Ultimate law is crap?

Started by Ieatfood7, April 06, 2014, 08:50:06 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Piotr

Quote from: Taysby on April 06, 2014, 09:08:53 PM
Quote from: Death, the Kid on April 06, 2014, 05:50:42 PM
Quote from: Piotr on April 06, 2014, 02:56:41 PM
Quote from: Keyeto on April 06, 2014, 09:38:33 AM
Quote from: Ieatfood7 on April 06, 2014, 08:50:06 AM
3-the purpose d punishment is to erase guilt, via retribution and restitution.

I feel like this last part was being a bit pedantic about the word choice, but it was not without its points. Perhaps some rewording of the law would make sense here.

And just to touch on te retribution stand point. You had mentioned that it's only purpose was to make the aggrieved feel better. A lot of times, that's all we can do here. As this is an Internet forum, we can't go around arresting people or using the real world set of laws so easily. That is why our law exists, and we use it here for the purposes of dealing with this forum.
I'll leave it as is for now. I just got off work and need me some sleep, but I'd like to see where this goes. As I said, this interested me as someone who is here to follow the law, and help make sure it is being followed.

Ok, guilt can be defined as "the state of being unpunished criminal".
This is all I read. Nowhere in the dictionary does it say this, nor is it logically accurate. Will a criminal feel guilt? No, because they may feel like they dos the just thing.

Also, are they not guity of breaking a law if they're not punished? And since they can't be punished until guilty, doesn't that mean nothing would ever happened?

When will you finally see all your falsities?

For the purposes of this law, guilt is defined as the above.  They are guilty of breaking the law if not punished.  Where does it say they can't be punished utill they are proven guilty?

Nowhere. The logic of reality is that one is guilty from the moment one commits crime.

Quote
This law takes people who aren't ignoramuses to properly use it.  Your comments are valid, if idiots are trying to interpret it.

This is a valid issue, law should be worded in way which is clear enough for ordinary people to understand. In that aspect, Ultimate Law is far better than, for example, EU regulation ;) Given a couple of pages of simple definitions, Ultimate Law can be used at state level.

MisterJH

^with disAstrous consequence. do you really think that wouldnt be abused worse than rihanna when chris brown got a hold of her? If 'logic' were used at state level.. Well America would finally take the dive off the cliff that im pretty confident in. Not that you said it should be used at state level, only that it could.