Think of a new criminal law

Remove all ads!

For example, I really think there should be a criminal law rule starting "Whosoever in advertisement falsely claims association with the receiver..." and another one starting "Whosoever attempts to disguise advertisement as response to message never sent...".

It's so damn wrong. First, they intrude on your e-mail address. Next, they deceive your spam filters. That alone should be punishable like trespass or even like breaking into property. Next, they claim to be long lost friends, or business partners or whatever such. Or they lie that you sent them something. Others will even make up some agreements you have supposedly made with them. Or outright frame it like you have to pay something, period.

The bloody bastards make all that to sell products. If it's possible to contact them to buy the thing, it's possible to contact them to get them indicted properly as they should be.

Another good way would be to interpret the standing trespass and forgery laws to include this kind of offenders.

So, what do you think should be a criminal offence that isn't one as of now? It can be something entirely new, or a different type of an existing offence, or something that is already punishable as of now, but deserves to be made a separate offence in its own right.

 

Making alot of noise when you eat. That really pisses me off.

...Sorry Chev...

 

Being mean... Seriously.

 

How about making songs with only two repeated chords(or less)? It seems thats the latest rage amongst most bands and it'd be nice to never hear terrible music again.

 

I think that the greater authority and privileges of adults in comparison to minors should be made criminal discrimination... an 18 year old who is too dumb/lazy to have finished high school has the right to vote, whereas a 15 year old with a college degree in politicology (for example) isn't, people should be judged on merits, not age

 

Fat women are only allowed to show their forearms and head in public. It can't be tight clothing either. I had a horrible experience today involving fat girls wearing too little clothing. It's damn near pornographic because I'm not sure of those are boobs or flab.

However on a serious note I agree with Chev. IIRC spam costs the western world something in the billion dollar value area.

 

Indecent exposure bothers me as well. I don't really care, but I'd rather see people naked altogether than wearing revealing clothing. Especially if it gets too frowsy, like, e.g., trousers going down and underwear showing. It's disgusting to me when women do that and it makes me utterly want to vomit when I see men dressed like that. I seriously think there should be a law on that. And thongs under transparent trousers as well. Just in public places, of course.

 

Sexual harrassment laws. Even with proof outside of filing your own lawsuit against a company most labor boards or companies dont seem to listen.

 

Showing midriffs in general needs to be illegal, I'm practically a waif but I hate having my stomach, half my back, and my underwear showing at all times.

I've heard of some terrible rape crimes and sexual harrasment cases that have gone unpunished. Yeah....I'd love something to be done about that in the near future....something involving a rubber band and a sharp knife comes to mind.

 

Hey hey hey!! That is a fashion statement that happens to look good on some chicks. I personally fell if laws start coming into effect about what people can wear, then that is infringing on personal freedoms.

 

Yeah, just ban it on fat people...
Sorry. Can't forget the sight. It was horrible.

 

When people start wearing unaesthetic clothing, that is infringing on other people's personal freedoms. The idea of an individual's rights and freedoms is that while the authorities can't cross them, other individuals can't either. Frowsy clothing is not the same as, let's say, outlawing blue trousers or yellow jackets or some such. People wouldn't be being told what to wear, or even what not to wear (leaving anything else for them to wear freely), but how to wear it - ie to wear properly, the way it was intended, without underwear sticking out from under trousers or skirts. For the ugly, and for the pretty indiscriminately, underwear is just it, underwear. Meaning it's worn under something.

And it's thrice as annoying when men do that.

 

People who spit on the floor should be flogged. Be it at the theatres, on sidewalks, in subway stations, etc. It's ****ing disgusting, so aim for the bush dammit! (no pun)

Dog owners who let their animal poo anywhere should be burned. Along with their dog. Seriously.

Polluting must be punished.

 

I don't.

Now lack of respect for your elders - that would be something to consider.

 

@Oxymore: hmmm, ever visit Singapore?

 

Touhger laws and more realistic penalties need to be put in place for residential (custodial) parents who stop non-residential (non-custodial) parents from seeing their children, particularly when court orders are in place. A 'slap on the wrist' is simply not good enough. Throw a few in prison and see how they like it, maybe that'll send a message top all parents like that that what they are doing is a serious crime against children.

Oh, and introduce a few laws to stop people putting stupid bumper-stickers on - especially those "Bad Boy/Bad Girl/Bad B!tch" and "No Fear" ones.

 

You sure have a warped understanding of what personal freedoms are and who is infringing on whoms personal freedom at that.

But while we're at it: I really look forward to the day cheap shoes are banned. There simply isn't any excuse for them.

 

Except for poor people being able to afford them...

 

In that case I plead for banning poor people.

 

Didn't we already discuss the topic of 'damage' being done as a punishment sexual predators? And I think that we ran into the same argument that we would run into with most of these laws. They infringe on other peoples freedoms, and this in itself is a difficult, if not impossible, to over come.

I would agree with Foradasthar. If a person is judged by a jury of their peers, and/or peer appointed magistrate, to be guilty, then that person has forfeited some of their rights in that regard.