This is an action project or my core class A Nation's Argument. This unit was all about the constitution and its amendments. This led to some interesting conversations about which amendments are important and which aren't as important. For example, the third amendment has been ruled as not important because when would a soldier actually come and sleep in your own house. Another argument was how are these amendments related to the problems in the world today? which problems work against the amendments? In unit 1 we visited 1770 and talked about the thesis that "all men are created equal." In unit 2, we visited 1850 and talked about the antithesis of "all men are created equal." For this action project, I was tasked with finding a rule in the city municipal code that I believe is unjust. I chose the rule of needing a permit to renovate the inside of the building you own.
"A building permit is required for now building construction, renovations, the installation of heating and cooling systems, or any plumbing or electrical work. If is necessary, you need to apply for building permits through Department of Buildings. A building permit is need to make sure that the project you are constructing meets the minimum criteria of the Chicago Building Code. The Chicago Building Code exists to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare." This is from the cities municipal code. In this code the only usual thing that they mention about why you need a permit is for the good of the public interest. I have written below what I believe is the governments argument in syllogism form.
P: You own the building.
P: You want to renovate the building.
P: You need a permit.
P: Unpermitted construction could hurt the public.
C: A permit will make sure the public will stay safe.
Although having a permit might help the public in keeping the city safe from your possible harm to the public, I have a counter argument that if you own the building, then you should be able to renovate the building if it is what you decide to do.
There are still many flaws in the permitting system as well. For example, when you apply for a permit there is the side of bias in the government, or laziness in the government. I have heard before that applying for a permit could take months because the city's alderman doesn't want to approve the application for a permit. This has happened to my family in the past. We needed a permit to work on our building yet they were reluctant for a few months. So, because of my experience with this I am against the permitting system.
What logical reasons are there to amend the statute?
1. This system is flawed and not effective.
2. If you own the property you shouldn't have to wait months to renovate it.
3. The people that have to approve the permit could be biased.
| lawrencecounty.gov/Building Permit/2020 |
Though we are nearing the end of my argument, I still have one more thing that might convince you that the permitting system is bad. Here I have a quote from a peer agreeing with my argument and talking about his take on the argument: "I believe that once property is bought, you should have the freedom to
do what you want with it as long as it isn't of any danger to the
neighborhood or yourself. It's a little ridiculous that even after
buying your own home, it still seems like you've still got to beg
somebody to change something about your home. It's not like you're
renting the property, it's yours." - DB
This project was very difficult to me mostly because finding something I have experience with and also something flawed with the government was difficult to think of. Eventually I was able to put it all together and make a project I am proud of. Overall I am happy with the way this turned out but if I was able to go back and change something I would try to think of another argument. This term has been very helpful to me and I was able to learn about many different ways I could make arguments and meaningful conversations I was able to back up with research.
Comments
Post a Comment