Do You Believe It Is Ever Right To Break The Law?

reply to post by Death_Kron


By the law here, if you believed that your life or another's life was in danger, you are not guilty of any crime.

That is one thing that still stands here. They have not destroyed everything.

reply to post by Death_Kron


Youre attempting to justify and create a broad generality,
that's how the real world is?
You know better.
If congratulations is in order to you then so be it.

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
reply to post by Death_Kron

 

Youre attempting to justify and create a broad generality,
that's how the real world is?
You know better.
If congratulations is in order to you then so be it.

Maybe I did know better? Maybe I was one of the "smarter" ones?

Either way, it doesn't change the fact that a natural act such as sexual intercourse should be considered a "crime".... especially if it's consensual

Haven't really read many replys. Just wanted to respond to the OP's question. I absolutely think it's right to break the law sometimes. I think for the most part we know right from wrong. That being said not all things that are illegal are wrong, and most certainly some things that are legal are wrong (or at the very least not right). Just to put it out there, I do not consult the law as to whether my daily activities are legal or not; now it so happens that with the exception of a contraband herb I enjoy, most of the time my actions are totally legal. But that's just coincidence that my actions are legal. To me legality is a non issue (given the obvious corruption at all levels of law enforcement). I think morality is more important than legality.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Hello all,

Do you think that it's ever right to break the law?

In times where it's the difference between life and death, at that point, the word "law" means absolutely nothing to me.

I have other thoughts on this but most have been covered by others. If one comes to mind that I haven't seen posted, I'll be sure to post it.

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Do you think that it's ever right to break the law?

what motivates laws to be written and become laws?

I think it is peoples' fears and hates that create laws, and through laws it becomes peoples' fears and hates that others legally become the extension of, being subjugate to the collective of peoples' fears and peoples' hates.

maybe others will hate that their fears do not entirely dictate my intentionality, nor my priorities, nor my actions and behaviors, but maybe they are just afraid and hatefull.

how many laws are there specifically? Don't pay attention to that little detail, or the law makers may stop getting paid to make more laws.

How many laws were passed in America due to the events of 9-11?

All America really had to do is enforce the existing laws, which not even the investigation followed (NFPA standards were not followed).

Why did Americans choose to make more laws instead of enforcing the existing ones? maybe just a diversionary tactic, psops stuff, me thinks.

These are some of the logical thoughts I entertain when trying to judge the judicial system,
ET

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Death_Kron

 

By the law here, if you believed that your life or another's life was in danger, you are not guilty of any crime.

Where is here?, may I ask. (State?)

While I was in Boy Scouts going for a firearms related badge, we had a local police sgt. Pat Lynd (R.I.P.) as our instructor. After the class, we were all talking and hanging around the table looking at all the guns he brought with him that the police use. (All the guns that here in CA, the thought of actually being able to own one is not too good.)

From out of nowhere, for some reason, he stopped us all and told us, "If anyone ever breaks into your house, make sure they''re inside, make sure they're facing you, and make sure they're dead. "

I think that last part is why it really stuck in my mind, especially coming from a police officer telling us to kill someone.

I don't know if it was advice to protect us from the law. More likely to protect us from future lawsuits. Either way, I hope I never have to find out.

If I had to protect someone from harm then it would be OK.

Laws are made to keep us all in line, But when the very people who make
these laws are crooks themselves then I beleive we are all doomed unless
we stand up and try to make a change to get rid of the Crooked Law Makers !.

Your Votes Count !!!!

Peace

reply to post by Americantrucker


Disclaimer-all law being discussed is exactly that, discussion. That being said-

If at anytime where a crime is being committed and you feel your life or another's life is in danger, you do have the authority to use deadly force.

Now, what you are talking about is castle laws, some states have that, some do not.

Without even knowing which does and which does not, it really does not matter. If a life is in immediate danger, deadly force is authorized by law.

That is only if your life is on the line or another's is.

In the states by the way.

Law and law breakers this brings us to another trap.

We have law not being just about right and wrong but who gets to decide how we social engineer.

Then we have law breakers which brings us to crime and punishment.

Well this is topic that brings us face to face with our own humanity. Or to steal some else's wisdom. “He who is without sin cast the first stone.” Most people miss the point it is not just about crime, or about sin, or justice it is also about compassion.

Does the punishment fit the crime or is the punishment a crime. Think about it folks.

There is a difference between justice and revenge

And lets us never forget there is a difference between morality and crime. Bad morals should never be a crime. We need to quit making vulgar and stupid crimes. We can all agree we need to be more respectful and less selfish in public. But it should not be punished by law but by the ridicule of your peers.

We know how hard it is to draw the lines but that is job of your community and it your duty to obey them or peacefully try to change them or leave. This is my opinion but our best course of action at this point is to vote not a single Republican or Democrat to office. No I am not some tea party supporter who has fallen into some trap by TPTB. These two parties need to die so they get the message what the people want. What we always have wanted. The cry that started a nation.

NO MORE TAXATION WITHOUT REPERSENTION!

And if history serves me correctly we would even fight for it.
I not trying to tell you how to think just THINK.

Yes, I do believe there are circumstances in which the law needs to be broken.

Sometimes laws are passed that are unjust laws, and as citizens of this country, it is our duty to protest those laws.

Think of the may unjust laws we have had just in the US over the years. Laws that made it legal to refuse service to people or treat them less than human because of the color of their skin, for example. If people had not stood up for their rights, by breaking those laws, where would we be?

If Rosa Parks has not sat down at the front of that bus and refuse to move, where would we be? If all those countless people had not sat down in "white only" restaurants and refused to leave, despite people dumping food on them and calling them horrible names, where would we be? If people had not stood up against these laws, facing hoses, angry dogs, and angry mobs of racist people, where would we be?

When a law is unjust, we have no other choice but to break that law. Break it until people realize that law is unjust and that law is abolished.

"I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.

-Martin Luther King Jr."

reply to post by Death_Kron


I'd classify any breaking of the law to vindicate a human-right, as long as it was proportionate to the threat posed to your right, as ethically right, for instance:

1. Non-violent civil disobedience

if there's some injustice in your society and you want to protest it in a way that doesn't destroy life or property, such as sit ins or protests, then this I consider right even if its against the law.

2. self defense

i believe it is ethically right to defend your life from aggression, even if the law does not allow. many states and countries have a 'duty to retreat' that says someone being attacked must make every effort to run before resorting to force, but 'every effort' and the 'availability' of an escape route is a tough and fuzzy concept. i'm sure there are instances where people who have no real options shoot to kill or cause some kind of harm to their attacker and are subsequently punished by the law.

3. love laws

i believe it is ethically right to choose who you are intimate with. breaking a law that says a man cannot sleep with another man or a black cannot sleep with a white seems perfectly ethical to me.

just 3 examples i'm sure there are more.

At one point in time it was illegal to teach a "colored" person how to read.

Laws are made by man. Ultimately it is you that will hold yourself accountable for your own actions. If you cannot live with the things that you do then you had better change your ways.

Originally posted by Death_Kron
But then you surely educate your children on the "birds and the bees"?
Like I said, I had sex at 13 and I've never come close to making a girl pregnant...

You were both lucky.

Even the Depo Provera your girlfriend was on, as you told in another thread, has a failure rate, (1%)
So, out of 100 girls using it for a year, 1, on average, will get pregnant, and possibly have her life ruined.
And it can have nasty side effects for the girl.

It's fine for guys to boast of doing with young girls, but when something goes wrong, it's the girls that pay the price.
Thus we have laws about underage sex to protect them.

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
An eye for an eye and the world goes blind.

Your recourse is in a court of law, not a mob.

Would you be saying the same thing if you witnessed a rapist sexually attacking your daughter?

Are you 100% confident enough to say that in such a situation you would only use enough force to simply restrain the criminal until the cops arrived?

Will say now, if I encountered that situation, the attacker better hope the cops come FAST.

reply to post by Darkblade71


" That being said, there are just way to many laws and not all of them,
in my opinion, are needed.

I believe that most laws are for the betterment of society though. "


Well said , my thoughts also..........

Originally posted by snusfanatic
3. love laws
i believe it is ethically right to choose who you are intimate with. breaking a law that says a man cannot sleep with another man or a black cannot sleep with a white seems perfectly ethical to me.

Should there be no laws restricting a voluntary choice of sex partners?

Originally posted by Death_Kron
Either way, it doesn't change the fact that a natural act such as sexual intercourse should be considered a "crime".... especially if it's consensual

I presume you mean "should not".
As I asked snusfanatic, are you saying there be no laws restricting a voluntary choice of sex partners?

I know NAMBLA would love all laws restricting sex to be eliminated.

i believe the only laws are
the right to life,liberty, and happiness.
everything else is made for profit and to keep us down.
# laws anyways its not like they government pushes their OWN LAWS ON THEMSELVES. no they get the easy way. # THEM ALL

reply to post by Kailassa


a child can't make a voluntary choice to be a 'sex partner' with a grown man. they wouldn't be 'partners' it'd be an adult exploiting a child. 2 gay people or 2 people of a different race or religion who are adults can be partners, but in nature, there is no sexual 'partnership' that is truly consensual between a child and an adult.

protecting a child from being coerced into sex acts with a grown adult is protecting the same sexual freedoms as allowing 2 adults to 'get it on.' its the same principle. there is a right to have consensual sex and a closely connected or almost identical right not to be coerced into sex.

NAMBLA isn't an exception to the rule its a violation of the rule.

Laws are made by people to be followed by people, just like average people have floors so do the lawmakers, so ofcourse there's going to be dumb laws that make no sense like where if you hurt a thief on your property they can sue you,etc.