Posted by
Allan on Tuesday, December 18, 2007 7:07:51 PM
There is a large emphasis on the enforcement of immigration laws right now. It makes sense to enforce laws. It seems of no value to have laws that are not enforced. But I think it troubling that some emphasize the enforcement of some laws and seem that they could care less about the enforcement of others. The contrast between the enforcement of immigration laws and the enforcement of traffic laws is an example. I want immigration laws to be enforced. However, I am not one to complain if, upon passing a police officer while going 5-10 over the speed limit, the speed limit is not strictly enforced.
Maybe I should be, if I want to be consistent, and if I expect immigration and other laws to be enforced fully. Some might say that speed limit laws are not as big of a deal as immigration laws. Maybe. But if you think about it, they are a big deal. In fact, if someone is killed by a person who is speeding, the person driving can be charged with a much more serious crime that if the person is not speeding and is not otherwise negligent.
Also, I've heard, and have no reason to doubt, that if people would obey the speed limit, fewer lives would be lost. So it appears that enforcement of the speed limit laws are literally a matter of life and death--which may undercut any contention that they are not as important as enforcing immigration laws. So shouldn't those that demand enforcement of the immigration laws be consistent and demand the strict enforcement of other laws as well? Shouldn't the thrust be for the general principal of enforcement and not just targeted to one aspect, lest inconsistency rule?