The Role of Bystanders in Crime Intervention and the Need for Legal Obligations

Why is equality valuable and is it more valuable than freedom?

Equality involves handling people in a manner that the result for everyone is alike. To achieve equality in different circumstances requires a variety of things to be put in place. On the other hand, freedom is the right to do as one pleases and this involves reasoning, freedom to move around, speaking, worshipping or not worshipping and in general to act as one decides (Janda, 2018). Freedom is denied when a person starts to interfere with another person’s freedom. This paper discusses the value of equality and offers philosophy dissertation help. Additionally, it offers a comparison between the value of equality and freedom.

Equality is valuable and can be applied to different perspectives. First of all, equality enables people to achieve better outcomes in what they do (Spicker, 2006). When people are given an equal chance to work on something, chances are that the result would be better. Secondly, to deliver high-quality services, equality has to be considered. Equality ensures the obedience of the law (Schmidtz & Pavel, 2018). Equal treatment of people reduces the chances of violations of the law when individuals comprehend that actions are fair. Strong relationships are often built where accountability is demonstrated. Where equality is practised, accessibility to certain resources or services is easier and thus transparency in decision making. Additionally, equality is important because all individuals are treated equally in different areas such as when using government facilities everyone gets equal access to services despite social classes. To achieve equality, it is important to employ strategies that support everyone to access resources and participate in decision making are important (Janda, 2018).

Freedom is accorded differently with respect to set rules and regulations set. However, this varies from state to state. According to Stivers (2008), there are four crucial human freedoms. First, there is freedom of speech and expression, freedom to worship in own way, freedom from want and lastly freedom from fear. According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, freedom is important because it results in self-actualization, esteem, love, safety and physiological satisfaction. Freedom is important because it leads to improved output, high expressions of inventiveness and originality (Stivers, 2008). Many people who live in freedom at times do not recognize its value and take it for granted. On the other hand, those who have been denied their freedom for a long time, appreciate being free and would find it hard applying it in the public when granted. Freedom is controlled through different legislation and regulations set by specific governments (Spicker, 2006). This ensures rules are followed and there is no interference of other people’s freedom. Lastly, freedom is valuable because it gives people an opportunity to move, learn and appreciate their surroundings (Schmidtz & Pavel, 2018).

Although freedom and equality are essential to human existence, equality is more valuable than freedom. For instance, an individual is denied access to a health facility because someone in a higher social class is using it and this individual succumbs to their illness. This highlights the importance of equality because if it was exercised the individual would have been attended to promptly. Nevertheless, freedom is enjoyed and appreciated by those who understand it well (Schmidtz & Pavel, 2018). Many people who do not have an education find it hard and some do not even understand their rights to freedom. Equality is open and one can easily realize when it is denied as compared to freedom (Stivers, 2008). Also, equality gives people the same platform to learn, understand and even get educated on their rights and freedom.

To sum up, freedom and equality are regularly seen as contradictory ideas but the idea of equality is straightforward; it allows complex ideas to make sense. Around the world, most governments try to make their people comfortable by equally distributing resources everywhere. With equality, individuals live in peace with each other because they are all appreciated and treated the same. Over many years, it has been difficult achieving equality because some people feel that even from birth we are all unique and it is hard treating everyone the same.

Reference List:

• Janda, K. (2018). The challenge of democracy: American government in global politics.Boston, Massachusetts : Cengage Learning.
• Schmidtz, D., & Pavel, C. E. (2018). The Oxford handbook of freedom. New York, NY:Oxford University Press
• Spicker, P. (2016). Liberty, equality, fraternity. Bristol: Policy.
• Stivers, R. (2011). The illusion of freedom and equality. Albany, N.Y: State University of New York Press.

Should there be a law compelling bystanders to intervene if they witness a crime?

Crime can be devastating with physical and emotional impacts. Families, friends, witnesses, bystanders and those harmed are affected by these impacts. Despite the manner in which crime occurs, victims may lose their sense of control and self-worth. Bystanders have various ways of reacting to crime. They are; non-interventionism—close but indirect relations, indirect intervention, and spontaneous vigilantism. They choose to intervene in a crime or not to depending on the given situation. This paper gives reasons on whether to have a law compelling bystanders to intervene in crimes in reasonable or all other situations.

Recent research suggests that before anyone intervenes in a crime, a clear deliberation of the likely consequences has to be considered. Violent crimes are a great bother and affect the very core of a free society (American Society of Criminology, Frost, Freilich, and Clear, 2010). There is, therefore, the need to have a sustainable peaceful community. This can be achieved through ethically upright individuals who have the responsibility to preserve peace. They also have to be trustworthy, have personal liberty and able to interact freely without violence. Bystanders are the best source of first-hand information about a crime. They, therefore, have the chance to avert crime, seek help or be of assistance to survivors but most often they do not. More so, they have a duty to intervene when witnessing a violent crime but must understand the form of intervention to take. They have to take charge and stand up for those attacked since society largely relies on them (Guiora, 2017).

In most parts of the world, bystanders are legally required to intervene. In Quebec’s charter of rights, people are encouraged to be of help to anyone whose life is in danger (Cook, 2015). The law, however, creates simple reasons for rescue. The law is satisfied by personal interventions or by a call for help and hardly compels bystanders to run serious risks that may lead to injuries. The common law in the jurisdiction in the United Kingdom, however, does not give people general duty to rescue (Guiora, 2017). For instance, based on law module, it is obvious for parents to take full responsibility for their children as well teachers are to protect their students. However, it is important to note that this does not apply to other relationships. In the past, most countries were in contrast with the idea of creating laws to adopt a general duty to rescue. This was to evade the basis that it would plainly invade an individual’s freedom of choice. This remains a significant point though exaggerated. It is vital to add to the safety of others as the days of autonomous freedom have been passed by time. If a legal obligation contributes to people contacting the police when they witness a crime, then it is of great significance and needs to be imposed (Cook, 2015).

Evidently, it is so obvious to assume that people avoid helping when they fortunately or unfortunately witness crime yet, there is more to it as the explanation is more complicated. For that reason, there should be laws to compel bystanders to intervene when they witness a crime in all situations. Laws can be helpful to allow them to share what they have witnessed and be able to seek help for those affected. In addition, laws help to tackle situations before they advance and result in managing situations before they get out of hand (American Society of Criminology, et al., 2010).

Conclusion

Enacting of laws to compel bystanders to intervene can bring closure to many affected by crime. These laws should comprise of all situations; reasonable and unreasonable. The law is significant in acting as a guideline in showing what is acknowledged in society. More so, laws help to govern people and ensure they report of crimes or any other situations that may cause havoc. Eventually, people can be able to seek justice using bystanders as witnesses resulting in peace in the community.

Reference List:

• American Society of Criminology, Frost, N., Freilich, J. D., & Clear, T. R. (2010). Contemporary issues in criminal justice policy: policy proposals from the American Society of Criminology Conference. Belmont, Calif, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cook, K. (2015). Kitty Genovese - the murder, the bystanders, the crime that changed America. Ww Norton & Co.
• Guiora, A. N. (2017). The crime of complicity: The bystander in the Holocaust. Chicago, Illinois Ankerwycke, American Bar Association.