Posted on 06/06/2015 6:30:56 PM PDT by Kaslin
It should come to no one’s surprise that we have way too many federal laws. It’s to the point where–on average–we break at least three of them every day without ever knowing it. Conservatives may complain about out tax code–and they should–but our criminal code is also out of control.
At the recent conference on justice reform hosted by FreedomWorks in June, our criminal code was subject to a prolonged discussion regarding how outrageous it has become
There are at least 5,000 federal criminal laws, with 10,000-300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. In fact, our entire criminal code has become a leviathan unto itself. In 2003, there were only 4,000 offences that carried criminal penalties. By 2013, that number had grown by 21 percent to 4,850. The code has become so big, that the Congressional Research Service and the American Bar Association simply do not have enough staff to adequately categorize every law we have on the books.
The Heritage Foundation is also concerned about this growth in our criminal code, which often contains laws that are often subject to a wide array of interpretation and are vaguely written [emphasis mine]:
Many new criminal offenses also are deeply flawed. Many federal criminal laws make it possible for the government to convict someone even if he acted unknowingly or without criminal intent (that is, without what lawyers call a guilty mind, or mens rea). The unfortunate result is that people who do their best to remain law-abiding members of society can no longer be confident that they are safe from prosecution. The Heritage Foundation and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers reported the results of a joint study finding that in the 109th Congress, 60 percent of new nonviolent, non-drug offenses lacked a criminal-intent requirement adequate to protect Americans who engaged in conduct that they did not know was illegal or otherwise wrongful from unjust criminal punishment.
Despite this rampant overcriminalization, Congress continues to criminalize at an average rate of one new crime for every week of every year. Practically all inherently wrongful conduct has been criminalized several times over, yet from 2000 through 2007, Congress enacted 452 new criminal offenses (which does not even count the innumerable crimes defined by agency regulation under delegations of authority from Congress). Congress must halt its overcriminalization rampage and begin to eliminate vague, overbroad criminal offenses that punish good people who violate one of the tens of thousands of federal criminal offenses without criminal intent.
There is law and order, and then there’s overcriminalization that often bars Americans from successful reentry into society. Misdemeanors, even arrests that don’t lead to a conviction, can be economically disastrous to the estimated 100 million Americans that have some sort of offense on their records. It’s also chipping away at the family structure as well. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 54 percent of Americans in federal or state prison were parents to minor children.
All of this leads to abject poverty, which means the welfare rolls, which are already burdened, are subject to additional strain, though one that could be erased through reform. We’re the number one country when it comes to imprisoning our own citizens. It’s not fiscally sustainable, it’s not serving the public interest by upholding law and order–it’s just slowly chipping away at societal building blocks–like the family unit–by haphazardly adding to our onerous criminal code. There’s certainly room to reform the code, and save the taxpayers and families the grief by axing redundant or vague laws from our books.
According to the Constitution, there are only three federal crimes: treason, piracy and counterfeiting. Everything else is outside the Constitution as written.
“The more corrupt a government the more laws it passes’’.
Enough that we are all guilty of breaking them. The authorities just have to pick the one they want to go after someone over.
We need to to flush all federal laws and regulations ever 20 years and start over fresh using the US Constitution as the base.
Of course our politicians are too lazy and corrupt to do that.
Federal laws will be the least of our problems.
Say hello to the New World Anti-Christ Government.
That’s not entirely accurate. Article I, Section 8 states Congress has the power to (1) provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States; and (2) define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations. Article III, Section 3 delegates the power to declare the punishment of treason. But no where does it state Congress cannot define other crimes and their punishments. Also, Congress had the power, but were not required, to provide those punishments. If they took no action, there would be no punishment for those crimes. They could have made them punishable with fines only or short prison sentences.
Under your interpretation, defrauding the federal government, destroying federal property, committing perjury in federal court, or committing murder in a federal jurisdiction cannot be crimes.
How 52 foot trailers will it take to move a single paper copy of all federal laws and rules, regulations and executive orders with the force of law? Remember regulations say you can only put 80,000 pounds in one trailer.
What was the old adage? Ignorance of the law is no excuse? Good luck knowing a million laws.
Ah, an interesting question for a math lover. So many variables: paper size and density, single sided or duplexed, font type and size. Or just say screw it and put them on a flash drive.
But really, the length to weight ratio for commercial trucks and the 40 ton max are to prevent little things like bridge collapses and lessen road damage. That means less tax payer money spent on road repair. And fewer cars falling in a river or chasm. It’s a pitiful amount spent now, but it could require much more.
Probably one of the most misunderstood expressions in the world. Often attributed to Aristotle, mistranslation and out of context reading have contributed to that misunderstanding. In the context of ancient Greece and Rome, there were many customary laws, rules, and social mores. It was considered a ridiculous proposition that someone who lived their whole life in the area would not know what was acceptable. Alternatively, translating the expression in another way means “Not knowing the law is harmful,” which sounds like something Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle would say.
Also, the general rule is you need notice of the law before it can be enforced against you (see Lambert v. California, 355 U.S. 225). However, if you go and engage in some activity, you have a duty to know the relevant law associated with that activity. Knowledge will be imputed. If you want to drive, you need to know traffic laws. If you want to fly an airplane, you need to know aviation laws. If you are a construction contractor, you need to know about labor laws, environmental law, zoning, building codes, and laws imposed on building contractors themselves. If you don’t engage in these activities, the law does not apply and you need not know it.
That argument can't float. The government is supposed to be limited, limited to the enumerated powers authorized in the Constitution.
If the government can assert authority where none is granted, then there is no limit to the power of the government. Thus it would not be a limited government...
Congress has no general police powers. It has police powers limited to its delegated powers. That is why you don’t have a single federal police force instead of state and local police forces. Notice the FBI doesn’t issue speeding tickets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.