Why do we need law сочинение
Обновлено: 08.07.2024
Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules. There are rules for games, for social clubs, for sports and for adults in the workplace. There are also rules imposed by morality and custom that play an important role in telling us what we should and should not do. However, some rules — those made by the state or the courts — are called "laws". Laws resemble morality because they are designed to control or alter our behaviour. But unlike rules of morality, laws are enforced by the courts; if you break a law — whether you like that law or not — you may be forced to pay a fine, pay damages, or go to prison.
Why are some rules so special that they are made into laws? Why do we need rules that everyone must obey? In short, what is the purpose of law?
If we did not live in a structured society with other people, laws would not be necessary. We would simply do as we please, with little regard for others. But ever since individuals began to associate with other people — to live in society — laws have been the glue that has kept society together. For example, the law in our country states that we must drive our cars on the right-hand side of a two-way street. If people were allowed to choose at random which side of the street to drive on, driving would be dangerous and chaotic. Laws regulating our business affairs help to ensure that people keep their promises. Laws against criminal conduct help to safeguard our personal property and our lives.
Even in a well-ordered society, people have disagreements and conflicts arise. The law must provide a way to resolve these disputes peacefully. If two people claim to own the same piece of property, we do not want the matter settled by a duel: we turn to the law and to institutions like the courts to decide who is the real owner and to make sure that the real owner's rights are respected.
We need law, then, to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which individuals' rights are respected. But we expect even more from our law. Some totalitarian governments have cruel and arbitrary laws, enforced by police forces free to arrest and punish people without trial. Strong-arm tactics may provide a great deal of order, but we reject this form of control. The legal system should respect individual rights while, at the same time, ensuring that society operates in an orderly manner. And society should believe in the Rule of Law, which means that the law applies to every person, including members of the police and other public officials, who must carry out their public duties in accordance with the law.
In our society, laws are not only designed to govern our conduct: they are also intended to give effect to social policies. For example, some laws provide for benefits when workers are injured on the job, for health care, as well as for loans to students who otherwise might not be able to go to university.
Another goal of the law is fairness. This means that the law should recognize and protect certain basic individual rights and freedoms, such as liberty and equality. The law also serves to ensure that strong groups and individuals do not use their powerful positions in society to take unfair advantage of weaker individuals.
However, despite the best intentions, laws are sometimes created that people later recognize as being unjust or unfair. In a democratic society, laws are not carved in stone, but must reflect the changing needs of society. In a democracy, anyone who feels that a particular law is flawed has the right to speak out publicly and to seek to change the law by lawful means.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines law as a rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority. Since even the most primitive forms of life have been known to live by some rule of conduct, by definition, law has existed before the dawn of the human race. However, no other species have adopted laws to fit their immediate needs more than humans. As groups of humans began living in larger and larger groups, competition for resources such as food, water, shelter, and even mating partners grew increasingly intense. Therefore, the leaders of these basic forms of society found it necessary to set guidelines for sharing and protecting these resources. As these societies grew in complexity, so did the need for laws. While in its nascent stage law primarily protected tangibles such as life, limb, and property, the scope of laws has grown to encompass moral values as well. However, these values often differed from society to society. With each passing year, more and more laws are coming into effect. Consequently, more and more people are growing incognizant of the laws that govern them. In effect, this ignorance of the law nullifies its effectiveness as a deterrent of crime. Therefore, modern law has taken a more passive role as a medium for holding people accountable for their actions.
Voltaire once said that a multitude of laws in a country is like a great number of physicians, a sign of weakness and malady. Historically, laws have been created in an attempt to correct perceived problems within a society. An epidemic of adultery must have occurred before laws forbidding such activity came into existence. Several affluent members of society must have been robbed before anti-theft laws were passed. Undoubtedly a number of politicians were shot and killed before gun-control laws were believed to be necessary. For the most part laws are created out of fear of becoming victimized. As illustrated in the preceding examples, most laws are designed specifically to address crimes in which the distinction between an offender and a victim is clear. However, laws against so-called victimless crimes suggest that its intent exceeds that of mere protection. For instance, according to California Penal Code 286, sodomy is sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the anus of another person. Any sexual penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime of sodomy. Assuming that both persons involved in the crime of sodomy are consenting adults, the law is clearly protecting an imposed moral position rather than the rights of the parties involved. Simply speaking, such laws are created to push a predetermined ideology of morality upon the public as a whole.
In the view of some, laws are mere extensions of what people already know to be morally correct. The Ten Commandments, perhaps one of the best examples of what is known and accepted to be fundamentally moral, supports this claim. The Sixth Commandment, thou shalt not kill, easily translates to California Penal Code 187, which states that murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Similarly, the Seventh Commandment, thou shalt not commit adultery, can be likened to California Penal Code 285, which states, persons being within the degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry with each other, or who commit fornication or adultery with each other, are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. Lastly, the Eighth Commandment, thou shalt not steal, directly correlates to California Penal Code 484, which states that every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft . In each of the aforementioned examples, the intent of the law as it is associated to what is traditionally considered to be moral conduct is clear. However, what is considered to be moral often differs from culture to culture. The act of stealing, as it is defined in California Penal Code 484, is widely accepted as morally appropriate in many gypsy cultures. Likewise, although bigamy is equally as accepted in many Mormon and African cultures, under California Penal Code 281, which states, every person having a husband or wife living, who marries any other person is guilty of bigamy, the practice is clearly forbidden. Furthermore, in cases involving controversial topics, such as abortion, gun control, and capital punishment, the difference between what is considered to be moral and what is not is ambiguous at best. Most often in these cases the definition of morality lies within the eye of the beholder. With such variances in the moral values of cultures and individuals, the law must undoubtedly go beyond that of simple morality.
Another common view of the law is that it protects the general public from crime and danger. However, since a law cannot physically stop a bullet or prevent a burglar from breaking into a home, it is better viewed as simply an intangible manifestation that gives only the perception of security. Does capital punishment really prevent murders? Does a restraining order really prevent an ex-husband from beating his ex-wife into a bloody pulp? Does the threat of being sent to prison really prevent sexual predators from raping women and molesting children? Most sensible people would agree that laws cannot actually prevent crimes from occurring. However, in many instances, laws can deter criminals from committing crimes. For example, the recent decrease in drunk-driving related deaths has been directly associated to the passing of stiffer DUI laws. Similarly, there is a direct correlation between the decline of car-jacking incidents and the passing of anti-car-jacking laws. These examples clearly illustrate that laws can make a difference in the reduction of crime. Still, such is only the case of laws that are widely publicized and known throughout the public. In order for a law to serve as an effective deterrent of crime, people must first be aware of the existence of the law. Case in point, it is quite common for a smoker to throw away a lit cigarette on the side of the road once they are finished smoking it. Yet, what many smokers do not realize is that by doing so they are in direct violation of California Vehicle Code 23111, which states that no person in any vehicle and no pedestrian shall throw or discharge from or upon any road or highway or adjoining area, public or private, any lighted or nonlighted cigarette, cigar, match, or any flaming or glowing substance . Only after being cited and fined up to $10,000, will this law truly deter smokers from repeating such an offense. Simply speaking, a conscience effort to obey some laws comes only after the violation has been committed and the offender has been punished. Although this can prevent the reoccurrence of a crime, it cannot negate its initial occurrence. Moreover, the aforementioned example is merely one of the many hundreds of thousands of unknown laws currently in effect today. Since such widespread ignorance ultimately undermines its effectiveness as a deterrent of crime, the true functionality of laws has been reduced to simply a means to hold its violators accountable for their actions.
In conclusion, although the creation of most laws can be observed as merely a byproduct of a natural fear of becoming victimized by crime, some laws have been unquestionably created with the sole intent of protecting a preordained ideology of the definition of morality. Nevertheless, law is sometimes viewed as an extension of what people already know, or should know, to be morally correct. However, since what is deemed to be right or wrong often differs from person to person, simply relying on an individual s sense of morality in respect to self-government would result in inevitable sociological chaos. This holds especially true for those who lack the mental competency to differentiate between moral and immoral behavior. Although some laws have been proven to be effective deterrents of crime, this holds true only for those laws that are known to exist. Furthermore, it is necessary to remember that even the most severe of punishments will not deter the motivated criminal. Therefore, the very essence of law is reduced to a mere mechanism to hold people accountable for their actions or lack thereof. Accountability for the law, regardless of moral beliefs, must be applied unconditionally and without prejudice to all persons within the jurisdiction of the governing body in order to safeguard the law s effectiveness. Although this can be construed as force-feeding perceived moral beliefs upon the society as a whole, accountability is necessary to insure that the violators of crimes are justly punished for their actions. Without such universal accountability, it would be impossible to apply laws upon a morally diverse and legally ignorant society.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines law as a rule of conduct or procedure established by custom, agreement, or authority. Since even the most primitive forms of life have been known to live by some rule of conduct, by definition, law has existed before the dawn of the human race. However, no other species have adopted laws to fit their immediate needs more than humans. As groups of humans began living in larger and larger groups, competition for resources such as food, water, shelter, and even mating partners grew increasingly intense. Therefore, the leaders of these basic forms of society found it necessary to set guidelines for sharing and protecting these resources. As these societies grew in complexity, so did the need for laws. While in its nascent stage law primarily protected tangibles such as life, limb, and property, the scope of laws has grown to encompass moral values as well. However, these values often differed from society to society. With each passing year, more and more laws are coming into effect. Consequently, more and more people are growing incognizant of the laws that govern them. In effect, this ignorance of the law nullifies its effectiveness as a deterrent of crime. Therefore, modern law has taken a more passive role as a medium for holding people accountable for their actions.
Voltaire once said that a multitude of laws in a country is like a great number of physicians, a sign of weakness and malady. Historically, laws have been created in an attempt to correct perceived problems within a society. An epidemic of adultery must have occurred before laws forbidding such activity came into existence. Several affluent members of society must have been robbed before anti-theft laws were passed. Undoubtedly a number of politicians were shot and killed before gun-control laws were believed to be necessary. For the most part laws are created out of fear of becoming victimized. As illustrated in the preceding examples, most laws are designed specifically to address crimes in which the distinction between an offender and a victim is clear. However, laws against so-called victimless crimes suggest that its intent exceeds that of mere protection. For instance, according to California Penal Code 286, sodomy is sexual conduct consisting of contact between the penis of one person and the anus of another person. Any sexual penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime of sodomy. Assuming that both persons involved in the crime of sodomy are consenting adults, the law is clearly protecting an imposed moral position rather than the rights of the parties involved. Simply speaking, such laws are created to push a predetermined ideology of morality upon the public as a whole.
In the view of some, laws are mere extensions of what people already know to be morally correct. The Ten Commandments, perhaps one of the best examples of what is known and accepted to be fundamentally moral, supports this claim. The Sixth Commandment, thou shalt not kill, easily translates to California Penal Code 187, which states that murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought. Similarly, the Seventh Commandment, thou shalt not commit adultery, can be likened to California Penal Code 285, which states, persons being within the degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are declared by law to be incestuous and void, who intermarry with each other, or who commit fornication or adultery with each other, are punishable by imprisonment in the state prison. Lastly, the Eighth Commandment, thou shalt not steal, directly correlates to California Penal Code 484, which states that every person who shall feloniously steal, take, carry, lead, or drive away the personal property of another obtains credit and thereby fraudulently gets or obtains possession of money, or property or obtains the labor or service of another, is guilty of theft . In each of the aforementioned examples, the intent of the law as it is associated to what is traditionally considered to be moral conduct is clear. However, what is considered to be moral often differs from culture to culture. The act of stealing, as it is defined in California Penal Code 484, is widely accepted as morally appropriate in many gypsy cultures. Likewise, although bigamy is equally as accepted in many Mormon and African cultures, under California Penal Code 281, which states, every person having a husband or wife living, who marries any other person is guilty of bigamy, the practice is clearly forbidden. Furthermore, in cases involving controversial topics, such as abortion, gun control, and capital punishment, the difference between what is considered to be moral and what is not is ambiguous at best. Most often in these cases the definition of morality lies within the eye of the beholder. With such variances in the moral values of cultures and individuals, the law must undoubtedly go beyond that of simple morality.
Another common view of the law is that it protects the general public from crime and danger. However, since a law cannot physically stop a bullet or prevent a burglar from breaking into a home, it is better viewed as simply an intangible manifestation that gives only the perception of security. Does capital punishment really prevent murders? Does a restraining order really prevent an ex-husband from beating his ex-wife into a bloody pulp? Does the threat of being sent to prison really prevent sexual predators from raping women and molesting children? Most sensible people would agree that laws cannot actually prevent crimes from occurring. However, in many instances, laws can deter criminals from committing crimes. For example, the recent decrease in drunk-driving related deaths has been directly associated to the passing of stiffer DUI laws. Similarly, there is a direct correlation between the decline of car-jacking incidents and the passing of anti-car-jacking laws. These examples clearly illustrate that laws can make a difference in the reduction of crime. Still, such is only the case of laws that are widely publicized and known throughout the public. In order for a law to serve as an effective deterrent of crime, people must first be aware of the existence of the law. Case in point, it is quite common for a smoker to throw away a lit cigarette on the side of the road once they are finished smoking it. Yet, what many smokers do not realize is that by doing so they are in direct violation of California Vehicle Code 23111, which states that no person in any vehicle and no pedestrian shall throw or discharge from or upon any road or highway or adjoining area, public or private, any lighted or nonlighted cigarette, cigar, match, or any flaming or glowing substance . Only after being cited and fined up to $10,000, will this law truly deter smokers from repeating such an offense. Simply speaking, a conscience effort to obey some laws comes only after the violation has been committed and the offender has been punished. Although this can prevent the reoccurrence of a crime, it cannot negate its initial occurrence. Moreover, the aforementioned example is merely one of the many hundreds of thousands of unknown laws currently in effect today. Since such widespread ignorance ultimately undermines its effectiveness as a deterrent of crime, the true functionality of laws has been reduced to simply a means to hold its violators accountable for their actions.
In conclusion, although the creation of most laws can be observed as merely a byproduct of a natural fear of becoming victimized by crime, some laws have been unquestionably created with the sole intent of protecting a preordained ideology of the definition of morality. Nevertheless, law is sometimes viewed as an extension of what people already know, or should know, to be morally correct. However, since what is deemed to be right or wrong often differs from person to person, simply relying on an individual s sense of morality in respect to self-government would result in inevitable sociological chaos. This holds especially true for those who lack the mental competency to differentiate between moral and immoral behavior. Although some laws have been proven to be effective deterrents of crime, this holds true only for those laws that are known to exist. Furthermore, it is necessary to remember that even the most severe of punishments will not deter the motivated criminal. Therefore, the very essence of law is reduced to a mere mechanism to hold people accountable for their actions or lack thereof. Accountability for the law, regardless of moral beliefs, must be applied unconditionally and without prejudice to all persons within the jurisdiction of the governing body in order to safeguard the law s effectiveness. Although this can be construed as force-feeding perceived moral beliefs upon the society as a whole, accountability is necessary to insure that the violators of crimes are justly punished for their actions. Without such universal accountability, it would be impossible to apply laws upon a morally diverse and legally ignorant society.
Why Do We Need the Law?
Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules. There are rules for games, for social clubs, for sports and for adults in the workplace. There are also rules imposed by morality and custom that play an important role in telling us what we should and should not do. However, some rules -- those made by the state or the courts -- are called "laws". Laws resemble morality because they are designed to control or alter our behaviour. But unlike rules of morality, laws are enforced by the courts; if you break a law -- whether you like that law or not -- you may be forced to pay a fine, pay damages, or go to prison.
Why are some rules so special that they are made into laws? Why do we need rules that everyone must obey? In short, what is the purpose of law?
If we did not live in a structured society with other people, laws would not be necessary. We would simply do as we please, with little regard for others. But ever since individuals began to associate with other people -- to live in society --laws have been the glue that has kept society together. For example, the law in Canada states that we must drive our cars on the right-hand side of a two-way street. If people were allowed to choose at random which side of the street to drive on, driving would be dangerous and chaotic. Laws regulating our business affairs help to ensure that people keep their promises. Laws against criminal conduct help to safeguard our personal property and our lives.
Even in a well-ordered society, people have disagreements and conflicts arise. The law must provide a way to resolve these disputes peacefully. If two people claim to own the same piece of property, we do not want the matter settled by a duel: we turn to the law and to institutions like the courts to decide who is the real owner and to make sure that the real owner's rights are respected.
We need law, then, to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which individuals' rights are respected. But we expect even more from our law. Some totalitarian governments have cruel and arbitrary laws, enforced by police forces free to arrest and punish people without trial. Strong-arm tactics may provide a great deal of order, but we reject this form of control. The Canadian legal system respects individual rights while, at the same time, ensuring that society operates in an orderly manner. In Canada, we also believe in the Rule of Law, which means that the law applies to every person, including members of the police and other public officials, who must carry out their public duties in accordance with the law.
почему мы должны закон?
почти все, что мы делаем, регулируется некоторые свод правил.есть правила игры, для клубов, для спорта и для взрослых на рабочем месте.также существуют правила, введенные морали и обычаев, которые играют важную роль в говорит нам, что мы должны или не должны делать.однако, некоторые правила, - обязательства, взятые государством или суды - называются "законы".законы напоминают морали, ибо они предназначены для контроля или изменить свое поведение.но, в отличие от норм морали, законы исполняются судами; если вы нарушаете закон - нравится тебе этот закон или нет, ты, возможно, будут вынуждены заплатить штраф, возместить ущерб, или сесть в тюрьму.
почему некоторые правила, так, что они не в законах?зачем нам нужны правила, которые каждый должен подчиняться?короче говоря,какова цель закона?
, если мы не живем в структуру общества с другими людьми, законы не потребуется.мы бы просто делай, как мы, пожалуйста, без учета других.но с тех пор, как люди стали общаться с другими людьми - жить в обществе, - законы были клей, который держал общества.например,в канаде законодательству государства, которые мы должны изгнать наши автомобили на правой стороне улица с двусторонним движением.если людям разрешили выбирать наугад, стороне улицы ехать дальше, за рулем будет опасной и нестабильной.законы, регулирующие вопросы помощи нашим для того, чтобы выполнить свои обещания.законы против преступного поведения поможет сохранить наше личное имущество и наши жизни.
даже в упорядоченное общества, людей, есть разногласия и конфликты возникают.закон должен обеспечить возможность для урегулирования таких споров мирным путем.если два утверждают собственные же кусок собственности, мы не хотим, чтобы этот вопрос решается дуэль: мы переходим к закону и учреждениями, такими, как суды решат, кто реальный владелец и убедиться в том, что реального владельца прав.
нам нужен закон, затем для обеспечения безопасного и мирного общества, в котором права человека соблюдались.но мы ожидаем еще больше от нашего права.некоторые тоталитарного правительства жестоких и произвольных законов обеспечивается силами полиции вправе арестовать и наказать людей без суда и следствия.силовые методы могут обеспечить большой заказ, но мы против этой формы контроля.канадская правовая система предусматривает соблюдение прав личности, и в то же время, обеспечение того, чтобы общество действует организованно.в канаде, мы также верит в верховенство права, которое означает, что законодательство распространяется на любое лицо, включая сотрудников полиции и других государственных должностных лиц, которые должны выполнять свои государственные обязанности в соответствии с законом.
Why do We Need Law? Vocabulary 1. rules imposed by morality and custom – правила, предписанные моралью и обычаем 2. rules made by the state or the courts – нормы, создаваемые государством и судами 3. to control or alter our behaviour – управлять и вносить изменения в наше поведение 4. to safeguard our personal property and our lives – охранять нашу личную собственность и наши жизни 5. a well-ordered society – высокоорганизованное общество 6. to ensure a safe and peaceful society – обеспечивать безопасное и мирное существование 7. to punish people without trial –наказывать людей без суда и следствия 8. to respect individual rights – уважать права человека 9. to give effect to social policies – оказывать влияние на социальную политику 10. to protect liberty and equality – защищать свободу и равенство
1. Прочитайте и переведите текст
Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules. There are rules for games, for social clubs, for sports and for adults in the workplace. There are also rules imposed by morality and custom that play an important role in telling us what we should and should not do. However, some rules – those made by the state or the courts – are called “laws”. Laws resemble morality because they are designed to control or alter our behaviour. But unlike rules of morality, laws are enforced by the courts; if you break a law – whether you like that law or not – you may be forced to pay a fine, pay damages, or go to prison.
Why are some rules so special that they are made into laws? Why do we need rules that everyone must obey? In short, what is the purpose of law?
If we did not live in a structured society with other people, laws would not be necessary. We would simply do as we please, with little regard for others. But ever since individuals began to associate with other people – to live in society – laws have been the glue that has kept society together. For example, the law in our country states that we must drive our cars on the right-hand side of a two-way street. If people were allowed to choose at random which side of the street to drive on, driving would be dangerous and chaotic. Laws regulating our business affairs help to ensure that people keep their promises. Laws against criminal conduct help to safeguard our personal property and our lives.
Even in a well-ordered society, people have disagreements and conflicts arise. The law must provide a way to resolve these disputes peacefully. If two people claim to own the same piece of property, we do not want the matter settled by a duel: we turn to the law and to institutions like the courts to decide who is the real owner and to make sure that the real owner's rights are respected.
We need law, then, to ensure a safe and peaceful society in which individuals’ rights are respected. But we expect even more from our law. Some totalitarian governments have cruel and arbitrary laws, enforced by police forces free to arrest and punish people without trial. Strong-arm
tactics may provide a great deal of order, but we reject this form of control. The legal system should respect individual rights while, at the same time, ensuring that society operates in an orderly manner. And society should believe in the Rule of Law, which means that the law applies to every person, including members of the police and other public officials, who must carry out their public duties in accordance with the law.
In our society, laws are not only designed to govern our conduct: they are also intended to give effect to social policies. For example, some laws provide for benefits when workers are injured on the job, for health care, as well as for loans to students who otherwise might not be able to go to university.
Another goal of the law is fairness. This means that the law should recognize and protect certain basic individual rights and freedoms, such as liberty and equality. The law also serves to ensure that strong groups and individuals do not use their powerful positions in society to take unfair advantage of weaker individuals. However, despite the best intentions, laws are sometimes created that people later recognize as being unjust or unfair. In a democratic society, laws are not carved in stone, but must reflect the changing needs of society. In a democracy, anyone who feels that a particular law is flawed has the right to speak out publicly and to seek to change the law by lawful means. 2. Подберите к английским словосочетаниям из текста русские эквиваленты.
Читайте также: