Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
6 pages/≈1650 words
No Sources
English (U.S.)
MS Word
Total cost:
$ 25.92

The relevance of the Harm Principle in the 21st Century Canadian Criminal Law (Essay Sample)


For this paper, you are not doing research outside of the materials assigned for this course and/or identified in the questions below. You must use the book. I will upload the information for this essay.
-No outside research can be cited in this essay
-all quotes to support the writing must come from the book
-Must be an ARGUMENTATIVE essay
All citations must be provided in footnotes or endnotes. Parenthetical or embedded references may not be used. - Any source that you identify in your footnotes/endnotes must also appear in your bibliography. Your bibliography may also include any source that you consulted during the course of your research, but which you did not refer to specifically in a footnote/endnote. Citations: References to materials in the course textbook must identify the author and title of the specific work contained in that collection (for instance, you must cite Aquinas specifically, not just Dimock).
If you use the exact words that are in your source, you must put quotation marks around the passage, and provide a footnote/endnote indicating the source the quotation (including the page number). If you use any fact, idea, or argument from any source, but do not use the exact words that the author uses to express that information, you must provide a footnote/endnote. Do not put quotation marks around a passage that is not in exactly the same words as the original text. If you are summarising or paraphrasing information (that is, if you are not quoting it directly), you must make sure that the words you use are significantly different from the original text. Changing one or a few words in a sentence, but keeping some of what the original author wrote, is not allowed. Changing the way each sentence is written, but following the author's train of thought sentence by sentence (even in different words), is not allowed. Not identifying the source of your information, identifying a direct quotation as your own summary of the author's argument, and identifying your summary of the author's argument as a direct quotation from the text, are all forms of academic dishonesty. University policies regarding plagiarism will be strictly enforced. *Susan Dimock* is the book author.
THESIS must be clear and good and support all things being discussed in this essay.
PLEASE review the sheet I will upload called "ESSAY CHECK LIST" and make sure everything is followed. This professor marks the essay on how well the instructions were followed.
ESSAY QUESTION: Does the harm principle adequately explain Canadian criminal law in the 21st century, or is something else required as well? Explain your answer, using specific references to materials studied in this course.


The relevance of the Harm Principle in the 21st Century Canadian Criminal Law
The Relevance of the Harm Principle in the 21st Century Canadian Criminal Law
Despite its ambiguities, J.S. Mill's harm principle has been influential to debates regarding the limits of the legitimate state or social action. According to Mill, the state has the right to intervene if a person's actions are perceived as a source of harm to other members of society. However, his argument for supporting the assertions of this principle creates a wide variety of meanings to the term "harm." His utilitarian argument creates open windows for extensive state control over individual life while still staying true to Mill's liberal political philosophy. Those who do not support the harm principle argue that the principle provides an avenue to the state to interfere and control the actions of a person who is assumed to have their rights. In essence, they argue that the harms principle is not supportive of the right of individuals. It gives the state more power than the individual. Despite these opposing views, the harms principle remains relevant in the 21st century Canadian Criminal Law.
Mill's harm principle is relevant in the 21st century because it gives people the liberty to plan their lives and makes coercion applicable beyond the limitation of state interference. The harm principle protects the people from state interference in cases involving risk of harm and unnecessary taxations that are caused by avoidable actions. The state is right to intervene in the event a parent fails his or her duty to a child because it involves another person. However, it is different in the cases of gambling, idling, and gambling. These acts present a risk of harming others but violate the individual rights only. But Mill asserts that the preservation of dignity and the development of natural abilities are the only duties people have to themselves, and the harm principle does not allow the state to intervene in such duties. However, the principle allows the state to coerce those involved in private drinking, idling, and gambling based on dignity degradation and failure to fulfill certain obligations. Such people cannot be coerced based on the risk they pose to others, but the state can intervene once they threaten public financial abilities. The harm principle does not provide any viable objection to the state's coercion on those individuals participating in life-ruining activities. Thus, the harm principle applies where public harm matter while state intervention comes in when the risk of perceived hurt is identified.[Dimock Susan. “Mill, J. Stuart: On Liberty” in Classic Readings and Cases in the Philosophy of Law, 304-319, 1st edition. New York: Routledge 2006.307]
Mill's harm principle allows the state's interference in some personal behaviors that are prevalent in the 21st century. The way he defined what harm is, there are a vast number of cases that allow the state to intervene. As a result, the point about risk can be added because Mill used the risk of damage as a legitimate basis for measuring harm. However, the actions that can create the risk of hurt among members of a society are varied. According to Mill, gambling, uncleanliness, idleness, and drunkenness do not qualify as actions that are prohibited by law. But in the real sense, these acts are harmful to either the individuals or the general society, or both. For instance, drunkenness makes one prone to possible injury to self and others, while gambling at its extreme levels violates an assignable obligation of a family person. In their simplest form, idleness and uncleanliness are significantly harmful to the public and welfare system of a state. In his perspective, some taxat...

Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

  • Legal Analysis Memorandum
    Description: Undergraduate writing level 2 pages Law Format Style English (U.S.) Essay. Legal Analysis Memorandum ...
    2 pages/≈550 words | 3 Sources | Other | Law | Essay |
  • Environmental Scanning: Future of Law, Defining the Scope
    Description: Find, cite (all citations in this course must use Bluebook format), and summarize keypoints of an article about one futuring technique...
    2 pages/≈550 words | 3 Sources | Other | Law | Essay |
  • Legal Ethics Memorandum
    Description: Rules of professional conduct, in essence, comprise the disciplinary standard for lawyers who practice law in a given state...
    5 pages/≈1375 words | 5 Sources | Other | Law | Essay |
Need a Plagiarism Free Essay?
Submit your instructions!