4 ms·

Ambiguous laws (which in this case are by definition impossible to comply with) which are capriciously enforced are a hallmark of authoritarian and fascist regi

Ambiguous laws (which in this case are by definition impossible to comply with) which are capriciously enforced are a hallmark of authoritarian and fascist regimes. Sadly ironic, the US government used to highlight this fact: "Authoritarian regimes’ unclear laws make anyone a suspect" - https://ge.usembassy.gov/authoritarian-regimes-unclear-laws-make-anyone-a-suspect-july-16/ https://ge.usembassy.gov/authoritarian-regimes-unclear-laws-...

geoduck14 6mo ago
Of note, the article seems to mention 3 things: 1) Vague laws 2) Arbitrary Enforcement 3) Lack of due process All three seem to be important facts for an Authoritarian Regieme I point this out, because I believe the US has long had vague laws, and our Due Process helps kick out arbitrary enforcement. I also believe that our Checks and Balance system (part of Due Process) is currently broken
- pigpag 6mo ago
  Given the astronomically high legal cost to individuals, the sheer presence of arbitrary enforcement can already cause a lot of fear and damage.
  - 3eb7988a1663 6mo ago
    There was a recent high profile of a case where a woman in Tennessee was accused of a crime in North Dakota. She spent months in jail, where she lost her car, home, and her dog. She was not even in the right state, and her life was destroyed. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47563384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47563384
    - _DeadFred_ 6mo ago
      [flagged]
      - watwut 6mo ago
        > it's just suddenly defense attorneys care because of the immigration/deportation angle instead of just someone losing their home, job, car, life. 1.) This has nothing to do with defense attorneys who are not available in these cases nor dealing with them. 2.) The scale of it is massively larger. 3.) The defense attorneys were actually talking about it for years, I know because I read about similar issues for years. And I am not particularly interested in legal system. There is that rhetorical trick where people just assume that since they just learned about something, professionals dealing with these issues were oblivious too.
        _DeadFred_ 6mo ago
        The key word in 'it's just suddenly defense attorneys care' being 'care'. Nowhere did I say defense attorneys were oblivious. Defense attorneys could boycott the system and force reform. How old is the saying 'you can beat the rap, but not the ride' now? You are right, defense attorneys have known that the justice system can destroy anyone just for being a target, for a very long time. I guess I should have written 'they suddenly have energy to challenge it'.
- chneu 6mo ago
  Vague laws were/are a hallmark of racist American law enforcement. It's what the US has always done.
  - cucumber3732842 6mo ago
    I'm at the point where I think that these things are just getting called racist as an easily defeated strawman. "See look, our terrible law that gives the government arbitrary power to levy ruinous fines treats all races equally, therefore it is not racist, therefore it is fine." It might actually be racist sometimes but that's beside the point. The whole premise of much of this crap is flawed.
- cucumber3732842 6mo ago
  >Of note, the article seems to mention 3 things: 1) Vague laws 2) Arbitrary Enforcement 3) Lack of due process <opens up zoning code> AreWeTheBaddies.jpeg
throw0101a 6mo ago
“For my friends everything, for my enemies the law.” ― Oscar R. Benavides, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Óscar_R._Benavides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Óscar_R._Benavides
firefax 6mo ago
If laws are ambiguous, governments run the risk folks will conclude they'll get in trouble no matter how diligently they try to suss out the spirit of said laws. When combined with a comical inability to secure government systems, it's honestly super cute that any federal agency thinks engaging in such dark patterns is in any way, shape, or form going to achieve their goals.
- idle_zealot 6mo ago
  > If laws are ambiguous, governments run the risk folks will conclude they'll get in trouble no matter how diligently they try to suss out the spirit of said laws Well, yeah, but that's the goal. People will correctly conclude that their ability to act unmolested is entirely contingent upon remaining in the good graces of local and remote authority figures. This produces extreme chilling on dissent or disagreement and promotes deals, bribes, and bootlicking. The law is transformed into a transparent legitimization mechanism for what the powerful wanted to do anyway, applied and ignored according to the real power structure adjacent to the legal bureaucracy. This is the default state of human civilization when the rule of law is not proactively defended.
  - firefax 6mo ago
    But to "chill dissent", you must be capable of tracking it down before it hangs you from a gas station. I don't think you're fully grasping how sudden and forceful change could come if just small number of folks decided to stop giving a fuck about the spirit of the law and do whatever they feel they can get away with. In my experience, folks from a legal/court context who think they can get cute playing the "you can't prove I broke the rules" game will literally void their bowels in fear when the same is done to them by just one skilled hacker, let alone a group of them all focused on a singular task.
- collingreen 6mo ago
  If the goal is chilling dissent, then it sounds like it would be working perfectly. Your point only holds if the government is trying to act fairly on behalf of the people and actively uphold justice.
juggina 6mo ago
[flagged]
- salthearth 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - juggina 6mo ago
    [dead]
terbo 6mo ago
Reminds me of this: "They devise laws that are broad and vague, but then they apply them like a scapel against those that they deem a threat" - William Dobson
thwarted 6mo ago
being specific is the essence of lawmaking and the whole difference between having a Congress and having a mom ~ P. J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"
isolay 6mo ago
And everyone’s a full-time suspect now in the US.

geoduck14 6mo ago

Of note, the article seems to mention 3 things: 1) Vague laws 2) Arbitrary Enforcement 3) Lack of due process All three seem to be important facts for an Authoritarian Regieme I point this out, because I believe the US has long had vague laws, and our Due Process helps kick out arbitrary enforcement. I also believe that our Checks and Balance system (part of Due Process) is currently broken

pigpag 6mo ago
Given the astronomically high legal cost to individuals, the sheer presence of arbitrary enforcement can already cause a lot of fear and damage.
- 3eb7988a1663 6mo ago
  There was a recent high profile of a case where a woman in Tennessee was accused of a crime in North Dakota. She spent months in jail, where she lost her car, home, and her dog. She was not even in the right state, and her life was destroyed. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47563384 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47563384
  - _DeadFred_ 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    - watwut 6mo ago
      > it's just suddenly defense attorneys care because of the immigration/deportation angle instead of just someone losing their home, job, car, life. 1.) This has nothing to do with defense attorneys who are not available in these cases nor dealing with them. 2.) The scale of it is massively larger. 3.) The defense attorneys were actually talking about it for years, I know because I read about similar issues for years. And I am not particularly interested in legal system. There is that rhetorical trick where people just assume that since they just learned about something, professionals dealing with these issues were oblivious too.
      - _DeadFred_ 6mo ago
        The key word in 'it's just suddenly defense attorneys care' being 'care'. Nowhere did I say defense attorneys were oblivious. Defense attorneys could boycott the system and force reform. How old is the saying 'you can beat the rap, but not the ride' now? You are right, defense attorneys have known that the justice system can destroy anyone just for being a target, for a very long time. I guess I should have written 'they suddenly have energy to challenge it'.
chneu 6mo ago
Vague laws were/are a hallmark of racist American law enforcement. It's what the US has always done.
- cucumber3732842 6mo ago
  I'm at the point where I think that these things are just getting called racist as an easily defeated strawman. "See look, our terrible law that gives the government arbitrary power to levy ruinous fines treats all races equally, therefore it is not racist, therefore it is fine." It might actually be racist sometimes but that's beside the point. The whole premise of much of this crap is flawed.
cucumber3732842 6mo ago
>Of note, the article seems to mention 3 things: 1) Vague laws 2) Arbitrary Enforcement 3) Lack of due process <opens up zoning code> AreWeTheBaddies.jpeg

throw0101a 6mo ago

“For my friends everything, for my enemies the law.” ― Oscar R. Benavides, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Óscar_R._Benavides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Óscar_R._Benavides

firefax 6mo ago

If laws are ambiguous, governments run the risk folks will conclude they'll get in trouble no matter how diligently they try to suss out the spirit of said laws. When combined with a comical inability to secure government systems, it's honestly super cute that any federal agency thinks engaging in such dark patterns is in any way, shape, or form going to achieve their goals.

idle_zealot 6mo ago
> If laws are ambiguous, governments run the risk folks will conclude they'll get in trouble no matter how diligently they try to suss out the spirit of said laws Well, yeah, but that's the goal. People will correctly conclude that their ability to act unmolested is entirely contingent upon remaining in the good graces of local and remote authority figures. This produces extreme chilling on dissent or disagreement and promotes deals, bribes, and bootlicking. The law is transformed into a transparent legitimization mechanism for what the powerful wanted to do anyway, applied and ignored according to the real power structure adjacent to the legal bureaucracy. This is the default state of human civilization when the rule of law is not proactively defended.
- firefax 6mo ago
  But to "chill dissent", you must be capable of tracking it down before it hangs you from a gas station. I don't think you're fully grasping how sudden and forceful change could come if just small number of folks decided to stop giving a fuck about the spirit of the law and do whatever they feel they can get away with. In my experience, folks from a legal/court context who think they can get cute playing the "you can't prove I broke the rules" game will literally void their bowels in fear when the same is done to them by just one skilled hacker, let alone a group of them all focused on a singular task.
collingreen 6mo ago
If the goal is chilling dissent, then it sounds like it would be working perfectly. Your point only holds if the government is trying to act fairly on behalf of the people and actively uphold justice.

juggina 6mo ago

[flagged]

salthearth 6mo ago
[flagged]
- juggina 6mo ago
  [dead]

terbo 6mo ago

Reminds me of this: "They devise laws that are broad and vague, but then they apply them like a scapel against those that they deem a threat" - William Dobson

thwarted 6mo ago

being specific is the essence of lawmaking and the whole difference between having a Congress and having a mom ~ P. J. O'Rourke, "Parliament of Whores"

isolay 6mo ago

And everyone’s a full-time suspect now in the US.