Would they be Liberators, Criminals, or Dictators
2007-01-23 18:11:52 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
It depends on why they did it in the first place. If they did it to free the land, then they would be liberators. If they did it to hurt the person who owned the farm, they would be criminals. If they did it just because they felt like it and they could, they could be dictators. It all depends on the reason.
2007-01-23 18:16:20 · answer #1 · answered by lori 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well whatever else they would be criminals, since they'd be breaking the law. I don't see how they would be "liberators" or "dictators" though. Liberators implies you are liberating something, making it free, which they are not really doing, since even on the level of smokers being liberated from tobacco, they would find a way to get their nicotine somehow, synthtic if nessecary, home grown, whatever. Dictators involves being the head of state, which they wouldn't be.
So yeah. Criminals.
2007-01-24 02:24:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends upon who owns the farms. If owned by large Tobacco companies in the UK , USA and other places then the perpetrators of the crime will be punished. If the farms were burned down to make way for the cultivation of poppies and marijuana , they will be rewarded by the drug mafia. depends.
If your question is to emphasize the fact that tobacco is injurious to health please note that most of the people use cautious approach. Today consumption of cigarettes have come down due to many regulations and self discipline. This should be the method rather than violent methods.
2007-01-24 02:27:27 · answer #3 · answered by YD 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Criminals.
2007-01-24 04:00:35 · answer #4 · answered by Voodoid 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They would be - tried, convicted, and sent to prison. However, if they were happy to go to prison for it, they would be Liberators. If they sold their story while in prison, they'd be criminals. If they were able to eliminate smoking in prison, they'd be dictators.
2007-01-24 02:21:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They would be martyrs, metaphorically. Morally, they would be heroes because they are doing lots of people a justice by attempting to save their lives. However, lawfully, they are destroying property. The struggle lies between law and morality.
2007-01-24 13:09:33 · answer #6 · answered by L Jeezy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definitely criminals. That is destroying someone Else's property, and it is unlawful to start fires that size.
2007-01-24 02:24:46 · answer #7 · answered by Max 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
firebugs
2007-01-24 02:23:54 · answer #8 · answered by missmayzie 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋