Want this question answered?
He dissolved the colonists legislatures
That they will go to war
The correct answer is: rescinding military protection for the colonies Because: While King George III's decision not to protect the colonies with the British military was a major grievance of the founding fathers, it was not a violation of the colonists' liberty. Rather, it was a failure of the government to perform its function of securing these rights.
The Stamp Act was passed in 1765 by the British Parliament to raise money to pay its debts after the Seven Years War (aka the French and Indian War), which ended in 1763. It required all paperwork, including books, newspapers, legal documents and playing cards, to bear a special stamp in order to be considered legal. Colonists were required to buy these stamps from government agents. It doesn't seem like it was a major issue as pertains to freedom of the press, but the perception was that the government agents who sold the stamps could theoretically withhold selling the stamp to a publication they didn't like, rendering it illegal. The penalties for publishing materials without the stamp were steep, and were enforced by special military courts rather than the normal colonial jury courts. The main issue behind the Colonists' dislike of the tax is "taxation without representation" rather than possible censorship. Parliament was raising taxes on Colonists, but the Colonists were not allowed to vote in Parliamentary elections. So the Colonists claimed it was unfair for Parliament to raise taxes on them, and a violation of their rights as Englishmen. Parliament's stance was that the Colonists were "virtually represented"- even though they didn't vote in elections, there were members of Parliament who sided with the Colonists (and it's true, particularly William Pitt the Elder), so it was OK that Colonists couldn't vote. The Colonists strongly disagreed. Colonial resistance to the stamp tax resulted in economic troubles, which caused Parliament to repeal the Stamp Act only a few months after it was enacted. However, Parliament insisted that it had the right to tax the colonies, and other attempts to do so, particularly the Townshend Act and the Tea Act, would continue the path towards war and colonial independence.
taxation without representation use of mercantilism violation of individual rights
Because the colonies lacked elected representation in the governing British Parliament, many colonists considered the laws to be illegitimate and a violation of their rights as Englishmen. In 1772, groups of colonists began to create Committees of Correspondence, which would lead to their own Provincial Congresses in most of the colonies.
violation of englishmen right
When a Government imposes restriction on the free movement,freedom of expression of its citizens, these will definitely be considered as human rights violation by the Government.
He dissolved the colonists legislatures
violation of a convention
they lost a battle and they taxed the colonists
The violation should tell you what your options are and how fast you should do something about the violation
Yes, it is considered a moving violation.
No, It is not considered traveling.
In some ways it could be considered a violation of the freedom of speech because it tried to curb republican criticism of government policy and stopped people from speaking disrespectfully against the government.
I got one and it is considered a moving violation The fine is around $500. Good luck
is a seat belt ticket a moving violation