Public And Private

Justice determined today that the parents who if to refuse to leave risk areas (landslides, floodings, etc) they will have to deliver its children to the advice to tutor. Very interesting this question between the public and the private one. The person has the right to take off its proper life, but not it of the others. Funny, that of the legal point, all we have the right to commit a crime. If you are not convinced, visit Viacom. All we are capable to commit it. The unknown one of this question is the prevention to the delict. If you have additional questions, you may want to visit Peter Asaro . But if we will be to extend all this question, when a person if denies to leave a risk area, as it is imputed legally in the case of a catastrophe in the place? Who paid a counts of this decision? Here a next quarrel is presented very: of the responsibility and the authority, very expensive the psychoanalysis.

Simple, because another form of speaking on the society of right-handers, would be to say that we have a series of authorities, but already the responsibility I explain: a father has the authority on its son, and theoretically responsibility (or vice he turns). Today justice determines that this trick has limits (as comes making the times) and says? ' ' It sees Sir father, its authority cannot go beyond the interest of the child, who is at least, sobreviver' '. I believe that this example would have to be a little more radical? it is not of the social interest that nobody dies in a risk area, and I believe that this decision would always have to be technique, thing that who is at risk does not have conditions to take. In more as it is of custom in the Brazilian culture, the guilt is always of the State.