Individual Rights versus Public Order
Individual rights and public order play a big part in everyday lives. For a state to have a functional society there needs to be a balance of both. When society cannot find an even balance between both of them, problem arises. Public order can violate individual rights and individual rights can put restrictions on public order. Individual rights play a huge part in our lives. Without individual’s rights, how can society function as a nation? Many positives derive from individual rights compare to the amount of negatives from these rights can be minimal. Public order plays a big part in how this nation functions. Public order keeps us safe from individuals, the nation safe from foreign beliefs, safe from terrorist, and keeps us safe from each other. The following paper will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of individual rights and public order. The history of why both public order and individual rights are needed to function as a democratic nation. History of Individuals Rights
Individual rights are entitled to everyone in the United States whether a citizen or not of the country. These rights should never be denied by any governmental agency no matter the status on the individual. Delegates from 13 states came together with a blueprint for self-government in Philadelphia in 1787 during the summer. The first idea drafted was the system of checks and balances and included a federal judiciary and representative legislature. When the Constitution was created, it did not hold a specific statement toward individual rights. Without written documentation stating specific regulations that the government could not do, the American people did not have individual rights. For example, it did not include what the government could or not do. In 1787, “consent of the governed” referred to White men only. The goal for individual rights had to apply to everyone and not just White men, but every person. In the beginning of the creation of individual rights, everything was turning out to be an obstacle. The absence of not having a “bill of rights” made things even more difficult. Some individuals thought it was unnecessary. For example, the federalists and others refused to take any part without a bill of rights. The anti-federalist feared a strong centralized government. At the end, the people in America wanted to be reassured that the new government would not take away any of their won freedoms of speech, press, and religion, or upon their right to be free from warrantless searches and seizures ("American Civil Liberties Union," n.d.). The bill of rights was inspired by Thomas Jefferson and drafted by James Madison. In 1791, it was finally adopted and the Constitution’s first 10 amendments became the law of the land ("American Civil Liberties Union," n.d.). Advantages and Disadvantages of Individual Rights
When considering what the advantages and disadvantages of individual rights are, the question that arises is; to what extent should a government be allowed to regulate the conduct of citizens? As citizens of the United States, we are entitled to individual rights. American history always advocated these rights through documents such as the Declaration of Independence. It grants the citizens the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (Individual Rights, 2011). This is why many individuals believe that the government’s purpose is to protect individual rights, thus giving him or her sense of security and justice. Furthermore, many individuals come to the U.S. for this same purpose because they do not have these rights in his or her county. These advantages make individuals feel safe when he or she knows that due process exists, and he or she will be treated fairly in the criminal justice system. At the same time, the people of the United States also have the right not to join the social contract defined by the government and laws. This type of disobedience...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document