Answers to ‘You Decide’ Questions

1.1: The regulation of Karr’s hair would be an example of the dysfunction of law as it served the interest of a small number of individuals as opposed to the welfare of society. However, the judges argued just the opposite, by stating that hair length was threatening the welfare of society on various levels (distraction, reason for conflict, etc). This type of law falls under the conflict approach to law as it illustrates how the majority group wanted to oppress those who did not agree with the political situation at the time (Vietnam war). Student dress code regulation can be a slippery slope as they can be used to oppress not only difference in political opinion such as in the case outlined above but also have religious considerations in recent years (with places not allowing religious headscarves) as well as moral uproar over females not being allowed clothing too revealing that it would be a distraction for others. I would not give schools power to regulate student dress and would have ruled that Karr be allowed in school with long hair.

1.2:Under the belief of the consensus approach I would say that as a society we all agree that sexual assault is morally wrong. As such, the individuals deserve to be punished for their crimes. Jail/prison time is the sentence that most places impose, yet we also force these individuals to make themselves publically known for their crimes. I do believe to an extent this is justifiable, from the point of view that they might reoffend. However, then we would have to adjust the laws and report other criminals for their crime as well (as there is no link between those who sexually assault to also reoffend more often than others). These laws tell us that as a society we place greater value to some crimes than others, viewing that children need extra protection than adults.