Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA
It's the fundamental lack of respect for the law that's a primary concern for me, yes. The destructive nature of it is secondary but a factor to some extent. Once might be bad judgment, twice is willful misconduct that's counterproductive to society. (hence my previously stated position that it ought to be two strikes & you're out, not three).
|
This is a very interesting statement considering the context of this thread. We have a man here who might not have broken the law even though his actions seem intuitively
wrong. I would consider stalking and killing unarmed teenagers a detriment to society, yet the law may permit us to do that evidently. On the other hand, we celebrate certain acts of civil disobedience such as the Boston Tea Party and Rosa Parks not moving to the back of the bus for moving society forward. Now I certainly don't mean to compare sparking up a fatty to the the civil rights movement, but it's difficult for me to see the law in black and white when they can be as flawed as the men that create them. But even if you do accept the law absolutely, isn't it a contradiction to believe it's okay to kill someone for minor crimes when the law itself says it isn't?