174 Laws should not be stationary and fixed

[rajanireddy123]

“Laws should not be stationary and fixed. Instead they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstance, times, and places”

 

Laws, the official rules and regulations generally found in constitutions and the like, are used to govern a society and to control the behavior of its members. In modern societies, authorized bodies such as a legislature make laws. They are sanctifies, for sociological purposes and backed by the coercive power of the state. Adherence is mandatory and any deviation is deterred and punished as the laws are sanctified and adherence to them is made compulsory, the question of whether they are absolute or not may sometimes arise.

 

Society is dynamic and ever changing and evolving. Laws and institutions of governance too have evolved along with it. Law develops as society evolves. The ancient societies, which were mostly tribal, were simple conglomeration of people, the cementing force being kinship and religious belief systems. These were devoid of legal institutions but not of laws. The religious beliefs, mores, traditions, taboos etc. combine to form the ‘unwritten’ laws. Inspite of the absence of organized law enforcing entities, tribal chiefs acted as enforcing authorities. The nature of law then was restrictive to perpetuate society and avenging to prevent wrongdoing against individuals. This nature of law is no different from, and no less important than that of modern law, at least in principle.

 

As the societies gradually evolved into territorial based ones, the concept of state and the ‘state’ law evolved. Governmental structures evolved and so did governmental laws. The changing face of society necessitated a new type of law and modern law began to take shape. Roman Law is the first written compilation of laws and these can be called the mother of laws. These early laws took into consideration the necessities of society and thus the nature of laws was directly dependent upon the nature of the society.

 

All this proves that the laws should be as dynamic as the society they govern, it is the members of the society that tend to influence the nature of laws. If we were to take for example, the legal right to own slaves and the laws that sanctioned this can equally be blamed . The Agri-based south of America before civil war needed work force for agriculture and thus slavery was institutionalized and legally sanctioned. On the other hand the industry based north of America, which did not encourage slavery that much, can be clearly absented here.

 

Thus, the discussion proves beyond doubt that, laws have been flexible all through human history as they should be. This must be the case, as they should serve the society in improving and in perpetuating it. If any law is against human conscience of a given period and place, the society itself develops some internal forces to resist and revise the law in question. The abolition movement in the US, the anti-sati movement instigated by Brahma Samaj in India are examples for this societal action to bring flexibility to the laws. So flexibility of laws is an ideal rather than a violation of tradition.(Ramana)

 

[gautam]

First para :- Lots of restatement of the same thing. Redundancy is high in first para.

 

You move from the past to present and from present to past.

 

Roman law "is" the first blah blah --> "is" should be "was".

 

Society is dynamic and ever changing and evolving. Laws and institutions of governance too have evolved along with it. Law develops as society evolves.

 

Third scentence restates whats said in the frist and second.

 

Lot of redundancy --> I request you read your essay again and if you still can't figure out where you went wrong, let us know. I will point it out, para by para.

 

I will give it a 4/6

 

[psifi]

Hi all,

 

Please find my response to the issue. Appreciate if you guys can read it and give me review/score.

 

Laws play a pivotal role in maintaining the order in a society. A society without laws is chaotic and unpredictable. The laws ensure the safety and well-being of the citizens. I believe that a fair, ordered and well-developed society is possible only if the laws are flexible and take into account the various circumstances that led to the action, the correct and useful rehabilitation techniques, and the cultural and sociological implications behind the action.

 

Laws are made to prevent crimes from happening. It is important to note the extent of crime, the reasons that led to it and then pass a judgement accordingly. It is evident that killing someone for money or other malign intents is far more heinous a crime than killing by accident. It is, therefore important that the laws consider the circumstances that led to the crime, and punish the convict accordingly. For instance, a serial killer or psychopath is a far more threat to the society than a person who accidentally hit someone on the road. In the former case, the person should be shunned and kept locked away in a prison for a long time as the citizens are unsafe if such a person is let loose. However, the driver who hit someone did not have any intent to kill anyone. If anything, he is a bad driver, not a bad person or a killer. In this case, the laws should be flexible enough to consider the circumstances and reasons that led to the death and should cancel his driving license and give a less intense punishment than the former convict.

 

Closely linked to the laws which determine the extent of one's crime are the laws that determine what should be done to the convicts. The purpose of these laws is to rehabilitate the criminals, so that they can again lead a life that is prosperous and safe for them and for the people around them. Even for these laws, it is important to note not only the circumstances, but also the personality and the mental condition of the convicts, because "one size fits all" kind of rigid, inflexible laws might prove detrimental to the rehabilitation of the criminals. Particularly, In context of murder, A rigid law that says that all murderers be locked away in prison for lifetime, or be hanged, is not the best rehabilitation technique. It is possible that the person committed the crime due to mental instability and voices inside the head guiding him/her, and not due to any other malign intent or hostility towards the victim. In this case, prison might not help in rehabilitating the convict. In fact, it might even exacerbate the situation. It is, therefore imperative that the psychological profile of the convict be assessed and a decision be taken accordingly.

 

Finally, the laws should accommodate for the prevalent religious, cultural and sociological values. The values and rituals of one culture might seem bizarre and strange to a person of different culture. A society should show tolerance and importance to these differences and should pass laws that prove utilitarian to all the cultures involved. For instance, killing of some species of animals is considered a sin in some cultures. However, cultures which do not follow these traditions might also be a part of the same society. It is in the interest of the judiciary to pay heed to these concerns, in order to prevent the arousal of any animosity towards the government in that group, which might lead to unnecessary riots or protests, thereby disrupting the peace of the society.

 

The differences can arise due to purely geographical reasons too. Killing an animal in a region where it is found in abundance, or where it serves as a staple source of food for the native population might be justified, whereas killing of the same animal might prove unjustified in a region where it represents the pride of the nation/state, or where it is endangered and is protected by the local government. The laws, should therefore take the geographical profile into consideration too.

 

Further, as discussed initially, one should take the reasons that led to the action in the case of animal killing too. Killing animals just for sport, thrill or for monetary reasons such as selling its hide/horns, is to be condemned by law, whereas killing it for food can be condoned.

[ajay123]

Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places.

 

kindly rate my essay

 

The point of contention in college students to choose between a course that is employment friendly and one that is akin to their interests and talents is quite debatable. Unequivocally the latter should be preferred for the same because college degrees are not temporary relationships rather are serious lifelong affairs. More, akin a student is to his course higher we can expect his interest in the subject leading to a higher performance in the same field. No talent is ever left not hired in any domain be it Theoretical Physics or Art. Even if there are not enough jobs and market is bust one can always enter the field of academics easily as he is already good at it either way employment is guaranteed.

 

 

As, the correlation between one's talents and interests rise and performance is close. One can easily expect high performance and growth in career from a prospective candidate in a field of his liking compared to a field where his interests are related only to bread and butter. The best example of this correlation is Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam he initially pursued mathematics as a field of study and went ahead with it completing his master's in mathematics had he stayed no-one would have known him today but later changed to aeronautical engineering and pursued it as his career and became the most eminent scientist received highest civilian honor, and was given the title of 'Rocket Man of India' all because he followed his heart over everything else.

 

 

Another important psychological factor that cannot be neglected is the satisfaction one gets from his job of his interests. He will not only work better than most but also have little to no self-doubt at any point in life that could be felt by his peers working alongside with him. This also translates to a more stable mental health for the individual better social life and low tendencies towards anxiety or depression. Marinda recently concluded results of it’s decade long research on over ten thousand people with people from all age working age groups had been taken all the way till retirement from different walks of life, the observation s were that the people pursuing field of their interest had enjoyed a better mental health suffered less from any sort of mental or emotional disorders and had a better social life overall.

 

 

It does not matter how much a person loves his work but if he is not able to survive financially, he sure will not pursue it for long. There is often a myth of employability in certain fields what should be understood is that there are cycles of boom and bust in respective markets and levels of automation that affect the job market. It is not necessary that the recession may continue forever in a sector or automation eat up all the jobs. A person can pursue his subject of interests gain mastery, wait silently in academic institutions in teaching jobs, and enter lead positions at the next bull cycle of the sector. Automation usually eats up mundane jobs in any sector and offer's unprecedented scalability to businesses at the same time opens up new and better paying opportunities for the earlier employed staff based upon their experience.

 

 

We can therefore say that one must always follow his subject of interests for career, as it is not only a lifelong decision but also offers better prospects for him in the future, maintains a mental equilibrium for him, can experience and contribute massive growth to the same field, and take home a better pay than his peers along with him.