I just need a little guidance on where to begin, can someone help me please.
Do you agree that for police action to be "just," it must recognize the rights of individuals while at the same time hold them accountable to the social obligations defined by law? Support your position.
Have the courts provided adequate protection to citizens against overzealous police officers? In which areas of search and seizure and interrogation law do you think the courts have not gone far enough? In which areas do you think the courts have gone too far? Support your answers.
The answer to the first question seems obvious. The U.S. Constitution guarantees equal treatment under the law.
For the second question, consider the plights of many of the poor snd racial minorities in the courts. Do all defendants have competent reprepresentation? What about the federal government bypassing Constitutional mandates for freedom of speech?
Thanks Ms. Sue!
To help you begin, here are some steps you can follow:
1. Understand the question: Read the question carefully and make sure you understand what it is asking you to do. In this case, you are being asked to express your opinions and support them with reasoning.
2. Assess the arguments: Consider the two statements made in the questions and evaluate them.
3. Conduct research: Start by looking up the concepts introduced in the question. Read about the principles of justice, individual rights, social obligations, police action, and the role of law in governing society.
4. Formulate your position: Based on your research, form an opinion on whether police action should recognize individual rights while holding individuals accountable to social obligations defined by law. Think about the balance between individual rights and societal safety and order, and how these principles intersect.
5. Provide support for your position: Use your research findings to support your position. Look for arguments, examples, or scholars who have written on this topic and align with your viewpoint. Use their insights to reinforce your stance.
For the second question, follow the same steps:
1. Understand the question: Clearly understand what is being asked regarding the courts' protection against overzealous police officers, search and seizure, and interrogation law.
2. Conduct research: Familiarize yourself with the legal framework surrounding search and seizure and interrogation laws. Look for cases, legal precedents, and scholarly articles that discuss whether the courts have provided adequate or inadequate protection to citizens against police overreach.
3. Evaluate the courts' actions: Based on your research, critically analyze whether you believe the courts have provided sufficient protection or not. Consider both areas in which they may have fallen short and areas where they may have gone too far.
4. Provide support for your evaluation: Justify your stance by citing specific cases, legal arguments, or scholarly opinions that support your stance. Consider the balance between civil liberties and law enforcement objectives.
Remember to back up your positions with evidence and reasoning. It is important to express your thoughts clearly and logically to form a strong argument.