Unjust laws

Agreed. Speaking of which...did you know a 16 girl was recently charged with 'child pornography' for taking naked selfies?

 

That was exactly my thought about it.

 

Welcome to America.

But yeah, you should read some of the sodomy laws that are on the books. In one state, I think it's North Carolina, it's illegal for two people of the opposite sex to be in the same hotel room under any circumstances.

 

Haha sounds about right.

 

Oh we're talking the 'war on drugs' xD

One of my favorite of the 'pointless' laws. You think in America we would have learned from the 'prohibition' but nope, America doesn't learn.

 

Their heart is in the right place as far as outlawing drugs and gambling is concerned, but it only makes it like fifty times worse. I'm for legalizing quite a few things and treating problems that arise with therapy rather than harsh punishment.

 

Drug laws. The police are willing to make Texans spend life in prison for just using crack cocaine and make marijuana users spend 5 years in prison while a rapist gets 5 years as well? 5 years for a rapist is pretty serious for a convicted one since most of them get only 3 years including parole.

The war on drugs inflated our incarceration rate. Rape, you hurt others. Drug use, you hurt yourself. Drugs should be treated as a health issue, not a crime.

 

^ Couldn't agree more.

 

Here in Ireland I recently heard from my sister who works with disabled people that it's illegal for two Down's Syndrome people to have sex.
That (the law, that is) disgusts me.

Also it is illegal to donate blood if you have ever had sex with another man if you're male, even if it was protected.

 

Here in Catalunya it is illegal to consume alcohol on the streets (Botellón it's called) and is punishable with large fines.
It's completely idiotic and an invasion of rights.

 

I wouldn't even go that far.

Too many laws are written by people who have no actual experience of what they're making laws about, or they're just stuck in their isolation of wealth and stability that they project onto all others. Their hearts are rarely in the right place; look at how the American War on Drugs affects people based on race and serves no purpose than a sadistic kind of punishment.

 

Plus many drugs can actually have medicinal benefits if taken in a supervised and controlled manner - which isn't really possible when they're illegal.

 

Thanks to the super awesome 'War on Drugs' we have the world's highest prison population both in overall number and percent. Not by a 'just barely' margin either, it's by a very significant amount.

That's right, we have more people in our prisons than dictatorships. Just sayin.

 

Depending on the specifics of the law, that could be a really good thing. I'm assuming it's overly-general and, in fact, totally disgusting, because that's just how it usually is.... But laws that protect the mentally-incompetent *can* be good things. *If* someone is impaired enough that they can't comprehend what sex is, what possible consequences are, etc... But I don't know the specifics of the law.

 

I think any crime without a victim should be legal, but things like human and illegal drug trafficking should still be monitored.

I'd go as far as legalizing any drug that isn't highly addictive, but not drugs like heroin and meth.

I think 75% of censorship is unnecessary, and I'd get rid of a bunch of unneeded FCC guidelines.

 

There seems to be an egregious amount of assumptions and inexperience tossed around.

Before I hear about sentencing procedures, I would review the Texan state statutes regarding false imprisonment, assault, battery, rape, and any other crimes or torts involved in the charges. Just as an example.

First, I will assume that the word "laws" is being applied as an umbrella term for rules, ordinances, statutes, case law, doctrines, etc.

Furthermore, given the nature of this conversation, it seems reasonable to assume that the discussion here is namely concerning the USA.

The could's and should's, wherefore's and whether's are endless with the question of, "what is the right approach to unjust laws?" Without dabbling into the complex structure of our government, there are several methods for challenging a law. 1) Our federal and state legislatures enact statutes, and just as we have seen corporations lobbying certain issues, we can too. 2) I forget the precise term, but there are options for groups of people to develop local ordinances. 3) Last but certainly not least, our courts. Which are an excessively overused tool for administering judicial decisions but, occasionally, they find an issue for which they can provide a binding precedence that promotes the welfare of the public.

Naturally, courts cannot debate hypothetical inquiries. Events are not evaluated until the plaintiff brings them to light. Transferring the responsibility to change and challenge laws is shifted from our government onto us. To some degree.

 

Also, I got curious.

The language is a bit convoluted, but sexual assault is defined in Texas' Penal Code § 22.011 is generally (and horrifically condensed by me) the unwarranted sexual penetration of another individual, sentenceable up to 2 to 20 years, perhaps longer.