4 ms·

The public aren't lawyers. One of the points of representative democracy is supposed to be that legislators are more experienced with the practice of writing e

The public aren't lawyers. One of the points of representative democracy is supposed to be that legislators are more experienced with the practice of writing effective laws - laws that will have their intended effect and stand up in court. With the initiative process, it's easy to find text that sounds nice when you describe it in 30 seconds to people on the street but is either ineffective or has awful unexpected consequences. That's not to say that there's no place for the initiative process, but it's not without its problems.

tunareter 8y ago
If laws can't be easily written and understood, that's a problem with the legal system (and the media explaining said laws and initiatives). The CA implementation seems terrible, but in general direct democracies end up with better laws, and the populace in such democracies ends up being better than a bunch of self selected politicians (who happen to not be experts anyway). US and UK lawmaking processes are a perfect example of why you need to give citizens more control (but you still want legislative bodies to do the grunt work).
- duxup 8y ago
  "but in general direct democracies end up with better laws" Is there something that indicates that?
- _red 8y ago
  >If laws can't be easily written and understood, that's a problem with the legal system (and the media explaining said laws and initiatives). Do you write code by chance? Ever introduce a bug or unintended consequence? I bet 10-1 it was logic problem, not a compiler problem. The hard part of writing laws is in exactly and completely defining your terms. It has nothing to do with the legal system, and more to do with the nature of language itself. Gödel's 'incompleteness theorems' comes to mind.
titzer 8y ago
Your criticism is valid, but keep in mind the alternative is generally legislation written by lobbyists. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googles-ceo-the-laws-are-written-by-lobbyists/63908/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googl...

tunareter 8y ago

If laws can't be easily written and understood, that's a problem with the legal system (and the media explaining said laws and initiatives). The CA implementation seems terrible, but in general direct democracies end up with better laws, and the populace in such democracies ends up being better than a bunch of self selected politicians (who happen to not be experts anyway). US and UK lawmaking processes are a perfect example of why you need to give citizens more control (but you still want legislative bodies to do the grunt work).

duxup 8y ago
"but in general direct democracies end up with better laws" Is there something that indicates that?
_red 8y ago
>If laws can't be easily written and understood, that's a problem with the legal system (and the media explaining said laws and initiatives). Do you write code by chance? Ever introduce a bug or unintended consequence? I bet 10-1 it was logic problem, not a compiler problem. The hard part of writing laws is in exactly and completely defining your terms. It has nothing to do with the legal system, and more to do with the nature of language itself. Gödel's 'incompleteness theorems' comes to mind.

titzer 8y ago

Your criticism is valid, but keep in mind the alternative is generally legislation written by lobbyists. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googles-ceo-the-laws-are-written-by-lobbyists/63908/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googl...