If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
We wouldn't be able to enforce it anyway.
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Is this a valid argument for not creating a law? You heard it in regards to the smoking ban, fox hunting, driving with a mobile phone, and most recently in reference to a proposed ban on smacking. It presumably could apply equally to speeding, drug-taking, hell based on current rates of conviction, even rape. Is it ever a reason not to have these laws in the first place? Can this argument apply to certain laws but not others?
0
Comments
In the end I think it's ultimately just something one side of arguement try to use to avoid laws being created - and ultimately should never be applied to a law. In the end of the day a government can enforce any law it wants - the question isn't that it can't be done, but often would it be too expensive to do...
exactly, an uneneforcable law because it's badly written lands up getting used for things it wasn't intended for
also unenforcable laws are unenforable because they are problems that are best solved by other means other than criminal trial means like sorting them out or their causes out
I think children should have the same legal protection as adults. That includes removing the defence of "reasonable chastisement" when committing low-level violence against children.
In my opinion, this issue is symptomatic of the arbitrary legislative decisions of this government that are aimed not at real improvement or change, but at political posturing.
They want to be able to say 'we're fighting for children's rights,' so they think passing an unenforcable law is a good way to go about it. They'd be better off putting money into children's charities and social services.
Oh and also, re the smacking thing, I was smacked as a very small child if i'd done something naughty, and I haven't turned out too messed up. The issue is that there's a very fine line between chastising your child for bad behaviour, and losing your temper with the child. The latter is dangerous, but both are hard to detect, except by improving social services.
the fox hunting ban isn't enforced as such. you can foxhunt all you like.
it's similar to filesharing. if someone has loads of evidence and gives it to the CPS you could get done. But it's not going to happen.
But that's true of many crimes. Police often don't go around looking for crimes to investigate, the crimes are brought to their attention and then they investigate them.
You can break into someone's house and unless its reported to the police they won't do anything. They certainly won't go around knocking on your door and ask if you've been burgled just on the off-chance.
No it's not valid.
Laws, quite simply, determine what is lawful and what isn't. Enforcement is a different issue.
How many laws are 100% enforceable anyway? The argument is a slippery slope argument, i.e, why bother with laws at all?
i dont think an adult slapping another ound the face should be assualt either
So if your boss slapped you round the face in order to get you to comply quickly because "there wasn't time to explain it to you" that would be fine?
Depends how much s/he pays you!
Another 100k a year and I would paint a target on my cheek (either one)
nah they'd get one back and i'd laugh thry take it that seriously