4 ms·

This is why laws should have sunset clauses

sandworm101 1y ago
Sunset? So that after a few years people can do work on bridges without having to put up warnings? In a modern context, we wouldn't sunset a law saying that traffic lights be green and red, even though maybe in a few years we might want orange and pink. You dont mess around with safety warning standards.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  If the law is actually valuable and there is political capital for its continuation then surely the legislative body can vote to extend it with minimal fuss.
  - looperhacks 1y ago
    If the law is useless and there is political capital then surely the legislative body can vote to abolish it with minimal fuss. A bit tongue in cheek, of course - but I can't image the amount of unnecessary work regular continuation of _every_ law would cause. Time limits on laws are already a thing, but it shouldn't be a default.
  - TRiG_Ireland 1y ago
    What you're suggesting is that if the government is dysfunctional, useful safety standards get abolished. That seems counterproductive.
- Ekaros 1y ago
  You do not remove them. But you should change them when environment changes. Straw bale was decent indicator back in the day. But I think there should be some more modern and even global standard that law could be changed to. And this should be done with reasonable planning, schedule and communication.
  - maratc 1y ago
    Decent indicator of what? It could be, to the contrary, that the legislators have come up with "straw bale" as something that simply does not belong under the bridge, in order to raise the brows of the people navigating the river, and make them wonder what's going on, all that in order to draw their attention. If so, it serves its purpose even more as straw bales are getting less common.
- johngladtj 1y ago
  We absolutely should sunset those laws. If they are needed they can be voted upon again by parliament, and will no doubt pass. In fact I would say not only should all laws have built in expiration dates, such expiration dates should be shorter the lower the percentage of votes in parliament it too to pass them! If you can only get a 51% majority in parliament to pass a law, that law should not exist beyond that election.
  - kelseyfrog 1y ago
    I see you've never played Nomic. Laws that automatically self-destruct are a very clever way to create the conditions needed to win the game. You should try it some time.
  - twixfel 1y ago
    Sounds like a huge waste of time to me.
philipwhiuk 1y ago
[flagged]
- os2warpman 1y ago
  Criticizing rationally acting rational actors on hn is discouraged because it is "low value" or "uncivil". When the rationally acting rational actors are pressed for answers about how their vision of the world would work they tend to reply with either examples from science fiction space fantasy novels or something that is just a simple dictatorship. In order to add to the conversation you should sprinkle some effusive praise about the AI/Crypto/Fintech/Quantum scam du jour (or criticism of Apple) into your comments to throw them off the scent. Something like: "Oh boy I really get what you're saying! Here at my quantum fintech startup we're using LLMs to turboencabulate novertrunnions. By the way did you know that safety regulations are written in blood and after years of working effectively the public may forget why they were implemented in the first place but the underlying issue will just return absent the regulation and a newer generation will just have to rediscover why the regulation was created and that's something we should avoid?" The initial tease excites the techbro-- they start daydreaming about being a billionaire dictator of a mars colony and that floods their brain with pleasure hormones which lower their defenses. This leaves a small, but existent, chance that you can hammer some reality into their antisocial brains.
- potato3732842 1y ago
  I think you've unintentionally created a great example of how and why public discourse and lawmaking are so broken. You invoke "safety" in the same manner that peddlers of all sorts of evil invoke terrorism or think of the children and then you cap it off with a straw man, as if there's serious money to be made with or without this mundane and niche law or comparable ones. Bridge height postings more or less stand on their own merit and probably don't need laws to continue to exist. The fact that they are legislated at all is mostly a reflection of the fact that the state was the only entity positioned to deal with such an issue when they first became of enough value to be worth doing basically all the time.
  - TRiG_Ireland 1y ago
tbrownaw 1y ago
> should have sunset clauses That would be the extra lights that have to be turned on at night.
arp242 1y ago
They can just change the law? I suspect the reason it's not in this case is because it's kind of an endearing tradition that people like. I don't think you can say much about "the law" in general based on this case.
- rvba 1y ago
  Wasting taxpayer money every time they build a bridge?
layer8 1y ago
The law does say that the bale of straw is to be replaced or supplemented by a white light at sunset.

Sunset? So that after a few years people can do work on bridges without having to put up warnings? In a modern context, we wouldn't sunset a law saying that traffic lights be green and red, even though maybe in a few years we might want orange and pink. You dont mess around with safety warning standards.

potato3732842 1y ago
If the law is actually valuable and there is political capital for its continuation then surely the legislative body can vote to extend it with minimal fuss.
- looperhacks 1y ago
  If the law is useless and there is political capital then surely the legislative body can vote to abolish it with minimal fuss. A bit tongue in cheek, of course - but I can't image the amount of unnecessary work regular continuation of _every_ law would cause. Time limits on laws are already a thing, but it shouldn't be a default.
- TRiG_Ireland 1y ago
  What you're suggesting is that if the government is dysfunctional, useful safety standards get abolished. That seems counterproductive.
Ekaros 1y ago
You do not remove them. But you should change them when environment changes. Straw bale was decent indicator back in the day. But I think there should be some more modern and even global standard that law could be changed to. And this should be done with reasonable planning, schedule and communication.
- maratc 1y ago
  Decent indicator of what? It could be, to the contrary, that the legislators have come up with "straw bale" as something that simply does not belong under the bridge, in order to raise the brows of the people navigating the river, and make them wonder what's going on, all that in order to draw their attention. If so, it serves its purpose even more as straw bales are getting less common.
johngladtj 1y ago
We absolutely should sunset those laws. If they are needed they can be voted upon again by parliament, and will no doubt pass. In fact I would say not only should all laws have built in expiration dates, such expiration dates should be shorter the lower the percentage of votes in parliament it too to pass them! If you can only get a 51% majority in parliament to pass a law, that law should not exist beyond that election.
- kelseyfrog 1y ago
  I see you've never played Nomic. Laws that automatically self-destruct are a very clever way to create the conditions needed to win the game. You should try it some time.
- twixfel 1y ago
  Sounds like a huge waste of time to me.

philipwhiuk 1y ago

[flagged]

os2warpman 1y ago
Criticizing rationally acting rational actors on hn is discouraged because it is "low value" or "uncivil". When the rationally acting rational actors are pressed for answers about how their vision of the world would work they tend to reply with either examples from science fiction space fantasy novels or something that is just a simple dictatorship. In order to add to the conversation you should sprinkle some effusive praise about the AI/Crypto/Fintech/Quantum scam du jour (or criticism of Apple) into your comments to throw them off the scent. Something like: "Oh boy I really get what you're saying! Here at my quantum fintech startup we're using LLMs to turboencabulate novertrunnions. By the way did you know that safety regulations are written in blood and after years of working effectively the public may forget why they were implemented in the first place but the underlying issue will just return absent the regulation and a newer generation will just have to rediscover why the regulation was created and that's something we should avoid?" The initial tease excites the techbro-- they start daydreaming about being a billionaire dictator of a mars colony and that floods their brain with pleasure hormones which lower their defenses. This leaves a small, but existent, chance that you can hammer some reality into their antisocial brains.
potato3732842 1y ago
I think you've unintentionally created a great example of how and why public discourse and lawmaking are so broken. You invoke "safety" in the same manner that peddlers of all sorts of evil invoke terrorism or think of the children and then you cap it off with a straw man, as if there's serious money to be made with or without this mundane and niche law or comparable ones. Bridge height postings more or less stand on their own merit and probably don't need laws to continue to exist. The fact that they are legislated at all is mostly a reflection of the fact that the state was the only entity positioned to deal with such an issue when they first became of enough value to be worth doing basically all the time.
- TRiG_Ireland 1y ago

tbrownaw 1y ago

> should have sunset clauses That would be the extra lights that have to be turned on at night.

arp242 1y ago

They can just change the law? I suspect the reason it's not in this case is because it's kind of an endearing tradition that people like. I don't think you can say much about "the law" in general based on this case.

rvba 1y ago
Wasting taxpayer money every time they build a bridge?

layer8 1y ago

The law does say that the bale of straw is to be replaced or supplemented by a white light at sunset.