violated a law that the protesters considered to be unjust. The U.S. government issued draft cards and the destruction of them was illegal, therefore the burning of the cards would have constituted an act of civil disobedience by people who perceived the mandatory draft laws and Vietnam War as unjust. This is the correct answer I saw it on a practice OGT and I had an answer key to use.
1. Burning down the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) buildings on college campuses. 2. Burning their draft cards. 3. Draft riots in the streets.
Young men in America during the late 1960's to early 1970's who were afraid to fight in Vietnam.
Students for a Democratic Society saw the war as not a war ( it wasn't declared) but a police action. So, that means it was illegal and that it was also illegal to draft men for the war. They wanted young men to burn their draft cards in protest of the war and would hold demonstrations on college campuses to protest the war.
In all probability, 9 out of 10 cases, those were DISGUISED cases of civil disobedience. The US military was a fearful organization back in those days; during the Vietnam War, the US military was still commanded by WWII veterans and they had no weak spots for weaklings and cowards! Those draft card burners were actually afraid of entering the US military (shaved heads and treated rough...in boot camp!); they'd actually prefer federal prison to the army (which burning a draft card, especially on nation wide TV will get them!). It was much more honorable to say "they were against the war and burning their cards" than admitting, "we're scared of being drafted, so we're burning our cards."
Baby boomers protested the draft during the Vietnam War through large-scale demonstrations, such as the "Stop the Draft Week" protests in 1967. They also utilized civil disobedience, burning draft cards and organizing draft resistance movements. The movement gained momentum with events like the Kent State shootings in 1970.
violated a law that the protesters considered to be unjust. The U.S. government issued draft cards and the destruction of them was illegal, therefore the burning of the cards would have constituted an act of civil disobedience by people who perceived the mandatory draft laws and Vietnam War as unjust. This is the correct answer I saw it on a practice OGT and I had an answer key to use.
By taking part in demonstration. They burnt their draft cards as part of a demonstration.
draft cards
breaking chains burning draft cards running around naked
Riots on college campuses; burning American flags; burning draft cards; and heading for Canada.
breaking chains burning draft cards running around naked
1. Burning down the ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) buildings on college campuses. 2. Burning their draft cards. 3. Draft riots in the streets.
No, as this was destroying government documents, and aiding and abetting the draft-dodgers and war-resisters. Burning eviction notices would be in a similar category, or intentional destruction of search and arrest warrants, etc. if the cards were inactive or cancelled- that"s something else, but the war resisters usually destroyed their own personal cards- to try to dodge the war service.
Young men in America during the late 1960's to early 1970's who were afraid to fight in Vietnam.
Men going to the Canada, and the public are burning of the draft cards.
They burned their draft cards.