Discrimination In 12 Angry Men

Discrimination is an important issue that still exists in today 's world. There has always been discrimination amongst the different cultures in the United States. For instance, the segregation and slavery of African-Americans were a long-existing discrimination which caused African-Americans to be hated and treated as animals. This correlates to the movie 12 Angry Men which shows prejudice of a eighteen-year-old Hispanic boy. The boy is being held on trial after he is presumed about murdering his father with a knife. The majority of the jurors vote guilty basing it off their personal views, but there is one who votes him not guilty. This shows that racial profiling is a key factor used in making this decision. Racial profiling should not

He is also the last juror to vote the defendant not guilty. The author of “The 50th Anniversary of 12 Angry Men: Mad About 12 Angry Men” asserts “[h]e too has been an abusive father, and the result has been violence and schism in his family. The harm suffered is not just to his child but to Juror #3 himself” (Landsman 3). According to Landsman, the third juror has been “an abusive father”, which means that he bases his decision off of his personal experiences. Discrimination is oftentimes caused by the assumptions created by the experiences of the people. Clearly, the third juror believes that the defendant is also a ruthless murderer. He compares the defendant to his own son, whom he has abused and been abused by. Landsman also states that the third juror is “so angry about his son that he lets his feelings destroy his ability to deliberate rationally” (4). Judging others based on personal feelings is unfair and should not be allowed in the court

In 12 Angry Men, the defendant is a Hispanic boy, and according to the majority of the jurors, he should not be given a second chance. Ronald E. Hall argues that “[t]he implications of skin color variations among Latino-Americans have had a devastating social impact upon them. Overtly motivated by white supremacy and covertly condoned by the dominant population, skin color is the unspoken factor in the various confrontations had by Latino-Americans with societal institutions” (81). The jurors consider all Latino-Americans to be criminals and won 't analyze the case carefully to determine the specific cause. They didn 't look into the motives of the Hispanic boy or how he killed his father. Only a knife was found at the crime scene, which could have been left there by anybody. In addition, they didn 't inspect the autopsy. Without inspecting the autopsy, the jurors would not have a authentic interpretation of the