5 ms·
Paraphrasing an aphorism I saw elsewhere: "Crime is legal now".
by anotherhue 2y ago
Paraphrasing an aphorism I saw elsewhere: "Crime is legal now".
- TacticalCoder 2y ago[dead]
- l0ng1nu5 2y ago“If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so” - Thomas Jefferson
- Aloisius 2y agoHe tried to have multiple people murdered.
- lupusreal 2y agoJefferson did, certainly. He was instrumental in starting a war from what I understand. Ross though? The government alleged it but never bothered to prove it. Furthermore the government agents involved were laughably corrupt, so anything they alleged needs to be taken with a massive grain of salt. For all anybody here know, they fabricated the entire assassination story to distract the public from their plot to loot Ross's money (which unlike the assassination stuff, has been proven in court.)
- mmcwilliams 2y agoThomas Jefferson was a slave owner.
- l0ng1nu5 2y agoSo were most aristocrats of the time. Applying presentism doesn't invalidate the idea.
- seanmcdirmid 2y agoIt is just hypocritical: even his time most people knew slavery was unjust.
- mmcwilliams 2y agoBut there were also abolitionists at the time, even amongst that class. Jefferson not being among them does, actually, diminish his standing and his views on justice. This quote, for example, does not acknowledge that there are also laws which are unjust to obey; such as the owning of human beings in chattel slavery.
- leptons 2y ago[flagged]
- pizza 2y agoI don’t think suggesting that his quote would imply his slaves would be justified in violating their own enslavement is any kind of presentism.
- DonHopkins 2y ago[flagged]
- DannyBee 2y agoHe never actually said it, either.
- arrowsmith 2y ago… in a society where slavery was legal, widespread, and rarely questioned. Murder has never been legal.
- mmcwilliams 2y agoThe legality of it is not in question (the purpose of this quote). It was as unjust then as it is now.
- adriand 2y agoIs it unjust to prohibit the sale of illegal drugs, weapons, etc.? Society has good reasons for regulating certain goods. I regularly see people in my community who are enslaved by fentanyl and I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. The society I live in decided to make selling it illegal. What is unjust about that?
- ndriscoll 2y agoThere are healthier middle grounds we could explore where e.g. advertisements are banned and individuals could register themselves as being banned from participating in certain addictive vices because they don't consistently have the willpower to quit or don't want to tempt fate trying it (and make it a crime to sell to an individual who has voluntarily banned themselves), but it's hard to argue that The War on Drugs has been in any way just. I expect in such a society, certain groups (e.g. Mormons) would normalize banning yourself from vices the day you turn 18.
- l0ng1nu5 2y agoAs I recall weapons weren't permitted on the platform. The society didn't decide, the ruling class decided to use drug policy to attack their own citizens. History shows that prohibition is an abject failure. The fent epidemic is symptomatic of this failed policy. If they actually cared about the epidemic, addicts would have access to regulated, pharmaceutical grade heroin whilst also having ready access to treatment. But then we'd have empty prisons and the police would be free to solve real crimes so we can't have that.
- jsheard 2y agoIs Trump pushing for broad drug decriminalisation? I feel like that would be necessary for this pardon to make sense on the basis of current drug laws being unjust. Last I heard he was promising to make drug dealers eligible for the death penalty: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-expand-federal-death-penalty-setting-legal-challenges-seco-rcna178979 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-e...
- 2y ago
- clueless 2y agoso we all individually can just decide a law is unjust? that'll be fun
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- DannyBee 2y agoDon't worry - jefferson never actually said this because he wasn't a complete idiot. Don't take my word for it though, the monticello folks looked into it too - https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... It is a fun quote though, because it's one of those quotes that people want to use to justify their own dumb behavior. "If you don't like the law, feel free to ignore it" - Albert Einstein
- jojobas 2y agoIf you come to disagree with the justice of a law, your options are to conform or, yes, decide that the law is unjust.
- XorNot 2y agoI mean strictly speaking the people voted for Trump, so collectively they're all okay with this. Of course Trump's platform was enormously based on law & order and combatting the drug trade, which he seems to think should still be actually illegal and is not ending the war on drugs so, I don't know - make of that what you will.
- bdangubic 2y agolol
- DannyBee 2y ago1. There is no evidence jefferson ever said this 2. There is no evidence anyone else ever said this, either The closest you get is MLK. See https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... But MLK also talks about moral obligation and not other forms of obligation. He was not trying to create a free for all where everyone gets to decide which laws are okay or not, because he (and jefferson) were not complete morons.
- scythe 2y agoMLK was himself referencing Saint Augustine: >Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying.
- dragonwriter 2y ago> Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying. Considering the diversity of standards of justice within the history of Christianity (which, in just the US, includes—relevant to this topic—MLK, sure, but also the Southern Baptist Convention, founded explicitly in support of slavery), I don't know that having rhetoric grounded in Christian theology tells much of substance about the standard of justice one is appealing to.
- l0ng1nu5 2y agoTouche, however there is plenty of evidence of people throughout history making this assertion, including MLK. He was trying to create a more just, egalitarian society. I don't understand how you can consider acting in accordance with leading research on successful drug policy "moronic"?
- nateglims 2y agoSuccessful drug policy meaning what here?
- lq9AJ8yrfs 2y agoMaybe Thoreau? That's more authentic and gets at similar themes. On more than one level considering his circumstances and run-ins with law enforcement. ”Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison."
- silverquiet 2y agoI wonder how this sentiment is going to play out in Luigi Mangione's trial.
- rhabarba 2y agoProviding online forums is legal now.
- pavel_lishin 2y agoHiring a hitman is legal now.
- kyleyeats 2y agoThe seven offenses in question: distributing narcotics, distributing narcotics by means of the Internet, conspiring to distribute narcotics, engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, conspiring to commit computer hacking, conspiring to traffic in false identity documents, and conspiring to commit money laundering
- ty6853 2y agoA judge bypassed the jury and prosecutor and sentenced him as if he hired hit men and admitted doing so. The sentence upgrade was based on a preponderance of evidence, whereas they would have had to proven beyond a reasonable doubt had he been charged.
- FireBeyond 2y agoFraming this as judicial activism is false. Many sentencing arrangements include - with the agreement of the defendant (since it is their rights in this case) - to have other related activities factored in exactly this manner. It happens all the time in pleas and diversion agreements, so don’t frame it as a reckless lone judge going off the reservation.
- 1oooqooq 2y agoblatant entrapment and gaslighting for more than a year by law enforcement dedicating 24h to it. the real criminals for that prank were never even tried.
- 2y ago
- gitaarik 2y agoCrime has always been legal for the ones with money and the right connections. Biden pardonning his son and other criminals also made this clear. Most people are becoming aware most politicians are actually criminals in suits.