4 ms·
I mean that's kind of what a law is. It stipulates things for a restricted set of circumstances. Should laws be continually refined to better define the circums
by sgc 8y ago
I mean that's kind of what a law is. It stipulates things for a restricted set of circumstances. Should laws be continually refined to better define the circumstances? Of course. But if you rule by loophole you have created a sieve of a boat for a social structure.
- smhost 8y agooh, well, i wouldn't want that. so maybe not ignore the law, but what about just writing in the intent anyway, wouldn't that help with leniency?
- sgc 8y agoLaws are supposed to be written in such a way as to communicate their intent. It's already there, it's just in terse, technical language. The problem with spelling out intent is it creates a huge attack surface to get a law thrown out or circumvented. It is sort of like trying to program using natural language. People understand better but it functions worse.
- GauntletWizard 8y agoThe way we fight this in programming is comments and documentation. Perhaps we need something similar for laws? I see the Federalist Papers mentioned quite often in constitutional law; are there other bodies of debate and paper that provide similar justification around other laws? There might also be room for "non-binding" clauses when writing the law.
- sgc 8y agoDepending on the governing body, there is a process of comment and redaction before a law is adopted which is recorded and can be used to make a case. It serves such a purpose.