left with powers of attorney. Clyde accumulated considerable assets in his lifetime due to his inventions, and greed got the best of Macaulay. “'He killed Wynant and he killed Julia and he killed Nunheim,'” Nick concludes (192). Hammett causes his characters to fumble around in the dark, which grows considerably darker due to the continual addition of crimes committed. This use of hardboiled convention adds to Hammett's repertoire as the master of the detective novel.

Since the novel centers around a murder (a staple in the world of the hardboiled detective), suspects don't stop appearing until the very end of the story, when the case is solved. The initial suspect in the murder of Julia Wolf is Clyde Wynant, as he has a history of being “batty as hell” (10). The next suspect introduced is Mimi Jorgensen. Mimi is the possible murderer because Clyde had an affair with Wolf which broke up his marriage, and Mimi has a tendency for dramatics and hysterical anger. The gangster Shep Morelli is suspected of the murder because he was Wolf's boyfriend. Nunheim may have done it because he came into frequent contact with Wolf and secretly had feelings for her. Gilbert, Clyde and Mimi's son, is a suspect, as well as his sister, Dorothy, because Wolf broke up their family and would have had information pertaining to Clyde's recent whereabouts. Clyde's sister, Alice, may have committed the murder due to a series of disputes she and Clyde had. Lieutenant Guild offers no alibi at any point, making him a (slightly less likely) suspect, and most other policemen are also viewed as suspects by Nick, as he generally finds cops to be corrupt. While the reader most likely follows Nick's train of thought as to who committed the crime, Nick himself is suspected of the murder by other characters. The multiplication of suspects in this novel occurs so rapidly that Hammett, being self-aware, makes his characters joke about it. Nora asks Nick who he thinks murdered Julia Wolf, to which Nick replies, “Mimi Jorgensen, Wynant, Nunheim, Gilbert, Dorothy, Aunt Alice, Morelli, you, me, or Guild. Maybe Studsy did it” (92). The irony of the case's resolution is that the actual murderer is hardly suspected until the very end of the novel. Nick trusts Herbert Macaulay with almost all of the information he discovers, unwittingly allowing Macaulay to continue to cover his murderous tracks. Ultimately, though, the unofficial detective cracks the case and surprises all involved (including the reader) with the outcome. Hammett's use of believable suspects, each with an abundance of motive, is a textbook example of hardboiled detective convention.

The Thin Man begins in a speakeasy and ends with the main character complaining that “this excitement has put [he and his wife] behind on [their] drinking” (201). In this novel, Hammett takes the hardboiled convention of frequent drinking to a whole new level. The semi-hero of the story, Nick, is rarely seen without a drink in hand, and if he is, he's usually suggesting the quickest way in which he can obtain one. More than once in the novel, Nick wakes up to Nora's suggestion of breakfast, complains that it is too early for food, and says, “How about a drop of something to cut the phlegm?” (10, 153). Almost all of the characters vital to the story are met in speakeasies, since, again, the story is set during Prohibition. Even after becoming involved with the mysteries presented, Nick often drops working on the case to go out to clubs and speakeasies for drinks. Out of thirty-one chapters in the novel, only six don't contain the use or mention of alcohol. Hammett's use of this hardboiled convention is extreme, but effective in its constancy.

The Thin Man doesn't fit all hardboiled detective story conventions. The story isn't centered on a MacGuffin, as Hammett's The Maltese Falcon and many other hardboiled stories are. The main character doesn't have sex with any of the women involved, other than his wife (if the reader goes far enough to assume that he has sex with her). The main character never claims to be a detective or a private investigator, in fact, he refuses to accept the titles when they are forced on him by others. On the other hand, the main character is highly paranoid and believes no one. He smokes hordes of cigarettes, and is wittier than the other characters combined. Obviously, as well, the novel is ripe with crime, suspects, and alcohol use. Through the use of many well-known conventions, Dashiell Hammett's The Thin Man stands firm as a hardboiled detective novel.

As he approached his home, he felt a sense of pride. He'd committed a crime and gotten away with it.

The large oak front door swung open weightlessly. As the moonlight spread across the vast hallway in front of him, the man breathed in deeply. "I have lived here for many years", he thought, "but i am still amazed at the beauty of my home".

The man swept across the threshold, grabbed the lighter off the sidetable and lit the candles that were either side of the door.

"Aah. Perfection!" he thought to himself.

But as he turned to take off his coat, something caught his eye. It was a shadow. It danced across the wall in front of him, and then disappeared. The man swung round, "Who's there!" He shouted into the darkness.

No one answered him, so he took off his cloak and made to go into his living room.

"Oh my goodness!" shouted the man when he switched on the light. Written in blood on his living room wall was "I know what you did, and i"ve come for you'.

The man was worried now. Was this the local pranksters or a deadly serious threat. He couldn't phone the police because they could decipher the message.

A loud crash came from the kitchen just then, scaring the man out of his thoughts. The kitchen doorway was just darkness, impenetrable by the human eye.

The only thing that would work would be going in that room and switching the light on. Obviously whatever was in there could see him, but he couldn't see it.

That thought scared him more than anything else.

First off, it does not consider that maybe once exposed to criminals they will not want to live their lives like that. The age group involved here is far from stupid. It is a sad day that this small group views are now made part of the constitution. Recently the Canadian government had an agenda to change the young offenders act to stiffer penalties for young offenders, but now that would be almost impossible. They are now protected by the constitution to be treated differently from adults for offenses. Crime rates for the age group protected have dramatically increased since the implementation of the act in the past decade. Now because of this, it will get worse, this current law is proving to create more crime, so what do the established bleeding hearts do, they make sure the system does not change.

To assertion that someone under the age of 18 does not know right from wrong is sadly mistaken, as even a cat knows when it is doing something wrong. Personally, I believe that the school system is partly to blame for this. In a recent and on going study of youth crime in Calgary. It is based on 123 young offenders; it seems that they commit crimes most likely during the week and not on weekends. And it goes on to say between the 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. sounds like peer pressure the school system attitudes and not on the parents watch as actual offenders do not seem to offend while under the parents influence when present.

Nevertheless, in all fairness, these kids profiled are drug users, the parents are often absent, and there is a history of family violence. Not enough or no activities to get this age group occupied in the school system. Alternatively, other things in life other than an environment of criminal activity. This age group is not stupid and is well aware that they cannot be disciplined for their actions and in fact are given special treatment for anti-social behavior by law. Sounds to me like more of an inducement to commit crimes, as at least they would be getting attention. Attention that they seem to be in need of such as counseling and group activities. The law treating them as special would be giving them status from peers, treated with respect, something much needed. A legal system that would give young offenders serious punishments for anti-social activity combined with a school system that showed some backbone allow discipline in school and have mandatory sports or other activities that spark the interest so as to get kids involved in social activities to suit each kid.

Raskolnikov thinks he can just commit two murders, get away with it, and get away with feeling anything. After murdering the two women, Raskolnikov thinks that he is immune to the normal human emotions that one would receive from committing the murders. Humans just can't live without feeling emotions in one way or another. No matter how much one tries to push away the pain and sadness they feel there is no way of escaping it. Raskolnikov couldn't realize this and that is his down fall. If only he had been able to realize that there was no way he would be able to hide from his emotions, and had dealt with them maybe he would have been able to handle the consequences and after math of the murders.

The super man theory is in fact proven to be impossible by Raskolnikov's actions in Crime and Punishment. In fact Dostoevsky proves that it is better to live with your emotions and human faults rather than to be devoid of them. It is better to be able to live with yourself than to live a great life but not be able to look at yourself in the mirror. One day people will realize this and the world will be a better place, but until then life will just have to go on.

He just answered, “I'm sorry, there are just things which people need to accept first before they can move freely.” I thought it was an insult, that's why I got really mad. I do not know what demon came to me. I got a knife and stabbed him until he died. I was arrested and put to jail, but I never felt sorry, after all he was always neglecting me. After a week, the mother of my friend visited me in jail and told me that my friend was deaf, and he just lip read. My heart broke into pieces. I asked her if she was angry at me, she said no. That very day I was able to say to myself that this was and will be the worst tragedy of my life.