There is a fierce debate surrounding the question whether it is the moral duty of citizens to obey laws even when they are bad. People take is for granted that a majority of the populace in the society we live in adhere to set laws. People are obliged to abide by the established laws, whether good or bad, due to moral or prudential reasons. According to the theory of prudential reasons, people abide by the set laws due to self-interest. In this regard, most people are pushed to abide by the laws of the land as a result of fear of consequences such as punishment and becoming a social outcast.
Criminals are not known for following the rules so all law abiding citizens have the right to defend themselves by any means needed. You could be going through a tough area of town and having that self defense on you makes you feel a bit more comfortable and safer, protecting oneself and family is a personal duty and the government should not impede the ability of responsible adults to defend themselves from potential harm. You got to take the good with the bad
Most people have a basic understanding of obedience; however, many may fail to see the application and the impact of it in their own lives and in our society. Submission into conformity discourages the type of independence that is valued in our supposedly free-thinking world. Censorship is one of the major themes in Fahrenheit 451, and its impact is illustrated through submission in appearance, behavior and thought. This invites us to draw clear relationships between Ray Bradbury‘s novel and our current society. The association between appearance and social acceptance is already apparent in our lives.
Defiance is used in every single part of the world, and takes a huge role in society. Although defiance can be considered a bad thing it is proven to be helpful and there for something good. The definition of defiance according to the dictionary is, “a daring or bold resistance to authority or to any opposing force.” it is also, “a challenge or a contest.” Defiant acts aren’t always illegal Structural Functionalism attributes defiance to the dimensions of social bonds with a group or institution. Social integration is the attachment to groups and institutions. Defiance is broken down into different categories.
By obeying and following rules the services are able to deal with all kinds of situations that they are facing and achieve their goals. If the service was lacking discipline then everyone would be doing what they please and there wouldn’t be a good team work either. There would be no team cohesion because of everyone being undisciplined so therefore nothing would get accomplished and the country would suffer. Orders must be followed in order to have a good discipline in the services. The consequences of someone not following orders could be serious or even life threatening.
I see that many people have the right to have their own say in this country and have the same responsibility as other do. But the government plays a big role in society because they censor many things that they hide from the people supposedly to keep us out of danger which at some points I believe they do this to make decisions without the people say and our opinions. We can say we are free and do what we want but at the same time we also see that the gov’t has a say in every little thing we do in our lives if they suspect you with anything they will look more into your personal life and hold you responsible for the
Outline and evaluate the definitions of abnormality A social norm is behaviour in any given society which is considered acceptable and regular, these norms are often based around the law set by the authorities or in some cases the unwritten law of the citizens within the society, it is expected that all people abide by these norms therefore any deviation from the norms is branded abnormal behaviour. Social norms vary hugely between not just countries and cultures but also areas within countries or even boroughs. Due to this wide diversity there have been criteria set into place to identify whether the behaviour is abnormal. There are also a number of criteria for one to examine before reaching a judgment as to whether someone has deviated from society's norms. The first of these criterion being culture; what may be seen as normal in one culture, may be seen as abnormal in another.
Why should people obey the law? By covering some of the basic reasons why people obey the law we will grasp a better understanding why the majority of society follows these laws. Some of these reasons that I am discussing can vary from views of morality will for others have certain obligation to obey the law. Pressure We have many reasons that keep us from breaking the laws of society. For some of us we feel a certain pressure or fear of being arrested that keeps us from trying to break laws.
Is squatting really helping the homeless people, or is it just a group of "freebooters" who aim at caosin the public? These types of questions are the major concerns in understanding this trend taken place in Europe. In my opinion if there are a lot of non-used houses on the one hand, and also a lot homeless people, it is really sensible to match these two groups. As cited in the article of Dee, Tony Mahony (one of the member of the London Squatters Campaign.) states that the aim of the homeless people is just to obtain their right to decent roof over their heads and ther is no central ideology in this movement.
Thus, many people argue the point of how to create a single standard for the whole world. However difficult this issue may be, in cases where crimes are prosecuted with a minimum punishment or even none at all is simply unacceptable and only hinders and reverses the progress of the UN missions. Although the UN has been working hard to establish clear standards and rules by which UN personnel must abide, much more progress must be made. This will require the cooperation of every state in order for universal standards to be implemented.One of the main reasons that many crimes have gone unpunished is the privileges and immunities given to UN officials. Many of these immunities have been in place since the founding of the UN and, in fact, are modeled on traditional courtesies granted to all diplomatic personnel by every government far back in history.