Are Depraved Indifference Laws Wrong?

[jogger08152]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AI68 wrote:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no law that forces anyone to drive at any certain speed. The law forbids driving above a certain speed. There is a huge difference.

Forbidding an action is different from forcing an action.

Forbidding an action may or may not be oppressive.

Forcing an action is slavery by definition.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



So you're game to drive 55, but you find stop signs objectionable?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Good point. And one I should have thought of when I made the post.

I should have said that there is no law that forces anyone to drive on public roads, period. All public roads are built on property that some local, state, or federal gov't bought and paid for. Or at least paid for the right of way. That right of way includes the right to make traffic laws.

If I build a road on my own property and let someone drive on it, then I can make the rules. And I could take away that person's "license" to drive on it. And they are still not being "forced" to stop at my stop signs, since they were never "forced" to drive on my road.

[/ QUOTE ]
Roads are just one example of this type of law, but to run with the example, here's another: you are forced to pay taxes to build and maintain the roads, even if you elect not to use them. You could of course argue that nobody forces you to work (and thus pay taxes), but the quality of life issues that would result from lack of work make it a practical necessity.

If you don't feel that society passing tax laws is inherently onerous, what's the issue with a law requiring someone to put forth minor effort to save a stranger's life? Again, a law that "forces" someone to save another person's life at little or no cost to the reluctant hero is pretty clearly +EV relative to any number of extant laws that force us to do things (like pay taxes to build roads we may not use, or fund public education when we are childless) that we accept without a second thought.

Personally, I find it far more disturbing that we (apparently) need "forced samaritan" laws in the first place.