Laws aren’t black and white, they’re always open to interpretation and discretion. It’s why jury’s exist, it’s why lawyers exist, it’s why the courts exist, it’s why the police exist.
If allowances aren’t made, it’s not a lawful society.
You’re wanting to go back to Monarchy/dictatorship, which is where one person rules and makes the decisions.
What you’re saying is really that breaking the law was justified, something that the legal system has no concept of and never can.
This has nothing to do with dictatorship; all democracies are built on the rule of law, which means the if you break the law (and are caught) you suffer the punishment.
It’s actually the opposite: Discretionary exceptions to the law are a hallmark of authoritarian societies where those with power let their friends off the hook, but punish their enemies harshly. Maybe you can think of some examples in recent times in the US.
Laws aren’t black and white, they’re always open to interpretation and discretion. It’s why jury’s exist, it’s why lawyers exist, it’s why the courts exist, it’s why the police exist.
If allowances aren’t made, it’s not a lawful society.
You’re wanting to go back to Monarchy/dictatorship, which is where one person rules and makes the decisions.
The law’s pretty clear in this case.
What you’re saying is really that breaking the law was justified, something that the legal system has no concept of and never can.
This has nothing to do with dictatorship; all democracies are built on the rule of law, which means the if you break the law (and are caught) you suffer the punishment.
It’s actually the opposite: Discretionary exceptions to the law are a hallmark of authoritarian societies where those with power let their friends off the hook, but punish their enemies harshly. Maybe you can think of some examples in recent times in the US.