Laws which make large numbers of people crminals are illegal.

If the government passes a law which by it's very nature makes a large portion of people into criminals shouldn't that law be illegal? I'm referring to, for example: the current internet gambling law, drinking age, use of illegal drugs.
Considering the fact that all of the examples I just cited are widely disobeyed and flagrantly so in many cases and the fact that otherwise law abiding people are automatically criminals by the very passage of these laws, they should be illegal. I am already aware of the massive holes in this argument so please don't insult me by saying that murder and theft are in the same boat with the above cited examples.
What I am trying to say is wasn't the whole idea behind the establishment of the USA for us to have more or less freedom to choose our own actions? How can we even be considered a free society when silliness like this goes on? Thousands smoke pot, gamble on the internet and almost everyone I know drank underage. What does this say about us that we have grown use to our own status of criminality?, in other words so many of us are law breakers according to the current laws. This has to be wrong and unamerican, don't tell me the fact that since these are widely unprosecuted it makes it okay. Someone help me understand this better.

I am now realizing that perhaps my thread is way out of place, in the wrong section maybe the wrong website entirely. My apologies, if anyone cares to respond or even point me in the right direction it is well appreciated.

Perhaps you need to wait a little more than 15 minutes, as it is between you first and second post. Some times you may wait an hour or 4 OR a whole day. But if people find the topic interesting or can add value they will respond and then it will take off - or not.

AH! and welcome to ATS.

[edit on 1/10/2007 by shearder]

Just because EVERYONE does it, does not make it legal.

Technology has to be taken into account. Specifically, in gambling. Back in the good old days, gambling was done in person for the most part. You could bet on horses or dogs over a telephone, but laws were introduced that stopped that. Laws were added or interpreted to include the internet. Some of these laws were found to be valid while other laws were deemed illegal or unconstitutional when applied to this application of internet usage while considering it part of the telephone network.

The drinking age debate, in the USA, goes back into the 70's when many states were forced to raise the legal age from 18 to 21. This was done from the lobby effort of MADD and like organizations with the help of congress to withhold federal funding on highway projects. States fell into compliance for this reason of, basically, extortion from the feds. As a whole, I think it was a good idea as I was over 21 at the time so it did not affect me. My kids are all over 18 now, and I have this argument at home all the time about drinking and age.

The counter arguments about voting and military service but not being able to drink are apples and oranges. It would be as if you were comparing driving and these other objectives. Driving is the first step to administrative adulthood. Voting and voluntary military service are also steps in adulthood in our society. Reaching drinking age and then drinking is the final hurdle in our system of administrative adulthood. Our system of actions accomplished by age may not make sense to young people, and it seems flawed, but it works.

Drugs have been and always will be outlawed. Taxes are the blame, not the abuse of health that experts expound on. Once the feds figure a way to tax all illegal drugs, then they will be acceptable.

Your best choice for this argument was left out. Probably from drug and alcohol abuse while thinking about gambling. Passage of anti-smoking laws affecting all establishments within a jurisdiction such as a city or county. Some cities have even tried passing laws banning smoking within homes. Many of these laws have been upheld while a few have been thrown out. Passage of laws that ban a legal act, while on or in public places, sets a very dangerous precedent. People are too stupid to realize this because it can be applied to other aspects of daily life and other legal habits of people.

I'm not going to debate the social impact of these habits as being addictive or abusive in nature as this is a false argument in placing one person's moral standards on another person. I will argue the legal aspects though.

One final point, don't confuse freedom within our society with stupidity within our society. People can perform many things within our society, some of them are even illegal, as long as nothing stupid is done. The actions you use for examples can be done within the norms of our society. If done in public or to the extent you draw attention to yourself, then "problems" occur. This is just the way it is.

You are running into the standard problem that you are trying to make sence of it while thinking government is making laws to help common citizens.

A controlled society has many many laws, but few are enforced. This multitude of laws alows at any time, someone to find something illegal about anyone. So instead of law enforcement being justice, it is used to target people.

DWI is a good example, if it was a real law, bars would not have parking lots. I would say 90% of people driving home from bar are over 0.08%. Now by making the law, they change enforcement from the citizen, to the police. A police officer can now pick anyone who upset them and get them in trouble. The citizen does not chose if they are doing things legal anymore, the authority does. So many people they know go over .08 they do to, making it so all of them can be target if they pop above the radar of anyone that does not like them.

It allows for favoritism and punitive punishment for non illegal things such as free speech for instance. Having a camera in NY now requires a permit, not because it is a real law, you wont see normal people getting in trouble, but if you speak out, your gear is gone.

It is alot simpler then people make it, you just have to see they are going for control, not justice.

I guess there is just something extremely sinister about a legal system that constantly holds the power of arrest and incarceration over your head. Just go along and don't rock the boat or we will find some reason to arrest you and it will be a valid reason. We have so many laws and regulations now it just seems ridiculous.
Last night my friend fortuanately ID'd these kids and then subsequently did not serve them alcohol because they were underage, turns out it was a setup. The police sitting at the next table told her good job and then both tables got up and left after giving her a little flashlight and commendation for upholding the liquor commision laws. That is entrapment, on a fellow citizen. What in the heck is happening when we are setting up our fellow citizens? I remember reading about how friends, family and neighbors turned each other in during the Nazi period and how communist are supposed to do the same if someone is going against the state. Well what was that liquor commision setup but fellow citizens laying a trap for each other? They told her she would have been arrested on the spot. How is this good?

I am not sure I can buy the explanation that taxes are to blame for current drug laws. Would be easy enough to legalize it, sell it in stores and tax it. Something stranger is at work there, complete and total ignorance for one. I believe that if you legalized all substances that it would be anti-climatic. People would not rush out in droves to become drug-addicts. The people that do them now would do them still except in a much safer and legal way. I have no desire to shoot-up heroin or anything else. I find it extremely insulting that my government feels I could not handle the decision on my own. I find it ridiculous that we relegate people who do use substances to have to live in such a dangerous world to satisfy their addiction. They should be able to purchase it at the store and not have to worry.

Originally posted by Redge777

DWI is a good example, if it was a real law, bars would not have parking lots. I would say 90% of people driving home from bar are over 0.08%.

This is a very logical argument, and I wish I would have thought of it 25 years ago. If you have been on an Army post, you know about the drive up window at liqueur stores. Literally, a 12 pack to go!

Who would buy oxycotin if their neighbor was growing opium? Who would buy Benzo-diazepines if you could just grow some pot in your back yard to cut the anxiety? How could you sell adderall to the locals if the natives were already chewing coc aine leaves?

I can counter that. Who would buy beer if you could brew your own? Why buy whiskey when you can distill your own? Why go out to eat when you can make your own food? I still don't buy the taxation argument.
Why do we wish to live in a society where so many of us are criminals under the law?
My original question was shouldn't laws that make so many criminals out of citizens be considered wrong? Over 2 million citizens of the US live in prison. Who is in the wrong, the laws or the people?
Marriage is another example of this strange logic. If a product failed to work more than 50% of the time we would say the product was faulty. In the case of marriage we say the consumer is at fault for the failure of the product. Perhaps we are not meant to be married. But no, people insist there is something wrong with us that we can't make marriage work.

Originally posted by Redge777

.

DWI is a good example, if it was a real law, bars would not have parking lots. I would say 90% of people driving home from bar are over 0.08%. Now by making the law, they change enforcement from the citizen, to the police. A police officer can now pick anyone who upset them and get them in trouble. The citizen does not chose if they are doing things legal anymore, the authority does. So many people they know go over .08 they do to, making it so all of them can be target if they pop above the radar of anyone that does not like them.

I thnik the DUI Lws are a good think. WHen I tried to get my first drivers liscense I was rear ended by a guy that was 1.9 blood alcohol content. they found beer cans and tequila bottles still open when the cops and paramedics arrived

He even said if he was soiber he wouldn't have hit me. and I had seatbelt bruises from the impact for about a month

I still have too go get pain relievers because my back won't heal unless i get surgery....which means, ssi, ssdi, and stuff that makes sure the government pays for. It should be the drunk driver that pays for this stuff....

[edit on 2-10-2007 by Timmyboi23]

Originally posted by hammanderr
My original question was shouldn't laws that make so many criminals out of citizens be considered wrong? Over 2 million citizens of the US live in prison. Who is in the wrong, the laws or the people?

Well again you are trying to equate how and what laws are made with justice and what is right. Even though you know elections our bought with campaign contributions, and lobbyist get the laws the want. The laws are not to make things fair they are to maintain power.

So are the laws right, well if you are powerful, they sure are. If someone gets you mad, there is a ton of things you can throw at them. Now if you are a citizen, you just spin around going, I don't understand, till you break the mind set of us living in a just society. Then it is really clear.

Scary but clear

People in jail, did you know they got them making electronic boards now, this is a literal slave work force. All they have to do is pick one of those laws that many college age kids break, round up a few, and get a year of labor, and then the threat of probation if you open your mouth about anything.

And if you think prisons cost money, they cost taxes, those taxes get funneled into the owners of the new private sector prisons making a profit. So middle class people pay to send money up the chain even their.

do you really want to know how bad it is I too am upset at 2 million.
1 in 142 US residents now in prison that was 2002
At midyear 2004 the Nation’s prisons and jails incarcerated 2,131,180 persons
And in 2006


We have the highest prison population in the world, ever heard the term PrisonPlanet. More blacks are in jail then are in college. Just one more piece of freedom the current USA is fighting for.


[edit on 2-10-2007 by Redge777]

We have the highest prison population in the world, ever heard the term PrisonPlanet. More blacks are in jail then are in college. Just one more piece of freedom the current USA is fighting for.

And who is to blame for that exactly? With all the scholarships available to minorities and all the federal grants, etc etc available, there is NO excuse for them not being in school.

Second, maybe they shouldnt break the laws that are there to protect others. I seriously doubt they are in jail for gambling online or not paying taxes.



And on the drug issue. Im on the fence about it. Im all for people being allowed to do what they want in their own home as long as its consenting and doesnt harm anyone else. However, not everyone will JUST do their drugs at home. Just like not everyone will get drunk just at home.

The problem arises when people leave their home and get behind the wheel of a vehicle while under the influence - of anything....drugs, putting on music, talking on the phone, etc etc.

Im not exactly sure what the answer is.....but deregulating everything to appease to people is not the answer. Some of us want some protection. And right now, this is all we have - to hold people accountable for being dangerous to others.

Originally posted by greeneyedleo
Some of us want some protection. And right now, this is all we have - to hold people accountable for being dangerous to others.

This is a very valid point... however;

Many laws don't involve being a danger to others. Narcotics use, for example, does not endanger others. Junkies are likely to commit crimes in order to get their fix, but it's not the directly the drugs that make them dangerous. Ok, *some* drugs make people dangerous... but, hopefully you understand what I mean. I've never heard of someone freaking out on pot and attacking anyone. They might be dangerous to a bag of Doritos, but certainly not a human being.

Seatbelt laws fall into the same area. You are not being a danger to others by not wearing a seatbelt. Not unless you manage to fly out the window during a crash and physically impact someone (which would be an unlikely event, to say the least).

Gambling does not make you Dangerous.
Drinking under age doesn't threaten other people.

I believe these laws should be replaced by better education and/or more accessible treatment.

Originally posted by hammanderr

Marriage is another example of this strange logic. If a product failed to work more than 50% of the time we would say the product was faulty. In the case of marriage we say the consumer is at fault for the failure of the product. Perhaps we are not meant to be married. But no, people insist there is something wrong with us that we can't make marriage work.

Just to clarify your comment. 50% of marriages end in divorce because there is a subset of married people that get married and divorced a number of times. The majority of people that get married do not get divorced. Wife is a divorce attorney and has a group of clients that have been married and divorced 2, 3, and 4 times.

Originally posted by hinky
Just because EVERYONE does it, does not make it legal.

The counter arguments about voting and military service but not being able to drink are apples and oranges. It would be as if you were comparing driving and these other objectives. Driving is the first step to administrative adulthood. Voting and voluntary military service are also steps in adulthood in our society. Reaching drinking age and then drinking is the final hurdle in our system of administrative adulthood. Our system of actions accomplished by age may not make sense to young people, and it seems flawed, but it works.

I disagree. Our youth should enter legal adulthood at a certain age and drinking, voting, military service, etc. should be allowed at that age. In my opinion the age should be set when a person can make informed, competent decisions. The decision may be to handle alcohol in a responsible manner, be able to vote by making an informed decision, and serve the country with the understanding that they could loose their life. Simplified arguments but I think that makes sense. But then again many true adults cannot make those decisions. With the drinking age of 21 the politicians caved to a very powerful lobby that would love to make alcohol illegal.

reply to post by hinky


Ok you completly ignored the fact that people still do it including your kids becuase I do it too. It is so true what the OP said and I think he should firmly stand behind it becuase it is such a good idea. I havent even thought about that, do you realize how much crime rates would go down!!!

Has anyone thought about the concept of laws not being enforced to increase the ability for authority to pick and choose who they prosecute instead of having justice?

My Opinion

This is what happens when you have laws is the first place!!!!!

Laws are made by people who think they know better than everybody else,

and just because they dislike something they get a bunch of sheep to rally

around and protest just to get their own way.

But I guess thats just the way she goes because I'm not gonna bother or

even want to do anything about anything myself.

If people enjoy living like this then I don't care.

and those are my opinions

Originally posted by hammanderr
I can counter that. Who would buy beer if you could brew your own? Why buy whiskey when you can distill your own? Why go out to eat when you can make your own food? I still don't buy the taxation argument.

Many people are far more likely to make a hobby out of sacred plants compared to vegetables. And alcohol is a pain requiring equipment and processes that can be problematic while often not resulting in the same quality where the opposite could be said of more natural things. This also could be said of mere tobacco. Tobaccos' real power is that its so legal and EVERYWHERE. It's so trivial other than for avoiding its pointless side effects that it would flop if not pruchasable at stores. If the restrcted (and enforced it) the sale of tobacco (I'm not even saying criminalize it) while making it legal to purchase of mary jane at stores you'd you'd see about a million times the amount of growers of the latter compared to the probably 5 people who aren't farmers who grow tobacco. This would also count in cities, thus cleaning the air. While at the same time tobacco use and sale would flop after a year with people having to buy stepped on bags of scrappy tobacco which is really pointless.

If you want to see drugs decriminalized then start getting actiive for Ron Paul for president 2008.

Paul scores A by VOTE-HEMP on pro-hemp legalization policies
www.issues2000.org...