ENG 151 (9061)
April 9, 2013
Defining the Elasticity of the Law
In what situation would breaking the law become plausible? What circumstances will justify a person’s actions when they decide breaking the law becomes a necessary matter? The variables are essential. What type of crime was committed? Does it affect anybody else negatively? Whenever the law is broken, the potential perpetrator is brought to court. The justice system and its judges then decide if he or she is guilty. Depending on their decision will result in either punishment or absolution. In minor cases it’s possible to be looked over and favor the defense, but if a severe case is brought to court, it gets much more complicated. Who’s to say the law itself is justifiable? Movements and reforms have taken place in order to create a fair and just law enforcement system. There have been movements such as the civil rights movement, women’s suffrage, and gay rights, all forms of protest against the law. Those individuals were able to use their right to freedom of speech to express an inequality and inadequacy in the law. Due to ongoing democracy in the United States, modifications have been made to coincide with our natural rights. Is the situation a matter of life or death? The niches on this topic can extend variously. If someone had complete intentions of murder, and the evidence is valid, murder in defense to the offender may not have punishment. Again, the courts would determine all aspects of the situation. The defendant might slip up and admit to a fault or reasons as to why someone was trying to kill him or her in the first place, although nothing justifies the intent. In the predicament of and actually saying, "In defense for my life," would not entirely justify the action. Independent choices and the rights of an individual are another factor that ties into death.
Assisted suicide is punishable by law. When it comes down to self-affliction,...