“You make for a poor human being yourself. A good human being cares
more for the state of humanity and the safety and success of society
than his own selfish ends.”
Hence why a rigid application of law is a bad thing, because it’s bad for society.
Where does the selfish bit kick in , exactly? You think I’m an advocate for sensible justice policy for my own ends? I’m not a career criminal… 0.o
“When a person is told that performing an act will result in
punishment if they choose to perform the act then they must accept the
consequences.”
Why?
I’m not suggesting an overhaul of the justice system anyway, I think you might have taken my comments slightly out of context.
My point is that if a school system can punish a student for something like the above, then it is broken. If the only defence of an action is ‘they broke the law’, if the use of that law (or in this case, rule) is the only justification, then it’s likely not justified.
When someone is arrested for murdering someone, they’re not so much arrested for breaking the law, as breaking an important moral code - they pose a danger to society. As does a speeding or drunk driver. Someone who steals from someone else causes great emotional distress, plus the whole ownership thing. The law itself is just a formalisation of that act. A law for laws sake does not need to command your respect simply because it exists - respecting these laws does not magically benefit society through compliance.
Rules about haircuts in schools that may or may not relate to a subculture from nearly 30 years ago are allowed to be challenged.
tl;dr: the ‘because I said so’ justification should stop being relevant during adolescence. Law or not. That’s not being an anarchist, it’s thinking for oneself.
