Refusal to use violence in one's refusal to obey unfair laws?

Answer 1

This is an interesting question and I doubt if many people give it much thought. The question is usually dealt with in courses in jurisprudence. Note that a law, even a properly enacted law nee not be moral. A proper law can be quite immoral. There have been and continue to be laws in most countries that one could question the morality of. There are jurist who would argue that any good law must be moral and should coincide with morality these jurists belong to the natural law school. They would argue that if a law does not coincide with our understanding of good then such a law cannot be described as a law properly so called. On the other had there are jurists such as Jeremy Bentham who argue that once a law has gone through the proper due process and has been properly enacted then regardless of the questionable morality of such an enactment the law is the law and should be obeyed. At the Nuremberg trials after the Second World War for example the courts were faced with the many dilemmas One of the main ones was how to deal with people who no doubt had committed appalling act which according to the prevailing law in their jurisdiction at the time the acts were committed were perfectly legal acts. The tribunal took the view that natural law should prevail and that no one not least senior Nazi officers were not duty bound to carry out such despicable acts. I am in a great hurry now but I will edit this answer later. Tanti saluti !

Answer 2

The question must mean "unjust" in the opinion of the individual(s) violating them.

Depending on the way the "refusal to obey" manifests itself it would either be a crime or it would be civil disobedience

Answer 3

Crime. Just or otherwise, government mandated laws are there for all to follow. If you don't like it, get elected and change it. It's your constitutional right.

Answer 4

Civil disobedience.

Answer 5

Illegal.

Answer 6

Unlawful