Bad Law

Guest Post by John Stossel

Bad Law

A law in South Carolina bans playing pinball if you’re under 18. That’s just one of America’s many ridiculous laws restricting freedom.

“There is a role for the government in keeping people safe from actual criminals, people who commit murder, robbery,” says Rafael Mangual, a “tough-on-crime” guy at the Manhattan Institute.

“But a lot of laws don’t keep people safe,” he says. “There’s a federal prohibition on walking a dog on a leash longer than six feet on federal property. It is a jailable offense.”

Three hundred thousand federal criminal offenses are on the books. “It’s way too big,” says Mangual. “Part of that is because we don’t take any old or outmoded laws off the books.”

In Michigan, prosecutors filed criminal charges against a 10-year-old who, during a dodgeball game, threw a ball at another kid’s face.

“Anyone can be prosecuted for almost anything,” says Mangual. “Lying to your boss over the phone about why you didn’t come in. That could constitute wire fraud.”

Today’s laws punish activities unlikely to be performed with criminal intent.

“Taking a rake from New York into New Jersey, that’s actually a federal crime,” warns Mangual. “If you’ve ever had a rake in the back of your pickup truck and crossed state lines, you probably committed a federal crime.”

In my new video, I push back at Mangual, pointing out that nobody goes to jail for things like that.

“That doesn’t mean that it’s not a problem,” he responds. “Legal compliance is not free. It takes time, money, effort. It violates fundamental norms about fairness.”

One woman was prosecuted for sheltering animals during a hurricane. “My goal was to make sure that they were not out there drowning,” she said. But North Carolina prosecutors filed criminal charges against her for practicing veterinary medicine without a license.

In Kentucky, Holland Kendall gave eyeglasses to needy people who couldn’t afford eye doctors. Then state officials told him that was a crime.

What causes this excess? I was taught that the Constitution created checks and balances that make it difficult for any bill to become a law.

“Everyone has this idea from ‘Schoolhouse Rock’,” says Mangual, “that a law gets made in a particular way (but) that’s not how it works in practice. At the federal level, 98% of criminal laws are not passed by elected representatives. They are created by unelected bureaucrats who don’t have to answer to anyone.”

Established businesses manipulate those bureaucrats into passing rules that squash new competition.

“They can afford the lobbyists. They can afford to comply with the crazy webs of regulations,” explains Mangual. “If you’ve got an established cookie business, you don’t want a grandma from down the street who has a better recipe cutting into your business… You go to the legislature and ask them to pass arduous rules about an industrial kitchen and expensive equipment that you that need in order to qualify to participate in this business.”

One woman was prosecuted in a sting operation for selling ceviche on Facebook.

In Denver, a bartender mixed vodka with things like pickles and bacon and then put the mix back in the bottle. Some customers liked that. But authorities jailed the bartender for “infusing vodka.”

I wish I could jail that prosecutor.

Mangual warns: “People commit crimes all the time without knowing it. It’s impossible to know what sort of behavior is criminal.”

Law should stick to punishing assault, theft and fraud. Otherwise, leave us all alone.

A recent Manhattan Institute report makes suggestions for getting closer to that ideal.

The absence of criminal intent should be taken more seriously by legislators. With hundreds of thousands of criminal offenses on the books, the old adage that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” no longer makes sense.

Lawmakers should also consider listing crimes in one place instead of sprinkling them throughout the statutory codes, which would take a lifetime to read.

And government should regularly repeal laws we no longer need.

John Stossel is author of “No They Can’t! Why Government Fails — But Individuals Succeed.” For other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit www.creators.com.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Click to visit the TBP Store for Great TBP Merchandise

32
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Solutions Are Obvious
Solutions Are Obvious

If you can’t clearly identify a victim, then it’s not a crime.

The problem with laws and the cretins that create them – there’s no end to it. If they wanted to, they could create a law that puts video cameras in your bedroom and use spousal sexual abuse as the reason.

John Galt
John Galt

Problem is the laws created do not ever identify a potential victim. They are created for revenue….

gman
gman

“If you’ve got an established cookie business, you don’t want a grandma from down the street who has a better recipe cutting into your business… You go to the legislature and ask them to pass arduous rules about an industrial kitchen and expensive equipment that you that need in order to qualify to participate in this business.”

government is not its own entity, it’s just a tool. if it’s malfunctioning, that’s on the citizens.

oldtimer505
oldtimer505

The solution is simple, repeal all those useless civil rules and start over with some common sense applied. We will most likely find ourselves right back here with the same complaints but, we will have more fun getting here perhaps.

gman
gman

“The solution is simple, repeal all those useless civil rules”

well that would require legislative time, which is “better” spent in campaign donor maintenance and reelection activities – nobody has time for clean-up. the simplest and go-to solution is to just ignore outdated laws. lots of laws are on the books that no-one even knows about anymore, let alone enforces, and bringing them into court will usually result in a dismissal-with-prejudice for two reasons: 1) the courts don’t have time for them, and 2) the lawyers don’t want any attention drawn to all the laws that need to be repealed outright. so everybody just ignores them and goes on their merry way – quick, simple, efficient.

oldtimer505
oldtimer505

I see most if not all civil statutes as, “cover your ass”, material for our so called managers. It is like permission from the king to put an ass whoop-in on the subjects so they don’t step to far out of line.

gman
gman

“most if not all civil statutes as, “cover your ass”, material”

an apt characterization. and like most “cover your ass” rules, they are seldom applicable or applied.

for example, consider “no concealed carry weapons at work” rules. such rules make perfect sense to a manager. if he says “no weapons” and the profoundly unlikely event of someone coming in and shooting the place up occurs, no-one will blame the manager – he said no weapons, he tried to do the right thing, he’ll get a consolation medal or something. but if he says “weapons permitted” and the reasonably likely event of the carrier having a lover’s spat or other such event and shooting the place up then the manager will be blamed immediately – “this is your fault! you gave them permission! you’re legally liable!” etc. so, unlikely event / no blame choice, vs quite possible event / total blame choice – which would anyone choose? the “no weapons” policy of course. and if you were a manager you would make exactly precisely the same choice for exactly precisely the same reasons. and if you make that choice, what happens anyway? nothing. so there we are.

Steve
Steve

Quick, simple efficient? Except when somebody has an axe to grind. For instance, watch some cop involved videos. When they can’t get you for one thing they come up with some garbage. “You didn’t use your turn signal when you changed lanes back there”, etc…
Many laws should come with an expiration date.

gman
gman

“Except when somebody has an axe to grind.”

more exactly, when someone catches their attention. and usually that’s because the attention is well-caught and well-warranted. really, obsolete laws seldom play any role in any legal action.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty

So long as it is on the books, it can be used against someone for whatever reason. They have to go. Begin with ignoring, but they need to be cleaned up (or better yet, not law without a victim).

gman
gman

“They have to go.”

fine. take responsibility and take charge and make it so.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty

What, by voting for people who still care about freedom? By writing to the useless shit that claims to represent me and demanding action? Been there, done that. Political solutions no longer work (if they ever did).

gman
gman

“Political solutions no longer work”

(smile) you mean they take work – get people together around a common cause, get people working towards a common goal, get them to follow through to make it happen. which, simply put, most libertarian isolationist self-standing rightists simply won’t do. “work with all those snuffling morons? UGH!” it’s easier just to move to idaho or alaska. or to open fire.

so the leftists rule government, ’cause they’ll do the work.

it’s interesting. the left expects government to give them something they haven’t worked for. the right expects government to be something they haven’t worked for. it’s all personal taste I guess.

John Galt
John Galt

Until a marxist gets in charge then uses these laws to lock up deplorables….that is exactly what ignoring things can lead to.

gman
gman

“Until a marxist gets in charge then uses these laws to lock up deplorables”

a very valid and worthwhile consideration. the answer is to realize that at that point it’s not longer a matter of law, but of raw power, and to respond accordingly.

gman
gman

heh. look at the down votes. somebody doesn’t want to take responsibility.

grace country pastor

Pickles and bacon in vodka sounds pretty gross. A better idea… 1 pineapple chopped, 2 coconuts drained and chopped, placed into large glass container. Empty 1 large bottle 1800 Silver into same container. After a week pour infused tequila through a fine mesh strainer back into its bottle. Refrigerate and enjoy the Coconut Armadillo carefully in shot glasses. Stuff WILL sneak up on ya… ?

splurge
splurge

Your better idea sounds deliciously dangerous, the sort of thing that forced me to reconsider my alcoholic inclinations.

grace country pastor

Stuff is ferociously good! Handle with care.

Apple
Apple

Bacon and jim beam maple whiskey. Use bacon as a stir stick for beam neat. Bacon has its place, but with whiskey.

grace country pastor

Oh agreed, bacon has its place… just not with pickles and vodka… ?

Definitely with bourbon. Beam makes a maple flavor? You may have just improved one of my recipes! Thank you! I put bacon bits in maple bourbon ice cream and call it Maple Bourbon Baconater! Folks love it even when their somewhat hesitant to try it.

TampaRed

“At the federal level, 98% of criminal laws are not passed by elected representatives. They are created by unelected bureaucrats who don’t have to answer to anyone.”
one of the big problems at every level of govt is the legislative body passing a general law & allowing the bureaucracy to write the rules/penalties–
once the regulators come up w/rules/penalties they should have to be approved by a written vote of the legislative body–
no more ,”that’s not what we meant when we wrote that law.”
bs,you voted 4 the final version–

Glock-N-Load

“With hundreds of thousands of criminal offenses on the books, the old adage that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” no longer makes sense.”

Ya think?

'Reality' Doug
'Reality' Doug

The epiphany is to realize that the police don’t enforce the law on the books. They enforce policy self-serving policy. Legality is knowing what that policy is and avoiding the real prohibitions. Of course, that depends on what you are to them.

TampaRed

everything is on the internet these days,along w/you guys that are commenting–if you would spend time studying the various local,state and federal laws instead of wasting time here or on donkeyporn.porn you wouldn’t have to worry about being ignorant,at least about the law–
remember donkey,self govt won’t work w/o self discipline–

KaD
KaD

All of these sentences seem like violations of the Eighth Amendment to me.

MrLiberty
MrLiberty

comment image

John Galt
John Galt

”The absence of criminal intent should be taken more seriously by legislators. With hundreds of thousands of criminal offenses on the books, the old adage that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” no longer makes sense.”

Didn’t Hillary use this defense……she had no criminal intent……well, when Someone goes into the bank, finger in pocket, demands cash so he can live the good life, and cops show up, and he says what? I had my hand in my pocket, i “asked” for all the banks money, don’t i deserve a break today? I had no criminal intent. You cannot arrest me without arresting “HER”…..

gman
gman

“she had no criminal intent”

(properly functioning) law recognized both intents and actions, and addresses both.

government service heavily addresses both. before access to restricted materials or authorities is granted agreements and understandings – “I understand that etc” – must be signed and filed away, so “intent” is not an issue. “you said you understood, here’s the signed documentation, etc”.

Steve C.

Ayn Rand wrote that the objective of all tyrannical governments is to make everything illegal.

That gives them what they ultimately want:

SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT

MrLiberty
MrLiberty

Exactly why the laws need to be wiped OFF the books, not just ignored for the moment. But anyone who wishes to interject common sense to the laws, is called “soft on crime” by their opponents in the next election (regardless of which party, or how much sense their position makes).

gman
gman

“Ayn Rand wrote that the objective of all tyrannical governments is to make everything illegal”

alisa rosenbaum miscomprehended the situation. what they want is arbitrary power. “selective enforcement” is just a normalcy-bias approach to that goal.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading