Comments on: A nation of lawbreakers

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:20:49 +0000

“A nation of lawbreakers”

I think that should read, “A nation of absurd laws”.

We ignore laws because

1) there ar far, far, far, far, FAR, FAR, FAR too many of them. It is literally impossible for any one person to know the whole law of this country (yes, I’m using literally as defined, not as a generic emphatic adjective).

2. Adding laws is easier than getting rid of them (for reasons of politics and other stupid things), so laws we no longer want are much easier just to ignore by common agreement than to actually void through the proper process.

By: ben tillman

ben tillman — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:21:14 +0000

“It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her.”

Right, and one of the defense’s arguments should be that the executive branch’s actions constitute an illegal attainder. If the legislative can’t pass a bill of attainder, the executive branch sure as hell can’t execute an attainder.

By: ben tillman

ben tillman — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:17:49 +0000

“One that might have been added: low-level gambling in the form of office football pools….”

Except that that’s legal in some places, including Texas.

By: Anonymous Attorney

Anonymous Attorney — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:43:43 +0000

I think it’s just a function of shifting power bases.

Shelby Steele notes in his book “White Guilt” that 50 years ago, sex was taboo, while racial matters were openly discussed. Today it’s the reverse. The DOJ won’t prosecute pornography, but it will go after “hate crimes.”

By: Peter

Peter — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:42:20 +0000

No mention of federal tax returns? Speeding laws? Especially in the latter, we learn to ignore certain laws at a very young age.

By: Dave_D

Dave_D — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:12:16 +0000

Considering that we have more of our population behind bars than any other country in the world I’m damn glad that they miss something.

By: billb

billb — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:02:51 +0000

Low-level gambling of the kind you describe lacks that universality of a federal angle (assuming your football pool doesn’t cross state lines, use the mail, etc.) that the other examples have. Private gambling where the “house” takes no cut is certainly legal in many jurisdictions in the US….