It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by Hopechest
You change laws by disobeying them. Or simply by lobbying for them. And maybe have a clause of NON-ENFORCEMENT while a law is under revision/debate. As it happens in some countries. But one does not go around and shrugs shoulders with the comment: "Well its the law ...."
Originally posted by Hopechest
Change the law then.
If you allow a society to pick and choose what laws they want to follow you will not have a society for long.
Originally posted by Cabin
Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by Hopechest
You change laws by disobeying them. Or simply by lobbying for them. And maybe have a clause of NON-ENFORCEMENT while a law is under revision/debate. As it happens in some countries. But one does not go around and shrugs shoulders with the comment: "Well its the law ...."
As the current system shows - disobeying laws does not change the law, it only ends you up at the prison.
The laws may be harsh and often unfair, although at the end it is your choice and your responsibility if you get caught not following them, bearing the consequences is part of your choice, so you can ultimately blame no one else but yourself for the poor choice you made.
Whether we want it or not, that is how the world is currently.
Originally posted by Cabin
Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by Hopechest
You change laws by disobeying them. Or simply by lobbying for them. And maybe have a clause of NON-ENFORCEMENT while a law is under revision/debate. As it happens in some countries. But one does not go around and shrugs shoulders with the comment: "Well its the law ...."
As the current system shows - disobeying laws does not change the law, it only ends you up at the prison.
The laws may be harsh and often unfair, although at the end it is your choice and your responsibility if you get caught not following them, bearing the consequences is part of your choice, so you can ultimately blame no one else but yourself for the poor choice you made.
Whether we want it or not, that is how the world is currently.
Originally posted by Guenter
Originally posted by Cabin
Originally posted by Guenter
reply to post by Hopechest
You change laws by disobeying them. Or simply by lobbying for them. And maybe have a clause of NON-ENFORCEMENT while a law is under revision/debate. As it happens in some countries. But one does not go around and shrugs shoulders with the comment: "Well its the law ...."
As the current system shows - disobeying laws does not change the law, it only ends you up at the prison.
The laws may be harsh and often unfair, although at the end it is your choice and your responsibility if you get caught not following them, bearing the consequences is part of your choice, so you can ultimately blame no one else but yourself for the poor choice you made.
Whether we want it or not, that is how the world is currently.
Well then one begins to lobby for it. We see 1,000's of petitions surfacing on the internet for all kinds of causes. So petition for it. Choice of political parties. Independent groups and parties. I still "waste" my vote each elections on the "Greens" for example. But I sure can't be blamed for having voted "MY" present government into power.
These stupid laws exist because its this generic consumer attitude of "Not my problem...". We seem to have lost the ability to stand up. I have signed numerous petitions in my life for causes I could have cared less. But I did so because it does matter. Because if one freedom falls, then my own "lil' world freedom" of what I enjoy can be next.
Originally posted by Hopechest
No you change laws by going through the proper procedures of legislation, not by disobeying them. Suppose I decide that stealing is a stupid law and come and rob your house?
Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by Guenter
Prohibition was decided on a societal basis and subsequently removed on a societal basis.
Its a very good example because it proves my point. Certain laws are in regards to crimes that do not harm others but society has determined it should be a law.
It is not the right of the individual to choose what laws are good an bad. That is acting outside of the society they choose to live in and should be punished.
That is the basic level of it.
Originally posted by Guenter
Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by Guenter
Prohibition was decided on a societal basis and subsequently removed on a societal basis.
Its a very good example because it proves my point. Certain laws are in regards to crimes that do not harm others but society has determined it should be a law.
It is not the right of the individual to choose what laws are good an bad. That is acting outside of the society they choose to live in and should be punished.
That is the basic level of it.
The issue the OP began with is the for profit prison system. The incentive of greed to create more prisoners. And naturally as I observe so much in the USA is the incredible powers of special interest groups SIG on certain agendas. Especially from the RRR -(Radical Religious Right). But your argument that just because one does NOT obey the law he should be punished is quite flawed. If it does not harm society, then it is no ones business. The present system encourages "snitches" - now disguised to fight terrorism. And maybe the system of quotas, entrapment and so on, all well documented in US LEA is another issue. Just watching US TV and seeing your political attack adds is mind-blowing, so "Black and White". But critical thinking is not encouraged. And what about a cop who "sees you committing a victimless crime and decides he "didn't see it"?
Maybe for a better society it's not the issue that we need more "angels",, - maybe we just individually decide to be "Less of devils".
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by Hopechest
You realize that a great deal of the reason behind society changing their mind on prohibition was all the law breakers and the hyper-escalation of police required to fight the new prohibition-made law breakers, right?
You think repeal would have come is everything was all peaches and cream?
Originally posted by ttobban
reply to post by Hopechest
No victimless crimes... really?
If you do illegal drugs in your own house that you grew from seed, get up the next day and carry on in your life with no I'll effects on others, you hurt society how?
On the other hand, you smoke cigarettes in front of your children in your house all day and night... exposing them to second hand smoke. Do you feel that no harm is done to the children or society because cigarettes are legal?
Originally posted by ttobban
reply to post by Hopechest
And your opinion on the cigarettes?
Plus, I mentioned that you don't leave the house and get up the next day to carry on with your life.
Originally posted by Hopechest
Originally posted by ttobban
reply to post by Hopechest
And your opinion on the cigarettes?
Why are drugs illegal and alchohol is not?
Its because society makes the rules and those rules do not have to make sense. Those rules do need to be followed however and when they are not there should be punishment given out.
This is how societies must function to exist.
Plus, I mentioned that you don't leave the house and get up the next day to carry on with your life.
Can we guarantee that everyone will behave like this though?
edit on 17-5-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ttobban
Originally posted by Hopechest
Originally posted by ttobban
reply to post by Hopechest
And your opinion on the cigarettes?
Why are drugs illegal and alchohol is not?
Its because society makes the rules and those rules do not have to make sense. Those rules do need to be followed however and when they are not there should be punishment given out.
This is how societies must function to exist.
Plus, I mentioned that you don't leave the house and get up the next day to carry on with your life.
Can we guarantee that everyone will behave like this though?
edit on 17-5-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)
Of course not. But it does clearly define 'victimless crime', of which you mentioned does not exist. I think exposing children to second hand smoke is not a victimless crime, and it seems you're OK with it happening because it is legal.
There are leaders and there are followers. It's quite clear that you're a follower, and that is exactly what law makers want and need to be successful... even if their laws are good or bad for the future of society.
I don't condone breaking laws, but I surely do condone and wish for people to think for themselves. I also wish for people that wish to ruin their lives with drugs to have the right to do so without tax payers having to foot the bill for it. Once they start victimizing others, I'll be glad to contribute to jailing them.