Why should felons be punished for mistakes? I really disagree with felons not having some of the same rights other people have. I believe people make mistakes and they shouldn’t be punished the rest of their lives for it, especially if they have turned their life around. “Under the Constitution, those who commit serious crimes can be denied certain rights. Every state in the country except two--Maine and Vermont--prohibits at least some felons from voting.
To what extent should leaders rely on polling results to guide them in voting on legislation? Partially it will depend on how well the pollster informs the public on the Leader’s issues. It is not important to correct the prevailing opinion on popular questions as much as correcting the inaccuracies of polling results. Eighty-one percent say when making "an important decision" government leaders "should pay attention to public opinion polls because this will help them get a sense of the public's views." Only 18 percent of the public said "leaders should not pay attention to public opinion polls because this will distract them from deciding what they think is right."
Big Vs. Small Government After reading both articles about opinions on big and smaller government the truth came out. People want the government to work with and for them, however no one wants to pay for it. As long as the people do not have to pay for the protection they will take as much as they can get. Most adults want the government involved because it reassures them that they won’t be harmed. Now, if teenagers ranging anywhere between 14 and 24 years old were asked their opinion on the governments involvement in their lives would say “screw the government,” “the government is ruining my life bro!” Being in that category I am expected to think they same way, no.
A third problem with the Constitution according to the Anti-Federalist was that the states would have no power. The first issue the Anti-Federalists were concerned with was the national government having too much power. In the Anti-Federalist Paper No. 11 they address this issue about unrestricted power over commerce should not be given to the national government. The Anti-Federalists were worried that if a national government was in charge of commerce, then the states will not all get what they need and will begin to fail.
· Often the views of outsider pressure groups strongly oppose the views of government, and therefore are unlikely to be consulted. What are the differences between Pressure Groups and Political parties? Pressure Groups .Do not seek power .Have views on only one or two issues .Do not put candidates up for election .Seek to represent the views of only a part of society Political parties .Seek power .Have views on the whole range of government responsibilities .Put as many candidates up for election as possible .Seek to represent the views of the whole of society REMEMBER there is not a clear cut line between PGs & PPs What methods do Pressure groups use? ( How do Pressure Groups put pressure on the Government?) Insider pressure groups ·They have strong links with decision makers and are regularly consulted, by Ministers and Civil Servants ·They are the groups that the government - local or national - considers to be legitimate and are, therefore, given access to decision makers.
Comparative Government V for Vendetta 2/25/12 V for Vendetta The government tried to put a stop to V’s criminal yet heroic activities but they couldn’t seem to get the better of the man. The defense of the nation was entirely upon V’s back yet he proved his point any single time he wished. He was unstoppable, fueled by the ideals and thoughts of a society that wasn’t taken down by corruptness or greed; he wanted a society that was for the people, not a society for the chancellor. People for the most part tried to remain in a normal standard of living but the population grew scared as the chancellor became more powerful and turned into that of a dictator. V saw something in Evey no one else did, he saw
His own experience was enlightening to him; he found a more enlightened sense of his town. In the real world that is past his time there is still civil disobedience, in the civil rights movement people broke the law by protesting against the government. They were protesting for there rights and were thrown in jail for it exactly like Thoreau. I disagree with some of what he says like the people will one day be prepared to have no government in their lives, but I don’t think he is an anarchist; I think that he is an idealistic person. His ideas one day may happen that there will be a more people oriented government.
Instead, it will only take a toll on the innocent Americans who will not be able to protect themselves in case of an attack. It will also be a violation of people’s right and in addition, the citizens will lose their trust towards their elected leaders. The law enforcers should treat people with respect and fulfil their duty to protect and serve instead of using their power to terrorise them because without these people, they would not be enjoying those privileges. Liberalism is slowly going to change the country, and soon people will be under the rule of a few privileged individuals. Taking away people’s right to own firearms, as Dwyer notes, is a calculated move aimed at leaving the people with no free will.
also SNCC and CORE accused King of treating them as junior partners which led to further disagreements between civil rights groups. CORE felt that king was not supportive and didn't play a prominent role in the freedom rides. Another reason why personal differences were a cause of fragmentation was due to more criticism of king, people said that he dominated the media attention and SNCC and CORE were concerned that King was working too closely with presidents JF.Kennedy and LB.Johnson. this caused further fragmentation as radicals didn't want to work with the government as the believed that the government failed to protect the protestors. The debate on whether protests should be peaceful or violent was also a reason for fragmentation of the civil rights movement after 1966.
The founding father would have disapproved of this pace, because lot of things that are happening today in this country is not constitutional. Some politicians that are running the government run it to please his/her self instead of the rest of the citizen. Most people are in need of what they want to make it in this country and are not getting any help or attention. For example, there are lot of people who are in need health care, welfare, jobs, and more. Some of the fears the founders expressed in the federalist Papers as well as the constitutional structure they designed in Philadelphia, as evidence as they would have the want the government to move slowly or quickly.