Is it okay to break the law?

[Vee]

Laws exist for a reason and we are supposed to follow them for our benefit and the overall peace in our society, but I wonder if sometimes it might be justified to break the law.
For example, a person might need a weed based medication to fight an illness, but if the substance is illegal they would have to break the law.
There are other situations, of course. When the laws are unfair or go against our conscience, should we break them or blindly obey because, well, it's the law?

 

[Enoch07]

I voted sometimes not because I believe it's ok to break the law. But sometimes you are forced to break the law to survive.

Example: Your driving down the road. The car in front of you comes to an abrupt start unexpectedly. You don't have time to stop without crashing. So you apply break and turn the wheel to the skirt by the stopped vehicle in front of you. Congratulations you have just broken the law. But you avoided an accident, no damage to persons or vehicles.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I voted sometimes, so long as breaking said law brings no negative consequence to others.

 

[Father Heathen]

"One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." &

"I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law." - Martin Luther King Jr.

 

[Father Heathen]

Also, 99% of people always drive at least slightly above the speed limit, so there's that.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Also, 99% of people always drive at least slightly above the speed limit, so there's that.

Also, laws designed to regulate and control the lower echelons of society should not apply to their social, cultural or intellectual betters.

 

[Father Heathen]

Also, laws designed to regulate and control the lower echelons of society should not apply to their social, cultural or intellectual betters.

For example?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

For example?

People who talk in the theatre.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Generally speaking, if there is no victim there should be no law against it. However, sometimes we need laws to prevent potential problems and create an orderly process, such as with traffic laws.
But, generally, if we create no special circumstances for yourself, treat others with a base-level of respect, and don't hurt anyone, break all the laws you want.

 

[Father Heathen]

People who talk in the theatre.

Elaborate a little further.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Elaborate a little further.

They're an example of lower echelons of society.

 

[Father Heathen]

They're an example of lower echelons of society.

Could you give an example of a law that should apply exclusively to them and from which everyone else would be exempt?

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Could you give an example of a law that should apply exclusively to them and from which everyone else would be exempt?

Exclusively to people who talk in the theatre? Not a current law, no.

 

[Father Heathen]

Exclusively to people who talk in the theatre? Not a current law, no.

That's what I wanted an example of to understand your point. Not of who you regard as "lower echelon", but rather of a law that you feel should only apply to a specific group of society rather than to society as a whole.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

That's what I wanted an example of to understand your point. Not of who you regard as "lower echelon", but rather of a law that you feel should only apply to a specific group of society rather than to society as a whole.

Oh, stuff like open container laws, curfews, weapons laws, certain road laws, free assembly. stuff like that. A few good old fashioned sumptuary laws would be nice, but I admit I'm a bit old fashioned and they're probably not strictly necessary.

 

[Stevicus]

Laws exist for a reason and we are supposed to follow them for our benefit and the overall peace in our society, but I wonder if sometimes it might be justified to break the law.
For example, a person might need a weed based medication to fight an illness, but if the substance is illegal they would have to break the law.
There are other situations, of course. When the laws are unfair or go against our conscience, should we break them or blindly obey because, well, it's the law?

I don't think blind obedience in anything is ever a good thing. If there's a good reason for a law to exist, if it serves the interests of the public, then it should be obeyed. A truly healthy society would have the fewest laws possible, whereas an unhealthy or corrupted society has too many laws. Tacitus once observed "the more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."

Likewise, if a law is passed under false pretenses, then it shouldn't be considered valid, in my opinion. The laws against marijuana were originally passed because of a movie called "Reefer Madness," which showed people going crazy after smoking marijuana. Nowadays, it's considered a joke and totally without scientific merit, and yet, the laws against marijuana were based upon that movie and other such misinformation. That would be an example of a law passed under false pretenses.

 

[Father Heathen]

Oh, stuff like open container laws, curfews, weapons laws, certain road laws, free assembly. stuff like that. A few good old fashioned sumptuary laws would be nice, but I admit I'm a bit old fashioned and they're probably not strictly necessary.

By what criteria would the law identify and divide the "echelons"?

 

[Jumi]

Most of the time. Almost all of the time if laws are as just as in my country. Only reason I could think of breaking it, would be to save someone's life.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Laws exist for a reason and we are supposed to follow them for our benefit and the overall peace in our society, but I wonder if sometimes it might be justified to break the law.
For example, a person might need a weed based medication to fight an illness, but if the substance is illegal they would have to break the law.
There are other situations, of course. When the laws are unfair or go against our conscience, should we break them or blindly obey because, well, it's the law?

I’m trying to think of all the reasons to obey a law. Here’s what I came up with:

- because it was instituted by an authority that you respect or defer to.
- because it’s just.
- because the punishment you’d receive for breaking the law isn’t worth it.
- because upholding the law benefits you over the long run, even if you might be disadvantaged over the short term in one particular instance.

I can’t think of any others offhand, but there may be others.

In any case, if there aren’t any reasons to obey the law and some sort of benefit in disobeying it, then the law should be disobeyed.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

By what criteria would the law identify and divide the "echelons"?

Well, there's your "scum" and your "not scum".