Do Laws Prevent Bad Behavior?

[jaF0]

^^^ No. Not because the law alone stops them. Because their inner moral self tells them it's the right thing to do.

 

[icanhelp1]

^^^^Not all laws are considered to have moral value, some individuals consider some laws immoral by their value assessment and breaking them is justified. Protesters harassing judges around their homes was in conflict with laws protecting judges. In those cases only enforcing and punishing those individuals works. Those individuals consider themselves morally vindicated.

 

[LittleSwitchy]

There are some porn videos titled Bad Behavior. It can also be part of a campaign slogan. I don't see how it could be legislated.

It was legislated years ago. You can thank Larry Flint for getting it changed. What did he get from it hmmm. He was attacked and ended up in a wheelchair. He and his family get death threats. To this day his family gets death threats.

 

[Paul_Chance]

When you are discussing specific deterrence, among the factors to take into consideration are the issuing authority and the specific subpopulation.

Where the issuing authority is doubted or challenged and where the specific subpopulation does not concur with the law, then deterrence is reduced. This is one of the reasons why compliance with a specific law can vary within the same general population.

Enforcement actions and penalties, besides providing specific deterrence, will also contribute to general deterrence as information regarding those enforcement actions spreads through the subpopulation. If the law is not enforced and the penalties not imposed, then the subpopulation will continue to break the law, perceiving it to be toothless.

This is why jurisdictions that stop enforcing, or drastically reduce their enforcement, of specific laws see an upsurge in the prohibited behavior. That group of people represents those individuals who, despite having the will (or motive) to violate a specific law, did not do so and were specifically deterred.

 

[HisArpy]

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'.

I hope one day you will understand that all of those things are supposed to be protected under the Constitution and that you thinking they're not is where the problem is.

Free speech never comes from censorship. Freedom isn't what happens when the government stifles the people. Liberty is not oppression of undesired points of view.

Unfortunately you suffer from the current social delusion that the way forward is to do all of those things while blaming the victims of your tyranny for forcing you to hurt them.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I hope one day you will understand that all of those things are supposed to be protected under the Constitution and that you thinking they're not is where the problem is.

Free speech never comes from censorship. Freedom isn't what happens when the government stifles the people. Liberty is not oppression of undesired points of view.

Unfortunately you suffer from the current social delusion that the way forward is to do all of those things while blaming the victims of your tyranny for forcing you to hurt them.

So Timmeh, is "Free Speech" Absolute? Do you have the "right" to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater?

 

[TastySuckToy]

So Timmeh, is "Free Speech" Absolute? Do you have the "right" to yell "FIRE" in a crowded theater?

It's not illegal and yes, you're free to do it. You can look it up and confirm that yelling fire in crowded areas is in fact not a criminal offense. It's a common myth that it's a case where you are breaking the law or not allowed to do it.

As for it being a "right", it's as much a "right" as people on the forums here publicly name calling and insulting others, despite the documented fact such behaviors can result in people's sucide from online bullying.

 

[Paul_Chance]

Brandenburg v. Ohio (in case anyone wants to know the courts reasoning behind Free Speech and the 1st Amendment). Yes, you can yell Fire in a crowded theater. You'd still be an asshole, and depending on what else you did, might face some other charge. But in itself, speech is speech and the Court protects it.

(And yes, I am close to a free speech absolutist.)

 

[Bray123]

I hope one day you will understand that all of those things are supposed to be protected under the Constitution and that you thinking they're not is where the problem is.

Free speech never comes from censorship. Freedom isn't what happens when the government stifles the people. Liberty is not oppression of undesired points of view.

Unfortunately you suffer from the current social delusion that the way forward is to do all of those things while blaming the victims of your tyranny for forcing you to hurt them.

So inciting a riot is protected Free Speech.

Damn, you call yourself a lawyer.

 

[HisArpy]

So inciting a riot is protected Free Speech.

Damn, you call yourself a lawyer.

I never said that inciting a riot is free speech so your attempt at moving the goalposts is a failure.

 

[ll74]

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.

Some laws aren't enforced and are still not broken by the majority of the population. That's because the laws, themselves, do prevent bad behavior. The majority of the population typically want to obey laws. Some even have a desire to break the law, yet don't because it's a law....specifically drug use comes to mind.

 

[Bray123]

I never said that inciting a riot is free speech so your attempt at moving the goalposts is a failure.

I think you'll find you did.

shouting 'March on the Capitol, Fight like hell or you won't have a country'.

I hope one day you will understand that all of those things are supposed to be protected under the Constitution and that you thinking they're not is where the problem is.

Free speech never comes from censorship.

 

[HisArpy]

I think you'll find you did.

Highly unlikely dudly, but you go ahead and search to your little heart's content.

Post the exact quote of me saying "inciting a riot is free speech" when you find it. Otherwise, STFU.

 

[Bray123]

Highly unlikely dudly, but you go ahead and search to your little heart's content.

Post the exact quote of me saying "inciting a riot is free speech" when you find it. Otherwise, STFU.

I just did , moron.

 

[HisArpy]

I just did , moron.

Really?

Where exactly is this supposed quote of mine saying: "inciting a riot is free speech" located at? I ask because I can't find it in any posts in this thread or, in fact, in any other.

Or are you lying about it?

 

[Dribble]

I just did , moron.

Need to forgive him...he has been drinking since 7 this morning and it is catching up

 

[HisArpy]

Need to forgive him...he has been drinking since 7 this morning and it is catching up

Actually, it was 5 am and I'm drinking tea.

Not that you'd understand the significance of any of that.

 

[Dribble]

Actually, it was 5 am and I'm drinking tea.

Not that you'd understand the significance of any of that.

Well I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. That only leaves you being triggered to explain your hostility in so many threads. They do make meds that can help those feelings

 

[HisArpy]

Well I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. That only leaves you being triggered to explain your hostility in so many threads. They do make meds that can help those feelings

dudly, I'm not the one who is triggered. You'll never see me scream and cry on a sidewalk over the results of an election. You'll never see me go full internet asshole because someone I've never met, but dislike intently, wins that election. You'll NEVER see me attempt to overthrow the rule of law and impose mob rule.

All of which you've either done or support.

As for those meds you're so interested in, I suggest some carbonized water. You'd be surprised at what cleansing your body of the shit you put into it will do for both your physical and mental health. Plus some exercise. So, put down the keyboard, drink a few glasses of well filtered water, and get out there and sweat those cottage cheese thighs of yours away.

 

[Rightguide]

When you are discussing specific deterrence, among the factors to take into consideration are the issuing authority and the specific subpopulation.

Where the issuing authority is doubted or challenged and where the specific subpopulation does not concur with the law, then deterrence is reduced. This is one of the reasons why compliance with a specific law can vary within the same general population.

Enforcement actions and penalties, besides providing specific deterrence, will also contribute to general deterrence as information regarding those enforcement actions spreads through the subpopulation. If the law is not enforced and the penalties not imposed, then the subpopulation will continue to break the law, perceiving it to be toothless.

This is why jurisdictions that stop enforcing, or drastically reduce their enforcement, of specific laws see an upsurge in the prohibited behavior. That group of people represents those individuals who, despite having the will (or motive) to violate a specific law, did not do so and were specifically deterred.

So true.