Governments are justified in circumventing civil laws when doing so is vital to the protection of national security.”
Write an essay in which you take a position on the statement above. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true.
Do governments have the rights to break the civil laws? For the sake of national security supporters of this act claim that such acts are for the greater goods. Specially the security of the goods are more important than the civil laws which is important for the interest of nations. But these deeds attract the crime and impunity. Because it is undemocratic and can result in autocracy and despotism, it is immoral and illegal for the government to ignore the civil laws.
Governments breaking civil laws violates civil rights which goes against democratic principles. Government is in there to uphold these rights, not to diminish them; encouraging such behavior undermines and betrays democratic principles. For instance, the NSA scandal's revelations revealed the agency's widespread impunity, from listening in on private conversations to tapping homes, reading texts, and other nefarious deeds all done in the name of national security. Then civilians becomes terrorist in the name of security acts in this twisted measure . Is it really necessary to prevent the terrorist attack? No, it is not in the sense of democracy and civil rights because these heinous acts are the violation of citizen`s rights. The protection of national security should not justify the violation of civil laws.
Furthermore if such actions is not stopped, they may turn our current democratic situation in to an autocratic and despotism. Such powers can be destructive in the wrong hands of any group or agency. . The NSA scandals have sparked outrage around the world, leading to accusations that the US government has adopted a policy of impunity. This has even led to comparisons to the SS secret service of East Germany, which was responsible for spying on and threatening thousands of civilians living there just before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
In conclusion, breaching civil laws for the sake of national security is not justifiable by governments. Such irresponsibility leads to corruption and encourages tyranny and totalitarianism. Security is important for a country's overall health, but the government must walk a fine line between upholding the law and endangering national security.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-04 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2022-11-12 | Swarnali Swarno | 50 | view |
| 2022-11-12 | Swarnali Swarno | 75 | view |
| 2022-10-15 | srilakshmip05 | 33 | view |
| 2022-08-08 | ojehparvaz | 58 | view |
- The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area Although only a small percentage of the land wi 58
- All too often companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees such consultants would be unnecessary Write a response in which you discuss 58
- Governments are justified in circumventing civil laws when doing so is vital to the protection of national security Write an essay in which you take a position on the statement above In developing and supporting your position you should consider ways in w 75
- We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning 50
- The following is from a recent email from the Diord Corp Human Resources Manager Tobor Technologies found that mental health problems and mental illness were responsible for about 15 percent of employee sick days Tobor amended its employee insurance plan 64
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 552, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...of security acts in this twisted measure . Is it really necessary to prevent the t...
^^
Line 3, column 2, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Furthermore,
... justify the violation of civil laws. Furthermore if such actions is not stopped, they ma...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 201, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...the wrong hands of any group or agency. . The NSA scandals have sparked outrage a...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, may, really, so, then, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1845.0 2235.4752809 83% => OK
No of words: 347.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31700288184 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98937508728 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 215.323595506 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.541786743516 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 46.5191111354 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1052631579 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2631578947 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.78947368421 5.21951772744 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.180807876879 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.062884340377 0.0831039109588 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0687666357476 0.0758088955206 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115265321107 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0468963013539 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.