However hard people try laws are always insufficient эссе

This page was last modified:

На этой страничке мы помещаем л»чшие творческие работы ст»дентов юридического факультета Московского Гос»дарственного «ниверситета.

There is some eternal law. It is good for all times and places.

Tell a man there is 300 billion stars in the universe and he will believe you. Tell him a bench has wet paint on it and he will have to touch it to make sure. MurphyТs Law

One of the most famous MurphyТs laws which I have just quoted is the best example to show the constants of human nature.

Any time humans don’t believe in the truthfulness of some fact or phenomenon, they tend to experiment on themselves. That’s why thousands of years ago our ancestors created a set of rules of behavior in self-protection. Most of these rules are still in force nowadays. I am talking about the eternal law or the so-called natural law.

This school of law appeared in ancient Greece and Rome in the 5th century B.C. Famous philosophers Plato and Aristotle thought that alongside with the positive (human-made) law there was some eternal law. In other words, they taught their disciples that this kind of law didn’t depend on people’s will.

The Romans called it jus naturale. But unlike the Greeks, Romans were sure that positive law inevitably contradicted the eternal law. In their opinion, all men were equal eternally but positively there existed a social class of slaves.

The next step of development of the natural law theory can be traced back to the Middle Ages. People then changed their views on the issues of eternity. They had no doubt that the eternal rules had not been created by Nature but they were God-given. The 17-18th centuries saw the rise of natural law school. It was represented by such thinkers as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Alexander Radishev.

Rousseau pointed out the difference between this theory and the surrounding reality. He didn’t understand why people were born free but lived in fetters. His ideals were developed in the slogan of the French Revolution: «Freedom, equality and brotherhood!»

Nowadays the eternal law is the foundation of the contemporary laws. Unfortunately such rules as «don’t kill» and «don’t steal» aren’t enough to regulate the complicated relations in our society, and our lawmakers are doing their best to create sufficient laws.

But according to another Murphy’s law, «Before you find your princess, you’ve got to kiss a lot of frogs!»

 Кузьмичев Олег, юридический факультет, гр 117

---

However hard people try, laws are always insufficient.

God created the land and Devil created the. God created the Sun and Devil created darkness. God created a lawyer and Devil was thoughtful for a while Е and created another lawyer.

This joke helps us to understand who lawyers really are.

It is common knowledge that in our society the person who has money and power is always right. Probably (but very doubtfully) history knows some examples when justice triumphed for the benefit of poor people.

As an example letТs take the case of a good and law-abiding citizen who is trying to start a lawsuit against a very powerful and rich man. Do you think the offender will be imprisoned?? Very unlikely! Justice usually serves the highest bidder!

I think that law can never be absolutely effective and fair because money can buy almost everything in the world.

Laws are always insufficient because of human greed.

Айрапетян Аревик, юридический факультет, гр. 106

---

Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers.

I completely agree with this statement. Unfortunately, practically all laws contain special legal terms (and this is inevitable) and the language of law is so complex that ordinary people can’t just make out the meaning without the help of a lawyer. Of course, someone will contradict saying that laws are made for the people. However, I think our laws are made to meet just the needs of our government.

Looking back in the past we see that kings made laws to provide themselves with power and hold ordinary people in obedience. That is why the less intelligent the society was, the simpler it was to rule it. The Chinese philosopher Confucius said: «ItТs possible to make people obey, but itТs impossible to make them understand what for».

Unfortunately in modern society the situation has not changed and laws are still created for and by governors.

However it is obvious that our lawgivers should change their attitude towards law making, because if we want to live in the developed society laws must be made comprehensive not only for lawyers but for ordinary people as well.

Широкова Аня, юридический факультет, гр. 117

---

Laws haven’t changed since primeval times.

Can you imagine yourself standing next to a troglodyte, in other words Ц a caveman? OK, you are better dressed; you think you have more brains, but have forgotten to take a cudgel or an axe with you! That is why: there is a sudden BOOM — and you have become a very good dinner for a primitive family.

Unfair?

Certainly!

Lets see whether the law has changed from those ancient times.

Throughout history humans were trying to establish the rules of behavior, which controlled the relations in society. At first those were customs and traditions, and then they were replaced by written laws.

These were carved into stone, fixed on clay tables, or written on parchment, and later — on paper. These laws set up various norms and rules, both fair and unfair. Only one law has always remained in force: the battle is to the strong (the strongest is always right). This law was the basis of judicial duels of the past and it is still in effect for all classes in modern society. The difference is that in older times it was the physical force which mattered, and now Ц itТs the force of MONEY.

If the strong and the weak were equal, this could change a lot!

For example, letТs take the beginning of last Iraqi war. They were looking for the weapons of mass destruction as a reason for invasion. Then the country was invaded, the weapons have not been found, but still as always — the strongest is right!

Does it mean that any law is powerless against the law of the jungle? I think it is not true. The law should be the force to fight crime, but for this purpose it is necessary, that people should realize that it is easier to observe the law, than to pay the price for non-observance.

Only then people would be able to leave the primitive law behind!

Чугунов Михаил, юридический факультет, гр. 117

---

There is some eternal law. It is good for all times and places.

Catholic monk Thomas Aquinas (1225—1274) is said to be the author of the following idea: «There is some eternal law, which rules the Universe; it can be identified with God and it is the source all other laws.» This idea is still supported by many people all over the world, despite their race, nationality, sex or confession. It is the law of good and justice. Members of every community are trying to set up their own rules of behavior according to this eternal law.

The history of human race can provide us with some examples. In the middle of the 17th century the Russian Empress Catherine the Great in her instructions to the first Russian Legislative Commission stated that laws should correspond to the moral ideals of Christianity.

Of course the idea of bringing everyday laws into accord with the eternal law came into the mind of other rulers, maybe famous than Catherine the Great.

…Somewhere in the South Seas the chief of the small Papuan tribe Ooga-Ooga Ц Lumumba-the-10th Ц ordered his people to love each other in order to please the God and to be given a rich harvest of bananas. The Papuan whoТd break this rule had to be immediately eaten by his «loving» tribesmen.

It sounds like a miracle, but it is a firm fact: the same idea occurred to such different people as the Papuans and the great Russian Empresses, churchmen and lawyers…

In this way, we can really assume that there is some eternal law, which is good for all times and places. Every person feels its existence. If it were not for this law, we would lose orientation in our life and stop understanding each other. This law is in our hearts. It is called CONSCIENCE.

Никита Лисичкин, юридический факультет, гр. 106.

---

There is some eternal law. It is good for all times and places.

In my opinion, there are some eternal laws, like » Thou shalt not kill», » Thou shalt not steal».

These laws appeared many centuries ago. We can find the same principles in the Laws of Babylon, that were drawn up in about 1758 B.C. by Hammurabi. These laws have existed for centuries and they are still in force today.

I must say that not all the laws that we know are eternal. For example in HammurabiТs Law Code you can’t find any regulations on computer crime. At the same time in modern legislation we can’t find any laws about slaves and slave owners.

In fact, I think that some laws are eternal, because we can find them in all religions. You can open the sacred texts of the Holy Bible, the Torah, the Koran, the Tripitaka (the collection of Buddha’s teachings), the Avesta (the Zoroastrian holy book) — and you will find these laws there.

 Константин Евграфов, юридический факультет, гр. 117.

---

However hard people try, laws are always insufficient.

Immanuel Kant said: «A lawyer can tell what particular laws mean, butЕare these laws legal — that is the question.»

Many philosophers, such as John Lock, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Alexander Radishev, claim that there is some eternal law. It is good for all times and places and it hasn’t changed. However, others, such as Friedrich Engels and Karl Popper, state that laws are being changed with time.

We should realize that every law must be legal, humane and fair. But peopleТs understanding of these qualitieshave changed because the society has been developing.

In Hammurabi’s Law Code death penalty is mentioned many times. And nowadays there is still death penalty in many countries. Russia used to apply death penalty ten years ago, and now we have the moratorium on it.

Therefore, we can clearly see that if our society is changing (and it really is), our laws are changing too. And we can boldly say that lawyers will have their jobs to do as long as the humanity exists.

Василий Раудин, юридический факультет, гр. 117.

Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers.

In my opinion the saying «Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers» very accurately reflects the Russian lifestyle.

This statement might mean that our laws are sometimes confusing and even illogical. Many years ago Thomas More, the English thinker and statesman, said that a prosperous State should have simple laws. However, there is no need for lawyers in such a state because its citizens will understand laws themselves and they will be able to interpret them in a proper way.

Having this in mind, I still disagree with the idea that life is only good in a state where laws are simple and understandable. ItТs too idealistic because the society is constantly developing and therefore it is becoming more and more complicated.

LetТs take Moscow streets as an example. Very often it seems that pedestrians who are trying to cross the street, cars and traffic lights are not interconnected at all!

When I’m watching it, two personalities are struggling inside me. The first one is a common Russian citizen who knows what the red light signal meansЕbut if there are no cars … «Why shouldn’t I go and quickly cross this road!!!» The second one is a young lawyers who stubbornly stands at the road-crossing trying to convince himself «Well, if not me then who should follow the rules?»

Well, frankly speaking I am in favour of complicated laws because they justify the existence of the profession of a lawyer.

Дарья Злоказова, юридический факультет, гр. 117.

© Just English

No part of this publication can be reproduced
in any form without the prior permission of the Copyright owner.

Кто нас читает

ИНТЕРАКТИВ

На этой страничке мы помещаем лучшие творческие работы студентов юридического факультета и факультета мировой политики Московского Государственного Университета.

NEWSPAPER MATERIALS ON LEGAL AND
POLITICAL ISSUES:

            Model Summary
           
Libel Cases
            Silence Can Be Golden
            War on Terror

ARE
LAWYERS PARASITES ON THE TAXPAYERS’ BACKS? 

STUDY
PACK //
Student’s essays

ON
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

ON ELECTIONS

DIPLOMATIC BODY:

             BEST ESSAYS ON DIPLOMACY

            
HOW TO IMPROVE THE IMAGE OF RUSSIA IN THE ESTEEM OF WORLD COMMUNITY

            
CROSS-CULTURAL CONTROVERSIES

Monarchy Debate

Government and Constitution
Is Internet Cheating RRRReally Cute?!
Napoleon’s Words of Wisdom

ЭССЕ —
ЗДЕСЬ ТОЛЬКО ЛУЧШЕЕ!!!

The Modes of Punishment. A Monologue of a Young Judge.

I am a beginner in the sphere of justice. The most frequent punishment I apply when I have to decide on a convict’s sentence is community service. I think it is the most lenient measure for wrongdoers, but a very useful one for the rest of the community. Since my experience is not very big, I haven’t dealt with atrocious crimes which would deserve capital punishment.

When I studied at Moscow State University my English teacher suggested a very productive idea that a person who has committed a crime should be deprived of those rights, which he or she mostly appreciates. That will be the most effective mode of retribution and deterrence. I am strongly opposed to fines of any kind or scale, as I suppose that money couldn’t make a restitution for moral or physical sufferings. And what’s more, people nowadays are always ready to lose a small sum of money, rather than their freedom or some rights.

I also consider solitary confinement to be an effective measure. When an offender is barred from the rest of the world, deprived of normal social life, when he can’t turn to anybody for help or advise, he has time to think about his life and behaviour. If he is later reformed (according to the assessment of prison board), then he should be sentenced to community service and supervision. But if he can’t understand the cruelty of his behaviour, he faces life imprisonment. I don’t like to use probation and suspended sentences, as there is a fear that an offender may always turn to a slippery slope.

Nevertheless, I usually turn to case study while sentencing this or that person, since I understand the importance of my duty to decide the destinies of people.

Нелли Ганжела, юридический факультет

Is
criminality inborn or acquired?

In
my opinion it is a very complicated problem because criminality is a complex
notion. I think the majority of criminals are shaped by environmental factors.
It does not mean, however, that a person becomes a criminal because of the
influence of poverty. To my mind such environmental factors as the impact of
family, friends, school and social rank of a person do not matter. I know many
cases when a rich man became a criminal. I agree there are some people who have
criminal proclivities but these are rare cases. If children have alcoholic or
drug-abusing parents and they see a lot of violence around — there is a very
big opportunity that they will become criminals.

For example, my parents think that there were much less
criminals in the USSR because there was powerful ideology claiming that everyone
should study, work, have a good family. People were more patriotic, teenagers
had particular aims in life, they wanted to become useful members of society.
Being good was a good taste.

These days, the situation is different and moral values are
‘denominated’. That is why in order to prevent crime each person should take
proper care of his children and his family. If all members of our society do so,
this world will become better.

Аревик Айрапетян,  юридический факультет

However hard people try, laws are always insufficient.

The Greek philosopher Aristotle once said «Life and state are far from being perfect.» Why are laws always insufficient? Why can’t we make laws, which will satisfy our demands? It is a very old and interesting question. It is closely connected with the issues of the of the origins of law in general.

Long long ago our ancestors lived according to their customs and conventions, and later according to the law of God. Then, why was there a necessity for inventing some comprehensive law for society, some written law? Today we can investigate the reasons for this phenomenon.

Life is changing constantly. Laws, which were in effect, for example, in Soviet times, can’t be in force these days because life has progressed greatly, our attitudes towards each other have changed and we look at things in a different way.

Of course, one can mention as an instance the USA or some other countries that have once adopted their national constitutions, which are still the supreme law in these countries. And in Russia we have changed 6 constitutional laws for the last 100 years. «Why?» — this question is quite in order. The answer is very simple. Just compare the events of American and Russian history for the last 100 years and you’ll understand the difference. Besides, this is a matter of legal theory as the two countries are guided by different legal principles.

So, as long as life is changing, law will be changing too, and it will always be insufficient. And to my mind it is very good! It’s better to change our life and law for the better, than to stand at one point, however good it may be.

Чиликов Егор, юридический факультет

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

The wisdom of the Bible is often misunderstood, the text is often misread. As many other statements, this one has fallen the victim of human ignorance and shallowness.

What does it mean? ‘Judge not, or God shall Judge you?’ ‘Judge not, or terrible justice shall be unleashed upon you?’ At first, I hesitated to accept one of the points of view that were offered to me. But later, I understood… To make it clear, let me give you an apologue.

Once upon a time, there lived a man of honor and virtue. He was a pious and righteous person, ascetic and devoted to God. But there was one flaw… He used to judge… He judged all humanity most harshly, accusing men of suffocating in their lust to please their bodies, drowning in their sins, forgetting about the salvation of their souls and development of their morale. He judged… He treated them as inferiors, he set himself above them on a pedestal of self-righteous and selfish blindness. He did not think of them as humans. He treated them as animals, or servants of the Devil. He considered himself to be Chosen by God to save this world from corruption and decay of morale…

He became an outcast. No one would speak to him; no one would offer a helping hand to him. Living in seclusion, far from civilization, he saw the light …. God granted him the wisdom and the truth became evident to him. And what he saw was unpleasant: Pointing at others’ weaknesses, he failed to notice his own faults. Self-righteousness, foolish pride, diminishing others’ achievements — that is what he saw. But he continued to judge… Yet, along with the others, he began to judge himself as well…

So the one who judged finally had justice meted upon him. But not from above, he took it from inside his soul…

Миловидов Олег, юридический факультет

However hard people try, laws are always insufficient.

When people first began to live in groups they had few rules or laws, but they soon realized that each individual had to pay attention to the needs and the welfare of his neighbors in order to make life not only tolerable, but pleasant for the greatest number of people. It was considered necessary for each person to recognize everyone else’s rights to life and the ownership of property. Otherwise society could not function in peace. Laws were passed to establish the order in community and they also had to protect the moral values, which were developing among people for many centuries. However in ancient times for example the laws which specified the rights of slaveholder could hardly comply with the slaves’ notions of justice. Another example of unfairness of laws is the condition of Russian peasants during the period of serfdom.

In modern societies law is applied to control the behavior of their members. Law guarantees and protects the rights of all people, who ought to respect and obey the norms, adopted by the legislature.

But as many scientific investigations show, lots of people do not respect

law. They follow its norms just because of the fear of punishment. People pay for the tickets in transport just to avoid being fined. Very often motor-car drivers don’t lose any opportunity to exceed the speed on the road, when it is not allowed, if they are sure, that there is no policeman near. A lot of people don’t have any legal culture. The reason is that we have imperfect laws. This trouble can lead to the increase of offences and crimes.

One more fact which shows the insufficiency of laws is that some rights,
proclaimed in important official documents, are hardly realized in practice. Many young men have lots of trouble when they try to escape the service in the army and want to choose some alternative service.

It is a matter of fact that to provide laws which will help its people to live safely and as comfortably as possible is a Homeric task. But in my opinion a legislature should revise laws, find their defects and try to work out some new perspectives for establishment more perfect and fair laws.

Кулямина Юля, юридический факультет

Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,

I consider it a great honour to address you
today. And I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak that you have
bestowed on me.

I would like to start my speech with a story
that a friend of mine told me yesterday.

An indignant lawyer reproaches the
judge: «Last time you charged my client with
a theft committed in broad daylight. This time you are bringing charges
for the artful robbery committed at night. Can you please tell me now, when
exactly my client ought to steal?!!!

The joke suggests that people like this thief
should study laws just to know when they should rob other people and when
they should not.

You know that there wasn’t any law in the primitive
society. And, of course, all of you know, that one of the first written codes
of law appeared in Babylonia. Does anybody here know what laws I am talking
about? Yeah, you are right. It’s the Code of Hammurabi. All of us
have heard a lot about it. But have you ever heard about a jurist or a lawyer
in Babylonia? The answer is «No». That is why I can assert that law was addressed
to every member of Babylonian community: to the rich and to the poor; to
government officials, priests, and soldiers, merchants, labourers and artisans.

Laws aren’t made only for lawyers. They have
always been meant for all of us. If it were not so, you wouldn’t know
your rights — what you can and what you can t do. You would be absolutely
helpless. And lawyers would be the most powerful and rich people (by the
way, this is not very bad, I think). There would appear a necessity of putting
at least one policeman at every street corner to prevent people from breaking
the law. In fact, every man would become a potential offender.

Let’s make a speculative assumption: A respectable
man in a black suit with a black case comes to you and says that the government
and the state need the house you live in. Then he shows you some papers,
says that according to the law you must leave your house at once. And
then goes to your kitchen and starts having tea while waiting for you
to go away. And you just pack your things, say Goodbye to your house and
leave. Then, standing in the street you begin to realize, that you haven
t got a home any more and you have got no place to live in. And you’ll have
to go your Old Folks, and, perhaps, to live with them for another couple
of years, before you earn enough money to buy yourself a new flat.

But if you were acquainted with the law, at
least with the Constitution (the most important of all our laws), you
would know, that according to the article #35 of the Constitution, if the
state needs your house and wants you to leave it, you ought to do so,
but the state must present you a new house, equal in cost to that of yours.
And if you knew that, you wouldn’t feel desperate and homeless for a single
moment, and, of course, you wouldn’t t have to live with your parents for
another couple of years.

I can give you many more examples, but all
of them prove the same idea. That is why I can surely say, that laws aren’t
made only for lawyers, they are made for ordinary people as well. And
if you want to be a literate person, if you want to know your rights and
duties, if you don t want such nasty things to happen to you, you should
study the Law, at least you should know the Constitution.
Don t let the government fool you, be smart!

Thank you for your attention!

Роман Шарапов, юридический факультет

Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers

Judge: You’ve been found guilty of not stopping at the red traffic light when you should’ve done. What do you have to say for yourself? The defendant: Your Honour! I alawys stop at green traffic lights when I don’t have to…

This joke shows us that people do not always
know their rights and obligations. There are some widely known rules which
are followed by everyone — just for self-protection. For example, what
would people do, unless there are some rules of the road?

But there are other very important rules and
laws, closely connected with our everyday life. Unfortunately almost
none of us knows them well. The knowledge of law is very important in every
society, for every human being. If you know your rights well, you could
demand that others should respect and observe them. In the absence of law
you could only rely upon the law of the jungle.

As for me, I don’t agree with the idea that
laws are not for ordinary people, but for lawyers. I know that there are
some special legal terms, which are unknown to the majority of the people.
But ordinary people should try to improve their general knowledge of law.
They should know their rights listed in the Constitution. It goes without
saying that average citizens don’t have to learn and understand all kinds
of rules and laws. Therefore it is the job of a lawyer to interpret complex
legal theory and precedents and «translate» them into layman’s terms.
That is why lay people have to consult lawyers in order to get legal advice.

I hope that in the future more and more ordinary
people will know their rights better. This is not an easy thing to do,
but I believe that very soon familiarity with law will allow people to
live safely and comfortably and enjoy their legal rights.

Елена Гусакова, юридический факультет

Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers

To my mind, this point of view is partially
correct. First and foremost, law is considered to regulate the life of
ordinary people. On the other hand, legal experts are employed to help
their clients struggle through the jungle of legal technicalities. Their
efforts are devoted to this primary aim. Still, most lawyers use their brilliant
skills and knowledge not only for the benefit of their clients but for their
own benefit.

Here’s a joke on the subject — just to back
up the theory:

A client comes to take a famous lawyer’s
opinion.
«Could you tell me how much you charge for your legal advice?»
he says.
«Of course», the lawyer replies, «I charge $200 to answer
three questions!»
«Isn’t it too much?»
«It depends» the lawyer says, «And what’s your third question?»

In any case, though laws are made for ordinary
people, lawyers are the only people capable of making sense of all the
tricky rules and regulations. In modern society lawyers are considered
to be the cornerstone of the sophisticated legal system. That’s one of the
reasons why they demand huge payments for their work.

However it’s obvious that lawyers do the job,
which is essential for the society we live in.

Михаил Мурадов, юридический факультет

LAWS ARE NOT FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE — THEY ARE FOR LAWYERS

Once upon a time, the famous English philosopher
and lawyer Jeremiah Bentham said, «If there weren’t any laws, all the
lawyers would die out from starvation». This statement surely has a grain
of truth since throughout history laws have often been created in the form
incomprehensible for ordinary people. The first written sets of laws were
very concrete, casual, and dealt with particular cases. For example: «If
a man has bitten off another man’s finger, the bitten man shall bite off
the first man’s finger too». That’s why those ancient laws were far clearer
for ordinary people than modern ones. But in time, the legal language — legalese
— had changed a lot, and it has become rather difficult for lay people to
understand what all those laws really mean.

Ordinary people have always understood the
simple biblical rules of behavior — thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not
steal, thou shalt not sin, and so on — but sometimes they’re just unable
to make sense of the meaning of the words written in a particular law.
And, therefore, these poor ordinary people need lawyers because only a lawyer
can understand the law created by another lawyer.

The Roman lawyers used to say, «Law is what
we explain», and they weren’t far from the truth. In the modern society,
lots of laws and law codes are written in such a mysterious language that
it’s absolutely clear — these laws are not for ordinary people. And a
lawyer is to explain, clarify all these frightening legal terms, «translate»
them into our everyday language. That’s also one of the ways a lawyer
earns his money — by giving legal advice to ordinary people, and thus lawyers
are sometimes believed to have made laws more complicated just in order
to make more money.

However, nowadays there seems to be a trend
to make laws more comprehensible, more readable, so that even a housewife
could grasp the meaning of some clauses from the Civil Code. This can
be seen, for example, in some European countries, and it really makes us
believe that laws are going to be made for all people. And we won’t have
to pay for legal aid in order to mitigate the penalty for killing our rowdy
neighbors.

Roland Novozhilov,

There is some eternal law. It is good for all times and places.

I quite agree with the statement given above
but I would like to interpret my idea by contraries and to back my opinion
with the following example:

Let’s imagine a dreadful situation: a builder
accidentally drops a brick which kills the only son of his employer. What
punishment should the negligent builder receive? These days it might be
considered just an accident and the builder will be punished but not very
strictly. And what would happen if the same accident took place long ago,
for example, in ancient Babylon?

Now when we are familiar with the laws of ancient
world we can find them amusing or astonishing but we don’t take them too
seriously. It is not always easy for us to understand the laws laid down centuries
ago. In ancient Babylon law was based on the cruel principle of revenge:
«an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth». On the one hand it seems logical
if the punishment fits the crime. On the other hand this principle meant
that if the builder (our luckless builder) killed the son of his employer,
his own son had to be killed. Cruel? Unfair? Not for the times of Hammurabi’s
rule! The approach was suitable for that particular society. But is it
acceptable for the contemporary society? Of course NOT! Why? Because our
life has changed greatly, people have changed, everything has changed.
And the law of the talion is not an eternal law. It doesn’t fit the present
situation. The human society is constantly developing and in the course of
this development it requires new laws and regulations which sometimes totally
replace the old ones.

So most laws have changed. Nevertheless there
is some law that we can still call eternal. This law is derived from the
moral values. It is rather a way of thinking, a mentality than a law
per se.

For example, since the times immemorial there
has been the law which prescribes the younger generation to respect their
parents. Throughout the history different legal codes have included specific
articles on the subject. Nowadays we don’t have such articles either in
our Constitution or in other legal documents. But still we do respect our
parents, our elders. Why? Because it’s in the human nature. We are guided
by the moral standards. And if these don’t constitute the eternal law,
could you please tell me what does!!

To sum it up I’d like to say that though our
life has changed a lot since ancient times we still have moral values,
moral laws and most of these laws are good for all times and all places.
Don’t forger it and … obey these laws.

Екатерина Назарова, юридический факультет

Laws Haven’t Changed Since Primeval Times

When human beings first began to live in large
and settled groups they had few rules or laws. Quite soon they realized
that each individual had to pay attention to the needs and welfare of his
neighbours in order to make life not only tolerable but safe for the greatest
number of people. Thus, certain rules of behaviour were set up to enable
people to live in any kind of satisfactory state. These regulations were
ancestral to contemporary laws.

One of the earliest best known legal codes
was that of Hammurabi, the king of Babylon, who lived in about 1800 BC.
Of course it would be difficult to compare his laws to modern ones. Nowadays
many things such as the instruments of punishment or the degree of offender’s
responsibility are different from those of the primeval times. What’s
more, throughout the history the very approaches to the concepts of crime
and criminality have changed.

For example, not so long ago euthanasia (assisted
suicide) was made legal in the Netherlands. Now it is the only country
where «painless killing» of those people who are terminally ill or very
old in order to stop them suffering is no longer a crime.

Undoubtedly legislation is in the process of
permanent change. However, its function remains the same — it is designed
to make people responsible for their deeds.

Дарья Захарова, юридический факультет

Laws Haven’t Changed Since Primeval Times

In the courtroom:
Judge: Now, Mrs. Johnson, how was your first marriage terminated?
Mrs. Johnson: By death.
Judge: And by whose death was it terminated?

Jokes about courts, lawyers and criminals have
always existed in our society. But justice and courts appeared much earlier
than jokes on the subject. Unfortunately our world is far from being perfect
and since the very beginning of human society crimes and criminals have also
existed. Even our remote ancestors had to administer justice. Of course early
laws might be very unrefined and naive but they reflected the human values
which are valued these days too and will be valued until the last man dies.
Thousands of years ago when a man was at a very primitive stage, crimes against
person such as murder and crimes against property, such as theft were not
approved. Punishments at that time were different from those we have nowadays,
but here is an admitted fact: penalties for bad deeds existed in human life
even in those dark ages. And nobody can question the need for them.

Justice is a cornerstone of a civilised society
and one of the greatest inventions of human mind. Without law life is
impossible. I just can’t imagine the situation when a hooligan has stolen
a handbag from a woman and people around greet him in the following way:
«Good boy! Bravo! Well done! How clever of you! We hope it will finish as
good as it has begun!»

Thus laws are an integral part of our life.
Of course a lot of water has gone under the bridge since primeval times
but pure and simple rules of good behaviour will never expire. It has always
been considered bad to kill, steal, inflict bodily harm or cause damage
to property.

Maybe many centuries ago people lived by the
law of the jungle but that was the very beginning of our modern legal
system which is still developing day after day. Which is a good idea, as
progress is always better than stagnation. I hope that at one point laws
will become really perfect and they will be worthy of real civilised society.

Екатерина Родыч, юридический факультет

ЧИТАЙТЕ ЗДЕСЬ!!!
ОДНОАКТНУЮ ПЬЕСУ от Дмитрия Мальцева

… И ПОЧТИ ФИЛОСОФСКИЙ ТРАКТАТ от Антона
Денисова

---

2001-2002 УЧЕБНЫЙ ГОД:

However hard people try, laws are always insufficient

Once a captain asked one of his soldiers: – Private Johns, what’s your favourite book? – The thin book, was the answer

From my point of view this attitude towards
books has some similar features with the attitude of the Russian people
to the law. We want to use as few laws as possible and we obey laws only
if the danger of punishment is obvious. The main reason of such behaviour
is not that we have imperfect laws. Our general trouble is the absence of
the good guidelines for law-making.

From the times of Jaroslav-the-Wise a lot of
lawgivers and authorities have been trying to lay down different laws and
codes. But however hard they tried, in modern Russia the crime rate is extremely
high. I think that one of the reasons of such situation is the absence of
respect to the law, or rather appreciation.

We begin with violating traffic rules, and
later we might commit more serious offences or even crimes.

Last year when some friends of mine and I visited
Finland, a very funny incident occurred. We were in a great hurry and so
we intended to cross the road when the red traffic light was on. There were
no cars on the road and we moved on. Just in the middle of the road I looked
back and saw people staring at us with great astonishment if not with fear.
They had probably never seen anyone crossing the road at the red light. You
see, it’s a high level of “legal culture”. No wonder the level of road accidents
as well as the crime rate is very low there.

To sum up, I’d like to say that only proper
observance of laws would make them work to our credit.

Николай Курмашев, юридический факультет

Laws Haven’t Changed Since Primeval Times

“A creaking door hangs long on its hinges”
— says an old English proverb. From my point of view, we can say quite
the same about laws, because they haven’t сhanged since primeval times.

Even in pre-historic time people in tribes
had different norms and rules of behavior. For example, a member of a
community was punished if he had done harm to another member of the same
community, if he had stolen something or if he had failed to perform his
duties. Nowadays the essence of such regulations of social life is absolutely
the same. Today people are responsible for all their deeds according to
contemporary laws.

This statement is easy to illustrate. In primeval
time if a man murdered another man from his tribe he had to pay а sort
of compensation, for example three sheep. And in modern law code of Chechnya
we can read that if somebody kills another man, he has to pay a compensation
of one hundred cows.

Therefore laws haven’t changed since prehistoric
times and in all ages their function has been to regulate the life of
people in society.

Виктория Модина

Laws Haven’t Changed Since Primeval Times

When the world was at a very primitive stage,
people did not realize the importance and the necessity of law. People
tried to follow some religious norms of behaviour. But soon they realised
that such rules were insufficient because they did not suite all the situations
and were not very fair.

There was a need to invent some new modes of
regulating human relations. Many kings managed to create their own law codes
and thus made it easier for themselves to rule their countries and their
people. But all of them had different points of view on what was right and
what was wrong, so laws were to be changed all the time.

Besides the society itself is developing bringing
the need for new changes in legislation. That is why nowadays it is impossible
to live under some primeval laws. For example, today individuals and whole
industries can be sued and tried in courts for violating the bans on
environment pollution. Certainly the laws, which are applicable to those
cases, are ecological laws and statutes, that did not exist before at
all.

Consequently we can see that laws have changed
since primeval times, though the main idea of justice has remained.

Лера Храмовских, юридический факультет

Laws are not made for ordinary people, they are made for lawyers

I don’t agree with this statement. In my opinion
laws are made for ordinary people as well. And I will try to prove my
point of view.

Here is a joke about lawyers.

— What is the difference between a lawyer and
a vampire?

— A vampire? — A vampire only sucks blood at
night!

This joke reflects the general attitude of
ordinary people towards nasty blood-sucking lawyers. It is absolutely
true, that the work lawyers do is very important and demanding of both
intellect and time. The legal business is really complicated and difficult
to understand. That’s why some people have to consult lawyers now and then
in order to get a piece of advice or just help. But the trouble is that
lawyers usually demand huge payments for their work. People who are well-off
can pay big lawyers’ bills. But there are always poor and very poor people
who cannot afford it. Therefore, the more ordinary people know about their
rights, about law, the better.

Юлия Эктова, юридический факультет, 2001-02
учебный год.

Laws haven’t changed since primeval times.

I don’t agree with this view. To my mind, if we tried to tell somebody that we love them just with the help of body language it would be very funny. And if the decisions in the US Congress had been made through strikes and wars, not through deliberation and agreement, it would have been very stupid too.

For a very long time the human being has been developing. People need to be better and cleverer. I think it is so, because it’s not right to act like animals in the jungle. Yes, some scientists think, that we descend from animals, but we are cleverer and better. At the same time, it is very important, that a lot of people believe in God, they claim that they descend from Adam and Eve, and they need to be better, because of their human nature. With time people have been changing, they have become civilized, so laws have been changing too. Laws have become more important and complete.

Nowadays people can solve their problems with the help of laws, because laws provide for our safe life. That’s why men are more sure of their lives and the lives of their relatives. The jungle world is only for animals these days.

I’m proud of my life in the modern civilized world, where I can feel stronger, because there are laws, which help me in solving different problems. The world is changing, the problems and possibilities are changing, that’ why laws are changing too.

Шевердина Ира, факультет мировой политики МГУ

Task 1. Read the text.

Nowadays it is obvious to everyone that, in a community such as the
one in which we live, some kind of law is necessary to try to prevent
people from killing each other. When the world was at a very
primitive stage, there was no such law, and, if a man wished to kill
another man. no one interfered officially.

Later members of every community made laws for themselves in
self-protection. If it were not for the Jaw, you could not go out in
broad daylight without the fear of being kidnapped, robbed or
murdered.

There are more good people in the world than bad, but there are
enough of the bad to make law necessary in the interests of everyone.

There is no difficulty in understanding this but it is important to
understand that law is not necessary just because there are bad
people in the world. If we were all as good as we ought to be, laws
would still be necessary. If we never told lies, never took anything
that didn’t belong to us, never did anything that we ought not to do,
we should still require a set of rules of behaviour, in other words
laws, to be able to live in any kind of satisfactory state.

In the absence of law we could only rely upon the
law of jungle. Every country tries, therefore, to provide laws which
will help its people to live safely and as comfortably as possible.
This is not at all an easy thing to do, and no country has been
successful in producing laws which are entirely satisfactory. But it
is better to have some imperfect laws than to have none at all.

Task 2. Learn the following words and expressions. Make your own
sentences with them.

1.nowadays— в настоящее время	2.obvious— очевидный
3.a community— общество	4.a law— закон
5.necessary— необходимый	6.to prevent— препятствовать ч-л или к-л, мешать к-л сделать что-то.
7.to interfere— вмешиваться	8.self-protection— самозащита
9.to kidnap— похищать	10. to rob— грабить
11. to kill = to murder — убивать	12. to require— требовать
13. a set of rules — набор правил	14.behaviour— поведение
15.to rely upon— полагаться на	16.to provide— обеспечивать
17.in other words— другими словами	18.safely— безопасно
19.imperfect — несовершенный

3

Task 3. Give
the Russian equivalents to the words below:

It is obvious, in the community we live in, to prevent people; at a
very primitive stage; to make laws; in self-protection; to be
kidnapped or killed; in the interests of everyone; a set of rules; as
comfortably as possible; entirely satisfactory.

Task 4. Find in the text the English equivalents for the following
words:

В в настоящее время	Несоверешнные законы
Это очевидно	Полагаться на закон джунглей
Препятствовать чему-либо или кому-либо	Создавать законы
Набор правил поведения	Действовать официально

Task 5. Find in the text the conditional sentences.

Task 6. Answer the questions:

1. Why is it necessary to have some kind of law in our community?

2. Why did people make laws?

3. Are there more good or bad people in the world?

4. Is there any country in the world which has perfect laws?

5. What is better: to have imperfect laws or have none at all?

Task 7. Make a list of arguments for and against the following
statements.

1. Laws haven’t changed since primeval times.

2. However hard people try, laws are always insufficient.

3. Laws are not for ordinary people, they are for lawyers.

Task 8. Speak about the need for law.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

Другие языки