Discuss laws that are outrageous, outdated, wasteful, ridiculous and just plain funny here!
My dad told me of a law in, I believe, Alabama in which an unwed couple cannot be in a vehicle alone. if i remember correctly one had to get out and walk along side. My dad and a female cousin were pulled over for this.
Also in Michigan there was (or maybe still is) a law that states if your driving your car down the road and you come upon a horse you must pull your car off the road and behind a bush. While behind the bush you are to DISASSEMBLE your car until the horse has passed so as to not frighten the horse...Anyone got a blow torch??
Here in Australia there are some states that still have anti-WITCHCRAFT laws. And in Victoria it is illegal to wear hot pink pants after midday on Sundays.
LOL Boy, what a funny forum located on a crime site!!! Rich, I think those public horse troughs are the people's way of preparing for the y2k. Hoo knows, we may need them! And as for Athena, it must have been a puritan who made that law in Kansas! You should email it to the prez -- let him have a nice day! AND yes women should be whipped once a month, BUT ONLY ONCE A MONTH. Now, that leaves us the question about men. How many times should we whip them? Heh, heh, heh???
D.Battles, then lets say let the one day the women is whipped be the only day that the men are not whipped.Seems fair to me. :)
Want to hear about rediculous laws? How about some that still really effect us.
For example, Companies are legally "Fictitious Persons", and it is because of this definition that they are granted essentially all the same rights that real people are entitled to according to the US constitution (and similarly for most other countries). However, companies don't go to jail when their negligence or outright policies criminaly cause pain or death, and they don't get executed when their policies and actions kill (even in states that have the death penalty). Imagine the uproar if some serial killer were convicted, and asked to pay $1,000,000 to the family of each victim instead of going to jail or the electric chair? Or to put it even more realistically, in Michigan a driver can kill (manslaughter) 3 people before the state is legally required to revoke his or her drivers license (though a judge may do so at an earlier stage), and each case of manslaughter may result in jail time as well, in addition to a fine and reparations to the family of the victim. There is no limit to the number of fatal industrial accidents a company can have, as long as it can keep paying the fines and reparations. Its company charter can never be revoked. And in fact large companies have calculated how many such accidents they expect to have per year and how much they should budget for these costs. Imagine sitting down at the beginning of the year and saying, "well, I expect I'll kill 2 people with my car this year, so I better set aside $3 million for legal fees, fines, and reparations".
On a similar note, fines for industrial polution in the united states are often set so low, companies sometimes prefer to intentionally break the law and just budget the fine into their costs. "Its gonna cost us $1.5 million in fines to keep poison Spring Creek through the rest of this year, but we've budgeted for it and profits are up, so no worries."
On a completely different note, US citizens, such as myself, grow up being taught that we have "fredom of speach" because the constitution says "Comgress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speach or of the press . . . ". However, the Supreme Court has interpreted this according to English common law, which understands freedom of speach and of the press in terms of "no prior restraint". THis means, the government isn't allowed to STOP you from saying anything (no prior restraint), but the govenment CAN decide that certain things are illegal to say. So if you do say them, you can be prosecuted and you can go to jail--and many people have gone to jail under laws that take advantage of this "no prior restraint" interpretation of free speach--the US state department usually call these people "political prisoners" when countries like Iraq and China use these kinds of laws. Additionally, the Supreme Court has often ruled that the govenment CAN use prior restraint, that is, it CAN prevent you from printing/saying certain things that are determined to be detrimental to "national security". Which, by the way, is the same excuse China usually uses to lock up dissidents and prevent them from priting/saying things the government doesn't like. For example, there was an ex-CIA agent who wrote a book on the CIA (can't remember the name off the top of my head right now). The CIA went to court and requested that the publication be blocked. The judge read the book (the judge is allowed to read it, but regular citizens aren't!) and said he wouldn't block the publication of the book, but he would order the deletion of about 200 sections, a section being anything from one word up to several pages in length. So much for freedom of speach and of the press.
To me these are really weird laws, and they are being enforced today.
In Florida there is a law that says snooring is illegal, its like disturbing the peace.
aren't these laws really wierd, you are allowed to strip in your front garden but only if no-one sees (in kingston, england) stiff upper lip eh