It means that if you break the law and are arrested, you can't legally claim that you are innocent of wrongdoing, because you didn't know there was such a law. Think of how many current and potential criminals could get away with stuff otherwise! ;-)
It means that you cannot break a law and then claim you are innocent because you did not know it was illegal.
I believe that the saying is - 'ignorance of the law is no excuse.' Which I take to mean that because you did't know something was againsty the law it isn't a defense. Seems a little absurd to me, if that is the case, why do judges and solicitors have to study for years and pass many exams, and we have to pay exhorbitant fees for their services when we are all expected to be conversant with the law.
Because it is the job of the court to tell the rest of us what the law is.
Ah, but we are expected to know the law before we get in court. As laymen we are expected to know what has taken solicitors many years and many exams to learn.
One purpose of such a statement is that it releases governments, since they are the only entities that pass laws, from their obligation to inform the public about new laws passed. It also provides the government -- since they are the ones that prosecute crime -- a distinct advantage in controlling its citizenry and getting convictions. Because it is via criminal convictions that governments maintain power. It is a method of control whereupon, people are afraid of venturing outside the "known" boundaries of what is permitted.
The phrase is similar in nature and in conjunction with the "we are a nation of laws" propaganda. Simply because there is a law permitting or restricting something doesn't make it just. In reality every nation is made up of laws -- but that does not make laws passed legitimate. The US often makes claims that another country's laws go against laws of nature. The laws of Communist China or under Nazi Germany were the laws of a nation. That doesn't make the laws right or just. In fact the US went to war because of laws of another country that "we" felt were -- wrong, unjust and inhumane.
by Jack Lee10 days ago
Recently, with regard to illegal immigration, Califronia and other states and cites have decided to refuse to enforce federal laws. They have chosen to disobey federal laws and not help ICE in enforcing our immigration...
by Levi Legion2 years ago
Christians: What are one or two laws you would pass in the US if you had the power?Pretty simple question. If you had the authority to pass a law by yourself, what are one or two laws you would enact? Feel free to...
by Alexander A. Villarasa2 years ago
Of all the presented (20 of them, including Pascal's Wager) arguments for the existence of God, the most persuasive, and therefore could stand on its own, is the "Argument from the World as an Interacting...
by SheliaKay12 months ago
What do the Scriptures of Matthew 5:17-20 actually mean in relation to the New Testament?Matthew 5:18 (KJV) "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass...
by andrew savage4 years ago
What are the aspects of the two modes of practical law that make one incompatible with the other?
by Peeples4 years ago
Is there ever a good excuse to do something illegal?Such as stealing food for your family, stealing something so you can pay a bill, smoking marijuana because it's natural, is there ever a good excuse to commit a crime?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.