Why do people think the laws are perfect?

[LongAndShort]

While I refuse to get into any argument about the rights or wrongs about the legalization of drugs, be they hard or soft, I will say there is a certain amount of legal-moralism that pervades in many Western cultures (the "it's legal/illegal so it must be morally right/wrong"). Often those with a strong national identity and civic (or nationalist) culture.
Robert Bellah's excellent 'Civil Religion in America' (1967) is one of my favourite pieces on the subject of nationalism as a religion, worth the read, and a good starting place if anyone's interested.

Not sure if I stayed on topic or not, given all the arguments about drugs (that we've heard so many fucking times before), but I've tried to answer OP's question.

 

[Limecake]

Ridiculous. Criminals don't suddenly turn into law abiding citizens and start paying taxes. And the costs of addict care, reduced labour productivity. If anything, society loses money over legalising drugs.

Partial truth, Drug dealers themselves wouldn't likely turn around and start running straight, however the people who buy drugs would likely start buying from the legal shops which would be taxed and that money would go to the government. I never said we should increase addict care, we already pay quite a bit for such things anyway. as for reduced labor productivity that's just false, alcohol is legal it doesn't mean everybody shows up to work drunk.

They choose to use drugs, they also choose the consequences. Don't like that risk, don't play with drug dealing criminals. Their selfishness isn't an argument to legalize anything.

so let's say you woke up tomorrow to discover Fishing is illegal, sure you might not fish but I guarantee at least a few people would start buying bait and rods off the black market. Does this mean that they deserve whatever happens to them because they 'knew it was illegal and took the risk anyway?'

not to mention a large portion of people who are buying pot are under the age of 18. So you're saying it's ok to subject kids to dangerous criminals because they are being selfish?

Bad comparison, not killing is an instinct that runs a lot deeper than it being a law.

However, you'll notice that in a place without an authority to enforce the rule that you can't kill, there is a lot more killing going on.

maybe not the best comparison but I used it more to make a point. the argument that the only thing stopping people from smoking weed is a law, is equivalent to saying you have no moral compass whatsoever. Just because tattoo's are legal doesn't mean I want one.

where are these places you mention where killing is increased because of no authority figure? The only place I could think of was international waters and I'd think most of the killing is caused by pirates (the real kind)

Not an argument. Harm reduction is done through education, detoxing and care, not through legalization.

And if you'd ever seen someone on heroin ever in your life, you'd agree with me that getting people off the stuff whatever it takes is the best approach. Especially heroin turns normal people into trash with nothing to live for.

actually legalizing heroin would make it much safer, if you control where the heroin addicts are receiving their drugs you can also provide them with clean needles, you can educate them and you can help ween them off which would be much easier to do if the heroin addicts came to you.

I couldn't agree more, Heroin is by far one of the worst drugs you can take. The only thing worse is arguably angeldust but I'm not going to get into that.

too bad there is already an effective treatment to battle heroin and meth addiction. It's called Ibogaine.

If you've never heard of it before, there is a reason for that. because it too is illegal Here's the wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibogaine

if you don't trust wiki just google ibogaine and see what comes up.

I'm not naive to think I'm going to completely change your way of thinking I just hope I can give some food for thought.

 

[daveman247]

Laws are there to be broken anyway.

Woah woah woah, im sorry, but this is just a silly comment. Lets see if you are saying the same thing when someone robs you. There are A LOT of suspect/ imperfect laws. but if we didnt have any the world would turn into some kind of mad max hell.

OP: you have a valid argument, but using the drug laws as an example it just makes you look like an addict crying about the government not letting you have your fix. just saying

At least use something like those in power seem to have less laws to deal with.

 

[chuckman1]

snip

wait they have something that treats heroin addiction (other than opiates) and its illegal?
I mean I'm not suprised but god...I HATE OUR LAWMAKERS

 

[daveman247]

snip

True, although if you believe in no religion what else is going to tell you what is right and wrong? Somebody else? That may be a lot worse depending on who you talk to...

 

[LongAndShort]

snip

True, although if you believe in no religion what else is going to tell you what is right and wrong? Somebody else? That may be a lot worse depending on who you talk to...

Oh definitely, definitely. Mind you I think a lot of people confuse the absence of god/s (as defined by out Judeo-Christian culture) with an absence of religion, not least because religion is one of the most difficult define terms you can get. This often means that what might be otherwise be defined as cultures or cultural norms also easily fit within the rather vague label of 'religion', such as nationalism, atheism and Star Wars Fandom. But I'm getting off topic.

The thing about legal-moral cultures is that they very rarely go unjustified. America, is a great example of this. A civic religion with its own myths of creation and development (Independence and the Civil War), great Prophets (Lincoln etc), temples and places of worship (the Lincoln monument, Mount Rushmore etc), and most on-topic, a holy text: The constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Law always has some sort of authority with a higher power, be it culture or, as other philosophers have argued, with ideas of power, hierarchies, fear or consent. Some good, some bad, some just plain stupid (seriously, the way some Americans slam down arguments for gun control by siting the constitution - the holy text - is bizarre).

 

[Kolby Jack]

Of course laws aren't perfect. Pretty sure NOBODY thinks that they are. However, the laws are still the law, as such they must be followed or you'll face charges. Should we endeavor to change laws we feel are unfair? Absolutely, and it is our right as humans in a free society to do so. Does that make it okay to break the law before it's been changed? Not according to the rules and practices of our society, so don't ***** and moan when you get arrested if you decide to take that risk. Just because you think a law is unfair doesn't give you free reign to break it.

Police officer: "Sir, I clocked you 120 mph on a 70 mph road."

Guy: "Yea, but that speed limit is so unfair! This road is practically empty this time of day, therefore speeding puts nobody in danger!"

Officer: "Oh, it's unfair? I didn't realize! My apologies sir, you can go."

See how ridiculous the reasoning sounds when applied elsewhere? So again, endeavoring to change laws = justifiable and right. Breaking the law = wrong. This is the way our society works. If you don't like it, then move.

 

[Niflhel]

A lot of people's main argument against legalization of drugs is "theyre illegal for a reason" WHAT REASON!?!?!?

Pay attention to the next thing they said, and you would've known the answer to that.

The other way around, all arguments I've ever seen in favour of legalising drugs are "Because I'd like to get more, easier, and cheaper, and I don't care about anything else", which is a really selfish and bad argument.

Sure, some people think like that. Some. But the pro-legalization camp is much more diverse than that, so what you're doing is... creating a strawman.

There's so many reasons why some people object to the current laws - Philosophical, economical, health etc.

 

[Insanum]

Laws are not perfect. Laws are a response to a perceived social need.

On the whole though they do a VERY good job. There are some laws that are stupid, but common sense usually prevails.

Also - Police brutality claims - NEVER believe what you see in the media. Unless you were THERE, trust me, you wont know the full story. Its easier to paint the cop as the bad guy to sell a story than it is to say what actually happened. Thats not to say it doesn't[/I] happen, but I've lost count of the number of times police have been labelled as 'going too far' when really it is a proportionate response to the situation, its just the precursor to the alleged 'brutality' just 'forgets' to get published.

And the Legalised argument? Look at the amount of crime that is to do with drugs. I Know of several people that refuse to look for a job, live on benefits and steal for a living to pay for a cannabis habit. The cannabis habit will get the blame in every occasion as it's illegal. If you dont like it, go to a country where it is legalised and deal with any lapses in human rights they may have.

Its simple really - If you dont like/dont wish to obey the laws of the land - Move.

 

[unoleian]

Many people seem to equate law to morality, and this is just wrong. Full stop. What a horrifying and perverted world-view this is.

Just because something has been deemed illegal doesn't make that something evil, and just because something has been deemed legal doesn't make that thing right. People should use their fucking heads and judge for themselves what's right and what's wrong, and if they form their world-view and tune their moral compass based solely based on what a judicial unit has deemed "legal" and "illegal," well, then, that's just fucking sad.

 

[OniaPL]

Eh... many people agree with Socrates. The laws are not perfect, and they may be wrong from time to time, but when you live in the country you agree to them and must follow them in order to not harm the state / break the social contract.

 

[Twilight_guy]

People use the laws as a moral code since they are presented an taught as the moral code of the land. Law is taught using ideas like justice, equality, fairness, and things like that that protray it as being a system that works for good and operates under benevolent manners to do moral things and keep everything running smoothly. Of course the law fails and of course people make laws that aren't necessarily for the common good but as a citizen of a democratic country its sort of our job to find and point out such laws since in this country we can actually change the laws if we try really hard. Aside from that, have you considered that maybe people support laws that support their opinion because, I don't know, they support their opinions. If the law support your point of view don't you think you'd be more inclined to agree with it and use it as evidence to support you?

 

[daveman247]

rrrr

I dont think anybody said that :/ Its more of a starting point really. OF COURSE common sense comes into it. anybody that just blindly follows anything is a fool.

 

[unoleian]

rrrr

I dont think anybody said that :/ Its more of a starting point really. OF COURSE common sense comes into it. anybody that just blindly follows anything is a fool.

Then our world is full of fools.

One thing, though, that wasn't directed at anything particular that anyone said, just a general response to a litany of willfully ignorant bastards that may or may not actually exist in this thread, but certainly exist on this planet.

 

[Zen Toombs]

I feel like a House MD quote is relevant:

Cuddy: "How is it that you always assume you're right?
House: "I don't, I just find it hard to operate on the opposite assumption."

Also, people are predisposed and conditioned to follow the laws, and people are predisposed and conditioned to think that what they follow is right.

 

[Heinrich843]

So my question is, Why are so many people content when things are HORRIBLE and dont see the error in the way things are and NEVER wanna change?

A much better one is stuff like gun laws, extreme 'self-defense' laws that basically legalise murder, or police brutality. Especially the US seems to accept the idea that laws are never wrong and self-justifying.

In general, "people" don't believe the law is perfect or without flaw. They simply agree that following the law and thus adhering their social contract is for the best of everyone, even if some laws don't make sense. At the same time, change causes stress (even good change) and stress is generally unpleasant.

Perhaps people are content with the laws because they don't have time, or don't take the time to form complex opinions on the matter. Worse yet, following through with those opinions and the process to change those laws. If you don't agree with the law, you petition, lobby, protest, and so on. You do it like crazy. Hopefully, if enough people agree with you- you'll get the change in the law you want. It's not a guarantee and it's a difficult process.

At the same time, when something big comes up like a bill to legalize marijuana, it just so happens that the voter turnout from supporters of legalization is so small that the movement fails.

As for your quote of "legalized murder", there's many things wrong with that expression. Up to and including the part where murder is an illegal killing involving malicious intent. However, such is a common argument for those who live outside of countries that allow common firearm ownership and self-defense. It's extremely ignorant, but I don't think it's going to ruffle any feathers due to it's age and repetition.

As for the taser incident, a stupid amount of force for a handcuffed girl. They may be cleared of wrongdoing now, but in the future the population will remember this incident if it should ever come to pass again.

 

[Thespian]

I think a better question is why do people think the laws aren't perfect, but they can do better. They. Alone. Their opinions > Democracy. Greeeat.

And no, of course laws aren't perfect. I don't think anyone posits that they are.