Sunday, July 30, 2006

Too Much Law?

I think so, don't you?

We are accumulating new laws faster than I can count them. Are we going to allow this to continue? Well, unless we decide to do something about it, it will. It is in the interests of those people who want to make us just like them [but without their power] to bring us evermore under their control.

What's the solution?

Well, I would propose we obviously demand a far more rigorous system of law introduction where the public is more involved and wider debate is encouraged so that the necessity for the law can be measured in a wider context than it being the subject of the latest tabloid crusade or being a certain politician's bee in his/her bonnet.

[BTW, what bonnet can you suggest for your favourite politician?]

This would mean changing the culture of belief that passing a law will lead to solving a problem when the reverse is true. It creates problems.


This creates new criminals.
This adds to the prison population.......

Take the Drug Problem. People who use illegal drugs for whatever purpose are automatically categorised as criminals even though in other areas of their lives they may be quite model citizens. As they cannot obtain their required drugs legally they are forced to deal with dealers who are the thin end of vast criminal organisations which exploit people at all points along the drug chain. In order to pay for their requirements, addicts may be driven to steal of even mug folks to obtain cash to pay for their habit. Thus a whole cycle of criminality is created by the very fact that something is illegal.
How much simpler things could be if the drug wasn't illegal in the first place. The raison d'etre for that criminal regime would cease to exist. Less people would get hurt, there'd be less people in jail, etc etc
Sure, there might be an increase in dependency, but a more caring attitude in society could help ameliorate this if not eventually reverse it.Extend this type of analysis to other illegalaties and I think you could find equally appalling problems which are essentially the result of a law rather than people's desire to be criminal.

Of course there are certain actions which are truly undesirable and need the control provided by law. But I would contend these are fairly few and far between and relate mainly to the safety and security of the individual. Much law is dedicated to the protection of institutions which operate in the interests of various powerful groups which exploit or subjugate others. These deserve to be questioned and removed in order that society can become more equitable.

I do not believe that the majority of law exists in the interest of or to protect the general population. Rather its purpose is to keep the population in its place and ensure that the current politically correct status quo is maintained.

Getting back to my proposal, I would favour moving towards a situation where all law has a limited lifespan - say 15 years. After this time is should be reviewed and if found to be working usefully, renewed for a further term - otherwise it should be amended or dropped. Thus we would do away with quaint situations like it being illegal to take a horse and carriage to attend church on Christmas Day etc - some might say this would be a shame!

The sheer amount of work involved in the review process would ensure that only really useful law would remain on the statute book and the kinds of law which arise out of kneejerk newspaper campaigns would have an assured minimum lifetime.

I think That just about covers it for now so I'll stop - but I'd like to hear your comments. Please feel free to shoot me down in flames or make further suggestions to advance the argument. My favourite pastime is changing my mind so please put forward exciting ideas to make me want to think on!


Blogger Abi Rhodes said...

go to

for further comment on drug policy

5:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home