Larry Bicketts Arguments In Breaking The Law

It has been brought to my attention that Larry Harbinger, who is a good student, receives good grades, and has never been in trouble with the school, is facing a five day out-of-school suspension. Ms. Bicketts’ biology class was to participate in the vivisection of frogs, but Larry stole the frogs out of the laboratory, hid them in his locker overnight, and released them in a nearby pond. Larry and his mother have both claimed that Larry is an animal-lover and views the lives of all beings as sacred, and that he also voiced his apprehensions about participating in the assignment to his teacher. Nonetheless, Ms. Bicketts would not budge on her requirements. Both Ms. Bicketts and Larry have presented logical arguments for their actions, but
Before a person breaks a law in an attempt to accomplish a greater good, he or she should exhaust all options available under the law.
In an attempt to accomplish a greater good, a person should not cause serious harm.
A person must have sufficient knowledge and authority before acting on behalf of another person (or animal, in this case).
No one is obliged to obey unjust laws that suppress one group while elevating others.
In breaking the law in an attempt to accomplish a greater good, a person’s attempt should have a reasonable probability of success.
Larry meets a few of these criteria, and falls short on others. An analysis of these criteria could be useful to you when deciding how severe the punishment should be. In my opinion, Larry meets at least three of the six criteria. He is obviously trying to work in the interest of the greater good, which in this case the greater good would be achieved by saving the lives of twenty innocent frogs. He is also in compliance with the fifth criterion because Ms. Bicketts is attempting to place the value of frog’s lives beneath that of humans. Larry disagrees with this, and is again working towards the greater good by elevating the importance of the frog’s lives and saving them from a cruel death. Finally, Larry also meets criterion number six, which requires a probability of success. Larry is successful because his
Because Larry stole school property, he will serve two sessions of Saturday school. What he does at Saturday school will be up the discretion of administrators and Ms. Bicketts. He could spend time doing homework, help cleaning the classroom, or assist in cleaning the biology lab. This way Larry will be rightly punished for his actions, but he will not miss any school and fall behind. While some may say this punishment is too lenient for theft, it is counterproductive to be concerned about the educational experiences being taken away from students, but to then remove a student from the classroom for an entire week. It is important to students in classrooms as much as possible. Larry will also reimburse the school for the frogs he released as well as any damage fees that occurred during the theft (broken locks, soiled locker, etc). Finally, Ms. Bicketts should also be talk to and reminded of her responsibilities as a teacher. She must provide alternative assignments for activities like vivisection and the guardians input always trumps the teacher’s opinion. In sum, Larry should be punished for stealing school property because students do not get to decide what rules they will or will not follow. Had Ms. Bicketts handled the situation better Larry would likely