Is Breaking The Law For A Cause Justifiable?

Imagine a world without those brave people who dared to not abide by the law and fight for a right. A world without Gandhi would be a world without independent India; without Mandela there would be white superiority in Africa; without freedom fighters, there would be no democracy in Nepal. I believe that all the actions of such law breakers are good, even though they were against various laws, and such actions can be justified to some extent. Even though laws are meant to maintain order and protect rights, it is not always justified; some might be unfair to minorities whereas others might stir up a revolution. Some just violate human rights. In such cases, civil disobedience

One of the most crucial needs for human beings in the need to communicate with one another. Communication is what gives us meaning to our lives. Cell phones have become one of the most multifaceted and efficient ways for us to communicate today. I believe that cell phones are changing Canadian lives in a positive way, with the benefits outweighing the costs. Cell phones keep us connected, provide a wealth of information, are useful in emergencies and make our lives more efficient.

not only a social issue, but also a political and legal one as well. Opponents and

Many organizations fight for and against it. I will highlight some of these organizations and their stances.

There were times in history when breaking the law was justified: great leaders like Gandhi and Martin Luther King broke the law and changed the world for the better.

We want to research and understand the usage and ownership of landline telephones, as well as the use and ownership of cellular telephones in Canada. Currently, there is not enough information gathered on the topic of how Canadians would react to the eradication of the landline phone. If this problem is not addressed, the risk of damaging the company’s finances increases.

Do you have any recommendations on policy solutions that could effectively address this issue? If so, what are

In 1984, of the 85 million telephones in the United States and Canada, less than one percent

All around us laws are being broke; severe, mild, for a good cause, or for a bad one. When a police car, fire truck or an ambulance speeds, they are breaking the law. However, it is allowed since they are doing everything in their power to protect, serve and rescue. As an old saying goes 'For every rule, there will be an exception', it makes sense to have an exception for breaking a morally unjust law in good conscience. In life, multiple paths will present itself and after all else has failed, it is acceptable to move on to the last possible option if no serious harm is done-even if it means breaking the law to do so. After all, An unjust law is no law at

This does not seem too difficult and I am confident I can ask my questions properly in a five-minute timespan. I recognize that if I go over five minutes, some people may grow frustrated or disinterested into my topic. Another thing I will keep in my mind during my survey is understanding people’s responses. Since I am doing this entirely in person, if a person if confused they have the ability to ask my thought process right then and there, as opposed to doing an electronic survey. The same works in reverse, if I am confused about a response I can ask for immediate clarification.

Before this study, there were other publications that had systematically reviewed research on this question in 1996 (Ernst, &

Breaking the law is simple to do, any person can make a decision to not care and end up in jail. Socrates was a man who believed in the law and willing to stay in jail for life for a crime that he didn’t commit. However, there are some circumstances that a person may have to break the law to be heard and get their point across and be heard and Crito had another idea he wanted Socrates to break the law and get out of jail, Crito explains to Socrates that why be in jail for a crime that he didn’t commit wouldn’t it make more guilty being in jail but Socrates significance of the law was deeper than Crito’s. He believed that just because the people of the law are crooks and want him in jail or trying to easily to pin things on him it isn’t the law fault for a person’s mistake. The law has always helped him since the day he was born he benefited from the law and that is

Depending on which law your break it is very simple to get away with breaking the law but however it is outrageously easier to get away with it when you're rich. In Fact there is 91% of people who are rich in the United States that get away with breaking the law and that 91% doesn't just get away with it they get away with free of all charges. There is also no proof that the poor get away with breaking any law and the only reason is because the government cares about money more than the people because if they have money they have power and power is more important then someone's life and this is because money is the root to all evil and scientist prove that rich people are generally evil. "Scientists at the University of California at Berkeley analyzed a person’s rank in society (measured by wealth, occupational prestige and education) and found that those who were richer were more likely to cheat, lie and break the law than those who were poorer." Just because you're rich it doesn’t mean you should be able to get away with something that is against

cell phone in 1999. By 2008, that number rose to 91%. Texting is on the rise, up from 9.8

LITERATURE REVIEW RESEARCH METHODS Conceptual framework RESULT CONCLUSION DISCUSSION Recommendation Limitation of the study REFERENCES