Charlie Stross writes:
> There're some more possibilities you forgot, if you follow
> this line of reasoning. Fit all pre-17 year olds with chastity
> belts because sex before 17 violates the age of consent.
> Strip-search people every week to look for suspicious signs
> that they've been engaging in sadomasochistic sexual
> activities that cause physical damage.
I think laws generally tend to be too strict when they are difficult to
enforce, so that they are easier to enforce in those cases when they *can*
be enforced.
Once technology develops to allow a law to be enforced more easily, the law
itself needs to be adapted. The assumption that something is difficult to
enforce is usually designed into laws, so when this assumption stops being
true, the law needs to evolve consistently - in the spirit of what the law
was originally meant to achieve, not in the spirit of what the letter of the
law currently says.
I am looking forward towards a time when technology will enable us to limit
ourselves to good behavior by means of technology rather than by means of
law. However, I fear that some dumbsters in charge won't realize that
existing laws *do* need to be reconsidered and adapted once this takes
place. If they are not, this could easily lead to an Orvellian society.
- denis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:26 MDT