It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds."
(I want to know if the same essay fits for the following prompt as well: Many problems of modern society cannot be solved by laws and the legal system because moral behavior cannot be legislated.") looking forward to your feedback :)
Laws are developed to discipline the society so that every individual can live in peace and harmony without any insecurities and fears. To maintain such a control, rules are formulated to prevent all offenses, and punishments are devised for every social and personal transgression so that crimes once done may not be repeated by the criminal as well as the other citizens. An acute system like this is enough to keep people from all kinds of crimes and wrongdoings; however, if this was true there wouldn't have been such a high crime rate as we see today. This does not mean that the Legal system is futile as it may limit the occurrence of the crimes, but it has simply not been able to modify the criminal mode of thinking, the deep desire of committing a crime and criminal immortality which ultimately leads to it.
Human being is the most intricate creature in this world. Right from the time that he is a baby, he tries to do as he pleases; when asked not to do so he gets intrigued and eventually does it any ways. In such instances the child is scolded while in certain severe cases punishment ensues, which most certainly intimidates the child and prevents him from repeating such a behavior. But does the reproof eliminate the desire to do it again? Does the punishment transform the nature of that child from a brat to an angel? I don't think so. A rule may restrict the child but may not reform him, because it has only disciplined him not instilled the sealtered his mischievous nature. The criminal who is tried by law may be fined, or imprisoned or punished but all of these attempts neither ameliorate the individuals nor the society, as depicted by the recurrence of offences by the same offender as well as many others.
In the legal system similar punishments are given for similar offences, for example, all murderers are either imprisoned for life or hanged to death; the crime is undoubtedly the same but the motive may be varying, it may be greed, or vengeance or passion. On the other hand it can be a murder caused while defending one's self against a thug, which could not be proved because of lack of proper evidence or one committed by a mentally aberrant individual who was influenced by a book or that executed due to someone's venomous provocations. Dealing with all of them in a fashion alike is not justified, moreover, it may not prevent many others who are about to commit a murder due to lust or envy or blackmail or hatred. Actually the desire and ability of misdemeanor is imbedded in human nature, the first step towards an offense is the idea or yearning that emerges in the mind and heart respectively and if it is pacified then and there, there will be a strong chance that the final step may never happen. To that possible the legal system should operated in conjugation with facilitative organizations to prevent occurrence of crime as well as recidivism. Criminon is an international, non-profitable organization which utilizes the works of author and humanitarian L. Ron Hubbard to instill self respect and integrity in in-mates, ex-offenders and high risk individual and helps them become an advantageous individual of the society by teaching life skills and providing vocational education, and so far it has helped thousands of individuals around the world. In addition to that, the society should also play its part, by bringing up children with an understanding of goodness, by accepting every individual regardless of the social or financial status and by appreciating the attempts of ex-convicts to improve themselves.
To thwart a crime the state of the mind and heart of the individual should be explored to determine the core cause which perpetuated the crime and deal with it in an exclusive manner which epitomize crime as an act that brings affliction and turmoil to the society and also symbolizes the downfall of humanity not only for the convict but also for general public. Law should be a system of restriction, punishments as well as rehabilitation, only then it will help transform human immorality which in turn will facilitate the development of a peaceful novel society.
...the deep desire to commit a crime and criminal immortality which ultimately leads to it.
This is a run on sentence: Law should be a system of restrictions, punishments, and rehabilitation. On ly then it will help transform human immorality which in turn will facilitate the development of a peaceful novel society.
Okay... so you agree that moral behavior cannot be legislated, and you agree that laws can solve many problems of society by deterring crime.
I really do think it is possible to use this essay for both, but I want it to get more focused. What is the main point you are making? Before you write an essay, think of one sentence that really expresses your message to the reader. After all, a reader cannot memorize a whole essay, so ask yourself what sentence you want the reader to remember.
Write that sentence at the end of the intro para, and they just might remember it! :-)
Before you write an essay, think of one sentence that really expresses your message to the reader.
Actually i wrote this essay for the following prompt:
It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds."
as soon as I read it the idea that came to my mind can be explained by this statement: " This does not mean that the Legal system is futile as it may limit the occurrence of the crimes, but it has simply not been able to modify the criminal mode of thinking, the deep desire to commit a crime and criminal immortality which ultimately leads to it." So, do you think that it's good enough?
when i read the second prompt I thought that the same essay may explain it too, with a few alterations and additions that explicitly focus on it. But tell me does the body of the essay fits with the second prompt or sholud I write it all over again for it?
waiting for your reply.
take care :)
