|
|
Post by ½ A Gram on Mar 26, 2008 15:05:20 GMT -5
Sadly, I missed latino's bash, which was deleted.
and: they expect me to police MYSELF? wait....they expect anyone to police themselves?....wow...that is pathetic. if people were capable of policing themselves, we wouldn't need laws...
|
|
|
|
Post by DeltaMustang65 on Mar 26, 2008 15:21:01 GMT -5
Most people are capable.
|
|
|
|
Post by IGNIGNOC on Mar 27, 2008 2:55:36 GMT -5
They just refuse to actually do so...
|
|
|
|
Post by nightmare75 on Mar 27, 2008 15:52:20 GMT -5
Yeah, if you noticed, most people aren't psychopathic killers and serial rapists. For the most part, people follow the rules. It isn't unreasonable to expect someone to police themselves because most people do it as a matter of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by ½ A Gram on Mar 27, 2008 18:09:47 GMT -5
if we weren't raised by and in rules from a young age, none of us would police ourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by ciscokid on Mar 27, 2008 19:18:18 GMT -5
If we didn't have rules/laws/regulations, there wouldn't be such thing as policing ourselves or anyone else. There wouldn't be such a thing as a crime, criminals would not exist and there would be no need for jails.
|
|
|
|
Post by ½ A Gram on Mar 27, 2008 19:30:28 GMT -5
Indeed.
ABSTRACT THINKING FTW!
|
|
|
|
Post by nightmare75 on Mar 28, 2008 19:20:59 GMT -5
Yeah, anarchy is cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeltaMustang65 on Mar 29, 2008 2:48:13 GMT -5
Actually, all you're doing is removing labels. Criminals would still exist even if we didn't call them that or categorize them in whatever way, bad things would still happen, and we'd have to put all the bad evildoing people in a hole somewhere so society wouldn't implode.
But yeah, I'll stop being a buzzkill now.
|
|
|
|
Post by ½ A Gram on Mar 29, 2008 4:12:00 GMT -5
ah, btu we define these people as those who break the law. If we remove the law, then we remove the definition, therefore, we remove the type of person.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeltaMustang65 on Mar 29, 2008 4:37:24 GMT -5
People can still do bad things, or whatever you'd call it instead, even if no law existed. Would you let somebody rape someone in your family simply because there was no law against it? Right.
Nothing would change but our vocabulary and perhaps we'd think about it slightly differently due to that. That's about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by IGNIGNOC on Mar 29, 2008 21:52:44 GMT -5
^Articulated even better than I could. WTG, Matt. Murder, rape, theft, etc. is still detrimental to the victims, regardless of the existence of laws saying such. The purpose of the law is to remove excuse from the offender (namely "ignorance") so that justice may be swift and accurate. Personally, I believe that our government (a prototype as it was in the beginning) was a GREAT model. Laws were written by leaders of the people (elected), then ratified by the people personally, then enforced by the populace at large. Central government is a tad ghey, but I am much in favor of laws. Laws are good, even in spite of the misconceptions concerning them.
To summarize in the fewest words possible the function of law:
"Law is not to ensure proper conduct, because only the law-abiding even obey the law. Law is to condemn improper conduct and ensure swift elimination of criminality. Law is to protect the innocent and consume the guilty."
In light of the above statements, though, there are currently some laws that I believe are actually unlawful! So, I'm not so optimistic to believe that all laws are all good all the time. I just believe that the concept of law is necessary, even in spite of the pollution by career politicians and ignorant (by choice) citizenship.
|
|
|
|
Post by ciscokid on Mar 31, 2008 12:18:58 GMT -5
"Would you let somebody rape someone in your family simply because there was no law against it?"
Up until mankind made it a crime, and other than those laws man created for themselves, rape, murder, theft, etc. are all common practice in the world as a whole. You're not thinking as deeply as I am.
|
|
|
|
Post by ½ A Gram on Mar 31, 2008 17:12:47 GMT -5
couldn't have said it better Cis.
Before we outlawed it, no one thoguht of it as bad. it was just life.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lupin_IV on Mar 31, 2008 17:23:53 GMT -5
Wrong!
Things are outlawed because people think they're bad.
|
|
The Moast. Evil. EVAR. (next to Viper, that is...)
