Every current and proposed statute should be proven safe and effective, or be void. Safe and effective is at the core of due process. So a law imposing the death penalty for witchcraft violates Fifth Amendment Due Process.
First, prove a harm from a crime, either physical, economic, or permanently emotional. Merely upsetting acts are protected by the First Amendment. Peeing in the street would be harmful, in generating cleanup costs, spreading disease, etc. Private prostitution produces mutual benefit, pleasure and earning. If the person objects to forced prostitution, that is covered by kidnapping and enslavement laws. Consent should remain a defense.
Second, prove that criminal sanctions reduce the rate and the cost of harm to a greater extent than the cost of enforcement, and apply the least restrictive sanction. If a torts approach can be shown to work, enable that in the statute. So if speeding must end, does a police car in the bushes reduce the average speed on the road, or does a speed camera, generating emailed fines to all speeders reduce the average speed? Prove that a reduction in the average speed results in a benefit, such as fewer accidents. Prove that the value of the accidents prevented exceeds that of the enforcement camera and that of the total of the fines collected.
Third, test each law, its enforcement methods, and unintended consequences in small jurisdictions. They apply to a state. If still effective and beneficial, then make the law federal or mandatory in every state by the usual constitutional methods.
Lastly, set out the dose-response curve. If a remedy is too small or weak, it does not work. If it is excessive, it becomes toxic. For example, I would boycott the shops on the road with the automatic speeding tickets. We want to find out that bankrupting effect when tried at the county level, and not after the remedy is national.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
How much is a life of a loved one worth? Is it worth more than your convenience? I say it is. How much is a permanent emotional or physical scar from an accident caused by someone who believes the traffic laws are not meant for them because a harm has not been shown to them. Your argument is bogus, if you want to live rule free than move to an island of one!
T: Most traffic rules have validation. You can see the traffic slow down, and the accidents come closer if the electricity is cut off to traffic lights.
Part of the validation of rules should be the dose response curve. If you have automated radar that sends out expensive tickets to everyone doing 1 mph over the limit, that is oppressive. If you have no enforcement whatsoever, people speed and get killed. The burden is on government to find the correct "dose." It is not hard. You take a street, remove all lights, signs, limits. See what the majority of drivers do. Make that the rule. If they stop at the corner, put a stop sign. If they drive under 40 mph due to crowding, and dangerousness, you have your validated speed limit. It is not that hard nor mysterious.
Here is another scenario. I am a beautiful girl. My supervisor pinches my bottom 6 times a day, and demands to sleep with me to keep my job.
We agree people should be left alone and not repeatedly touched if not interested.
Two choices in the law.
1) Sue the employer, who has not done anything wrong, provides jobs, and who needs to focus on growing the business. After this lawsuit, I will be unemployable, since I sue employers. I will be taxed on the entire verdict, including my lawyer's fee. Little will be left over, and I will not be able to get a job. This process will take 4 years.
2) I am immunized to smartly slap the offensive pig's face, and to use a stick. If he gets rough, I can get my brothers and my boyfriend to kick his ass. No more pinching and harassment. No destructive effect on business. But no lawyer make work or fees. This process will take 4 minutes and is guaranteed to be effective.
I am proposing testing. What is wrong with that?
Post a Comment