Don,Well, maybe, but not for spitting. TB is airborne and requires close contact to be transmitted. The law would have to ban sneezing, coughing or breathing. But your idea of replacing older laws instead of just adding them may have merit. Any law scholars here like to weigh in?
There ought'a be a law that sez for every new law that gets passed an old law that isn't enforced or is seldom broken has to be deleted. On the other hand - there used to be a law against spitting on the sidewalk - sounds extreme but it was to control a TB epidemic. Today I'm astonished at the frequency of that behavior and there is a scary increase in TB. Do we need another law?
Don
AZ
There are all
kinds of laws on the books protecting privacy that would covervoyeurism. Same as there are for driving while
impaired that would cover the use of cell phones BTW.
What difference does the kind of technology a person uses to break the law make?
Lawyers and loopholes, I would imagine. Same as the cell phone and driving while impaired. It makes sense to people like us but the legal
profession is paid to find ways around it. I agree that existing laws
should be sufficient but maybe singling out one usage makes it a bigger
issue in people's minds and they will be less likely to do it? That may be a reach. It seems we have discovered morality all of a sudden and it is being beaten to death by legislators trying to ride it to election wins. Just another swing of the pendulum. Don
=======================================================
Don Roberts * Bittersweet Productions * Iowa City, Iowa
* *
We have met the enemy and he is us. - Walt Kelly
========================================================
--
=======================================================
Don Roberts * Bittersweet Productions * Iowa City, Iowa
* * We have met the enemy and he is us. - Walt Kelly
========================================================
