Hunter 8G

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/30/world/ middleeast/30saddam.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Singapore is one of the rare cases where the people respect the dictators ways, however there are many cruel and bad dictators who have used their power to abuse a country. Some of the worst leaders in the world, such as Saddam Hussein, are dictators. It is much better to avoid the chance of a country collapsing because of a harsh dictator, it is better to have a democracy so you can always have a voice and a chance to vote for someone new if the leader ends up being bad.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2097426_2097427,00.html

In a dictatorship people do not usually get a say in what happens in their country. Also, the dictator can choose who they want to be in their "government", for example, Muammar Gaddafi (now overthrown dictator of Libya) allowed only a small group, mostly members of his family, to participate in the governing of the country.

The reason why crime rates are very low is because the dictator establishes harsh punishments for even the smallest crimes. People should not be harshly punished when they commit a small crime, although it creates a more safe society, it could also create fear and anger amongst the people because of the harsh laws that they are bound to.

http://thenextgalaxy.com/disadvantages-and-advantages-of-representative-democracy/

Argument #2: People living in a democracy would have a place to turn to if they ever have an issue in their country, they can easily access their local official. These officials can then help them with their problems and guide them through the steps they need to take to get it to the next level of government. This right will let people know that they have a voice in their country and if they ever feel that there is a problem that is really bothering them, there can always be a way to solve it. The right to have a voice is important for a person, if there is an issue in a country, it should have the chance to be brought up and fixed to make the people happier and to make the country an overall better place.

Even if the dictator has advisors, the decision to pass a law or not would still be entirely up to him. If the democratic leader becomes corrupt and avoids elections, they will no longer be a democratic leader, they would be a dictator. President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe is said to have risen to power by scaring the public into voting for him. This shows how unfair dictators can be.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33290341

Although not every democratic country supports gay marriage, the people would have the power to have a voice and express their feelings about this subject. In the US, gay marriage was recently legalized. This shows that in a democracy, the people in power can change the laws in favor of the citizens to ensure that they are earning the freedom that they deserve. In a dictatorship, people would never have the chance to express their feelings about the way their country is run because they wouldn't have the freedom of speech. They would have to follow whatever rule that their dictator sets for them, and if they don't, it usually ends up in harsh punishment. If people are scared into following something they don't believe, they will not respect their leader and they will not feel comfortable in their own country.

Since only one person has all the power in a dictatorship, the right to pass a law easily can be abused, they could create harsh and cruel laws. There are no different branches in the government, different branches of the government that can balance out the others and monitor them. In a dictatorship this doesn’t exist. So no matter what is being done, there is no one to intervene and try to stop it. The process of a law being passed in a democracy ensures that it is a law that everybody would benefit from, this is why it goes through a long process, to make sure that the citizens would benefit from it instead of the law just favoring the person in power.