"The problem with NOT having "catch all" laws is that, when used properly, they CAN save lives."

"When used properly" communism, socialism, fascism, automatic weapons, and nuclear devices "CAN save lives." -- Some of us, however, still think its a bad idea to promote their general use on the one-in-a-million chance that we might get lucky.

You seem highly impressed with the idea that unlimited freedom of action by government agents "CAN save lives." I've no doubt it can. As a black man, however, I'm CERTAIN, it destroys and COSTS far more lives than it saves.

This country was founded on the well proven belief that the government WILL abuse its power. Our justice system is predicated on the belief that "One should never let their morals or principles stand in the way of doing what is right." And, I might add, laws shouldn't prevent one either.

The justice system offers myriad opportunities to defend oneself by proving illegal action was a necessity. That it doesn't always work is unfortunate, but its the high risk attached to such a defense that helps ensure "legal" law-breakers act only WHEN absolutely necessary.

We can absolve law-breakers who acted in good faith, we cannot punish or deter those who legally act in bad faith -- other than making their actions illegal.

Arguments that the system is imperfect are disingenuous, at best. Nothing is perfect.

You are willing to give unlimited power and unchecked authority to the State, and are unwilling to take personal responsibility by accepting that constraining government may entail some risks, but failing to do so entails far more. But I suggest to you that "One should never let their morals or principles stand in the way of doing what is right."

Many "catch all" laws allow police agencies to pick up and interrogate sex offenders which could save innocent children. The recent child abduction going on here in FL (one county over from where we are) is a prime example. Unfortunately, this investigation and enforcement tool hasn't borne fruit in this particular instance. However, that does not negate the logic of the process or the tool.

Personally, I don't have a problem with ANY process or law that saves innocent lives. If it punishes the guilty in the process, so much the better..

Contrary to bad TV movies, the law has never stopped the government from doing anything it really wanted to do.

This seems to follow the precept that, if one breaks the law for the right reasons then one won't be punished.

This fallacy has been proven wrong time and time again, most recently with the TelCom scandals of a bit ago.

I came across a saying today in my internet travels that is so relevant and so dead on ballz accurate, it's scary...

One should never let their morals or principles stand in the way of doing what is right.

Words to live bi.

Michale......

What catch-all laws are "incompatible with" is the rule of law. It can not possibly be just to prosecute someone for an offense that didn't exist until the government decided to prosecute!

Your argument's hardly new. People have been proclaiming the efficiency of fascism since Machiavelli. Well -- OK, I'll grant you its efficient -- Wrong, but efficient.

You don't have to legalize murder because on rare occasions it may be justified as self defense. You certainly don't have to grant the government the legal right to prosecute anyone for anything because it MIGHT one day legitimately need to arrest someone who's broken no actual law.

Contrary to bad TV movies, the law has never stopped the government from doing anything it really wanted to do. (Where have you been the last 8 years?) It certainly wouldn't stop the government from doing anything it really NEEDED to do. NOT giving government a blank check, however, WILL curtail at least SOME government excesses.

Yes, it IS their misuse, and not having catch-all laws is one way to address the problem.

"Catch All" laws do have their uses and should not be discarded out of hand.

It is only their MIS-USE that causes problems..

It's similar to the concept that better 100 guilty men go free rather than one innocent man be detained.. While a wholly idealistic and pleasant sentiment, it's completely incompatible with the world of the here and now..

Michale.....

Its not just unconstitutional, its as fascist as you can get.

You mean like terrorism???

Michale.....

This law seems to be one of those "I can't define it but I'll know it when I see it" laws that should never be passed because they are too subjective.

...Stan