Can Breaking the Law Ever Be Justified Essay Example

Can Breaking the Law Ever Be Justified? Paper Can breaking the law ever be justified? 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 might be necessary. â€Å"Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed† said Martin Luther King Jr. The righteousness of revolt is shown by this remark made by a great revolutionary himself. Indeed, so much of justice has been served through revolutions. Gandhi, in India chased the British away through non-violent methods. Marching on, producing salt and breaking the law, Gandhi took a stubborn stance, without violent means, showing that they would not handle the British rule anymore. This established a happier independent India. Similarly, Mandela broke the racial barrier in South Africa, by breaking the law he helped in establishing greater good. Another major reason for breaking the law is because of one’s religion or culture. We will write a custom essay sample on Can Breaking the Law Ever Be Justified? specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Can Breaking the Law Ever Be Justified? specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Can Breaking the Law Ever Be Justified? specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer The French law has recently banned wearing the Islamic attire called ‘niqab’. An extreme effort to bring equality into the Muslim society, it is equally an imposition to women’s freedom. People put religion before law in some cases and rightfully so. It is not moral for the law to tell someone what not to wear; it is taking the freedom of choice away. It is a violation of human rights and not at all worthy of being called an offense. Similarly, public nudity is also taken as an offense to the law in many places. I do not think that shedding clothes will do more harm than create arguments among couples passing by. It is just a way showing the love of nature to many and there is no reason why it is wrong to do so. Likewise, PETA activists might have done a nude rally to raise awareness against wearing fur clothing. An act like this would be a justifiable reason to break the law. More than breaking the law, it is an animal rights awareness campaign which should lie higher than the nudity law. There are also cases where law breaking becomes a compulsion, which is when it comes to life and death. The hierarchy of law should be taken into account. Saving somebody’s life is always of more importance than obeying civil laws. For example, if a person is severely injured and the closest hospital is across the border in another country, then illegally crossing the border should not be the main concern, saving the person’s life should and in such cases law breaking is most definitely justifiable. However, breaking the law is not always justified. Vigilantism and Terrorism are two major issues where groups or individuals claim to be providing justice or freedom. Vigilantes like the Ku Klux Klan are basically extremists who try to bring justice by exterminating wrong doers, while in doing so they are violating greater laws. To some they are freedom fighters and to others they are terrorists. Other extremists like the Jihadists are even worse; they conduct violent bombings and self sacrifices in the name of religion destroying innocent lives along with their own. Both these acts are terrorizing rather than justifying. These terrorist and Vigilantes don’t seem to realize that before acting as saviors they are completely violating human rights. Personalities, heroes like Gandhi, Mandela and King will always be necessary. Times are changing and with them so will the wants of people. With time there will be more conflict and as a last resort there will always be room for justice even while breaking the law.

Differences Between Probability and Statistics

Differences Between Probability and Statistics Probability and statistics are two closely related mathematical subjects. Both use much of the same terminology and there are many points of contact between the two. It is very common to see no distinction between probability concepts and statistical concepts. Many times material from both of these subjects gets lumped under the heading â€Å"probability and statistics,† with no attempt to separate what topics are from which discipline. Despite these practices and the common ground of the subjects, they are distinct. What is the difference between probability and statistics? What Is Known The main difference between probability and statistics has to do with knowledge. By this, we refer to what are the known facts when we approach a problem. Inherent in both probability and statistics is a population, consisting of every individual we are interested in studying, and a sample, consisting of the individuals that are selected from the population. A problem in probability would start with us knowing everything about the composition of a population, and then would ask, â€Å"What is the likelihood that a selection, or sample, from the population, has certain characteristics?† Example We can see the difference between probability and statistics by thinking about a drawer of socks. Perhaps we have a drawer with 100 socks. Depending upon our knowledge of the socks, we could have either a statistics problem or a probability problem. If we know that there are 30 red socks, 20 blue socks, and 50 black socks, then we can use probability to answer questions about the makeup of a random sample of these socks. Questions of this type would be: â€Å"What is the probability that we draw two blue socks and two red socks from the drawer?†Ã¢â‚¬Å"What is the probability that we pull out 3 socks and have a matching pair?†Ã¢â‚¬ What is the probability that we draw five socks, with replacement, and they are all black?† If instead, we have no knowledge about the types of socks in the drawer, then we enter into the realm of statistics. Statistics help us to infer properties about the population on the basis of a random sample. Questions that are statistical in nature would be: A random sampling of ten socks from the drawer produced one blue sock, four red socks, and five black socks. What is the total proportion of black, blue and red socks in the drawer?We randomly sample ten socks from the drawer, write down the number of black socks, and then return the socks to the drawer. This process is done five times. The mean number of socks is for each of these trials is 7. What is the true number of black socks in the drawer? Commonality Of course, probability and statistics do have much in common. This is because statistics are built upon the foundation of probability. Although we typically do not have complete information about a population, we can use theorems and results from probability to arrive at statistical results. These results inform us about the population. Underlying all of this is the assumption that we are dealing with random processes. This is why we stressed that the sampling procedure we used with the sock drawer was random. If we do not have a random sample, then we are no longer building upon assumptions that are present in probability. Probability and statistics are closely linked, but there are differences. If you need to know what methods are appropriate, just ask yourself what it is that you know.