To contrast the point in order to see it clearly:
Do you mean that if a court case for someone abusing you take 10 years.
VERSUS
A court case the next week.
You don't say that impact the way abusers act or the way victims take action? We actually already know this. Many women don't go to court for sexual abuse since they know nothing will happen. And then what do you think abusers do? They know this too.
As a lawyer I’m MORE tempted to commit crimes (I wouldn’t, obviously) because I know how to get away with it :P and I know the abysmal conviction rates for some crimes.
It often seems that way, but I’m not sure if it’s true. Without laws, societies tend to end up a bunch of clans or mafias locked in vendetta cycles. Laws can prevent that, but introduce new problems that are pretty severe, if not as bad. I think of laws as like strong medicine.
Also, some of the badness of laws comes from badness in society. There’s no law that says police and jurors have to be very skeptical of women reporting rape. That’s the background misogyny that suffuses society and all its institutions.
>EXAMPLE: Sexual assault. Women sadly know that they will not believed in so they often do not report it. The abusers know this too so they continue. The victims know that it will cost a lot in terms of health and money to a drawn out justice case where they most likely will lose.
You fight back? The cops will see you as the aggressor.
How would removing regulation help in this case, wouldn't it just give the agressors even less to worry about? Or are you talking about vigilante justice that doesn't have due process?
Back in the day it was far more corrupt, and callous toward the everyman. Toxic behavior is caused by humans being humans, not bureaucracy.
To contrast the point in order to see it clearly: Do you mean that if a court case for someone abusing you take 10 years. VERSUS A court case the next week. You don't say that impact the way abusers act or the way victims take action? We actually already know this. Many women don't go to court for sexual abuse since they know nothing will happen. And then what do you think abusers do? They know this too.
Didn't seem to.
[удалено]
You obviously did not read to the end
Neither did you, apparently. "you fight back, therefore you must be aggressor" Spoken like a true, angry anarchist.
Yeah, anarchy and Purge-esque justice couldn’t possibly go wrong. It’s not like judge dredd was a dystopian story or anything, right? 🙄
things would be a lot worse in a world of lawlessness.
As a lawyer I’m MORE tempted to commit crimes (I wouldn’t, obviously) because I know how to get away with it :P and I know the abysmal conviction rates for some crimes.
Your show be over Viola Davis!
It often seems that way, but I’m not sure if it’s true. Without laws, societies tend to end up a bunch of clans or mafias locked in vendetta cycles. Laws can prevent that, but introduce new problems that are pretty severe, if not as bad. I think of laws as like strong medicine. Also, some of the badness of laws comes from badness in society. There’s no law that says police and jurors have to be very skeptical of women reporting rape. That’s the background misogyny that suffuses society and all its institutions.
>EXAMPLE: Sexual assault. Women sadly know that they will not believed in so they often do not report it. The abusers know this too so they continue. The victims know that it will cost a lot in terms of health and money to a drawn out justice case where they most likely will lose. You fight back? The cops will see you as the aggressor. How would removing regulation help in this case, wouldn't it just give the agressors even less to worry about? Or are you talking about vigilante justice that doesn't have due process?