english assignment essay

English
Tutor: None Selected Time limit: 1 Day

write an argumentative speech that makes a claim about how people should protest laws they think are unfair or unreasonable

Jun 11th, 2015

Thank you for the opportunity to help you with your question!

Which laws then, are that we are not allowed to break, if breaking it is fine?

There is always the extreme example of someone traveling back in time to kill Hitler and save the Jews from the Holocaust. The unfortunate fact is that one rarely knows who is responsible for such horror in the present, and killing leaders one disagrees with or is worried about is murder. (We'll except cases like North Korea's leadership that sends thousands to starve in Gulags today. Those are known evil leaders, and even known world wide as the Axis of Evil.) Protesters who seek to brake laws bring up these extreme cases. Yet they forget that the laws they are breaking are not just for society's protection but their own. When they burn a car dealership to protest gas guzzling cars, they did not just hurt the car dealer, but its employees, those who were getting cars fixed there that are not scorched, and money out of the business that goes to repairing the damage instead of buying and investing and growing. When anarchists riot and burn, they rarely even get seen by those they protest. Yet they are damaging businesses of those who are innocent, in some cases even hurting bystanders who are watching. When they burn a business, innocent people trying to buy coffee may be hurt and even killed. Shall we say it is OK because they are trying to protest a coffee shop, even at risk of killing coffee drinkers? Is it OK to not just boycott a business but try to burn it down because it is oppressive to employees, at risk of an innocent janitor dying in the flames? Then there is the incredible irony that protesters who think it is acceptable to break the law for their cause still expect its protection. They feel they are so right they can damage property, attack people, and risk lives. Yet the police are still to be civil, they are never to be beaten, no one is to burn their cars in like minded protest, and they should receive full legal representation if they are unable to afford it. Their belief that their cause is so right that they can break it seems to mean that they can break it, even at risk of the lives of others, but the protections of those same laws should still apply to them. If they have the right to break laws they deem unfit, shall vengeance killings by anyone they accidentally kill also be overlooked? If the laws are so wrong, support candidates to office to change those laws. Or use the courts to overturn the bad laws. Or run for office yourself and change it. Risking harm to people will not lead to people coming to your side, unless you want to become the equivalent to the Taliban, who won power by killing all who disagreed. And any movement that requires such evil methodology to change the world in their image is inherently undeserving of it. (Thus those who think they can maim, rape and kill merely for ideas may be fair game to be proactively killed to protect the rest of society.)


Please let me know if you need any clarification. I'm always happy to answer your questions.
Jun 12th, 2015

Your speech should include the following elements:

  • A claim
  • Acknowledgment of the opposition
  • Transitional elements
  • At least two references to Thoreau’s ideas

Jun 12th, 2015

Okay I will do your assignment $1 dollar for all this work surely? will you add something?

Jun 12th, 2015

Studypool's Notebank makes it easy to buy and sell old notes, study guides, reviews, etc.
Click to visit
The Notebank
...
Jun 11th, 2015
...
Jun 11th, 2015
Dec 9th, 2016
check_circle
Mark as Final Answer
check_circle
Unmark as Final Answer
check_circle
Final Answer

Secure Information

Content will be erased after question is completed.

check_circle
Final Answer