We do not officially sanction the use of beating & torture or execution for sex crimes. The printing of sex offender on one’s driver’s license as well as posting of warnings on websites could be seen as opening the door to vigilante behavior. Personally, I have no problem, just some pause, with such notifications, but there may be court challenges by some civil libertarian groups in re to such practices. There are even sex offender advocacy groups, such as ReformSexOffenderLaws.Org, set up for the purpose of modifying/overturning laws they perceive as unfair. The disconcerting thing is that on some issues a valid point is made practically as well as
Despite this, it is stated that following precedent too rigidly may cause an injustice. It is important that the law adapts with the times and judges in the Supreme Court may depart from a previous decision when 'right to do so'. However, the Practice Statement also recognises that it is important to be careful when departing from precedent as it may cause more injustice than if left alone. The first practical application of the Practice Statement was seen in Herrington v British Rail Board 1972 when the then House of Lords held that "any person bringing a dangerous animal on to their land must bear full responsibility"
Thoreau implies that people should not begin to act unless they are ready to face the consequences of their action. DR. King , with a different perspective, explains how one decides which laws to break or observe. He claims that there are two type of laws: just and unjust law. People have not only legal but also moral responsibility to obey just laws: A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.
For example the Dunblane school massacre in 1996 in immediate response the UK government made the possession of hand guns illegal this was possible because of the flexibility of the UK constitution. However in comparison in the USA there have been numerous incidents similar to Dunblane however because of the rigidity if the US constitution the possession of firearms is still legal. This is a clear example of the rigidity of a codified constitution preventing necessary laws being passed moreover it also shows it is difficult for entrenched constitutions to remain up to date. It is argued that the un-codified constitution is too flexible because Parliament and strong governments can change the constitution without constraints. For example the Blair government of 1997 who made a number of constitutional changes such as the removal of
This law is immutable, for mortal greatly to live is greatly to suffer,’ and Creon’s actions after he is persuaded to relent( he goes to bury Polynices before he rescues Antigone). This shows that Sophocles had the view that divine authority had precedence over human authority. This aspect of the play is of interest to present day society as it touches on topical and controversial issues such as civil union between homosexual people. If we had the same beliefs in the present
There are words in some of the rulings that maintain the ”ex post facto” and “due process” provisions inherent in our United States Constitution are being violated including and stating “collateral damage”. The legal definition of collateral damage clearly indicates punishment. This is Punishment after the fact and strictly forbidden. In addition they have substituted the word civil proceeding as opposed to “criminal proceeding”. Most of us are not totally ignorant, as courts would like to believe.
What Acme Fireworks should first be concerned about is where negligence falls into the picture. In conducting ordinary business through the sell and services of these goods, what is noticeable is the mix or hybrid contract which requires deciphering if it falls under the common law or the UCC law. Law is a sense of morality that is shaped by society; it’s not ethics, where one is suppose to follow. With the common law, it’s something where it continues to change or adjust through our federal and state courts to govern all laws. For example, the ever-changing law on how discrimination went from sanctioning segregation to dissolving segregation illustrates how adaptable common law is.
The Australian Human Rights Commission held inquires into areas of discrimination and human rights; recommendations are made to the government for the removal of discrimination and legislation which doesn’t fulfil with UN human rights treaties. Non-legal responses such as Lobbying by NSW Gay and Lesbian rights lobby argues that the legally recognised institution of marriage shouldn’t exclude same sex couples. It’s agenda is to advocate and promote the issue, to an extent this is seen effective as it generally speaks on behalf of same sex couples. Most of the responses to the recognition of same sex relationships are legal responses, changes to the law have recognised same sex relationships as having the same legal standing as heterosexual de facto relationships this is enforced through the Property (Relationships) Act
• Criminal Procedure Further Amendment (Evidence) Act 2005 (NSW) • And the Crimes Amendment (consent-sexual assault offences) Act 2007 (NSW) These legislation change the way we deal with matters of serious sexual assaults, which has largely been brought upon by a change in social attitudes regarding sexual crimes and this will without a doubt will lead to future court decisions rethinking the law in a way that leads to further law reform as well as have a more impact on justice for all involved. Agencies such as The Criminal Justice Sexual Offences Taskforce, The New South Wales Rape Crisis Centre and the New South Wales Bar
In his own words it is “uncommonly silly” why punish someone because of what they choose to be sexually? He also stated that it was not in the Bill of Rights and not in the Constitution. So why waste valuable law enforcement resources to prevent and punish someone because of his or her sexual preference. In Justice Scalia dissection she announces that the court described petitioners conduct as an exercise of their liberty which it is. “Before the Medieval period early Romans tolerated alternative sexual practices, such as masturbation in males and females and homosexuality.