Which is better: legal discretion or automatic enforcement?

[Southern Dad]

[exploited]

[Saz]

You sound upset. It's cool if you don't understand the difference between subjective and objective, many people don't.

Example: You are an idiot. That's my subjective view. But I have objectively called you an idiot. Look at that, a subjective statement CAN lead to an objective statement!

You can subjectively think something is illegal. But when a court says something's illegal, that's objective, because the court is the one with the inherent power to define what objectively the law is. You are innocent until proven guilty.

[exploited]

[gla22]

If you drive in any major city you have to break the law just to get around. Laws are broken frequently and often out of necessity. Total enforcement is a complete impossibility. Society would completely crumble under the financial and logistical complexity of having the entire populace either waiting for a court date or involved in the system of scheduling, managing, judging, and policing the other half of society.

[exploited]

[spacemonkey]

If everyone just obeyed the rules/law all the time, and never question anything. We would still be subjects of the British Empire. Needless to say, they didn't.