Which works best? A Liberal or a Punitive system of Law.

Up until a few months ago I really paid little attention to the civil laws or the constitution of this country. I didn't pay much attention to the inequality, discrimination or injustice that might result from either the Irish Law system or the Constitution that is the fundamental driver of Irish society and its laws. Although, I've been acutely aware of all the cock ups and ridiculousness of Irish society since I was a young child.

So the marriage equality referendum came along last year. Again it didn't really affect me as I'm a straight male living in a country fairly well suited to a man of my persuasion. In the end though I was slightly moved by the fact that the gay community have to fight so hard to achieve an equal status in society. And even though the vote went in their favour I was shocked to see the tide of hostility and opposition to a Yes vote by a sizeable minority of the population. I was also a bit shocked that the Irish public rejected the right of people less than 35 to run for the office of president which to my mind is just age discrimination. Anyway, it all woke me up to other problems in Irish society where the law seems a bit rubbish and it got me thinking about where I stand on some issues like abortion, drug usage, prostitution and removing the stranglehold that the Catholic church has on Irish primary schools.

Personally, I'm very liberal. As in, more or less anything goes as far as I'm concerned as long as it doesn't physically affect other humans/animals negatively. So as far as I'm concerned you can do as much drugs, booze and prostitutes as you want as long as you're not affecting someone else negatively and you can then end your own life in a clinic if you want to go that way and you can say whatever you want prior to your own death, even inciting violence, as long as you don't end up obviously causing violence. So basically anything goes as long as no one else is proven to be getting harmed as a result of your actions.

Alas the law is not so liberal. It prevents you doing most of the above things and actually harms you when you do any of these things even if you only harmed yourself in the process.

So I'm wondering, do all these laws actually work? As in laws around drug, prostitution, abortion, lack of a right to die at a time of your choosing. Do they work? The evidence I see or at least the reality that I see indicates to me that these laws just don't work. Fair enough, I might not be doing anything illegal myself and maybe the majority don't do anything illegal but I do see it everywhere. Dublin is full of junkies. I was only talking to a friend last night who is a high ranking, working professional in a major industry and he was telling me he did drugs recently. The amount of Irish men that have been involved with a prostitute is probably not a well known accurate figure but I hear it all the time how Irish men are going abroad and end up with a prostitute, particularly those younger than my generation, and there is a considerable sex industry in Ireland. I would have my doubts about what most Irish men are getting up to when they travel to Amsterdam or Germany or on their way out to Australia. And Irish women are heading abroad in their thousands for abortions. Something like 160,000 Irish women have had abortions in Britain alone per published figures. And there is some Irish people who travel to Europe to die at a time of their own choosing and I'm sure there is plenty of people who want to have that right should they get sick in the future.

If we liberalized the law system and legalized all areas such as abortion, drugs, prostitution and the right to die while at the same time properly regulating these areas and educating our children/adults so they can make informed decisions then would we end up with a better, fairer and more inclusive society? I just don't see these punitive laws working at the moment and even if they did work then I'm not convinced that they are good for society. I mean like, putting a woman in jail for having an abortion after being raped or putting a drug user in jail even though they ended up on drugs due to homelessness and neglect by the state seems wrong to me. And putting a woman or man in prison for paying for consensual sex seems wrong to me. And telling someone with a painful terminal illness that is making them miserable that they cannot die at a time of their own choosing seems wrong to me. And with most of these areas, all the current laws seem to put lives at risk. Prostitutes have to take extra risks. Drug takers have to take extra risks and at the same time these laws create a perfect environment/industry for criminals who exploit the opportunity and create even more risk as their activities are unregulated mainly.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Absolam

I think a punitive system is based on the idea that if you make the consequences of a particular action sufficiently unpleasant people will be dissuaded from the action. A liberal system is based on a notion that people are habilitated, and if they fail to demonstrate it, can be rehabilitated. neither one is terribly relatable to whether or not certain crimes should be treated as crimes, they only relate to how we deal with things we have already decided are crimes.
I've been wondering myself whether there actually are such things as victimless crimes. In general, as a society we regulate by law activities which are injurious to others; creating crimes which have victims, essentially. But, as a society, we also have an obligation to at least some degree regulate the harm people can do to themselves; certainly when they lack the mental capacity to understand they may be acting injuriously we have some duty of care. Is there anything that is considered to be a criminal act that doesn't have some negative effect on someone?

I think our system is a combination of both punitive and liberal; we penalize offenders by fining or imprisoning them, and we supposedly rehabilitate them whilst they are incarcerated. I suspect a system of law that was so liberal as to be absent any system of law would be even less effective in protecting people from harm than our current notions of rehabilitation are.

If we legalised all areas such as abortion, drugs, prostitution (dying is already legal, including commiting suicide), wouldn't we have more of areas such as abortion, drugs and prostitution? The current thinking is these are things we don't want in society; that's why they're illegal. The idea that educating people so that they can choose whether they want abortion, drugs and prostitution for themselves without forcing them on others seems attractive, but how does it deal with the effect each of these has on other people when someone decides it is what they want for themselves?

I think Permabear is right; you're going to encounter both right and left wing opposition, but I think that's because what you're proposing is having no system of law at all (or at least, no system of law for some things?) which is essentially anarchy. I don't think many people will really conclude that will end up with a better, fairer and more inclusive society.

TL; DR If you want to minimise the amount of harm people will do to other people, I think a punitive system works best.

esforum

Grey grey area. I tend to agree with you, no harm then no foul in my book but it's not always so simple.

Take drugs as an example, so you take cocaine, you don't hurt anyone, you don't spend more than you can afford and you don't let it interfere with your responsibilities. On that basis, no harm no foul. But what about the people forced to work on the plantations? Its in, let's say Columbia so do we factor that in? Maybe, maybe not.

Prostitution, again isn't that more a moral issue? They are willing to sell, you are willing to buy. But is she really willing? We will never really know.

I don't know where I fall overall. I have seen harsh systems and light systems. Both had positives and negatives to them. Overall I would say that as long as there's democracy the laws will reflect societies wishes. By and large someone that needs your vote won't bring in an unpopular law.

I will say this, we should prioritise the safety of people over the rehabilitation on the criminal and no one has ever been mugged by a prisoner sitting in a cell, plenty getting robbed by people on bail, probation and early release though.

In regards the Irish system, I think the confusion stems from the fact that we have tough laws but weak system. There's no balance.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Absolam

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I don't think that actually addresses whether or not there is anything that is considered to be a criminal act that doesn't have some negative effect on someone, but I take your point; making something illegal can also yield negative results. So in considering that point it becomes a question of which yields the least bad result for society; prohibition or integration. Which isn't exactly straightforward since each of the examples has an enormous number of potential permutations of restrictions, before you even get to how punitive we should be once the lines are crossed.

I'm more interested in the facts to be honest. Found this interesting. It doesn't make sense to me to lock people up in a lot of situations.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/why-norways-prison-system-is-so-successful-2014-12?r=US&IR=T

Absolam

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm more interested in the facts to be honest. Found this interesting. It doesn't make sense to me to lock people up in a lot of situations.

The article you're linking seems to suggest that locking people up and rehabilitating them whilst they're there does make sense? Or at least appears to work better in Norway than alternatives do in other countries.

esforum

esforum wrote: »

Take drugs as an example, so you take cocaine, you don't hurt anyone, you don't spend more than you can afford and you don't let it interfere with your responsibilities. On that basis, no harm no foul. But what about the people forced to work on the plantations? Its in, let's say Columbia so do we factor that in? Maybe, maybe not.

Do we wear imported clothes?
Do we eat fish from abroad?

Drugs are not the only products that can have nefarious sources. It seems very strange to me to that we as a society shine the big torch on the sources of what we deem illegal, yet can have significant blindspots when it comes to legalised goods. It would certainly be a very odd bill that proposed the banning of garments based upon the potential for unsuitable labour practices, though the logic is surely similar?

There is of course the problem of the additional value added to a prohibited product by the simple act of prohibiting it (and each added layer of value/expense that is added by any and all further prohibition). This added value can of course increase the propensity to engage in further risky behaviour as the reward for success grows higher. This actually creates and exacerbates the issue of nefarious sourcing!

This perverse system converges to the extremities of what could possibly be foreseen, as both sides of the coin develop 'weaponry' to aid in their effort to either provide or prohibit the product.

tomofson

Deleted User wrote: »

Up until a few months ago I really paid little attention to the civil laws or the constitution of this country. I didn't pay much attention to the inequality, discrimination or injustice that might result from either the Irish Law system or the Constitution that is the fundamental driver of Irish society and its laws. Although, I've been acutely aware of all the cock ups and ridiculousness of Irish society since I was a young child.

So the marriage equality referendum came along last year. Again it didn't really affect me as I'm a straight male living in a country fairly well suited to a man of my persuasion. In the end though I was slightly moved by the fact that the gay community have to fight so hard to achieve an equal status in society. And even though the vote went in their favour I was shocked to see the tide of hostility and opposition to a Yes vote by a sizeable minority of the population. I was also a bit shocked that the Irish public rejected the right of people less than 35 to run for the office of president which to my mind is just age discrimination. Anyway, it all woke me up to other problems in Irish society where the law seems a bit rubbish and it got me thinking about where I stand on some issues like abortion, drug usage, prostitution and removing the stranglehold that the Catholic church has on Irish primary schools.

Personally, I'm very liberal. As in, more or less anything goes as far as I'm concerned as long as it doesn't physically affect other humans/animals negatively. So as far as I'm concerned you can do as much drugs, booze and prostitutes as you want as long as you're not affecting someone else negatively and you can then end your own life in a clinic if you want to go that way and you can say whatever you want prior to your own death, even inciting violence, as long as you don't end up obviously causing violence. So basically anything goes as long as no one else is proven to be getting harmed as a result of your actions.

Alas the law is not so liberal. It prevents you doing most of the above things and actually harms you when you do any of these things even if you only harmed yourself in the process.

So I'm wondering, do all these laws actually work? As in laws around drug, prostitution, abortion, lack of a right to die at a time of your choosing. Do they work? The evidence I see or at least the reality that I see indicates to me that these laws just don't work. Fair enough, I might not be doing anything illegal myself and maybe the majority don't do anything illegal but I do see it everywhere. Dublin is full of junkies. I was only talking to a friend last night who is a high ranking, working professional in a major industry and he was telling me he did drugs recently. The amount of Irish men that have been involved with a prostitute is probably not a well known accurate figure but I hear it all the time how Irish men are going abroad and end up with a prostitute, particularly those younger than my generation, and there is a considerable sex industry in Ireland. I would have my doubts about what most Irish men are getting up to when they travel to Amsterdam or Germany or on their way out to Australia. And Irish women are heading abroad in their thousands for abortions. Something like 160,000 Irish women have had abortions in Britain alone per published figures. And there is some Irish people who travel to Europe to die at a time of their own choosing and I'm sure there is plenty of people who want to have that right should they get sick in the future.

If we liberalized the law system and legalized all areas such as abortion, drugs, prostitution and the right to die while at the same time properly regulating these areas and educating our children/adults so they can make informed decisions then would we end up with a better, fairer and more inclusive society? I just don't see these punitive laws working at the moment and even if they did work then I'm not convinced that they are good for society. I mean like, putting a woman in jail for having an abortion after being raped or putting a drug user in jail even though they ended up on drugs due to homelessness and neglect by the state seems wrong to me. And putting a woman or man in prison for paying for consensual sex seems wrong to me. And telling someone with a painful terminal illness that is making them miserable that they cannot die at a time of their own choosing seems wrong to me. And with most of these areas, all the current laws seem to put lives at risk. Prostitutes have to take extra risks. Drug takers have to take extra risks and at the same time these laws create a perfect environment/industry for criminals who exploit the opportunity and create even more risk as their activities are unregulated mainly.

In practice a liberal, but in peoples bloodlust vengeful vindictive minds a right wing unforgiving punitive.

Torakx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPQ5dSq6Iks
Stefan Molyneux makes some good arguments for liberty.
He has a few videos up with hour long debates which cover a lot of points brought up here.

Marc Stevens might also be of interest regarding the constitution and application of the courts and by laws.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi4XDTyeHqA
His overall point is to show that it is governance by force.
He asks for evidence that does not exist. The constitution only applies because a judge assumes the majority believes it does.
Which they do. That's where I see the need for knowledge instead of more rules for living this life..

And a quote to sum up.
"The criminal type is the type of the strong human being under unfavorable circumstances: a strong human being made sick." Nietzsche