1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
zlopas [31]
3 years ago
11

1. In a democracy, why is it important to be able to

Law
2 answers:
d1i1m1o1n [39]3 years ago
8 0
Because then you can stop them from overall sucking and freedom of speech
boyakko [2]3 years ago
7 0

Answer:

If the government is open to public criticism, political excesses can be brought forward and used to generate outrage among the voting populace to either get them removed from office or shine the light of truth upon those performing unsavory acts, hopefully shaming them into stopping or changing.

Explanation:

Basically, stopping leaders from becoming tyrants.

You might be interested in
What brought on the creation of the Tea Party?
likoan [24]

Answer:

The 1773 event demonstrated against taxation by the British government without political representation for the American colonists, and references to the Boston Tea Party and even costumes from the 1770s era are commonly heard and seen in the Tea Party movement.

6 0
3 years ago
How did watching the debate (vice president 2020) extend or broaden your thinking about the candidates and the campaign? What ne
Volgvan
That we don’t need any of them in this White House
7 0
3 years ago
The United States was governed by the
Katen [24]
The articles of confederation
8 0
2 years ago
What kind of vote is used to decide the president !!
kaheart [24]

Answer:

a candidate must receive a majority of electoral votes. im pretty sure.

Explanation:

(sorry if not correct.)

4 0
3 years ago
In which case did the Supreme Court state that a seizure has occurred if the officer's conduct in conjunction with the questioni
german

Answer:

terry v. ohio

Explanation:

Terry v. Ohio, in 1968, was a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is not in violation when a police officer stops a suspect on the street and frisks him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Taco bell implied contract
    8·1 answer
  • What would the answer be
    6·1 answer
  • Which option runs counter to the classical theory of criminology?
    15·1 answer
  • PP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'SPP'S
    14·1 answer
  • What age do you have to be to get a business bank account
    11·2 answers
  • 3
    15·2 answers
  • 16. Women are more likely to develop
    15·2 answers
  • Over-length loads require
    14·1 answer
  • How is law important to you as a student and a filipino citizen?​
    11·2 answers
  • ***50 POINTS+BRAINLIEST*** Number 8 <br> Question in picture below.
    15·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!