# Laws should be written to be followed, not to 'send messages.' **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 16, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350 "2011-12-16T00:28:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/1 "2011-12-16T00:28:36Z")
Sometimes in political debate, we talk about “the message it sends” to undertake a given policy. There seems to be an assumption that the penumbration of political implication around the law is more important than the law being just. > [@Do democrats want illegal alien votes?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-democrats-want-illegal-alien-votes/606195/26): > > I am very much anti illegal-immigration but I don’t think illegal immigrants are terrible people. I would be one of the first ones swimming the Rio Grande if I was a poor person in Mexico but it still doesn’t make it right. We shouldn’t just grant rights to illegal aliens ad-hoc and piecemeal. It \*\*sends the wrong message \*\*and doesn’t address the underlying issues. Illegal immigration is a root cause of many problems in this country with lots of different groups that are culpable including some businesses and politicians. There is nothing good about it compared to setting a reasonable policy in the first place and sticking to it. > > Right now, illegal immigrants face some degree of risks by doing what they do. We shouldn’t suddenly start mass imprisoning and deporting them as a whole but we shouldn’t do anything further to encourage the behavior either. The whole idea needs to rebuilt and rethought from scratch and this time everyone really has to play by the clearly defined rules. > > [bolding added] Immigration policy is a case of this. So’s the drug war. So, I suppose, is the ban on switchblades. We’re afraid to cut back on severe penalties rather than make punishments fit crimes, because to liberalize would be seen as ‘encouraging bad behavior.’ But in the end we instead have a law that isn’t really followed for being too severe. And then we stop believing law will ever be followed, and treat law as a sort of idle threat, like a preacher yelling about hellfire or a mother that threatens emptily to kill her kids for misbehavior. What a mess! I worry about this sort of indirect argument. Shouldn’t we get the law right, so it can usually work and be respected? And doesn’t that sometimes mean admitting we got it wrong before? I’m not just concerned about excessive penalties, but the whole ‘sending a message’ justification for whatever. How important is that criterion? Perhaps not completely unimportant, but surely less important than just having laws that can actually be enforced. No? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/2 "2011-12-16T00:30:30Z")
Perception being reality, sometimes the message is all a politician can accomplish. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/3 "2011-12-16T00:33:51Z")
I don’t really think your point contradicts his. He’s not saying there are laws against this country without authorization (that is, the illegal part in illegal immigrants) to send a message. He’s saying that if we ignore the fact that people broke those laws, and instead granted them rights and priviledges, we’d be sending the wrong message. And that message is that you can violate our laws and get rewarded for it. So he’s actually advocating your point more than you are - that laws should be made to be followed, and that we shouldn’t ignore them for political reasons. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/4 "2011-12-16T00:49:28Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I don’t really think your point contradicts his. He’s not saying there are laws against this country without authorization (that is, the illegal part in illegal immigrants) to send a message. He’s saying that if we ignore the fact that people broke those laws, and instead granted them rights and priviledges, we’d be sending the wrong message. And that message is that you can violate our laws and get rewarded for it. > > So he’s actually advocating your point more than you are - that laws should be made to be followed, and that we shouldn’t ignore them for political reasons. Sort of. He’s saying we shouldn’t change the existing law because it would send the wrong message. But in this case, he’s talking about changing the law only temporarily (ie, granting some sort of preference to those in the country) because it would sends the wrong message to potential illegal immigrants in the future. They won’t bother obeying the law because they’ll think they’ll get “amnesty” later. At any rate, the OP couldn’t have picked a worse example. He should try again with something that aligns more closely with his thesis, if such examples exist. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/5 "2011-12-16T03:14:32Z")
Obviously I was unclear. I want to liberalize immigration law, drug law, intellectual property law, etc. I think the penalties are excessive relative to the harm. That doesn’t mean legalizing everything. It means having rules which can be consistently applied and wherein punishments fit crimes. That’s why I worry when the conservative response whines about “sending the wrong message.” ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/6 "2011-12-16T03:46:54Z")
**foolsguinea** : total agreement. Take decriminalization of marijuana. People shouldn’t go to jail for forty years for having a couple ounces of pot in their pantry. But if we reduce the penalties, that is seen as “sending the message” that “drugs are ok.” To my mind, putting up those excessively harsh penalties in the first place “sent the message” that the legislature was batmuck crazy, and that some conservatives see hurting people as the primary goal of the justice system. Sometimes, harsher penalties make sense. And sometimes, more lenient ones do. You can’t get locked into a situation where leniency is “politically incorrect,” as that destroys your ability to maintain a balance. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/7 "2011-12-16T05:47:06Z")
I may end up quoting you there, Trinopus. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 11:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/8 "2011-12-16T11:40:15Z")
The current system, and particularly the sends the wrong message mentality, is designed to terrorize the population into obeying even unjust rules. It is a system that I don’t like, would like to see it torn down never to rise again. With such a high percentage of the general population in the US in prison, we can not honesty call ourselves a free state, because with these rules in place people are not living freely. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/9 "2011-12-16T11:45:04Z")
Well, it’s those in prison, those on parole, those disenfranchised as felons–then all of us who know we could be busted for something and try to keep our heads down. Reform is difficult, since the media will go after you hard if you get up too high, and the political parties want to present the image of a law-abiding Christian, however false that is in reality. Fear of embarrassment keeps more of us disenfranchised subtly. And then there are the undocumented aliens. So, yeah, kanicbird, you’re right. ---
**Author:** ![Corresponder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@Corresponder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corresponder)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/10 "2011-12-16T11:57:01Z")
I also don’t think someone should receive a harsher than usual prison sentence for a crime “in order to send a message” to others. The punishment should fit the particular situation. The convicted person should not have to serve more time in regard to potential acts of others. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/11 "2011-12-16T12:32:44Z")
This is one reason why all laws should have an expiration date (on the order of a few decades) – it would clean up the accumulation of “get tough”/“send a message” legislation. (The bigger advantage is that it would keep politicians out of mischief by keeping them busy re-enacting the genuinely necessary laws.) ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/12 "2011-12-16T13:57:38Z")
Then we can have more showdowns like the absurd debt limit crisis. “CUT TAXES OR WE WON’T RENEW MURDER LAWS!” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/13 "2011-12-16T14:28:35Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > Obviously I was unclear. I want to liberalize immigration law, drug law, intellectual property law, etc. I think the penalties are excessive relative to the harm. “Liberalize” is a pretty vague term. I’m all for eliminating drug laws, so I don’t need any more specificity there. For the other two, I’d need to see details before I jumped on that train. > [@](#): > > That doesn’t mean legalizing everything. It means having rules which can be consistently applied and wherein punishments fit crimes. > > That’s why I worry when the conservative response whines about “sending the wrong message.” Why is that a “conservative” response? And, whining about some vague statement by some undefined person or persons… well, it’s hard to get all worked up about that. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2011, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/laws-should-be-written-to-be-followed-not-to-send-messages/606350/14 "2011-12-16T14:54:23Z")
In keeping with **John Mace** , why is it a Conservative angle to… enforce the law and punish transgressors? I might be all for increased immigration if anyone bothered to ask. That doesn’t mean I’m against laws to guard borders and demand that immigrants obey the law as with anyone else. And **Shagnasty** ’s peice here might not have covered every argument, but it seems that he intended that we should send the right message on top of various reforms. I have no problem with sending messages provided the law does so through practical rules and regulations.