The government should have the right especially when actions undertaken by its citizens prove to pose a danger to society. These actions may include the smuggling and trafficking of goods such as drugs and wartime weapons. These goods pose great harm to society and are universally recognized as goods prohibited by the world for individual use as well as the abuse of it. This is because drugs cause detrimental effects to the body on the individual level, though it may prove to be far fetch from causing harm to society, it can affect the country’s reputation and economic growth.
However, some may argue by stating that it is difficult to define the magnitude of ‘danger’ posed by the actions taken and actions taken by the government would be seen as infringing the citizens rights and freedom of choice. For example, the government limits the amount and the criteria to be met when buying drugs for medical purposes. Therefore, some may find it a hassle having to consult a medical specialist before being allowed to buy the drugs for example pills to improve one’s sleeping habits. I agree that these measures taken seems to restrict the freedom and actions. On the other hand, one must realize that these restrictions are put in place for the good of the people. Hence I feel that the government do have the right to monitor the actions of the people as the welfare of the people outweighs the infringement of people’s rights, after all it’s the government the ones who make important decisions for the people.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
very clear limitation ivy! good job at elaboration...
ReplyDeletebe careful not to be too focused on your 1st example though. your 2nd eg should prove your limitation instead of contradicting your 1st example. it's a little 'forced' here but still works!
to improve on it, you could expand your example to include all other things including the sale of weapons in USA or even vehicles, to monitor the use of these potentially dangerous equipment.