Do you obey the law?

[Reiper]

More and more, the justification people have used as to why I shouldn't do something is "it's the law". The question I have is why this should actually mean anything to me. Now, don't get me wrong, I am not talking about going around stealing and murdering, and it's not like I want a state of anarchy. I consider myself to be a moral person, and I prefer to allow my morals to guide me, as opposed to legislation that I may not agree with and that may be completely arbitrary.

For example, last month we bought some fireworks, and I noticed on the town website, that they said they would be stepping up enforcement of "fireworks permits". Seriously, a fireworks permit? You are telling me that I have to spend $80 so you can give me the privilege of launching fireworks on my own property? Of course I said screw that, and launched my fireworks anyway. What an outlaw I am!

I have not done this one yet, but I was also looking into systems to potentially block ANPR and road cameras, which I consider to be an invasion of my privacy. I probably won't end up doing this, since it seems the countermeasures have dubious effectiveness anyway, but if I did, so what? It may be illegal, but why should I care? I say it should be illegal to have the cameras in the first place.

It feels like there are so many arbitrary, stupid and unjust laws, many of which are just government money grabs; there are also more of them by the year. In 500 years we probably won't be able to step outside without breaking some kind of ordinance. If I feel I can get away with it, what should compel me to follow laws I disagree with? Do you always obey the law, or do you let your conscience guide you?

 

[Drummodino]

It's highly unlikely you'll get anyone admitting they break any laws since this is part of the Code of Conduct:

Our forums are a place to talk with like-minded people, not a place to advertise your blog, webpage, YouTube channel or commercial enterprise. Your profile has a place for such things, and that is where it should stay. If you fail to do this, you will automatically get a 1 month suspension. Similarly, posts including, advocating, or linking to illegal or adult material are a very quick way to end your time as part of The Escapist community, which should generally be kept to a PG-13 standard. An example of these are:

Piracy - Do not link sites for piracy, nor advocate or admit to piracy.
Ad Blockers - Do not link to, advocate, or admit to using ad blockers.
Illegal Drugs in the United States - Do not admit to using illegal drugs, and do not link to nor advocate them outside of specific discussion threads.
Illegal Acts in the United States
Pedophilia
Pornography
Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks - Remarks such as these are often met with elevated penalties or bans.

Highlighted in bold by myself, Illegal Acts in the United States cannot be advocated in these forums or you risk mod wrath.

 

[tippy2k2]

You know...I shouldn't be admitting this since I can't imagine that The Escapist would raise a fuss once I admit to this. Not to mention my Facebook account is listed on my profile but still...

Wait! You a cop!?!? You gotta tell me if yous a cop!!

>.>

Alright, your story checked out. I'm a fucking rebel...

I biked across the road when the blinky "Don't Walk" hand started

For obvious reasons, people don't fuck with me!

Spoiler

...alright, super serial time now. No more jokes. This is my serious face. You can't see me (or can you...?) but I assure you my serious face is on.

That would be quite illegal and your reasoning doesn't make sense because it's in a public setting. You lose most of your rights to privacy when you are in public space and someone video taping (whether it's automated by the government or some stranger video taping his family and you happen to be in the background).

As to the question at hand, we all have weird justifications for why we should obey some laws and some are just more guidelines than laws. It's the whole "I was barely going over the speed limit!" defense; if you really think about that, it doesn't make sense because "just barely over" is still over and therefore it's illegal. Part of the agreement you have with society is that you will follow the rules society sets and you get the benefits of said society.

If you don't agree with them, you can break them and face the consequences if you get caught or you can move to a desert island and rule like a King!

 

[Vegosiux]

Me, obey the law? Hah, I'm a rogue! No shelf-respecting rogue does that, ever! I pickpocket people so I got the dosh to spend on booze and tavern wenches! Or slap a bucket on a merchant's head so I can rob them blind while they're...well, blinded!

Uhhh, wait, that's not me, that's one of my RP characters.

Yeah, well, we may think some laws are stupid, and that some are just a cash grab, but those seem to be few and far in-between to me. Depending on where you are, I suppose. So yeah, I'm an upstanding citizen, but I do jaywalk now and then if there's nothing but me in sight on the road and I'm in a real hurry.

When I'm the one driving tho, well, you're not going to see me go past the limits, park in the disabled spots, or running red lights. And honestly I don't get people who blatantly break traffic rules then blame the cops for having to pay a fine.

I can't relate to "fireworks permits" though, in Slovenia, fireworks are illegal, except for a few weeks over the christmas/new year holidays.

 

[secretkeeper12]

On the matter of fireworks, firecrackers are well known to be loud and disruptive. If you failed to account for the noise and debris pollution they caused, then you really didn't have a moral right to use them. I can't speak for your local legislators, but it seems common courtesy to not launch bright, noisy rockets of DOOM without a good reason.

Generally, if you don't know why a law is in place, you should obey it. It is certainly true that wrong laws can and do exist, but if your opinion of them is based on hearsay and a very broad definition of freedom, you haven't really thought about it. Law-makers work to legislate on every conceivable occurrence in society; if they've done a poor job, one should make absolutely sure that is the case before disregarding their decisions.

 

[Zhukov]

I seem to vaguely remember there being something in the code of conduct about...

Illegal Acts in the United States

Wait... it only applies to the US?

Well, as an Australian who has never been to the US I suppose that means I'm free to tell everyone about that one time where I littered in a public area at the age of seven.

That sandwich wrapper flew clean out of my hand, bounced not once, not twice, but three times before coming to rest in a gutter. 'Twas some hardcore shit, I'm tellin' ya. An act so roguish, daring and rebellious that its very existence causes The Man to suffer occasional palpitations and minor bowel irritation to this very day.

I never did dare to return to the scene of my nefarious deed, so to my knowledge it may still be there.

 

[Sassafrass]

I once littered at the age of 13.
The response from everyone around was kinda over the top.

 

[Eleuthera]

I speed regularly, just on highways though and generally no more then 6 or 7 miles over the limit.
As a child (10-12) I did some shoplifting (candy).

But that's really about it. Fireworks are illegal here (except for some 16 hours on new years eve/day)

EDIT: Yes, advocating criminal behaviour is against the CoC, but admitting to jaywalking, speeding or other things "everybody" does is probably safe (from me at least other mods might be more strict)
EDIT2: Admitting to (more serious) crimes that you have been punished/fined for and/or were committed a long time ago also generally get a pass. All on a case by case basis though, that murder you committed 12 years ago will still get reported to the authorities

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I once littered at the age of 13.
The response from everyone around was kinda over the top.

And here I was excited I would get to use that clip.

Illegal Acts in the United States cannot be advocated in these forums or you risk mod wrath.

This begs the question - what about illegal acts outside the US?

 

[Drummodino]

That sandwich wrapper flew clean out of my hand, bounced not one, not twice, but three times before coming to rest in a gutter. 'Twas some hardcore shit, I'm tellin' ya. An act so roguish, daring and rebellious that its very existence causes The Man to suffer occasional palpitations and minor bowel irritation to this very day.

I never did dare to return to the scene of my nefarious deed, so to my knowledge it may still be there.

You dastardly criminal you! Our country sure is a hive of villainy, dare I say!

This begs the question - what about illegal acts outside the US?

That is a very good question. Is it against the rules to admit I drank alcohol when I was under 21? I was legal in my country!

 

[Queen Michael]

Isn't it funny that when we're discussing places like China, Russia or North Korea, we regard people as heroes for breaking the law, but here it's a basically bad thing? I never quite managed to figure out where the line is.

 

[Zhukov]

Isn't it funny that when we're discussing places like China, Russia or North Korea, we regard people as heroes for breaking the law, but here it's a basically bad thing? I never quite managed to figure out where the line is.

Surely it depends on which law is being broken.

If a school massacre were to take place in China tomorrow I doubt anyone here would be regarding the perpetrator as a hero.

But the one dude with his shopping bags standing in front of the tanks outside Tiananmen Square? Kind of a different case of breaking the law.

 

[Reiper]

It's highly unlikely you'll get anyone admitting they break any laws since this is part of the Code of Conduct:


Illegal Acts in the United States


Highlighted in bold by myself, Illegal Acts in the United States cannot be advocated in these forums or you risk mod wrath.

I am not advocating breaking the law, more having a discussion regarding from where the law derives its moral authority / legitimacy. Perhaps you could view it as similar to all those crazy R&P threads questioning bestiality laws. Also, I don't live in the United States.

So how does that rule work when certain things are illegal in some states and not others? I have noticed marijuana threads seem to get a free pass...

That would be quite illegal and your reasoning doesn't make sense because it's in a public setting. You lose most of your rights to privacy when you are in public space and someone video taping (whether it's automated by the government or some stranger video taping his family and you happen to be in the background).

Who says I do not have an expectation of some privacy in public, and how does my reasoning not make sense? Using this logic, certain forms of stalking would not be illegal, after all, you have no expectation of privacy in public. This technology can be used to track your movements and patterns, something that the government should not be doing. Evidently some countries agree (ie germany), because they are restricted or banned there use. In any event, I think you are getting too tied up in the examples.

On the matter of fireworks, firecrackers are well known to be loud and disruptive. If you failed to account for the noise and debris pollution they caused, then you really didn't have a moral right to use them. I can't speak for your local legislators, but it seems common courtesy to not launch bright, noisy rockets of DOOM without a good reason.

Generally, if you don't know why a law is in place, you should obey it. It is certainly true that wrong laws can and do exist, but if your opinion of them is based on hearsay and a very broad definition of freedom, you haven't really thought about it. Law-makers work to legislate on every conceivable occurrence in society; if they've done a poor job, one should make absolutely sure that is the case before disregarding their decisions.

Again you are getting too tied up in the specific examples. I did not elaborate fully on the nature of this example for brevity, but it was a national holiday. I was not derping around launching fireworks in the middle of the park in broad daylight or waking everyone up, most people had purchased fireworks. The only question was whether I was going to pay the money-grubbing town for their permission to launch them on my property. I do not think I know a single person who got the permit.

And what do you mean by the "moral right to use them"? Whose morals are we talking about here, since we are now in the realm of subjectivity. What it basically sounds like is "bow to your legislator overlords you ignorant pleb, what you do has been decided by those infinitely your better".

Isn't it funny that when we're discussing places like China, Russia or North Korea, we regard people as heroes for breaking the law, but here it's a basically bad thing? I never quite managed to figure out where the line is.

I agree, this is the question I am grappling with. The one argument I refuse to accept is that I should follow the law simply by nature of being the law, that doesn't make it right.

 

[Leemaster777]

Here's the part where I get philosophical about the law.

Laws are created to protect the people, the people's interests, and maintain order. They have nothing to do with morality. There is no bar in front of the Capital building stating "You must be this righteous to enter".

Laws are made BY people FOR people... sometimes more for SOME people rather than others, but that's not what I'm getting at here.

The point I'm trying to make is that laws should serve those original three things (the people, the people's interests, and maintaining order). If they don't, then they're bad laws. Laws aren't written in stone. They change all the time.

You think those fireworks laws are stupid? Tell someone. Gather signatures, call your congressman, hold a rally, do something. Breaking the law to prove it's ineffective is a bad plan. Attempting to CHANGE the law is a good plan. And if you fail? Well, then that just means that your perception of what legislation is arbitrary is different from the majority.

And to answer your question about whether or not I obey the law... I try to. I've gotten pulled over for speeding a couple times. I may or may not have indulged in alcoholic beverages before I was 21 years of age. Nothing that 99% of people haven't done.

 

[Eleuthera]

This begs the question - what about illegal acts outside the US?

That depends on the act. Doing things that are legal in the US, but illegal some place else would probably not get you in trouble. The mods (and staff) aren't international law experts.

Example: Having an airsoft M-16 is illegal in the Netherlands, but admitting to that is highly unlikely to cause trouble. There's actually a bigger chance I'd get into trouble with the local police if I said such a thing on FB.
Example2: Chewing gum is illegal in Singapore, I doubt anyone will care if you confess to this.

Admitting to acts illegal in the States, but committed in countries where such things are legal is a bit more of a grey area. For example smoking weed in Amsterdam or drunk driving in some countries.

 

[Vegosiux]

Who says I do not have an expectation of some privacy in public, and how does my reasoning not make sense? Using this logic, certain forms of stalking would not be illegal, after all, you have no expectation of privacy in public. This technology can be used to track your movements and patterns, something that the government should not be doing. Evidently some countries agree (ie germany), because they are restricted or banned there use. In any event, I think you are getting too tied up in the examples.

Be that as it may, I'm still less concerned over a government doing it than I am over private companies doing it and then force-feeding you targeted ads. Oh, but I prefer not to be taped in public at all, or, if I am going to be, for there to be a clear and obvious notification that the area is under video surveillance. I am in favor of speed traps at certain sections of roads, though.

I agree, this is the question I am grappling with. The one argument I refuse to accept is that I should follow the law simply by nature of being the law, that doesn't make it right.

Oh, that's very true. You do want to avoid the "I don't like this law == This law is unjust" trap, however.

 

[Scarim Coral]

I suppose the only time I break the law is I sometime jaywalked as long the driving cars are in the distance. I'm such a rebel!

 

[Greg White]

Can't really think of any laws I've broken aside from not renewing my car's registration on time, but then there are some pretty silly laws out there that most people are completely clueless about, though most of them fit in the category of 'why would you need to make a law against this?'

 

[rutger5000]

I never pay much attention to the law, I trust my own judgement.

 

[kasperbbs]

The worst i can tink of is jaywalking, i go to work at 5 AM and theres not a soul in sight, why should i wait for the light to turn green? Oh, and i ride my bike on a sidewalk without a helmet or that ridiculous green west, i should be locked up.