“Governments are justified in circumventing civil laws when doing so is vital to the protection of national security.”
Write an essay in which you take a position on the statement above. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true.
It is said that it is justifiable for government to circumvent civil laws for protection of national security. I believe that breaking laws is not justifiable for anyone even for politicians unless in the circumstances that the security of citizen is really threaten.
Civil laws are related to the citizens’ affairs, such as marriage, property ownership and their freedom. These rules are very important for individuals, as they are related to their personal rights. When people are satisfied and do not have any objection that their rights are respected by government. Therefore, many people believe that the state has no right to ignore the civil laws which are related to their affairs. If the government is allowed to circumvent civil laws, many corrupt politicians misuse this situation in favor of their interests. For example, in my country Iran, many problems related to embezzlement occurred because of the permissions given to politicians for circumventing civil laws. This situation cause people’s outrage and they went strike, as they believed that their rights had been ignored.
But in some circumstances government has no choice but to circumvent civil laws. For example, five years ago, some foreign people tried to evoke Iranian young people to go on the streets and break the stores or cut the trees and light the fire in order to show that they are not satisfied with their government. The government for creation of security was forced to forbid the commuting in the streets. For several days, the net in the country was interrupted and people had no access to the world. Many people believe that the state had no this right to curtail people because all individuals have this right to express their opinions and officials only had to punish those who destroyed the public properties. However, sometimes for national security government need to avoid civil laws even if the people become angry and find this condition unfair. This situation is the same as being in the traffic. Cars are in the line and they are not allowed to go into the bus lane. However, suddenly drivers see that the fire truck without any warning goes to the bus lane. At first, they car drivers think that their rights are not respected but after that they can understand the fire truck need to go that lane just because they want to help the city from a bigger problem. It is possible there is bonfire in one places that if it is not put out, it can be extended and suffer more people. So, it is acceptable that most of the time circumventing of civil laws is not desirable for people but they may be justified if they understand ignoring them has been for national security.
Politicians cannot keep all people satisfied. They are responsible to provide security in their country and they usually do that even if it is necessary to bypass civil laws.
In conclusion, In my view it is justifiable the civil laws to be circumvented in some vital situations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 259, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'threatened'.
Suggestion: threatened
... that the security of citizen is really threaten. Civil laws are related to the citi...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'circumstances'' or 'circumstance's'?
Suggestion: circumstances'; circumstance's
... rights had been ignored. But in some circumstances government has no choice but to circumv...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 539, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
... Many people believe that the state had no this right to curtail people because al...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, really, so, therefore, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 33.0505617978 172% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2463.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 503.0 442.535393258 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89662027833 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.73578520332 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66608922021 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.443339960239 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 769.5 704.065955056 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3171920835 60.3974514979 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.625 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9583333333 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 5.21951772744 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.131958269296 0.243740707755 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0506452753223 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0574360031039 0.0758088955206 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106952076924 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0421422713078 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.