I am really trying to understand what you're saying, but I disagree because I do think that today it is axiomatic that laws need enforcement to be useful and mo

I am really trying to understand what you're saying, but I disagree because I do think that today it is axiomatic that laws need enforcement to be useful and most legal enforcement involves negative consequences. I also thing that most negative consequences are either pain related (Contemporary morals have generally eradicated pain-based consequences) or restriction on access to material things. What I am ultimately trying to say is that the large majority of people on this forum see the symptom of a broken society (homelessness and drug addiction) and for whatever reason, refuse to believe that a complex network of problems is actually the thing that should draw our 'hacker' focus. Like sure, you clearly had a negative experience with permitting that caused you to have an expensive fine and feel resentment that other people do 'worse' things 'scot-free'. Would fining a homeless person more money actually solve your or the city's problems? No. The person would just not pay, because again, they have nothing to lose. Ultimately, I think where we agree is that the idea of law needs to evolve to include both punishment and state funded / enforced humanitarian care. The reason that I think this will never happen in America is because we are an inherently vengeful people with a dark history of race-based hatred and a fundamental disdain for paying taxes that fund public goods.