Just in case you didn’t know, the state makes laws.
The state is also allegedly supposed to protect people, and their rights.
Which makes it seem that the purpose of laws is to protect people.
All of this is based on a completely naive view on the nature of the state, and on the way in which the state keeps its power.
There is a reason states tend to grow more powerful. It is become more and more laws and regulations are added to the books while very few are ever repealed. You get power, while claiming legitimacy, by adding more and more rules for everybody (not merely aggressive criminals) to follow. More rules means a rise in “criminals”, as it becomes harder and harder to traverse everyday life without breaking some law or disobeying some rule. The noose is ever tightened around the necks of ordinary, well-intentioned and peaceful citizens. Those that wiggle will hang themselves. Those that don’t want to hang themselves, stay standing, scared to death about moving. So in a sense, it is true that not moving is for your own good.
Is there truly still someone outside of the political class that believes that all laws and regulations are necessary for the protection of the innocent?
The point of them, plain and simple, is to remind the common people who the boss is, and to intimidate them into complete obedience of ever more arbitrariness. At which point will people recognize the signs of despotism? Which law will be the signifier?
Anyway, Scott Shackford at Reason makes clear that:
“The law must be followed, even if breaking the law actually makes people safer.”
This is not Shackford’s own opinion; he is merely paraphrazing what a Judge has said between the lines. It is not about keeping people safe; it is not about protecting the innocent and the harmless from harm.
The law is about obedience to your ruler, plain and simple.