Why do we have laws for 50/50 arguments?

But I want to win.

If I choose to, I could mow my grass at night. If I were to do this however, I’m sure someone would grow tired of the noise and complain. Eventually this could result in a law banning this practice. In the future when others make this similar decision — to mow their grass at night, they would learn of this law. There would soon be a politician that rises in popularity based on his claim that he would strike down this law and replace it with a law that allows mowing the grass at night. Soon, there could be amendments explaining what situations must exist and what permits and permissions you will need to mow your grass at night. An entire industry could spring up around this law.

Or, the neighbor could say, “hey, do you mind doing that earlier in the day?”

Murder, is something bad and I feel safe in saying that at least 99% of the people feel that there should be a law against it. Rape, robbery, violence, etc. These are actions that one person does to another and generally everyone agrees they are wrong and deserve a law to enforce them.

But, we also have a lot of laws that exist for very little reason other than someone came around and made a law for something that only a very small majority agreed with. Take something like abortion. It’s an incredibly intense topic and one that people on both sides feel strongly about. However, the reality is that about 50% feel one way and 50% feel the other. There are probably many variations to their beliefs but people generally can say yes or no if they believe in it. But why do we need or why would we ever want laws about something like this? Shouldn’t there just be what people do and what people choose to not like another about?

Did you know there’s a law in the U.K. that makes it illegal for farmers to wash their chicken eggs. The idea is that, if an egg is clean looking without being power-washed and scrubbed, then the chicken probably lived in fairly decent conditions.

It’s a reasonable law but also one that doesn’t strictly ban something. It’s very open to interpretation and seems to force individuals to think for themselves.

Every time I read the side of some plastic bottle that says BPA Free, I can’t help but think about all the chemicals that replaced BPA and just haven’t been studied yet. The reality is that BPA shouldn’t be illegal, but instead people should be willing to research the safety in drinking from plastic. Just in general, not the type of plastic.

By living in a world that markets the ingredients we leave out, many will not stop to think and instead just assume the remaining product is completely safe.

50/50 law enforcement is a way to feel good or to feel safe when you’re on the winning side. It doesn’t actually change the reality of anything, it just makes you feel good and someone else feel bad. It would seem that we should all begin examining the actions we take, the products we use, and the foods we eat to decide for ourselves. We should never abandon our own ability to reason for what we’re being told by others.