On the other hand, people might argue, if some people stop obeying the law in the name of justice, others will stop following them completely. The rules and regulations of a country is what keeps it successful, and these rules sometimes bring success in the wrong ways. Many times laws are unjust morally, but are beneficial to the economy, upper class, or politicians. These groups might not think the law as unjust, but nonetheless, some laws are made to be broken. For example, the Sedition Acts signed by President James Madison were against what the United States of America stood for, and those who obliged to this law did not do the country justice by not
Civil disobedience is the refusal to conform to a certain law or policy in a form of peaceful or non-violent political protest. However, it is still illegal and considered as a crime and deviant act as it goes against the law (a formal norm) enforced by the government. In this essay, two different sociological perspectives, namely the functionalist and symbolic interactionist perspectives, will be applied to analyzing the issue of civil disobedience. In the case of the Umbrella Movement, civil disobedience falls under the category of positive deviance. This is because the protestors are simply over-conforming to once again remind the government how the existing method for selecting the chief executive goes against Hong Kong’s human rights treaty, binding agreements that require the government to establish mechanisms that allow for equal, meaningful participation in public life.
It is made even more disturbing upon recognizing that these biases are not, as is often believed, seen only in consciously racist individuals, but even in people who believe themselves to be neutral and objective. It would be simplistic to pin police brutality and racial violence on racist actors - that would imply that institutional racism could be remedied by removing such officials from the system. However, acknowledging these ingrained biases and understanding their impact is crucial to recognizing that the system is itself inherently biased, and that a neutral and objective institution of law enforcement can only be created when the emphasis is placed not on racists, but on the construct of racism
When asked Saumya said “It’s abuse of free speech, since you’re just bashing someone else.” Using your freedom of speech to hit on theirs is a abuse of free speech. In reality, though what is actually being accomplished, besides trying to deteriorate others soul and being in such a provisional way. Hurting others because you think how they are is not right is a ridiculous way of thinking in this day and age. Using hate has not resolved any issues and sure is not making anyone believe that they are any more wrong in their
There is no reason to think that these rulers would cease to wish to resort to paramilitary forces or groups of thugs who informally exercise violence on those who, although acting within the framework of established rules, express disaffection or opposition to the regime through their actions. The informal exercise of violence generalizes fear among the population, thus, individuals lose any incentive to engage
In a world without law peace and justice would be hard to maintain. The law is created to help protect the people’s rights and keep them safe. Throughout time laws have been changed either creating new laws or restructuring old laws or just removing old laws. There is a thin line between right and wrong and that is why people have been struggling throughout the ages to come up with the perfect set of laws to follow. With this uncertainty set in place the question of whether if it is ever justified to break the law comes up.
The con to the argument presented by supporters of shaming penalties is that though they give numerous points to support their arguments these points are not evidenced based. The pro of the argument presented by opponents of shaming penalties is that they spoke of restoration for offenders and not to label them which may ruin their lives. The con of the argument presented by opponents of shaming penalties is that they like the supporters of shaming penalties lack empirical evidence to support their argument. I however support the shaming penalties though there are not enough evidence to prove its efficacy neither are there enough evidence to prove it is ineffective. Shame and embarrass is not an emotion many want to experience and to avoid shame people will not commit criminal activity as they do not want to be humiliated.
This importance created for political correctness by the media is hypocritical and not genuine as it does not condemn someone for insulting someone but for their personal gain of making news. This is why often the Racist comments spilled by a common man is not publicised and condemned however if a public figure were to make the same comment it would probably break he'll lose for him
. .”(Doc. B) However, it was wrong to do what McCarthy did and even worst what society did which was promote the injustices and just go with it.(Doc. B) Even though probably criticized at the time they began their criticism, Sahl and Murrow deciding to not follow society and to stand up for their