I am writing a paper for my criminal justice class and the topic given was whether I was an individual rights or public order advocate. I'm on the fence because I believe individual rights are important, yet I can see when being a public order advocate is also important (preventing 9/11, oklahoma city etc). I'm 50-50 at the moment. for this particular paper we have to be one or the other. what are your views?
You have the correct answer. There's is a balancing of competing interests. We want to maximize individual life, liberty and property while retaining for the society equity, fairness, health and safety, etc.
Judging by your answer on the cop forum, I'd say you are left with the choice of anarchy v. dictatorship. Here's some shit from a decent website that can help:
1. Simple systems require less organization.
2. Organized groups grow naturally from anarchic individuals.
3. Teamwork is superior to isolated effort or hermitism.
4. Anarchy is actually organized by game theory and chaos theory.
5. A strategy is needed for every organization.
6. The larger the organization, the more its leader loses direct control and knowledge over it.
7. Democratic organization is better than dictatorial organization.
8. Self-interest and freedom should always coincide with the common interest, and be prevented when it does not.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-spectrumtwo.htm
