Issue21 Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
字数595，写了整整一晚上一早上。。。
Notwithstanding assorted effusions in our society to the contrary, I still primarily agree with the speaker’s statement that laws should be flexible enough to take various circumstances, times, and places into account.
Admittedly, objections to flexible laws make sense in that they insightfully point out a latent peril of flexible laws in effect in China. The peril is that the flexibility of laws would perhaps leave room for and thus facilitate manipulation or abuse of laws by the rich and privileged in their favor. In some cases stirring up waves of public angers, the adjudications taking advantage of some flexible terms of laws did not mete out to the rich and privileged the condign penalty. A recent case happening Taian, Shandong Province that two princeling brothers who were sentenced to life imprisonment but bailed out for the so-called medical treatment (they were in fact not qualified for the treatment) slaughtered four police staff appears to bear the testimony that some flexible stipulations in laws have been notoriously manipulated or abused either by the rich and privileged, and that a clarion call for awareness of the hazard of flexible laws should be sounded.
Nevertheless, the injustice does not stem from the flexibility of laws, but from some inherent deficiencies of the law system, to whose elimination the flexibility of laws lead. Were laws not flexible to eradicate the intrinsic defects, the defects of laws would have been the invariable source of injustice. More importantly, flexible enforcement of laws, which is also to blame in this example, is by no measure equivalent to flexible laws. After all, it is not flexible laws themselves but flexible enforcement of laws that is the genuine culprit behind people’s specter that justice cannot be served. Eliminating possible illicit flexible enforcement that maybe results from some form of deficiencies of laws, flexible laws can and should uphold the common good.
Having recognized that flexible laws do not necessarily serve as a hindrance to justice, at least within the parameter of the above scenario discussed, it is safe to say that flexible laws, declaring war on societal evils and cankers, are the truly competent champion of fairness and justice. Laws that are flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places strengthen their muscles by adding in the new, deleting the obsolete and amending the flawed, thereby leading to the ultimate eradication of all possible sanctuaries of evils and shedding light of fairness and justice upon every corner of our society. For example, special laws have been enacted to accommodate to the cultures in minority regions, charge with “anti-revolution” deleted to evolve with times, and tax laws ameliorated to keep abreast of economic development. On the one hand, the flexibility of laws renders the gap as small as possible between the justice served by laws and the perceived justice by people that may vary in circumstances, times, and places, thus ruling out the potential devastating accumulation of such sentiments in our society as grievance, indignation and resentment springing from that discrepancy. On the other hand, the flexibility of laws makes sure that evils, no matter what forms and veneers they use to camouflage themselves, cannot escape from their fate of doom.
In conclusion, the inherent defects and the flexible enforcement of laws cannot deny the legitimacy of flexible laws. In deed, flexible laws contribute to the elimination of the former two. The merits of flexible laws, fighting against evils and defending fairness and justice, underpins my faith that laws should be flexible enough to comprehensively encompass various circumstances, times, and places. 作者: coco3263 时间: 2011-8-21 15:01:13