„The Man Penal settlement. Do you know whats happening there? The murders, the starvation, the complete breakdown of law and order.“

P. D. James photo
P. D. James
1920 - 2014
Publicidade

Citações relacionadas

John F. Kennedy photo
Gore Vidal photo

„The period of Prohibition — called the noble experiment — brought on the greatest breakdown of law and order the United States has known until today. I think there is a lesson here.“

—  Gore Vidal American writer 1925 - 2012
Context: The period of Prohibition — called the noble experiment — brought on the greatest breakdown of law and order the United States has known until today. I think there is a lesson here. Do not regulate the private morals of people. Do not tell them what they can take or not take. Because if you do, they will become angry and antisocial and they will get what they want from criminals who are able to work in perfect freedom because they have paid off the police. "The State of the Union" (1975)

Publicidade
Gaurav Sharma (author) photo
Julius Streicher photo

„I have to repeat again and again: He who knows the Talmud, knows the Jew! The laws of the Talmud are contrary to the German system of laws. You should acknowledge the importance of discussing this matter in connection with the judiciary budget. Once you know what the Talmud orders the Jew to do, you will understand today's state of affairs.“

—  Julius Streicher German politician 1885 - 1946
Ich muss es immer wieder sagen: Wer den Talmud kennt, kennt den Juden! Die Gesetze des Talmuds sind unserer deutschen Rechtsordnung entgegengesetzt. Erkennen Sie daraus, wie wichtig es ist, dass diese Frage im Zusammenhang mit dem Justizetat besprochen wird. Wenn Sie wissen, was der Talmud dem Juden befiehlt, dann werden Sie auch unseren Zustand von heute begreifen. 05/01/1925, speech in the Bavarian regional parliament; debate about the budget of ministry of justice ("Kampf dem Weltfeind", Stürmer publishing house, Nuremberg, 1938)

John Eardley Wilmot photo

„There is no merit in a settlement: it depends upon positive law.“

—  John Eardley Wilmot English judge 1709 - 1792
Rex v. Corporation of Carmarthen (1759), 2 Burr. Part IV. 873.

Cesare Beccaria photo
Robertson Davies photo

„The word "religion" just means "law," the consideration of law and consequence. That's what interests me: what happens as a result of what people do.“

—  Robertson Davies Canadian journalist, playwright, professor, critic, and novelist 1913 - 1995
Context: The word "religion" just means "law," the consideration of law and consequence. That's what interests me: what happens as a result of what people do. Also the reluctance people have to learn that certain actions will bring certain consequences … people don't learn. Over and over again they do the same stupid things without having learned what happens. … We are not wise because we are always looking for causes for things which are outside ourselves. "Robertson Davies: Beyond the Visible World".

 Aristotle photo
Muammar Gaddafi photo

„What's going on? … What you are doing is not allowed in Islamic law [halal]. What you are doing is forbidden in Islam [haraam]! … Do you know right from wrong?“

—  Muammar Gaddafi Libyan revolutionary, politician and political theorist 1942 - 2011
Remarks to captors minutes before death, quoted in msnbc.com (2011 October 21) "Even stashed in a meat locker, Gadhafi divides Libya" http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/44986347/ns/today-today_news/t/battle-over-body-delays-gadhafis-burial/

H.L. Mencken photo

„One of the main purposes of laws in a democratic society is to put burdens upon intelligence and reduce it to impotence. Ostensibly, their aim is to penalize anti-social acts; actually their aim is to penalize heretical opinions.“

—  H.L. Mencken American journalist and writer 1880 - 1956
Context: Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. A democratic state may profess to venerate the name, and even pass laws making it officially sacred, but it simply cannot tolerate the thing. In order to keep any coherence in the governmental process, to prevent the wildest anarchy in thought and act, the government must put limits upon the free play of opinion. In part, it can reach that end by mere propaganda, by the bald force of its authority — that is, by making certain doctrines officially infamous. But in part it must resort to force, i. e., to law. One of the main purposes of laws in a democratic society is to put burdens upon intelligence and reduce it to impotence. Ostensibly, their aim is to penalize anti-social acts; actually their aim is to penalize heretical opinions. At least ninety-five Americans out of every 100 believe that this process is honest and even laudable; it is practically impossible to convince them that there is anything evil in it. In other words, they cannot grasp the concept of liberty. Always they condition it with the doctrine that the state, i. e., the majority, has a sort of right of eminent domain in acts, and even in ideas — that it is perfectly free, whenever it is so disposed, to forbid a man to say what he honestly believes. Whenever his notions show signs of becoming "dangerous," ie, of being heard and attended to, it exercises that prerogative. And the overwhelming majority of citizens believe in supporting it in the outrage. Including especially the Liberals, who pretend — and often quite honestly believe — that they are hot for liberty. They never really are. Deep down in their hearts they know, as good democrats, that liberty would be fatal to democracy — that a government based upon shifting and irrational opinion must keep it within bounds or run a constant risk of disaster. They themselves, as a practical matter, advocate only certain narrow kinds of liberty — liberty, that is, for the persons they happen to favor. The rights of other persons do not seem to interest them. If a law were passed tomorrow taking away the property of a large group of presumably well-to-do persons — say, bondholders of the railroads — without compensation and without even colorable reason, they would not oppose it; they would be in favor of it. The liberty to have and hold property is not one they recognize. They believe only in the liberty to envy, hate and loot the man who has it. "Liberty and Democracy" in the Baltimore Evening Sun (13 April 1925), also in A Second Mencken Chrestomathy : New Selections from the Writings of America's Legendary Editor, Critic, and Wit (1994) edited by Terry Teachout, p. 35

Neal Shusterman photo
Ragnar Frisch photo
Martin Luther King, Jr. photo
Philip K. Dick photo
Franklin D. Roosevelt photo

„Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Etiam egestas wisi a erat. Morbi imperdiet, mauris ac auctor dictum.“