Skip to main content

View Diary: Anti-Capitalist Meetup: A Necessary Evil, or Just Evil? (130 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The DA and Vigilantism: Good questions.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG, Geminijen

    The DA:

    In our current system the state (ie the district attorney of some legal area) can also accuse a person of wrong doing. Most serious crimes are prosecuted in this way. Murder, especially, since the victim is dead and can not be an accuser.  

    I think a lawless society could still have the DA. The community at large should also be able to accuse a person and bring them to court.

    Vigilantism:

    Even in the tone of your question, you negate the idea of getting a gun and enforcing your own law. It is clear from the way you wrote the comment, that will never be considered acceptable by you. Me either. If I took a poll among the readers of this post, I bet none of them would find such behavior acceptable.

    In truth, you don't get a gun and enforce your own desires because such behavior is unacceptable TO YOU. You don't go around thinking to yourself, "I wish it was legal to shoot my neighbor for his loud music at night." (At least I hope you don't.)

    If you did shoot your neighbor for his music in a lawless society, the DA would accuse you and bring you to court. You would face 12 of your other neighbors who would judge if your actions were reasonable and obeyed the Golden Rule. My guess is that 12 people would not find your actions reasonable and you would face their decision on punishment, just as you would now.

    The major norms of society most likely would not change without law. The major norms are the way they are because we do have a culture that is a much stronger enforcer of its rules than the law will every be.

    The main change that a lawless society would see would be the use of the law to permit things the culture would never permit, like poisoning the water supply to increase profits.

    De air is de air. What can be done?

    by TPau on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 05:18:20 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  But it's not so different from current system (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TPau

      on violent crimes. You prefer to go to common law and don't use written laws as far as I can understand. But in many cases where there is no minimal sentencing this not so different from what it already done.

      Since someone needs to investigate the crimes, police departments will have to exist as well (maybe in diminished capacity).

      So it's not going to be lawless society, just the society with somewhat different application of laws.

      •  Actually yes.... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FG

        Yes, I do think peace officers will be necessary even in a lawless society. Both to issue warrants, sooth tempers, prevent real destruction or harm, and to investigate crime that does not have a ready accuser.

        Common law or tort law is actually law. Juries are restrained by decisions that have happened before in related cases. While a record of previous decisions should be kept and juries should have access to that record, it should not restrain a jury. Each case should be decided on its own merits. Lawyers arguing a case, should be allowed to cite such decisions and how they related to the current case, but juries should decide whether the decisions of a previous jury are relevant or not. A judge should not be the one to make that decision.

        None of that is actually "law" however. Only what a jury decides in the moment.

        De air is de air. What can be done?

        by TPau on Sun Jun 17, 2012 at 06:58:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yet, in our patriarch society, many women (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TPau, NY brit expat

      have taken the law in their own hands to stop their abusers -- and usually end up in jail as the aggressor with accessive sentences to make sure the patriarchal right of men to punish their women is not overturned. Also, sorry i was late to the discussion, but I was at a 'stop and Frisk" protest of the law in new York City which is used to keep young black men in their place in a racist society.
      Lasws are always meant for the ruling class to keep us in line. But I agree there is a big difference between individual anarchy vs. a society in which the community tries to adjudicate differences without official punishments, but judges each case on its own.  But this can only be done in a small or highly decentralized society.  And there would probably still be a need of a few general guidelines.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site