Do Laws Prevent Bad Behavior?

[DeluxAuto]

This is why you're good with censoring "misinformation"? Because what you deem "misinformation" is violence?

Like the Laptop from Hell? That kind of violent "misinformation"?

Lol. Carbon boi talking about misinformation.

 

[TastySuckToy]

No, the existence of ciminals proves that laws don't fully prevent crimes or completely curb behavior.

Again - laws aren't meant to be 100% effective - they are effective, though.

The all or nothing bullshit attitude towards governing that you have is laughable.

Go ahead and try to prove a law stops someone from doing anything.

 

[georgerb]

The reality is, there is no way to quantify the number of crimes not committed because of laws. So you can't really argue the laws reduced crime.

 

[TastySuckToy]

The reality is, there is no way to quantify the number of crimes not committed because of laws. So you can't really argue the laws reduced crime.

You can however absolutely quantify the number of crimes commited, the existence of which requires the laws not preventing them in the first place.

 

[ll74]

Go ahead and try to prove a law stops someone from doing anything.

lol, so speed limits don't stop anyone from speeding? Traffic laws don't stop people from wrecklessly operating a vehicle?

It seems like common sense is what you need more than proof.

 

[TastySuckToy]

lol, so speed limits don't stop anyone from speeding? Traffic laws don't stop people from wrecklessly operating a vehicle?

It seems like common sense is what you need more than proof.

"Speeding and vehicle accidents due to reckless driving don't happen! The law prevents it!"

 

[ll74]

"Speeding and vehicle accidents due to reckless driving don't happen! The law prevents it!"

Ok - be more specific in your argument because you're purposely being a twat.

Laws don't prevent crime - incorrect
Laws don't prevent all crime - correct.

 

[HisArpy]

Go ahead and try to prove a law stops someone from doing anything.

Whether they do or don't depends on your viewpoint.

Some people need a cop on their shoulder in order to keep them from committing a crime. Absent the cop, will they commit crimes? Yes, because they don't care about anything except what they want or who they have to hurt to get it.

Others have hardly any need for cops at all. Will they commit crimes? No, because they choose not to act in ways which put them above everyone else.

In the first instance, no law will stop them.

In the second, no law is necessary but the law exists anyway. Was it the law which prevented them from committing a crime or something else? If so, what?

 

[TastySuckToy]

Ok - be more specific in your argument because you're purposely being a twat.

Laws don't prevent crime - incorrect
Laws don't prevent all crime - correct.

Prove the existence of laws prevent *any* crime.

Here, I'll give you an easy example: demonstrate that your typical law abiding citizen is unable to break the law by speeding.

While you're at it, demonstrate a law prevents someone from breaking it when they're not even aware the law exists.

 

[georgerb]

You can however absolutely quantify the number of crimes commited, the existence of which requires the laws not preventing them in the first place.

But that doesn't mean more laws equates to less crime...

 

[ll74]

Prove the existence of laws prevent *any* crime.

Here, I'll give you an easy example: demonstrate that your typical law abiding citizen is unable to break the law by speeding.

While you're at it, demonstrate a law prevents someone from breaking it when they're not even aware the law exists.

I already gave examples. But good that now you want to move the goal posts.

I never said citizens are unable to break the law, whether they are aware of them or not.

You're making a dishonest argument and have to move the target because it's blatantly obvious that you're full of shit.

 

[ll74]

But that doesn't mean more laws equates to less crime...

More specific laws equate to less crime. When laws are vague, they are less effective.Although some laws are vague on purpose

 

[TastySuckToy]

But that doesn't mean more laws equates to less crime...

Correct. More laws does not equate to less crime. Like I keep saying, the existence of laws doesn't prevent crime at all.

 

[TastySuckToy]

if there were no laws against rape -
would you guys be like t-shit and fucking destroy women?

In ll74's world, apparently so. Because he thinks laws prevent crime.

In the real world, laws do not prevent me from assaulting people. That law just happens to be consistent with my own ethics and morality. If the law didn't exist, I still wouldn't do it.

 

[jaF0]

'It is a violation of Federal Law to apply this product in a manner inconsistent with package labeling.'


Fuck that. If I want to put down more bug stuff per area than the package says, I damn well will.

 

[TastySuckToy]

'It is a violation of Federal Law to apply this product in a manner inconsistent with package labeling.'


Fuck that. If I want to put down more bug stuff per area than the package says, I damn well will.

"But...but...the law written somewhere will stop you!" -some clueless idiot

 

[ll74]

In ll74's world, apparently so. Because he thinks laws prevent crime.

In the real world, laws do not prevent me from assaulting people. That law just happens to be consistent with my own ethics and morality. If the law didn't exist, I still wouldn't do it.

Again, they do.

Your morality is shaped by them as well....from birth. Parents teach their kids about right and wrong.....including laws

 

[Bray123]

This is why you're good with censoring "misinformation"? Because what you deem "misinformation" is violence?

Like the Laptop from Hell? That kind of violent "misinformation"?

No, stupid. Like shouting 'Fire' in a crowded theatre, and like shouting 'March on the Capitol, Fight like hell or you won't have a country'.

 

[LLCox]

Absolutely fucking not. I break more laws before noon than most people do all day.

 

[Paul_Chance]

"We find overwhelming evidence of a substantial general deterrent effect. Therefore, a well-balanced crime-control portfolio must necessarily include deterrence-based policies. Yet this general deterrent effect is far from uniform, as it appears to vary according to sanction type, crime type, jurisdiction, and the targeted individuals." -The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice.

 

[ll74]

"We find overwhelming evidence of a substantial general deterrent effect. Therefore, a well-balanced crime-control portfolio must necessarily include deterrence-based policies. Yet this general deterrent effect is far from uniform, as it appears to vary according to sanction type, crime type, jurisdiction, and the targeted individuals." -The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice.

Bingo.

 

[jaF0]

"We find overwhelming evidence of a substantial general deterrent effect. Therefore, a well-balanced crime-control portfolio must necessarily include deterrence-based policies. Yet this general deterrent effect is far from uniform, as it appears to vary according to sanction type, crime type, jurisdiction, and the targeted individuals." -The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice.

Because the laws are far from uniform and vary widely. In locations just across state lines, you can break laws in both states daily during your normal routine without even knowing it.

 

[Paul_Chance]

Because the laws are far from uniform and vary widely. In locations just across state lines, you can break laws in both states daily during your normal routine without even knowing it.

Yep.

One of the factors that is calculated into specific deterrence (e.g. "does X law deter X crimes") is how widespread the knowledge is that the particular act is a crime. As knowledge spreads, deterrence increases.

That is why, when passing new laws, the government attempts to communicate those new laws. If the law will create a new crime or criminalize a behavior that is currently lawful, often large scale information campaigns will be part of the implementation package.

 

[adrina]

Go ahead and try to prove a law stops someone from doing anything.

Go to your local any parking lot and look at the reserved spots for the handicapped and law enforcement. Dollars to donuts they are empty - unless someone with a handicapped placard is there, or a police car.

Do some people use these spots some of the time? Yes. But most don't. Because there is a law that stops them.

 

[icanhelp1]

Go ahead and try to prove a law stops someone from doing anything.

Laws are a framework, by themselves they do not stop a person from breaking the law, enforcement and punishment are what keep people honest. If laws aren’t enforced then laws will be broken.