I can't imagine anything more destructive for any society than to pass laws on every concievable subject, and then not enforce those laws. Laws that can routinely ignored or flounted, indermine ALL laws. EVERY law should either be enforced, or repealed.
2006-10-01 07:23:23 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
yes
2006-10-01 07:31:56 · answer #1 · answered by chuco 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Every thinking person knows that laws need to be enforced. However that takes a lot of thinking and effort. We also know that humans are basically lazy, especially modern American humans. (I'm assuming that this is an American question but it fits in many other contexts too)
In our current political system it is so much easier to make a new law than to repeal an old law that it is simply irresistable to just make new laws whenever confronted by a problem. Add to this that it makes it look like something is being done and all the gullible voters go home happy and the politicians have effectively dodged another issue by merely writing down some legalese bullshit and ignoring the problem.
It gets votes. It makes it look like something is being done. Its easier to write a law when you don't have to think about enforcement and easier still if you ignore it alltogether.
To change the system we will have to change or throw out a lot of old outdated laws and put more effort into clear efficient thinking but who wants to do that when its far more sexy to make up new ones?
Besides who's got enough time for clear thinking when we're so busy reacting to all the crises we've created by being lazy and stupid.
2006-10-01 15:19:12 · answer #2 · answered by megalomaniac 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That happens more often than you would believe...but here's an interesting twist for you:
Who on Earth has the memory to learn every law they are to enforce?
The problem with the lawmakers is that they make bad laws- too specific to enforce. Law enforcement officials are too fickle to choose which laws they feel like enforcing...and some laws are so outdated they should be removed but havent.
What a mess.
Anyone want to clean this up?
2006-10-01 14:31:48 · answer #3 · answered by paradigm_thinker 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A lot of laws have been passed but through time have not been omitted and/or enforced. Therefore realistically should they still be enforced? For a list of some that may/may not have been ommitted from the books go to http://www.dumblaws.com
2006-10-01 15:49:02 · answer #4 · answered by Superman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
true, but i think that if law is not based on an action or something that physically harms or materially takes from another individual without their consent, it should not exist. (asside from traffic laws such as drunk driving and reckless driving, speeding should
not be a problem unless in a residential area.)
(murder, rape, assault (consentual fights should be accepted), theft should not be allowed)
(one should have the right to carry concealed wether or not they have a permit accept for convicted murderers and those convicted of violent crimes + 3 strikes rule for thefts.
narcotics should be legalized but people need to be better educated law such as a 2500$ fine for ridding a bycicle on the side walk shoud be abolished!!!, i do not believe uttering threats should be a crimes, it contradicts freedom of speech and other civil liberties yet severe harassement should be punishable.)
2006-10-01 14:45:23 · answer #5 · answered by sikn_shadow_420 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it is useless and frustrating. But I guess the argument would be that it's a deterrent, (so long as the person committing the crime doesn't know it's not enforced.) Otherwise unenforced laws are useless.
2006-10-01 14:31:50 · answer #6 · answered by Silver Snake 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And as a Taxpayer, are you willing to pay for the time, manpower and expense necessary to prosecute every jaywalker in every town, in every county of your state? Think of the number of Police Officers and Governmental employees that would be required to arrest and prosecute every offender for every offense from Jaywalking to Murder. I seriously doubt that you'd want to pay the taxes required to accomplish that feat. Yes, crimes and offenses have their priorities..... would you prefer the officer's write a parking ticket.... or catch the burglar who just broke into your home and stole your Stereo and Jewelry?? In order for the officers to use their time efficiently, sometimes some things take precedent over others.
2006-10-01 14:38:20 · answer #7 · answered by dathinman8 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
AND YOU KNOW THAT'S RIGHT!! BUT LETS ADD THAT ALL, I REPEAT, ALL PEOPLE SHOULD BE SUBJECT TO ALL, I REPEAT ALL LAWS!! THE RICH AND THE POWERFULL TOO.
2006-10-01 14:26:34 · answer #8 · answered by ? 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋