Canaan Stuart CRJ

Both of the assigned readings question and analyze the idea of making and/or retaining laws which are typically unnecessary and asking why they could be.

For example, in Edward’s Laws that are Made to be Broken he argues that laws should never be created without the true need of them. Clark writes about preemptive laws like burglary tools being enough to charge a person. As always, my take on this will take us into the book 1984.

The ultimate defense may at times be offense, but whenever it comes to liberty and freedom these powers can very quickly be abused.

Whenever it comes to laws that are based around what you COULD do, freedom is inherently killed. A person traveling with a truck bed of tools could be arrested for simply having bolt cutters, when in reality they just needed these for their construction job. The idea of making laws that are meant to be broken is also a bad idea, as Edwards agrees, in that laws like this are simply abusive to their power. Laws need to deserve to be made, and must not assume of an individual, as that may lead to death in the civilian world.