Hamilton Federalists 16 - Essay Example

By so doing the government not only controls what states do but also what the individuals do. If the federal laws apply to individuals, then punishment on wrong doing will be subsidized as well as the activities in the country (Hamilton, Madison, Jay 2009). According to Hamilton, legislation on states only would be a chance for lawlessness. The states would choose what to implement, and when and where to implement the laws. They could also avoid implementing the federal laws which in turn could result in chaos.

This would result in government intervention and as such the use of military to enforce order. Using force on people could make them retaliate and that could lead to civil wars in a bid to resist the authority. Having federal laws ensures that there is a body that governs the actions and activities of the entire nation. This will ensure that there is synchronization in every legal aspect of peoples’ lives and also it will ensure that if an individual’s rights are violated he has a channel that he could use to attain justice (Hamilton, Madison, Jay 2009). . This will be a means to show the other states the possible consequences that they would face if they did not follow federal laws.

While states may not want to favor a constitution that uses the military to enforce the law, they cannot change the federal law. Hamilton was wrong in thinking that it would only take the military to enforce the law. In actual sense, the people would ensure that the laws are enforced as long as the laws protected their rights and ensure that people cohabit peacefully (Hamilton, Madison, Jay 2009). Hamilton also wrote that if the implementation of the federal laws did not need the states legislation to intervene, and were implemented directly on the people there would be no need for the government intervention with violent application of the military, an unconstitutional command.

This means that the states would not be part of any violent and forceful inputs of the government and hence would not be a part of any acts that infringe the rights of individuals. This also means that if individuals did not on their own part follow the federal laws then the effects of their actions would affect them directly and not affect people in the state that do follow the federal laws. This is to say that, an individual’s actions will mean that any punishment will be directed at the individual without involving fellow state members who are innocent and also will not affect the state.

I agree because if the legislation is on individuals there will be minimal chances that innocent people will suffer on account of people that do not want to follow the laws. This means that the government will not result to measures that infringe on human rights, as well as federal