John Q

Leg tout ensemble in ally speaking potty Q was not justified in the actions he took in post to spare his son. Firstly because he held up the hospital and took hostages. legitimately and morally this is not acceptable, property others for personal gain is not right, even though it was to save his sons life. This image maintains the rule of law by showing at the reverse of the movie john does push convicted of kidnapping. This shows that even though he did it for what were the right reasons for him; hes still not preceding(prenominal) the law. A positivist would direct at this movie and asseverate that this man held people up, and menace to kill them so he should be put into put to sleep for the maximum objurgate possible. This is because positivists reckon that the law is the law and at that place should be no exceptions. This is contrary to the idealists (natural law followers) way of visual percept things. They would conceptualize he should admit no time in jail because in order to save his son he had to do what he did since there was no other option.

These looks at law are different than what was actually used in the movie. The movie uses the legal realism way of mentation. This way of thinking states that there are many factors that come into the law, for example John Q only held up the hospital because he had to and there was no other way. Although this is not like the natural law, they still believe that he should vex time, but not to the full outcome the law is allowed. This is the way I think, that you should look at all the circumstances in a case as relevant. Th is is my seize on on the legal aspects of ! the movie John Q.If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: BestEssayCheap.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: cheap essay