What is the basis of Law?

Question

On what basis was Law imposed on humanity? Is it for beneficent purposes, or is it control? Feel free to elaborate.

Answer 1

I may well elaborate, we'll see as I go along.

First laws were mandated by priests, claimed to be the orders of the gods. At some point later, kings emerged and kept up with the lawmaking tendency. The oldest acknowledged scripts, clay tablets from ancient Sumeria attest to a system of laws, attributed to the gods, in existence within their society that seemed to emerge out of nowhere. They had a ton of administrative laws, and letters on these clay tablets at the time attest to a pretty heavy police presence as well. So laws, by whatever source, have been with mankind since its earliest civilizations.

It started as God's laws (the one or the many gods, really makes no difference). From there, law evolved into two forms of law, Eccliastical, or Canon law - used by the Catholic Church to this day (not to mention the other religious legal bodies in Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and all the other isms), and then came about the creation of secular, or Civil Law, best evidenced by the law of the ancient Romans.

In one sense, law is, and should be, a protective measure. Through the usage of courts, people are able to bring grievances agianst people who do them or their property harm. This became known as the Common Law - a law that mandated that there had to be an injured party. A person who was physically harmed by physical assault, or who had their property harmed or damaged by arson, vandalism or any of the other numerous crimes against property or persons. Under Common Law, if there is no injured party, there is no case. Common Law stretched into the realm of contract law when people breached or exceeded contractual obligations and the signatories could claim injury through violation of the contract under the tenets of Common Law.

Common Law became known as the Law of the Land, and this is even moreso when you realize that there is a law of the sea called Admiralty Maritime Law. Admiralty Maritime Law governs all that happens on the seas and navigable waterways. So, in essence, you have a conflict between the law of the land and the law of the sea. Each has their jurisdictional boundary and one should not intrude upon the other. But through the course of the last couple of centuries, the law of the sea has made its way upon the land and the common law has been seruptitiously replaced with Admiralty law. The whys and hows of this are too lengthy to go into in such a forum, but if you are into studying law, you can discover it if you are looking for it.

To get to your final question about law being beneficial or harmful, law these days, and the application thereof, transcends the tenets of common law. Today the State - a non-entity given the statuts of a person in the courts - can claim damage when no real damage has occurred. Without getting onto the rights or wrongs of this I will use speeding as an example. The State sticks a sign in the ground and says that you can only travel at this speed. If you exceed this speed, an enforcer of the law can pull you over and fine you for exceeding the speed limit set by the State. No one is damaged by your exceeding the speed limit posted on the sign, but the State claims damage by your violation of its rules. There is no injured party, and the ticket and fine you receive for your violation, have no basis in the old common law, because in actuality, there is no damage to a person or their property - unless you consider the law the property of the State - which - BTW - these days it has become.

People should always remember this - Whenver they pass a law, you lose a freedom. People may cheer going after the smokers, but when the smokers are all run to ground tby bullsh*t legislation, then laws against cokes and twinkies is not far behind, because the State creates nothing. Government creates nothing but more government, and it can only support its burgeoning growth by creating ingenious laws to take money away from the people it was originally created to protect. At that point, law becomes a weapon of government, not a benefit of being governed. And sadly, America is already a pretty far piece down this road of using law as a weapon.

Hope this answers your question, and I doub't you will get a better or more insightful answer.

Answer 2

Your question is WAY to broad, the history of law is much too long to elaborate on Yahoo! Answers simply because a good elaboration would take a few hours to type up.
However, if I had to answer your question with an understandable answer I would say that Law was created to protect, punish and deter.
In the very early times of humanity, law was imposed to punish the offender. After time grew on and ethics became involved, punishment has evolved into not only the punishment itself but also rehabilitation.
The law was created to protect the people living under it in each respective society. There are International Laws that are created by participating countries and those laws are generally very broad because again, every society has different views on what the law should be.
The law is supposed to uphold societal standards and support the interest of the people whom live under it.

Answer 3

LAW - Rules established by a governing authority to institute and maintain orderly coexistence

Each nation has its own authority - monarchy, democracy or totalitarian - conflict between nations results as a result of difference.

The primary authority is the Creator - various religions have outlined these laws.

Laws are ingrained in nature, like physical laws. Violation creates a counter action.

Human beings are different from other creatures, as they are endowed with the reasoning power. They have a free will which can opt for any course of actions. When a course of actions conflicts with the interests of another, it gives rise to conflict and a Society living with conflicts is a miserable Society. So elders within a tribe, decided modalities of living harmoniously, and thus came the early taboos. As the Society developed and so too problems. Laws were evolved by the Authority to govern the subjects so that there would be peace -

A Law without teeth, is ineffective. So the idea of coercion with ever law. Capital Punishment is the ultimate coercion.

Answer 4

The man with the gold makes the rules. But really it is just one person legislation there thoughts and ideas upon another person . And the system kind of stinks that way . Laws get put into effect, and they never get tossed out . It is still illegal to carry a pair of pliers in the state of Texas. It is foolishness like that that keeps freedom in chains. I think there should be one golden law for every state , every two years all laws are sunset, along with the special taxes. and then voted on by the people , if it is a system for the people by the people , then could anyone ever complain about the system ? I know there should be a set of laws that stay in effect , killing , rape and stuff like that . But some of this other foolishness is a waste of our taxes.

Answer 5

Law was imposed on humanity by humans. Like the declaration of independence says. Mankind is endowed with certain rights to protect these rights governments are instituted amongst men.

We are either governed by Law or by the will of others. I'll take the law.

Answer 6

I think law is a reflection of social consciousness and was developed by societies to codify behavior - as a way of defining what is acceptable behavior and unacceptable behavior. Law can't be about control - you can't control people's behavior. Well witnessed by the number of otherwise law-abiding people who speed. Many criminal would say that criminal penalty (law) was not a deterent to their actions - so laws can't be about control.

Answer 7

It's a societal thing. In order for people to live together a consensus had to be reached. Certain guidelines must be set forth in order to live in harmony. Everyone had to know what was and what was not allowed, or accepted by others.

Answer 8

Just daily experiences.

Answer 9

"If men were angels, there would be no need for governments. And if the men in government were angels, they would be no need for constitutions." -- James Madison.

Answer 10

to be obeyed,,, or not