Answer:
In 1920s the prohibition of alcohol is not much effective than compared to current prohibition of drugs however drugs are more harmful for our health so there are still Case of drugs addiction and trafficking. There need a proper implementation of laws and order for the prohibition of drugs cause it still not decreasing instead of that it is increasing. So people of 1920s is much more responsible than today's. In the presence of this strict rules and regulations drugs addiction is not decreasing then it is proved that laws and order is weak at 1920s compared to current era but the case of drugs in current society is more than 1929s. Both prohibition is equal according to the laws,order and development at their time .
Answer: Securing liberty
Explanation:
Liberty is defined as sense of freedom and independence in any society .It eliminates any social, political, economical or other forces to interfere with the state of freedom.People of liberty society are permitted to pursue their interest and work.
American revolution was started for acquiring freedom and liberty from Britain through war and revolt from 1765 and 1783 .Thus, after revolution United states of America as formed.
The Scottsboro Boys were nine African American teenagers, ages 12 to 19, accused in Alabama of raping two white women in 1931. The landmark set of legal cases from this incident dealt with racism and the right to a fair trial.
Answer: Stanley Milgram
Explanation: As Stanley Milgram himself stated, the essence of obedience to authority is when a person begins to perceive himself as a tool to fulfil the wishes of the authority, not his own wishes, so he sees all his actions and consequences of these actions as a result of the action of authority, not as a result of his will and responsibility. Milgram based his experiment on the conflict that arises between the state of obedience and the conscience of a person who subordinated to authority. The essence of the experiment concerned the responsibility of those who committed genocide during WWII, who claimed to have been merely obedient, i.e executing the orders of superiors, and based their defense on this claim.
This begs the question of whether or not they were complicit in the genocide.
The experiment was performed with pairs of participants where one was a "student" and the other was a "teacher", and where the student was connected to an electroshock electrode. Each time a student would give a wrong answer, the teacher would activate electricity through the electrodes and the student would experience an electric shock. With each wrong answer, the teacher would increase the level of electric shock. There are also some moderation in the experiment, such as a student would make a mistake on purpose, etc.
The conclusion is that ordinary people are generally willing to kill people, even if they are innocent in order to execute the orders of superiors, recognised as authority. It is considered that when it comes to authority, all its orders are justified and legal. So it is moral and proper to follow the orders of authority, whatever it may be.
The answer is C
Explanation: I looked it up