Do We Need More Laws? Part 1: Unintended Consequences

in news •  7 years ago 

From time to time things change in the world. New laws are needed to meet the challenges of the ever expanding capabilities of technology.

From automobiles came traffic laws, vehicle safety regulations, emissions standards, and so on. An ardent libertarian may argue that no such laws are needed. In fact a strong argument for doing away with traffic laws exists.

Even if we can't agree on how much regulation is needed, most of us agree that some regulations are necessary. The big question is, when does it all get a little redundant.Take fraud for example:

18 U.S. Code Chapter 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS

18 U.S. Code Chapter 63 - MAIL FRAUD AND OTHER FRAUD OFFENSES

Title 18 contains forty-nine sections across two chapters pertaining to fraud. That includes the repealed section §1008. Why not simply establish a simpler definition of criminal fraud that can be more broadly applied. I mean we all know what is and isn't fraud right? Or do we?

Condensing these laws to something much smaller may cause more harm than good. While fraud may seem simple to explain, "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." The reality is, that it is not enough. Should children be charged with fraud when they lie about doing their homework. Seems absurd, but where do we draw the line. Can every prosecutor, judge, and policeman be trusted to exercise adequate discretion when up holding the law.

Just these two sexual assault cases help demonstrate the problem with absolute trust in the way laws get carried out. Justice may be blind, but that does not justify blind faith in those who seek to enforce them.
First as reported by American Broadcasting Corporation.
Second as reported by Gwinnett Daily Post.
After the collapse of the USSR new governments rose up to take its place. Among them was the Russian Federation where they decided, at the birth of their new nation, to outlaw pornography. But, what is pornography? In the legal sense I mean. It doesn't specify in Russian law. And so, the fight rages on in Russia. The government contends that pornography is illegal, porn distributors contend that images of naked people having sex is not pornography. Both are right, and both are obviously wrong.

It is a common, and well known, problem that new laws and regulations can have unintended consequences. An example is the time when Rode Island accidentally legalized prostitution. But there can be even deeper and stranger consequences. Let's return to automobiles for a moment. The odds of surviving an accident increase while wearing a seat belt. However, the odds of being in an accident increase proportionally, leaving mortality rates mostly unchanged. In fact, we seem to have only increased the amount of property damage and traffic delays. Why you might ask? People, wearing seat belts are more confident drivers. Arrogant you might even say. The more secure a driver feels the worse he performs it seems.

Organizations such as the Government Accountability Office and even lobbyists dedicate much of their time to tracking down the unintended consequences of proposed legislation.

We'll discuss more in part two.

Updated: 201704020746

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

only 1 law is within us if we keep this we won't be affected by all other laws that humanity is afflicted by.......after 1 is 3 then 7....jesus was of seven laws.........then the 10....these were the laws..........and I'm sure all are familiar on how to multiply by 2 after the 10 and here most sit today with whatever number they are to be afflicted with

as well overtime a law is made and broke another is formed and so it goes...sure seems silly but really is only intended to be in the universes parrelele to our existence if we are within natures 7

Why not reform and A-B testing

the reform is in the choice of the individual the law is made for ..........choice is the testing ,,,,even tho the law may remain for others it may just be that when the person that the law is made for pass the test of there own choice then that law even tho it is still there becomes null and void in the parrelllel universe

I think all your questions boil down to what type of libertarian you are and how you view the law. Are you a libertarian, anarchist, minarchist, or other variant? Do you believe that all taxation is theft? Do you think that all government is force? When is it acceptable to use force?

Once you settle some of those questions, or at a minimum the question of when the use of force is appropriate, then we can talk about whether we should do away with traffic laws, seat belt laws, pornography laws, and others.

I would contend that it is always wrong to initiate force, so any law which intends to affect the peaceful, voluntary interaction of consenting adults is the wrong usage of the law. I would suggest everyone should read The Law by Frédéric Bastiat [1850]. It is essential reading for any lover of liberty.

Come join us in the Steemit Libertarian Chat Channel. I'd be glad to know you more.