2006-11-28 23:13:38 · 17 answers · asked by ravi k 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
Both its a double edge sword
2006-11-28 23:15:30 · answer #1 · answered by Evans 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No one give or accepts corruption. Do you mean the one that gives are accepts a bribe? Both are examples of corruption. Both are to blame. Picking one over the other is like blaming a hired killer or the person who hired them.
2006-11-29 20:41:02 · answer #2 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion both should be blamed but the one who accepts it is the one who be more blamed because by accepting corruption he is sending a massage to the man who is corrupting that it is OK and this problem is found a lot internationally to solve this we should stand up against corruption no matter its form
2006-11-29 07:25:25 · answer #3 · answered by ThE oNe FoR aLl 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both, but the worse is the one who offers it... we are humans and likely to fall into temptation after all, but if there is no offering there can be no accepting now, can there?
Nevertheless, the one who accepts it should be punished for being weak and doing what we (the society) agree that is wrong, not for taking the money (they might need it and it's useful, after all).
Yeah, That's what I think: The person who offers the money or whatever other bribe they might have should be punished twice as much as the weakling who fell into temptation, unless the one who suggested the bribe was the one that was going to take the money, in which case /he/ should be punished more for perverting the people and opening them to the possibility of /trying/ to bribe to get things they want.
2006-11-29 07:42:20 · answer #4 · answered by (/\_SomniuM_/\) -AxelRiv 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The trial lawyers and the ACLU. Simply, they have worked hard to ensure that religion is taken out of society, down to the 10 commandments, which this nation was built on. We have lost the edge that our actions are accountable to a higher authority. With this removed, we have become a society of "what's in it for me". As for the corruption, it is a side effect of where society is heading.
2006-12-01 08:12:50 · answer #5 · answered by spag 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Corruption is rampant in Washington D.C. again. Problem with this crime is the lock was removed from the door.Oversight is like a lock, if you use it , it works in keeping honest people honest. The crooks find away around the lock and those take some work to find. The last congress had zero oversight. All should be charged with a crime and the oversight people should be reprimanded for malfeasance in office.
2006-11-29 12:35:44 · answer #6 · answered by hillcountrysb 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Both people. The one who proffers the corruption and the one who accepts it. This is an act in which they are equally guilty.
2006-11-29 07:30:10 · answer #7 · answered by Beau R 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both. And also the society that allows the corruption to continue without repercussions from the act.
2006-11-29 10:06:17 · answer #8 · answered by namsaev 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The one who accepts it. There are always going to be bad people but corruption can only come when people accept it.
(I'm not saying that the bad guys shouldn't be punished tho)
2006-11-29 11:36:01 · answer #9 · answered by Gidget 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Both are equally responsible. If it is India-centric question, first we need to make our elections spending to be banned Elections should be totally State funding. Both politicians & bureaucrats should be accountable and action on defaulters should be fast.
2006-11-29 07:33:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋