First of all if you don't know this your are not the shiniest apple in the tree, the answer is obviously because then you could not go to war and serve your country!
violated a law that the protesters considered to be unjust. The U.S. government issued draft cards and the destruction of them was illegal, therefore the burning of the cards would have constituted an act of civil disobedience by people who perceived the mandatory draft laws and Vietnam War as unjust. This is the correct answer I saw it on a practice OGT and I had an answer key to use.
1. Burning down the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) buildings on college campuses. 2. Burning their draft cards. 3. Draft riots in the streets.
The law banning the burning of draft cards was passed by Congress in 1965 as part of the Vietnam War era regulations. This legislation made the destruction of draft cards a criminal offense, reflecting the government's effort to maintain order during a time of significant protest against the draft. The law was challenged in court, leading to a landmark Supreme Court case, United States v. O'Brien (1968), which upheld the constitutionality of the law while also affirming the protection of symbolic speech under the First Amendment.
Young men in America during the late 1960's to early 1970's who were afraid to fight in Vietnam.
Students for a Democratic Society saw the war as not a war ( it wasn't declared) but a police action. So, that means it was illegal and that it was also illegal to draft men for the war. They wanted young men to burn their draft cards in protest of the war and would hold demonstrations on college campuses to protest the war.
Baby boomers protested the draft during the Vietnam War through large-scale demonstrations, such as the "Stop the Draft Week" protests in 1967. They also utilized civil disobedience, burning draft cards and organizing draft resistance movements. The movement gained momentum with events like the Kent State shootings in 1970.
violated a law that the protesters considered to be unjust. The U.S. government issued draft cards and the destruction of them was illegal, therefore the burning of the cards would have constituted an act of civil disobedience by people who perceived the mandatory draft laws and Vietnam War as unjust. This is the correct answer I saw it on a practice OGT and I had an answer key to use.
By taking part in demonstration. They burnt their draft cards as part of a demonstration.
draft cards
breaking chains burning draft cards running around naked
Riots on college campuses; burning American flags; burning draft cards; and heading for Canada.
breaking chains burning draft cards running around naked
1. Burning down the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) buildings on college campuses. 2. Burning their draft cards. 3. Draft riots in the streets.
No, as this was destroying government documents, and aiding and abetting the draft-dodgers and war-resisters. Burning eviction notices would be in a similar category, or intentional destruction of search and arrest warrants, etc. if the cards were inactive or cancelled- that"s something else, but the war resisters usually destroyed their own personal cards- to try to dodge the war service.
The law banning the burning of draft cards was passed by Congress in 1965 as part of the Vietnam War era regulations. This legislation made the destruction of draft cards a criminal offense, reflecting the government's effort to maintain order during a time of significant protest against the draft. The law was challenged in court, leading to a landmark Supreme Court case, United States v. O'Brien (1968), which upheld the constitutionality of the law while also affirming the protection of symbolic speech under the First Amendment.
Young men in America during the late 1960's to early 1970's who were afraid to fight in Vietnam.
A draft deck typically consists of 40 cards.