Civil Disobedience Martin Luther King David Thoreau LA riot Essay

Civil DisobedienceOn April 29, 1992, the City of Los Angeles was surrounded in a riot in result to the "not guilty" verdicts in the trial of four white Los Angeles practice of law Department (LAPD) officers accused of unlawfully beating Rodney ability. Six days later, when the fires were last extinguished and the smoke had cleared, estimates of the material damage done vary amidst about $800 million and $1 billion, 54 people had been killed, more than 2000 injured, in excess of 800 structures were burned, and about 10,000 people were arrested.(Khalifah 89) The 1992 riots in the City of Los Angeles were arguably the more or less devastating civil disturbance in the history of the United States.Anyone croup say that a law is unfair and dirty. However, who is really willing to hope the consequences for going against this law? Is breaking this law really worth the penalisation? The government is the one to decide whether a law is reasonable, but what if a member of the public believes that a law is not? Should he grayback against this law? Henry David Thoreau and Martin Luther pansy junior answered yes to this head teacher and believed that one should chat out against an injustice. They both believed that government had many flaws. They shared many beliefs in the same subjects concerning Civil Disobedience but had many different views on how the government should work and how the citizen should be treated by society.Civil noncompliance can turn into civil disturbance. When a white truck driver, Reginald Denny, was dragged from his vehicle and severely beaten by an angry mob. Both Martin Luther superpower Jr. and Thoreau believed that one should act out against an unjust law by gist of nonbelligerent protest. Therefore both King and Thoreau would not support the rebels groundless behavior of the LA riots. If one is going to openly express his ideas of disagreeing with an unjust law, he must be willing to accept the consequences. Both Ma rtin Luther King Jr. and Thoreau demonstrated this acceptance of consequences by going to jail without repercussion. This shows that they real believed in the eradication of such a law that forces them to do something that they do not want to do. Martin Luther King Jr. was arrested for gathering with others to protest peacefully, which the jurisprudence claimed was unlawful, because they were parading without a permit. Martin Luther King Jr. peacefully went ... ...or not paying taxes. Martin Luther King serves a sentence, which is usually longer than a day, for a peaceful protest. non paying taxes seems a lot more incriminating than having a peaceful gathering. However, the laws have changed considerably since the time of Thoreau. Despite this, there still was a double standard that people of different races had to deal with. The answer to the question whether one should disobey an unjust law is yes. One should stand up for what he believes in, and not have anyone else dictate t o him what is right or misemploy by passing unjust laws. According to the U.S. Constitution, one has the right of go off speech the ability to speak out against a law that he believes is morally unjust.(____) People should not be treated differently because of their race, color, or beliefs. Laws should not be passed that impose bad intentions upon certain groups. In conclusion, King and Thoreau believe one should have the right to question their warrant if the authority has passed an immorally just law. The way looters questioned the injustice has gone overboard, affecting the lives of white is not what King and Thoreau believed in terms of civil disobedience.