Slashdot Mirror


Using Wikis to Catch Outdated and Bad Laws?

Mick Ohrberg asks: "While listening to NPR this morning, I heard about the ridiculous law, passed in 1675, that orders the arrest of all American Indians entering Boston, and just now, 330 years later, is ready to be repealed. There are a LOT of really outdated and/or inappropriate laws out there; would an 'open' Wiki-style approach to law-making (with appropriate supervision, of course) be able to catch more of these 'bad' laws? Should the law-makers be able to keep track of all these laws, or are the number of laws simply too large for that relatively small group of people to keep track of? The more and more outdated copyright laws also come to mind as an area that could stand some more scrutiny."

6 of 137 comments (clear)

  1. The laws ARE open by MerlynEmrys67 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    There are a few strange building code laws, but by and large - for the price of publication - you too can get a full copy of the law as it exists on a given day.

    That said - this document would be HUGE and frankly no one will want to read it.

    I would love to run to become a congress critter with a sole platform of "I will not vote for any law that I can not read and understand". Unfortunately - I would have to vote against pretty much EVERY law being writen today. Of course the libertarian in me says this will be a good thing

    --
    I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them
  2. New laws more important than old ones by Trepalium · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Generally, more effort is put into making new laws rather than getting rid of old obsolete ones. The basic problem with repealing old laws is they become bikeshed type events with endless debate on things that don't really matter. Secondly, as a politician, no one will remember you for the laws you got rid of, only the ones you brought into existance.

    Also, keep in mind that laws that are not enforced might as well not exist. If they do get suddenly enforced, I believe a court may very well turn over any decision because of this selective enforcement.

    --
    I used up all my sick days, so I'm calling in dead.
    1. Re:New laws more important than old ones by mrami · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem with obsolete laws is that they can be used for blackmail by the state (an example of largesse). 1) Make a joke about that blowjob you got to an undercover cop. 2) Write an editorial recommending police cuts. 3) Wait for the arrest warrant...

  3. It could work, but... by AntsInMyPants · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I think this could be done. One way of handling it logistically, is for people to concentrate on their home state. Although you wouldn't get nation wide coverage right away, but as the project became more popular than it would build. I think what you are talking about are for the most part blue laws (In Connecticut, I tihnk you can't eat a pickle on Sundays). From a logistical standpoint it makes it easier, as there aren't too many blue laws being passed now a days.

    The real problem is going to be politcal. Unless you very carefully limit the definition of "bad laws" you open yourself up to all kinds of partisan spamming. Left wingers will put up all anti-gay marriage laws, far right wingers will start listing welfare laws, white supremicists will put up all laws pertaining to non-descrimination, etc.

    If you can deal with that issue, I think you will be fine. If not, the wiki will just become a jumbled yell fest.

  4. Re:experation date by mbstone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, sometimes it happens that a court decision invalidates a whold bunch of laws that most people would consider good public policy. Earlier this month, a federal judge in Virginia ruled that roads on military bases in Virginia are not "Virginia highways," thus invalidating most traffic laws on military bases in Virginia. So if you find yourself on a military base in Virginia (and you are not in the military and therefore subject to military discipline) feel free to drive as fast as you want.

  5. How about a byte quota for legislators by mbstone · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Write it into the Constitution that the entire law of a state (or of the federal government) can not exceed x number of bytes, and the most recently-enacted (total bytes - x) bytes (or the oldest such number of bytes) are deemed invalid (i.e. they go to the bit bucket).