Issue 17 kito小组leedgen习作，交晚了

leedgenUID: 160823

17"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."

法律题写得实在痛苦啊

提纲：
1．很难准确地法律分成公平和不公平两种
2．社会上的每个人都应该遵守法律
3．对于那些确实不合适的法令应该以合法的手段提出异议，争取得到修改

As a legal document setting forth rules, law is mostly used to govern a society and control the behavior of its members, which is enforced by the government. Accordingly, I strongly agree that every individual in the society should have a responsibility to obey the laws. But when it comes to the issue that laws are divided into unjust laws and just laws, I hold the opinion that no criteria exists actually to judge what is just or not. So to my mind this statement is too extreme in this point.

It is quite impossible for people to reach a consentience on what constitute the just laws or not. People’s attitudes to laws differ extraordinarily because of their different faith and interests. Consider, for instance, people having different religions hold distinct views to abortion. Some believe it is not humane to stop new lives in this way and consider laws unjust to allow potential mothers to abort while others, on the opposite, think abortion is but the individual’ own decision and regard laws just in this respect. Besides, on many occasions people’s views to laws depend on their own interests. Taking a common issue in the society for example, employers and employees mostly have a conflict in pension: the former perhaps regards law unjust for they have to turn in a relatively high amount of money for the later for their finance are always tight. In a word, whether laws are just or not is rarely a straightforth problem.

Moreover, everyone in the society should obey the law of the country. Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules: sports games have specific rules, companies have their own staff rules and some others, and we have to obey the rules to keep things going through smoothly. However, laws , the rules baked by the coercive power of the state, are enacted and enforced by means of appropriate penalties and remedies by courts or legislatures. It is quite possible that laws are constituted in the name of representing the majority’s interests whereas run by a few individuals. Most people will agree with this view that law is designed to protect basic rights, freedoms and to treat everybody fairly. Therefore, individuals have to obey with the laws to keep the society, our living environment, well-ordered.

Yet another essential problem we should consider is that the nature and functions of law will vary throughout history and in some circumstances laws might be out-dated or improper in current society. But should every individual act as said in the statement to disobey and even resist the laws? As to me, I assert that disobeyance or resistance will not bring about the corresponding affects of what are expected or intended. The most effective means is to give our suggestions and recommendations to the court or legislature and then making our efforts to enact or make null the laws. Only by this way can we, the public, protect ourselves under the legal system

All in all, based on different believes and interests the public are reluctant to hold a complete assent on what is just laws or not, and in modern and democratic society I deem that individuals have the responsibilities to act in accordance with the specific laws and avoid using radical actions to respond to those improper or outdated laws. By legal means people should make their opinions known by the court or the legislature so that laws could be modified to adapt with the fast changing world.

jingjingtousUID: 2164820

As a legal document setting forth rules, law is mostly used to govern a society and control the behavior of its members, （which is enforced by the government这句话是修饰law的吗，怎么看好像是修饰members的？）. Accordingly（admittedly), I strongly agree that every individual in the society should have a responsibility to obey the laws. But when it comes to the issue that laws are divided into unjust laws and just laws, I hold the opinion that no criteria(用得好) exists actually to judge(for judging) what(whether it) is just or not. So, to my mind this statement is too extreme in this point.(记得修锐老师说过最好不要用背景作issue得开头)
It is quite impossible for people to reach a consentience on what constitute the just laws (or not去掉，先行词是what 不是whether,要不改成and unjust laws?). People’s attitudes to laws differ extraordinarily because of their different faith and interests. Consider, for instance, people having different religions hold distinct views to abortion( 这个例子是《北美GRE范文精选》上的吧我也有引用，不过你这里说是因为人们不同得信仰导致对流产得不同看法未免有些牵强吧，我看应该从伦理和人道得角度去考虑会合适些。）. Some believe that it is not humane to stop(kill) new lives in this way and consider laws unjust to allow potential mothers to abort while others, on the opposite, think abortion is but the individual’ own decision and regard laws just in this respect（论证是从这个角度出发的，恩，好）. Besides, on many occasions people’s views to laws depend on their own interests. Taking a common issue in the society for example, employers and employees mostly have a conflict in pension: the former perhaps regards laws unjust for they have(them) to turn in a relatively high amount of money for(去掉) while the later regards that their finance are always tight. In a word, whether laws are just or not is rarely a straightforth problem.(这段的论述比较合理，围绕不同人对法律公正与否的看法展开）
Moreover, everyone in the society should obey the laws of the country. Almost everything we do is governed by some set of rules: sports games have specific rules, companies have their own staff rules and some others, and we have to obey the rules to keep things going (through smoothly换成well吧). However, laws , the rules baked by the coercive power of the state, are enacted and enforced by means of appropriate penalties and remedies by courts or legislatures. It is quite possible that laws are constituted in the name of representing the majority’s interests whereas run by a few individuals. Most people will agree with this view that law is designed to protect basic rights, freedoms and to treat everybody fairly. Therefore, individuals have to obey with the laws to keep the society, our living environment, well-ordered.(此段的论证力度不够，法律是规则，但规则如比赛，公司章程不一定都是law，我也用到类似的例子现在仔细想想觉得不大好）
Yet another essential problem we should consider is that the nature and functions of law will vary throughout history and in some circumstances laws might be out-dated or improper in current society. But should every individual act as said in the statement to disobey and even resist the laws? As to me, I assert that disobeyance(应该是disobedience吧？） or resistance will not bring about the corresponding affects of what are expected or intended. The most effective means is to give our suggestions and recommendations to the court or legislature and then making our efforts to enact or make null the laws（这个好像行不通哦？记得美国的宪法都是通过amendment一步步完善的）. Only by this way can （we,去掉） the public, protect ourselves under the legal system

All in all, based on different believes and interests the public are reluctant to hold a complete assent on what is just laws or not, and in modern and democratic society I deem that individuals have the responsibilities to act in accordance with the specific laws and avoid using radical actions to respond to those improper or outdated laws.（怎么感觉这句话说的是公民不应该对不适当或过时的法律报以不满？直接说公民应该遵守法律就好了呀） By legal means people should make their opinions known by the court or the legislature so that laws could be modified to adapt with the fast changing world.（恩，好）

这篇文章总的来说写的不错，围绕法律是否公正与不公正的问题作了细致的分析，指出人人都应遵守法律，不同的人对不同的法律难免有不同的看法。但是，对于法律的不公正性没有作有力的论述，也没有在此方面举例驳斥。
个人愚见，leedgen无怪哦

jingjingtousUID: 2164820

对了，还有一篇在哪里呀，我找不着，不会沉了吧？