Where's my victim at?

[fluffylandmine]

It is said that every crime has a victim, well with the case being it would appear that isn't quite true. A crime is breaking a law, and it doesn't really need a victim. And while I would say a laws are put there for a reason, they are sometimes put in for a truly moronic reasons.

This is a thread about your take on your nations laws or just any laws in general(gun laws, child related laws, etc., etc.). Are they needed? Are they ethical? Are they harming anyone?

P.S. I know this may bring up some interesting views and what not, but it may bring about disagrements and I hope we can be respectful about one anothers thoughts and feelings, so if you disagree just rreply with your take and why that is(we're at the escapist so I thought I wouldn't have to so that but hard feeling get the best of us at times)

And so with that reminder Let's begin.

 

[joswie]

All/most laws are the way they are because somebody doesn't want somebody else doing it for either public/self safety or public/self interest. These DON'T need a victim, but they often do.

 

[Danny Ocean]

In quite a few situations, the criminal is also the victim.
I mean, what motivated them to steal the two packs of peas and a chicken from the supermarket?

 

[fluffylandmine]

Brutus has a rather good point on this topic, Jowsie and his/her pussy cat need to work to impress me however, just because good laws are for the people dosen't mean all laws are good.

 

[Scolar Visari]

I think people need to specify what laws they are talking about. For instance I'm all for not allowing people to kill other people, it's just not needed you know. On the other hand there are laws like the gun laws in the United States that I believe are unfair and will fight to my last breath. By the way I'm a Libertarian so I'm for maximum personal freedom.

 

[ElephantGuts]

That's a point I make all the time in debates, how can something be illegal if it's not impacting anyone negatively? Like gay marriage. It's rediculous that that's still illegal, it simply doesn't hurt anybody.

No offense to Christians, of course, but I don't care if the Bible says marriage is between a man and a woman. What happened to seperation of church and state? It's fine if what the Bible says is going to set the laws for Christians, but people who don't believe that what the Bible says should guide their lives shouldn't be made to follow it for no other reason.

 

[fluffylandmine]

I think people need to specify what laws they are talking about. For instance I'm all for not allowing people to kill other people, it's just not needed you know. On the other hand there are laws like the gun laws in the United States that I believe are unfair and will fight to my last breath. By the way I'm a Libertarian so I'm for maximum personal freedom.

You're the first person to bring up a law. There is no predecessor to make someone think there is an unsepcified law at the table.

 

[Razzle Bathbone]

Systems of power and authority exist primarily to protect those who hold the power and authority.

Sometimes they start out with good intentions, but the longer they last, the more corrupt they become. When it gets to the point where practically everyone is guilty of breaking some law or another every day, just in the normal course of living their lives, the system is thoroughly rotten and ready to collapse. As ours is now.

History tells us this happens all the time. It can't be prevented. The best we can hope for is that the next collapse will be relatively gentle. Although it's not very pleasant, we (humans) have survived many such crashes in the past, and at least a few of us will likely survive this one too.

 

[Evilbunny]

Like gay marriage. It's rediculous that that's still illegal, it simply doesn't hurt anybody.

I think the point they try to make is that Gay marriage is hurting the sanctity of marriage. I don't agree with that but I think that's what they believe.

 

[fluffylandmine]

That's a point I make all the time in debates, how can something be illegal if it's not impacting anyone negatively? Like gay marriage. It's rediculous that that's still illegal, it simply doesn't hurt anybody.

No offense to Christians, of course, but I don't care if the Bible says marriage is between a man and a woman. What happened to seperation of church and state? It's fine if what the Bible says is going to set the laws for Christians, but people who don't believe that what the Bible says should guide their lives shouldn't be made to follow it for no other reason.

*Bows to you* I'm a Catholic and I must say if Christianity talks about understanding than why do certain Christians refuse to understand other people.(not all though, there are people that take the time to understand other cultures with a respectful outlook.

 

[Scolar Visari]

This is a thread about your take on your nations laws or just any laws in general(gun laws, child related laws, etc., etc.). Are they needed? Are they ethical? Are they harming anyone?.

You're right about my asking for specifics so please disregard the beginning of my comment. However this quote shows a few of the laws you put forward and I decided to comment on them.

 

[fluffylandmine]

This is a thread about your take on your nations laws or just any laws in general(gun laws, child related laws, etc., etc.). Are they needed? Are they ethical? Are they harming anyone?.

You're right about my asking for specifics so please disregard the beginning of my comment. However this quote shows a few of the laws you put forward and I decided to comment on them.

Note the ETC. behind them, those were just examples, you don't have to talk about them.

 

[Damin_Knight]

By-law in Ottawa, No eating Ice cream on bank street on sunday, no victim for that crime

 

[Zombie_King]

I'm criminally, so it's hard for me to sympathize with anything, or obey laws. The three encounters I've had with law enforcement have ended with me wanting to smack the jackass with a bat (or golf club; I had a parking incident at a golf course). Of course, if I beat up some guy because he was being a "D-bag", it doesn't matter how justified I think it is, I'm still going to jail. But in the craziest move the police force could ever do, if I beat a cop, I'm in for a felony. This undermines the police's whole goal, because they say that everyone is on the same level, and must obey all laws. By putting themselves above others, they're saying that they are on a higher level. You are the enforcers, as are we. If I ran the country, justice would be swift and unforgiving. The current punishment for murder is to go to jail. It costs $25,000 a year to keep a criminal in a jail. How much does a handgun and a bullet cost? If you kill someone, you shouldn't live. If you rob someone, then you should be put away for a very long time. Hey hey hey! I feel a thread coming on!

 

[GothmogII]

Any kind of police force rather scares me. Not because I'll ever commit a crime. Nor that I think there aren't guards out there doing a good and honest job. But, rather an inexplicable fear that somehow, some way, I'll get picked up out of the blue for no reason, taken away, and there will be literally nothing I can do about it.

As for law in general:

Theft is wrong, except as mentioned above, the steal a loaf of bread example to feed oneself and family.

Murder/Killing is wrong, except when in genuine defence of one's own life, or the lives of others.

Assault is wrong, except when again, in defence of one's own life or the life's of others, and I think preferable to killing the assailant, better to incapacitate no?
Sexual assault, rape and the like, is wrong at all times.

Paedophilia. Wrong in the context of assault, of course. And again, where minors are involved, however, it gets kind of iffy into the teens. See...though say a 15 year old and a 16 year old are unlikely to be prosecuted for having sexual relations...although there have been cases. I don't know whether to make the same judgement as to it's inherent 'wrongness' when it may involve such as a 16 year old having sexual relations with a 40 year old say. Because, at this point I'm sure many people would say the 16 year old hasn't any business having sex at all i.e. not being 18. Despite at this point, most likely a sexually active person. As such, I don't think there should be laws against the contact itself, but rather something designed to protect the victim in this case against -unwanted- sexual contact. If that makes any sense?