One Nation Under…Arrest?

I have railed against the ever expanding number of laws passed by incompetent and incurious legislators for years. However, a recent article I read shows just how far we have fallen. The old adage “ignorance of the law is no excuse” no longer flies. Not only are non-intuitive laws on the books, but they are either so complex or poorly written as to be incomprehensible to all but attorneys.

In fact, lawyers lobbyists and government is the only people who benefit from these laws. We could strike 99/100 off the books and the average citizen would have no idea. Daily life would be unaffected.

Criminal law has changed in the last 50 years. Once criminal law was about criminal acts that everyone knew were inherently unlawful (like murder, rape and robbery). Limiting criminal punishment to conduct that is inherently wrongful restricted governmental power in two important ways.

First, and most important, it kept the range of governmental power small. Having few criminal laws and a short list of things not to be done limited the scope within which government can exercise its authority.

Second, a limited criminal law served a teaching function. It reflected the beliefs and understandings common to the vast majority of our citizens — the very citizens who were subject to the criminal law.

Today, the criminal law has grown as broad as the regulatory state in its sheer size and scope. In 1998, an American Bar Association task force estimated that there were more than 3,000 federal criminal offenses scattered throughout the 50 titles of the U.S. Code.

Just six years later, a leading expert on overcriminalization, John S. Baker Jr., published a study estimating that the number exceeded 4,000. As the ABA task force reported, the body of federal criminal law is “so large . . . that there is no conveniently accessible, complete list of federal crimes.”

If “ignorance of the law is no excuse,” then every American citizen — literally, every single one — is ignorant and in peril, for nobody can know all the laws that govern their behavior.

www.heritage.org...

Who would have imagined that a system run by lawyers would be most beneficial to lawyers?

It is an abomination. More laws are passed and government keeps expanding under the guise of needing more resources to enforce the new laws. It’s a threat to freedom

Waiving the bedrock right to a speedy trial by default is just one way lawyers conspire together to enable the corrupt system they have built
Plea bargains by default work to deprive victims of justice and prevent the accused from having their day in court as due process requires
The federal takeover of the Grand Jury system ensures accountability only applies to those “they” say it applies to

The whole corrupt system could be brought to its knees if lawyers would begin acting in the best interest of their clients. They should never waive the crucial right to a speedy trial. This forces the prosecution to put up or shut up. And if lawyers stopped cutting deals to convict the client they are charged with defending, it would force prosecutors to carefully weight the charges instead of the “charge the kitchen sink and see what sticks” crap we see today.

We don’t need them to change or even acknowledge how wrong they are. We just need lawyers to do their damn jobs. No waiving of any Constitutional protection- you aren’t given anything in exchange for doing so. And no plea bargains. They’re a miscarriage of justice, making the law whatever the attorneys agree it is vs what is written. Take them to task, stop giving your rights away!

a reply to: JBurns

I've always said that before enacting any new law they should find two old ones to erase.
It would slow down silly knee jerk actions and make politicians think while they unclutter the system from archaic and useless throwbacks.

I also suspect that some new laws are pointless as they are brought in due to a failure to act when existing laws are broken.

a reply to: Tulpa

Agree!! 👍🏻

Folks don’t understand we have these rights for a reason. The government isn’t your friend, and even when it makes someone comfortable it’s only done to lull them into a false sense of security or control designed to elicit damaging admissions or outright confessions

As law enforcement there are only a few reasons to speak to someone in an official capacity. I say official capacity because shooting the breeze and friendly conversations happen and are part of the job. But if police want to speak with you in regard to a crime it is because they are investigating said crime and intend to arrest and charge one or more persons. They are speaking with you because you are either a witness to the facts and circumstances OR because they suspect you are responsible and they intend to arrest you for the crime once probable cause is established

Just another example of waiving crucial Constitutional rights

a reply to: JBurns

Most people don't generally break the law anyway.
I've had few run-ins in my youth but nothing major.
The vast majority of people who I know who have got into trouble have just sort of ended up getting caught up in circumstances and had no intention of breaking the law. Their punishments were minor and benefitted no one.

Determined criminals will do what they do with no real regard for the law or the penalties and I have no suggestions for solving that.

It sometimes seems that some laws are made simply as a means to appear as though something is being done .

A couple of local bobbies occasionally pop into our community centre to briefly show their faces but I very rarely see any these days unless they're in a passing car .

There should only be principles,

Treat unto others as you treat yourself

Respect for people and their property is virtuous

Common sense is king
Etc


We live in a country of idiots though most have bad virtue, selfish, greedy, me me me me, most with no respect. The law and big business manipulate these character flaws to their benefit for sure.

a reply to: JBurns

More laws the better….as long as they don’t apply to me….my family and friends…..my social class……

originally posted by: Tulpa
a reply to: JBurns

I've always said that before enacting any new law they should find two old ones to erase.
It would slow down silly knee jerk actions and make politicians think while they unclutter the system from archaic and useless throwbacks.

I also suspect that some new laws are pointless as they are brought in due to a failure to act when existing laws are broken.

I suspect many new 'laws' are brought in to help these a**hole 'elites' bring in the NWO , 'great reset' etc.

a reply to: JBurns

I truly believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights pretty much covers everything and no additional laws are needed.

What is something that could happen that is not covered in which a law is needed?