Question 1: (150 words)
Please respond to the following:
To reflect on . . .
- There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”
- ~ Ayn Rand
- “We do not condemn it because it is a crime, but it is a crime because we condemn it.”
- ~ Émile Durkheim
As we reflect on what is the nature of crime, consider – how does a crime become a crime? Who decides? How do new crimes get created? And when culture and society change, how and when does a crime stop being a crime? As an example:
- Think about new crimes that exist today that our founding fathers never dreamed of, and then consider crimes that were crimes back then (like having an ice cream soda, or shopping, on Sunday) – but are no longer – or crimes that are on the books today, but maybe should be removed. For example, think of some things that are illegal today that were not 100 years ago – like being able to purchase over-the-counter morphine. Or 13-year-old girls being able to get married without parental consent.
- On the other side, has anyone heard of people being prosecuted for committing adultery recently? (Other than in the military. ) It happened in NY just a few years ago in 2010:
- Woman Charged With Adultery to Challenge New York Law
- https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/woman-charged-adultery-challenge-york-law/story?id=10857437
- And then there are laws that perhaps go to far – at least 13 states require sex offender registration for public urination, according to Human Rights Watch’s comprehensive review of sex offender laws in 2007.
(This is what your post should be about): Think about the key differences between criminal law and moral law, and how laws have changed over the last 200 or so years in the US. From the e-Activities: the Supplemental Resources, or other on-line research, here is where your research comes into play – provide one (1) specific example where the criminal law system legislated (or is legislating) conduct or morality. Discuss how or why that law was passed or is being considered for passage.
In your responses to Question 2, consider Durkheim’s words, “We do not condemn it because it is a crime, but it is a crime because we condemn it.” Regarding the law presented in questions 2 statement, was it necessary or good for society at that point in time that the law was passed? Was it ever overturned? If not, should it be?
Question 2: (150 words)
Remember, this next part is a different paragraph separate from question 1 above: (In your reply responses to this following statement, please create a well-written response. Full citations are not required in the discussion but a photo of what your are talking about or a video link would be truly appreciated. Must include the following – case name, book title, or website link):
Statement:
“As you look at the conflict between crime vs. morality, you will probably run across the concept on blue laws, a/k/a Sunday laws, which prohibited certain conduct on Sunday because it was considered immoral or too frivolous for the Sabbath. Unfortunately for the good upstanding citizens of the community, there are always some heathen reprobates that look for a workaround. In that spirit, here’s a funny little history of how clever some New Yorkers were at getting around the law when it came to getting a drink in spite of a ban on Sunday boozing, and despite of all the legal efforts to make them virtuous teetotalers. Enjoy!
How Pre-Prohibition Drinking Laws Led New Yorkers to Create the World’s Worst Sandwich
Three men feast on the free lunch in this drawing by Charles Dana Gibson.”
0 comments