Comments on: Religious Right again pushes ‘Parental Rights’ Amendment

By: jay

jay — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:22:16 +0000

This is the problem. It’s what the ACLU and others have called the ‘lazy policeman’ approach, making the law so loose, so encompassing that law enforcement doesn’t actually have to clearly prove a real criminal act was committed. Drug laws are structured this way (especially definition of ‘possession’ and ‘intent’, laws involving confiscation of property, laws allegedly to prevent ‘money laundering’. Making laws ‘easy to prove’ generally means lowering the bar of ‘criminality’ to an unfairly low level. If it is easy to prosecute a law, there is a very good chance that law has snagged too many innocent people.

By: Charles

Charles — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 01:53:55 +0000

I disagree. Laws are only as good as their enforceability. A law that does not provide for its enforcement is nothing but an empty political statement on the part of legislators. Unwise laws clog up the legal system and hamper law enforcement. Practicability is more important than morality when it comes to law. An unenforceable law can actually end up working against its own aim and hurting those it was meant to protect.

By: jay

jay — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:08:20 +0000

I wouldn't mind seeing some clear limits on how far the state can go, because there is quite a hodgepodge at the moment. But I have a suspicion this is probably not that. [As a side point, I am somewhat bothered by the 'could make it harder to prosecute cases of child abuse' argument. We have a large number of very bad laws in place just to make certain things 'easy to prosecute'. Law should not be determined by the convenience of law enforcement]

By: ORAXX

ORAXX — Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:19:31 +0000

It is, invariably, those people who make the most noise about their “consvatism” who are the most willing to play fast and loose with the constitution.