Originally posted by Zakath
Interesting assumption. Is there a copy of the legal code you propose substituting for the current Federal Code available for exmaination somewhwere?
Merely reducing the number of laws doesn't guarrantee anything about the frequency that they would be broken; why do you assume the crime rate would be lower?
No. There is no proposal on paper that I know of, excepting the bible, which will only make sense if you understand the nature of God.
And yes. The number of laws does not theoretically dictate the frequency that they will be broken. However, fewer laws can more easily be made clear. And clearer laws are easier to follow than arbitrary or muddled ones.
But the strength of the system is in the correct principles it is founded on and the efficiency of the penalties used when the priciples are violated.
I disagree. The CR's propose the institution of "restitution" for certain property crimes. Such court ordered restitution must be tracked and administered to make certain it's being paid to the recipient in a timely manner.
Oh. Actually I'm not arguing the CR position. I would be arguing the ShadowGov position.
So now that we are aware of that, the administration would not be nearly as burdensome as you think. It won't work the same as todays government administration because the judge is not getting paid.
Our current legal system has something similar to restitution in place for one small segment of the population - children on child support. It's nicknamed the "Deadbeat Dad" program and it provides for administration of cour-ordered child care payments. It is maintained by the US Office of Child Support Enforcement, created in 1975, under the US Dept of Health and Human Services. Monitoring and administering "restitution" for the 17 million cases in this one program alone costs the US taxpayers $4 billion for the fiscal year 2002
(Budget info here). I fail to see how the proposed reorganization is going to do away with the need for such programs or the cost of administering them.
Some examples:
You get caught shoplifting. You pay 2 to 5 times the amount of the goods stolen. If that means clothes worth $100 - then you pay as much as $500 on the spot.
Let's say it's a $3000 diamond ring; You pay up to $15000 on the spot. Let's say you don't have that in the bank but your assets are worth that. The judge puts those assets in the hands of a liquidator, and the liquidator takes care of the rest.
Let's say you don't have anything to your name and you stole a $3000 diamond ring. Then you get to work for an indentured servant company until the debt is paid. And no, the household judges don't do this, and indentured servants are limited what can be done to them.
Any way, the judge does not need to do THAT much.
Child support - there wouldn't be any. Child support is a bad idea, there is no place for it in the law.
Okay. Your're going to ask how THAT's going to work. Well, a divorce will be a divorce. The 2 parties have basically nothing to do with each other anymore. If there are kids, the father gets the kids (unless he is a criminal) and that is the last word on the subject.