Public safety vs. Civil rights

Introduction

The issue of public safety vs. civil rights continues to be at the headlines of numerous important political concerns. Civil rights are the cornerstone of a state, and they give protection to it's people. However with that, transpires the safety of terrorists, criminals, and enemies of the country, as well as the liberty for these individuals to proceed and function against their country's values, principles, standards, morals and laws. The very least limitations on civil rights enhances the security of the general population, allows law enforcement providers to function a lot more fluidly, and also uplifts the rate for defeating the rivals.

This document explores several other dimensions of the debate regarding public safety versus civil rights debate. The content of the document is designed to cover certain key issues in this aspect such as hate crimes, death penalty, gun control etc.

Discussion

The security of the general public is way more vital than the security of the legal rights of one civilian. A number of people argue the constitutionality of limiting civil legal rights in the name of public security, but the same people lobby for law enforcement providers to exert more effort to safeguard our people from internal terrorism along with other criminal attempts. The two fundamentals are unable to go in conjunction, and public security is much more essential. Nearly every crime and internal terrorist act which has prevailed might have been averted by regulators. Civil rights limit law enforcement departments from working in an idyllic way. With firmer constraints, certain individuals and some activities tend not to glide by government authorities, and reduce the chance for a terrorist act of occurring across the country. Pubic safety of its people is the most important job of the government. Many times the government fails to do its job when more emphasis is placed on civil rights.

Death Penalty

Death penalty has long been used as a strategy to counteract with the crimes of very serious nature. It involves executing an individual after she or he has been found guilty of committing a very serious crime by the legal system. This is done either as an act of vengeance, to make sure that the person will not commit future crimes, thereby eliminating the risk of potential danger from society or as deterrent measure to teach lesson to other potential criminals regarding the consequence of committing serious crimes. Countries have long used this form of punishments of putting people to death.

Usually death penalties are advocated by philosophers who think that it serves as best measure to deter the crimes. It is argued that if executioners are given verdict of death and are put to death, prospective murderers will consider twice before killing for fright of losing their own life (Dieter, 2009). Majority of the law systems are typically and emphatically in favor of death penalties when an individual had committed atrocious crime such as murder. This plainly advocated that death penalty is one of the most vital reprimands in ...