2 ms·
I think exactly the same yet legalizing everything victim-less can be a hard target to reach. There is, however, an easier concept: laws that are scientifically
by qwerty456127 8y ago
I think exactly the same yet legalizing everything victim-less can be a hard target to reach. There is, however, an easier concept: laws that are scientifically and logically unreasonable should be cancelled.
- vidarh 8y agoI keep suggesting that laws should have "acceptance tests" in the form of a stated intent in a form that must be possible to invalidate if the premises are wrong. You'd need a mechanism to challenge laws both on the basis that the intent is not met and on the basis that the stated intent is too unclear.
- cies 8y agoOne such test is the constitution. That why I also suggest to ban victimless crime by constitution.
- qwerty456127 8y agoGreat idea! I absolutely support this! But it still feels a way too radical for today society to accept. They just want to outlaw whatever they feel like they dislike and call this democracy. But I've just came up with another compromise idea that can make sense for both progressive and conservative: committing victim-less crimes, doing whatever is outlawed yet doesn't actually harm anybody (like possessing or producing a schedule-1 substance for personal use) should never be considered a crime punishable with a prison sentence but can be considered an administrative infraction punishable with a reasonable (what a person can actually pay without becoming homeless or having to get a loan) fine.