People Obey or Disobey the Law? Many

¶ … people obey or disobey the law?

Many individuals are inclined to feel that the modern society is too rigid and controlling because of the numerous laws that have been imposed through the years. These people consider that humanity was meant to be free and that a free society would function much better than one that obliges its members to take on particular attitudes. However, the truth is that humans are probable to trigger chaos if they are not controlled by a solid system of legislations. This means that a healthy social order would have to understand and respect laws in order for people to be able to live in peace.

Although law is one of the principal tools that assisted mankind in experiencing progress, many communities in the contemporary society have differing understandings of particular laws. While it might seem that the whole world can act in agreement with a certain system of legislations, some groups live in accordance with their own set of rules and believe that it would be absurd for humanity as a whole to respect the same laws. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is one of the best examples that illustrate how people have different understandings of a set of common laws respected throughout the world. "Ideas of right and wrong and good and evil could be found in all communities, but what constituted a human right in one community might be an anti-social notion in another community" (ARE HUMAN RIGHTS UNIVERSAL?).

Not all communities in the world in the present consider that human rights are one of the most important concepts when considering the relationship between the authorities and citizens. Whether they are paranoid or not, many states that are reluctant to adopt the human rights agenda as an essential element of their community. They put across this attitude because they believe that Western powers are trying to start a wave of neo-imperialism by having them behave in a particular way (ARE HUMAN RIGHTS UNIVERSAL?).

Cultural diversity is a principal factor making it difficult for some groups to accept to act in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These groups have been accustomed to performing certain practices for most of their existence. This means that they would virtually need to abandon all of their principles and appreciate human rights as an active element of their society. Taking this into account, it seems less surprising that they believe Western players to have hidden interests in promoting the human rights agenda.

While it seems that it is perfectly normal for some cultures to have different understandings of human rights, the truth is that the majority of people have a clear understanding of the difference between right and wrong and between good and evil. It is practically impossible for someone to claim that he or she encourages practices like genocide or that he or she has no problem with considering women as being inferior. However, the fact that some societies are accustomed to promoting such values makes it difficult for their members to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong.

Surely, it is difficult to determine whether or not it would be right to obey the law as long as one lives in a community where certain values have been strictly set for centuries and even millennia. Even with this, most people are probable to consider that some laws are absurd while others are responsible for preventing the social order from entering a stage of chaos. What the masses need to understand is that "everyone breaks the law sometimes, and some people break it often" (Tyler 3).

Rules need to be obeyed in order to prevent chaos from occurring, taking into account that people would walk the streets stealing everything they can and virtually doing everything they want to without fearing that they are going to be reprimanded as a result of their behavior. Laws deter people from committing crimes and the fact that legislations are harsher if the crime is greater is effective in preventing people from committing severe crimes. Obeying the law is, to a certain degree, a tool that a person can use with the purpose of influencing others to behave similarly. For example, a military leader who refrains from committing war crimes is likely to have his or her subordinates feel that it would be wrong for them to act in disagreement with their leader's behavior.

Many people obey the law because they fear that they are going to be punished if they break it. While it seems that such behavior is absurd, the reality is that some actually want to break the law but feel that they are unable to suffer the consequences if they do. As a result, these individuals refrain from doing so and simply put across socially-acceptable behavior in order to fit in. It is not necessarily that they are not aware of the fact that some of the impulses that they have can be harmful for themselves or for society as a whole. It is just that they know that controlling these impulses would protect them from being punished. However, conditions are different in some communities where leaders impose unjust laws and people thus acknowledge that they need to break the law in order to be able to survive. Such individuals are aware that many laws are absurd but still refrain from breaking most of them because they know that they are going to suffer greatly if they do (Morris 1).

People should consider both rationality and morality when coming across a situation where their thinking in disagreement with a particular law. Their rationality might tell them that it is in their best interest to perform a certain act, but morality might dictate that it would be wrong to do so. By reaching a balance between both of these concepts one is probable to do the right thing eventually. Breaking the law is not necessarily bad when it is obvious that the respective law is unjust. Adultery is punishable by death in some countries while it is regarded as being something perfectly normal in others. Divorce is a more rational choice in comparison to execution and it is thus natural for some people to believe that particular governments are wrong to promote unfair laws.