Law & Morality
Using relevant examples, discuss the link between law and morality. Morality often leaves things vague and subject to general principle whereas law goes into specifics. Morality is to some extent uncertain and a matter for each individual. Law tries to be objective, written down in black and white and plain for all to see yet what should be legal roughly corresponds to what is really right or just, or what we would call morally right. First of all we must define morality; morality is a standard of right or wrong. For example, everyone knows murder is wrong; if one commits murder he feels guilty, proving a universal and absolute morality. These standards of right and wrong are recognised in various diverse civilisations and religious societies and revealed through the actions and beliefs of their citizens. All societies have the same basic code of morality. These morals are therefore considered innate. The bible in essence sets up moral standards for everyone to follow and actually has established principles and laws that govern how a society should operate. It supports the idea that a morally sound society operates for the benefit and good of all men, and that all men are subject to the same rules and regulations. According to the bible the law is discerned from the ten commandments and that to do what is right one must follow the word of God, or the law. One example of
Law and Justice
Law & Justice Laws are rules and standards of behaviour which are prescribed by authorities who enforce them with various sanctions. If a law is to be successful, it must be backed by a reasonable section of the community or it falls into disrepute and becomes meaningless. Law is about the control and directing of human social conduct and behaviour. In our legal system we have a number of areas of law dealing with different issues. Some laws deal with criminal behaviour, some deal with disputes between individuals and businesses known as civil, some deal with commercial transactions which is contract, civil disputes will include issues of negligence and nuisance. Law represents codes of social conduct, which society has decided should be compulsory. This might be described as the only common 'moral framework' there is. The law is a way of formally stating behaviour that is to be regarded as acceptable and behaviour that is regarded as unacceptable. There is no choice about which laws are to be obeyed, as they are mandatory. Justice is a difficult concept to define, the words a person may use when defining it might include fairness, honesty, equality and truth. The legal system tries to achieve justice for all individuals. Sometimes it succeeds and other times it fails. It is said, to be easier in seeing when justice has not been done than when it has. Law sets out to
smoke free legislation
The smoke free legislation1 came in to force across England on the 1st July 2007, this sets out that all work places and enclosed public places are now smoke free. This legislation has been put forward to protect the public and employees at work of the affects of second hand smoke.Second hand smoking cause's health risks such as lung cancer and heart disease2, it is 25% more likely to increase the likelihood of heart disease3 in work places second hand intake of smoking kills three times more workers than in accident at work places.4 It has been seen that a large number of smokers die every year around 114,000 smokers die in the UK from the affects of smoking5, thus it is a crucial matter than needs to be addressed. There is five sets of regulation that have been stated under the smoke free legislation6 The legislation covers all enclosed public places and work places that will have to be smoke free. It has been of discussion as to whether smoking should be allowed in public places or restricted; nevertheless the new regulations have made it clear that as of the 1st July it will not be allowed. The issue regarding this matter is in terms of the employers whether legally they are or required of to provide a designated smoking spot, or shelter area; this matter is clarified in the legislation as it makes it clear that employers are not legally required to provide such. On
Essay plan for : Critically analyse the extent to which modern theories of rights, which are increasingly being applied to rights beyond the merely human, represent a new paradigm or are simply the application of old ideas the new si
Essay plan for : 'Critically analyse the extent to which modern theories of rights, which are increasingly being applied to rights beyond the merely 'human', represent a new paradigm or are simply the application of old ideas the new situations' I will start off by looking at what a right is. The topic I will be focusing my essay on is, the animal rights theory. I will then go on to look at some of the rights given to humans. I shall then ask the question, do animals have rights? What types of rights do they have? I will also be looking generally, at different views on whether animals should be given rights or not. I will be looking at how people's views on animal rights have evolved over time, and how early philosophers like Aristotle who was of the view that the most important thing was the power of reasoning, he said that only humans can reason so they are the most important beings; Descartes thought that animals cannot feel pain he felt they are mere automatons and so they should not have rights , and Kant who believed that animals are not conscious and may therefore be used as a means to an end, as a way of getting something. They were of the general view that animals do not have rights. Two of the main philosopher's whose theory's I will be looking at in particular are: Peter Singer, and Tom Regan. Peter Singer is thought of as a utilitarian, so I will start by
Cyber- Crime and Information Compromise. What does the notion of reasonable security entail?
Cyber-crime and information compromise is on the increase, presenting potentially fatal consequences to both the targeted individuals and the organisations under attack. Due to information being increasingly exposed to cyber-attacks which might compromise the informations' confidentiality, integrity and accessibility, government laws and regulations have required organisations to employ certain security measures to minimize the risk for vulnerability. These have been fuelled by the large amount of potentially sensitive and personal information that is collected, shared and stored in large databases around the globe, often of core importance to modern organisations1. For organisations to fully understand the scope of its obligations for the implementation of reasonable security measures, it is important to be aware that the law considers security a relative concept2. What does the notion of ‘reasonable security’ entail? Government laws and regulations require organisations to implement security measures that are 'reasonable', 'adequate' or 'appropriate', as exemplified in i.e. the California Security Breach Act3, subsequently implemented in forty-six other states4, and the European Directive 95/46/EC5. Legal compliance is defined as the organisation's ability to maintain a defensible position in a court of law6. Organisations therefore need to implement measures that
Future of cyber-law
Cyber-space imitates real-world activity and this includes criminal activity. Internet law as a legacy of territorial law is attempting to challenge virtual criminality, but there is a big problem because cyber-space is not subject to a single jurisdiction. The European Council is trying to tackle this issue but unless all countries sign the EC treaty, cyber-law will not always work. National legislations with investigatory powers prove there is sufficient control for cyber-law to work. For example in Malaysia since 1997 and in India since 2000, Digital signatures have allowed the exchange of documents to be legally binding as far as the law of contract and evidence are concerned. Investigatory powers make cyber-law work and this is emphasized in section 10 of Malaysia's Digital Signature Act 1997 and section 78 of India's Technology Act 2000. Influenced by the UK Computer Misuse Act 19901, the Malaysian Computer Crimes Act 19972 categorises the unauthorised access and modification of computer contents an offence carrying punishment of RM 50, 000 or five years' imprisonment. Hate speech is another offence regulated under UK's Public Order Act 19863 and Australia's Racial Discrimination Act 1975 makes it unlawful to insult, humiliate or intimidate another person in public on the basis of their race. As a result, governments are successfully closing radical Islamic
Capitalist Welfare States
Political Science 111 Instructor: Dr. Gregory Johnston Due Date: 27 April 2009 Capitalist Welfare States A welfare state refers to a state's responsibility to secure some vital degree of welfare for its citizens and to ensure of the security of the people that live within the boundaries of that state. Capitalist welfare states are categorized under three models. These models include the Liberal regime, the Social Democratic regime, and the Corporatist regime. These regimes are characterized by several key variables, which create different systems of social stratification. The Liberal regime, which the United States is classified under, is associated with poverty relief that sustains differentiation based on income. The Corporatist regime is identified with contributory social insurance that maintains class distinctions based on occupational status. The Social Democratic regime is linked to middle-class universalism and social equality. While all of these models have benefits, the one that I find most appealing is the Social Democratic regime. The Social Democratic regime seems to be the most beneficial and ideal type of capitalist welfare state. This is the only model of the three that does not seem to classify its citizens into groups of aristocrats and underprivileged. This model has several benefits, such as universal healthcare, which make it possible for all within