[callumlocke]

> If a law is bad when enforced, then the law needs to be changed, not the enforcement.

Useful as a rule of thumb but it's not always true. Models are never perfect, the map is not the territory. We are constantly figuring out what our shared values are, and it's a moving target. And the body of law itself is a complex beast with its own surprising dynamics. It's part of an ecosystem. You can't wave away its complexity with such a simplistic ideal.

A given law may be 'bad' (regrettable, even draconian/immoral) when enforced in certain cases, and yet it may also be unfeasible to change that law to add those cases as exceptions. This is why the law gives judges flexibility on sentencing, for example.

[closeparen]

In practice, it really never happens that we make the law more permissive through a deliberative process and then start doing the thing. We relax the law because we found that people didn't really respect it and enforcement was unpopular.

[t-writescode]

And then we only enforce it on people we don't like and can use it as an excuse and everyone will go "yeah, well, I mean, it is a law, after all. They should have known better. Everyone gets caught eventually."