Posted on 09/25/2015 6:45:12 AM PDT by MichCapCon
That quote is all well and good if the only laws are pretty intuitive, like "Thou shall not kill" and "thou shalt not steal" . Unfortunately, it is a little more complicated than that now.
It’s one of the top quotes on my FR profile page.
“Ignorance of the law is no excuse”. Without that rule, ANYONE who commits a crime can just say, “I didn’t know...” And get off scott-free.”
Bullcrap only a lawyer could love. That made sense when laws had some semblance of sanity. Today you can violate a dozen laws just working in your yard, stopping to take a photograph, or pursuing some normal work relater activity.
There is no conceivable way someone can learn and interpret the body of law out there today.
Its generally impossible for a layman to even research it, even if they know a topic.
This is especially true in view of the layer of complexity added when modern laws simply authorize some regulatory agency to promulgate thousands of pages of dense regulations.
Next, for that to make sense, the law has to mean something so someone who reads it. When you abandon the principle that a law must by its very wording, be understandable, how can you hold someone to account for it.
No, “ignorance of the law is no excuse” needs to head to the garbage can. The method of putting it there is jury nullification. Refuse to convict.
I now must get a building permit to replace an existing window or even a water heater.
I’m OK with the idea of a building permit for an occupied dwelling or an electrical inspection to wire an occupied dwelling but a permit for a replacement window is all about keeping a county inspector employed.
Just hand everyone a book with all the laws!
“or laying a foundation in a technical wetland.”
And their definition of a wetland is not a layman’s. And the things that ruin a wetland are not what most normal people would easily recognize.
Some of the wetland stories are simply horrendous. And the fines are out of all proportion to the violation. I place them in the class of cruel and unusual punishment and excessive bail.
These 38,000 a day fines.... its time this country stood up to them.
And you are correct, it is regulatory agencies. The legislature writes a law, the agency puts out the regs. The Legislature huffs and puffs and says how this was never intended. And nothing changes.
“a law that says colored chicks and rabbits can’t be sold”
So do they have to use separate facilities and schools too?
First thing that came to mind.
Yes, that is where they should be going.
The law makes distinctions that some people don't really understand:
There is the intent to break a law;
There is the intent to commit an act which is unlawful;
There is the commission of a volitional act which is subsequently determined to recklessly endanger or injure others.
What should be done in the real world? What should be the result in the case of a 22 year old man who has sex with a 15 year old girl if everyone agrees that the 15 year old girl told the man that she was 18 (above the legal age for consent) and everyone agrees that he believed her? He didn't intend to break the law, but he did intend to commit an act which is in fact unlawful. What should be the result? Should the priority be to protect the child or the man's liberty?
Ya think????
Both fine suggestions, and I offer a third, jury nullification. Teach the prosecutors that they will lose these cases.
Quietly get on a jury, say all the things you know to say about following the law the judges instructions, etc. Then in the chambers wield the unassailable power a juror has. Your decision is beyond review.
Remember not to just be a stonewall digging your heels in. They will remove you for that.
Deliberate, argue, debate, etc. Pretend its a thread with 1500 posts. Enjoy yourself, act open minded, but know your decision is in stone. As a side benefit, maybe a liberal will pop a critical vessel.
"“Do you really think we want those laws observed?" Said Dr. Ferris. We want them broken. You better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against - then you'll know this is not the age for beautiful gestures. We're after power and we mean it. You fellows were pikers, but we know the real trick and you'd better get wise to it. There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now, that's the system Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."
Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, Part 2, Chapter 3, Page 404
Ohio got rid of traffic cameras! The Legislature did the right thing!
Jury Nullification is one of the greatest things our founders ever envisioned. Its why I have these quotes on my profile page.
THOMAS JEFFERSON (1789): I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.
JOHN ADAMS (1771): It’s not only ....(the juror’s) right, but his duty, in that case, to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgement, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.
ALEXANDER HAMILTON (1804): Jurors should acquit even against the judge’s instruction....”if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.”
U.S. vs. DOUGHERTY (1972) [D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals]: The jury has....”unreviewable and irreversible power...to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.”
“Ignorance of the law is no excuse.”
If so, then the statists can pass laws and fill the jail cells and turn the populace into submissive baaing sheep. As they are already doing.
I just watched “The prophecy of Ayn Rand” on Netflix. Good show. Who knew she pronounced her name that way? I didn’t.
That's not correct. The Federal Register is the listing of proposed regulations, new regulations, modified regulations, and rulemaking discussions. That is indeed 80,000 pages per year, which is a mind-numbing number.
However, the sum total of regulatory law is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations. It's much bigger!
Makes sense. ‘Mens Rea’ is the principle here, and it means “the guilty mind’. It is a legal principle stated thus: “Mens rea is a legal phrase used to describe the mental state a person must be in while committing a crime for it to be intentional. It can refer to a general intent to break the law or a specific, premeditated plan to commit a particular offense.”
The article clearly stated that this would not apply to criminal and drug laws. Look, even the ACLU is on board with what this Republican-controlled legislature is trying to do.
In my youth, at Easter time, at Woolworth’s (and other such places) you could buy chicks and baby rabbits who had been dyed spring colors. They were adorable in my child’s eyes but my parents thought it barbaric, and refused to buy them. These little creatures were not well treated and did not live long. I think this is what the law is referring to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.