From: btlee@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Mr. Byungtae Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean
Subject: Re:Another answers
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:44:44 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin; Austin, Texas

From: shlee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Seunghun Lee)  writes:

so you're saying that even if the law is terribly wrong, we should
obey the law.
I know you like changing a wrong law. and respect your opinion.
but you're saying the only way to change the law is within the law.
that is where we disagree with each other.
you said that you were furiously angry with Yoo-Shin.
then what about anti-YooShin movement in 70's?
they didn't obey the YooShin Law, did they?

i think that you agree on the fact that they who disobeyed Yoo-Shin
brought the collape of Yoo-Shin much faster than without their disobeyance.

       
        Didn't I say I support "Ju-Hang-Kwon"?
        Didn't I bring this issue  in the "normal" case under the supposition
        that laws were passed by "Normal" legistulatoin body and so we can
        believe those laws are supported by majority?

        When I raised this issue, I expected this kind of counter-argument,
        so I believe I made it clear. If didn't, sorry....But please read once
        more. 

        About your finger printing Example of Japan.
               
        I made it clear that I distinguish the activities of law reforming 
        from those of law violating. Sometimes the latter is the good means of
        the former.  
        
        In this example, the victims are foreigners who can not have
        any inputs for laws.  So it's fundamentally not fair.  It is
        analogous to the Japanies rules during their colonial times. 
        Laws were not the product of the peole whom are the target of bills.
        So this is the different case. 
  
        My original question was as follows:
        I have a confusion with the concept of "political prisoners"
        after our achievement of democratic structure of government in 1987.
        ( I mean only structure: do not bring other interpretation!)                  I am also very much symphathetic to them and some case, very thanksful
        to them because their motivation was their political preferences.
        However, if the laws were written and imposed by the proper "normal"
        mechanism, it is also very difficult to blame government
        for imposing those , for instance,
        occupation of factories by labor union, transpassing police lines, 
        throwing Molotov cocktails by demonstrators.  

        Some netters claimed that laws are outdated, are
        particularly violating fundamental freedoms or rights. For me 
        some of them are judging it from their perception rather than
        what it is in Korea.  

        My another point was that we have to recover the authority of
        judiciary system and laws. Some body said it is easy if we change
        outdate laws. However, do you think all traffic laws are outdated?
        Many drivers give bribes whenever they were caught by police. Upper
        middle class do not pay the right share of taxes. Only employees 
        are paying full of their share of income taxes.   Of cause employers
        have more means or power. But in other hands, labor unions have not
        respect labor dispute laws either.   If even intellectuals do not
        have any respect to laws, when can we have such society?

        Give me more specific conditions for that. If we became rich as USA?
        if we get rid of all chaebols? if we get rid of .....?