To what extent should laws be flexible and accommodate different circumstances is a pressing question for legislative officials and social study researchers. Some argue that people may commit crime unwillingly under special circumstances, and it would be cruel to deprive their rights without bringing the circumstances into consideration. Others disagree and believe that laws are set in order to bring order to the society, therefore it should treat everybody as equal no matter what circumstance they face. Since I also believe that laws are the most important tools for ensure the justice of a nation, regardless of occasions, I agree that laws should be fixed.
Laws reflect the standard of justice for a nation, and a nation that is strong and thriving must have a well-constructed legal system. From the dawn of mankind, scholars, politicians and researchers have been trying to find the best ways to rule a country. They may prefer different regimes and believe in various ideologies, but one thing that they argue on is that a nation must have fixed laws, in order to ensure the nation functions smoothly. Alternating the laws based on every case’s circumstance not only threatens the sanctity of law, but also tolerates and even encourages people to commit crime, because criminals could plead for mercy in court. If a criminal could make up a story that depicts the whole crime scene as an accident, he might even be pronounced innocent. Moreover, a flexible law requires the judge to have no biases whatsoever, but that is impossible. Flexible laws transmit the burden of justice onto the people who decide them, and demand objectivity of the judges. However, as a human being, nobody can truly be free from prejudices and biases, thus it is unwise to have flexible laws.
Fixed laws are more effective teaching tools, because they state clearly the consequences of violating laws. Psychology researches show that people tend to follow fixed and written rules, instead of oral commands and vague demands, because vagueness often leaves too much leeway for interpretation. Therefore, fixed laws can admonish people’s behavior to a greater extent. Anyone who intent to commit crime would calculate the risk versus the gain before he actually does it. But with flexible laws, people might think they don’t have to be responsible.
Nevertheless, it is undoubtful that flexible laws do have some advantages. Occasionally we see people who are in a dangerous situation would do something for the sake of self-protection. Woman who faces the danger of getting rape might happen to find a knife and kill the rapist. Staff who forgot to turn off oven might cause the entire store burn down to ashes. These people do not have the intention to commit crime, and it is probably reasonable to consider their lack of intent when deciding their crimes. However, if in some cases the judge shows sympathy, criminals of other cases would demand fairness, therefore sympathy for them as well. Flexibility in one circumstance would lead to a chaos in the entire legal system. So comparing the benefits of flexible laws with their drawbacks, it is better to have fixed laws.
In all, from the perspectives of possible consequences of having flexible laws, and its detriment in the legal system, or even worse, the nation’s governmental authority, I think it is better to have fixed laws.
- “Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places” 58
- If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting yo 16
- "The concept of 'individual responsibility' is a necessary fiction. Although societies must hold individuals accountable for their own actions, people's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making." 75
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities. 70
- The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for t 54
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, i think, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2857.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 557.0 442.535393258 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12926391382 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85807034144 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86461881482 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 288.0 215.323595506 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517055655296 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 890.1 704.065955056 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 10.0 1.77640449438 563% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.9194070377 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.884615385 118.986275619 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4230769231 23.4991977007 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.30769230769 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.195563984882 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0583319133297 0.0831039109588 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.05303426325 0.0758088955206 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115769001659 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0417494652968 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.1392134831 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 100.480337079 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.