What is something that is completely legal that should be illegal?

Not only they are bad ideas, but the incentives are horrible.

I could see the point of prisons if there was "warranty". If a person guess back to jail, the first sentence was useless and the prison should be financially punished. You'll see then how quickly therapy and quality job trainings are implemented.

Also education

Infinite return customers = infinite profit!

Man, just reading this plain sentence. It's so glaring as to why this should be illegal.

Displaying the price you will pay at the counter is my personal benchmark for civilized society. No price tags? You're a medieval backwater. Wrong price tags? Go see a shrink, USA. Correct price tags is the way to go.

Well that highly depends on location. I think that's illegal in most of Europe

That's only legal in like two countries.

Advertisements in general. Imagine world without ads and sponsored content.

This one is pretty location specific but I agree that US law doesn't make any sense. Like, physician and pharmacist spend 10 years at university to learn all the details about prescription medication and then have to get yearly retraining, so how do you even do ad's for that

I left the US to work overseas and when I came back the law changed and everyone was hooked on viagra, the "little purple pill" and everything else...it was VERY obvious what happened...after we sttled down we went to establish care woth a GP & I walked out of my initial appointment with 6 prescriptions.

ridiculous...

Lobbying in and of itself isn't bad, it makes our politicians aware of issues and alternatives.

Unrestricted lobbying is the problem, I recently read that lobbyists from Amazon would no longer have access cards to the European parliament so they no longer could come and go as they liked.

I just wonder why lobbyists ever got that access in the first place...

Owning shares when you are an elected official with jurisdiction over the industry you own shares in.

Also, any political figure owning shares in a media organisation, regardless of whether it is traditional media or “new media”.

God the nerds in here are annoying.

"Ackchually banning lobbying would mean nobody could talk to politicians anymore blah blah..."

Everyone knows what you mean when you say that lobbying should be illegal.

Banning lobbying would mean no one would be able to talk to a politician/official about an issue. Not even writing your local officials, proposing a local ordinance to making bike lanes or spending money to fix-up/improve a local park. Because that's lobbying. You're asking a government to wield their official power and/or spend public money, for your (and potentially others') benefit.

Even lobbying groups aren't necessarily bad. The Sierra Club, EFF, ACLU. These are American, but I'm sure there are equivalents of these in other countries.

So banning lobbying doesn't really work. Now if you're talking financial contributions and gifts and nice dinners from those who lobby, yeah that probably needs to be more highly regulated or stopped altogether. Generally speaking, any kind of quid pro quo.

But just talking to a politician should not be made illegal. In democracies, talking to people, talking to politicians, and trying to convince them to align with your view is the name of the game.

Does that include unions?

Gonna overturn the 1st Amendment?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

I'm sure there are ways to dial in the abuse, but what legislator is gonna vote for that?

Some forms of it are illegal, but it's hard to define what exactly constitutes Gerrymandering. Rather than enumerating all of the ways the Gerrymandering is possible, we really just need to make it so only one specific policy for forming districts is used. I think mathematicians have been proposing models for this that attempt to create districts with roughly uniform distribution of population and isotropic borders.

Looking at you, nvidia.

Automatic weapons for the most part are already illegal, assault rifle isn't a term that actually means anything and neither does military grade. In fact only 3% of gun deaths in the states are from rifles. The real issue is the illegal gun market and the endless supply of hi-points and other pistols.

You've been lied to.

What the fuck? You have to pay to stop getting junk mail? We in Australia just put a little sign on our letterbox saying 'no junk mail' and we stop getting it. That's insane. Same thing with the insulin comment and some of the stuff other people said like forced arbitration. America is crazy.

belonging to one particular political party or another doesn't necessarily dictate which way a politician votes.

Cheaters

Edit:

"they are cheating!"

Got elected to be congressman

"LET'S DO THIIISS"

Trading at all by Congress. They should be required to lock their money in a blind trust with heavy oversight. If a CEO has to publish their stock sales months in advance, congresspeople should too.

Just curious what your preferred solution would be?

I don't think owning your home is realistic in all scenarios. For example, let's say because you needed to leave your abusive partner, so you don't have the luxury of going through the whole process of saving money, then researching, and eventually purchasing a home. You need to get out, maybe live somewhere for a year or two to get your feet under you and save some money so you can purchase a home. If you couldn't rent a home, how could you possibly get out of this situation if you had no money on hand?

If you move to a new city that you've never visited before, sometimes you want to rent in a few areas to find the areas you like before commit long term to a place.

I really don't think buying a home should be your only option for living in a home. It's just not what's best for some people in some scenarios.

Kill it yourself and eat it? Fine by me. Circle of life, yadda yadda.

Send hundreds into an abattoir to be machine killed by robots or strangers and eat it? No. Own up to the process, or don't partake.

It is illegal to a degree, it violates rules and regulations with the IRS. When they back a politician, they are supposed to lose their church non-profit status. But that doesn't happen because any move to it would cause a huge "the government is attacking out religious freedoms/churchs".

In fact it's now a religious event every year called "Pulpit Freedom Sunday" to purposefully break these laws.

That's very vague and sounds like it would mainly affect minorities in a negative way. Not that I think that's your intention of course.

How about we set a no tracking flag in our browsers for example and companies actually respect the choice? One can only dream...

Definitely in a B2C context. If businesses want to force arbitration between themselves then fine.

How is that even legal somewhere ?

For context this is how the vast majority of jobs work in the US by default.

I've heard the argument that if those were illegal, loan sharks would just take their place. And they tend to be worse.

You know what would be really funny? Starting a payday loan business that isn't as nightmarishly exploitative just to upset the industry.

Also utilities need to be regulated like utilities; make them publicly owned services, not for-profit companies.

At the very least, do so for the infrastructure. I don't mind companies trying to sell me the service competitively, but the infrastructure should allow for a competitive market.

A bit tired and misread this as Capitalisation. That caused my brain to freeze, then reboot 🤣

It's wild that's legal there! Where I live learners and provisional riders are restricted by power to weight ratio (150kw per tonne/200hp per 2000lbs), and that honestly seems like it keeps them on reasonable bikes for the skill level without having them all stuck on 125cc bikes struggling to reach the speed limit

A 16 year old who just got their motorcycle license being able to buy a 200hp superbike capable of doing 180+mph.

True, but rarely does a 16 y/o have ~$10k saved up to purchase a sport bike with that power.

Eh, I don't think the correlation of age is the causation of getting wounded or killed due to questionable decisions on powerful motorcycles. I'd venture to say the correlation is moreso in personality type, and aversion, or lack thereof to risk.

Like, you don't see complete straight edge 16 year olds getting bikes, and from my own anecdotal experience, my straight edge friends were scared of it. Though if there wasn't an inherent aversion to the risk, I'd bet those types would be incredibly safe motorcycle drivers.

The types that currently get them are the types that will take risks, regardless of their age, and we can't rightly outlaw something because some risk takers act dangerously on them. We'd have to outlaw cars too.

In India, minimum age is 18.

Child exploitation is already illegal

And alcohol.

Giving tips is okay. Paying your employees less because you expect them to be tipped is stupid. Culturally requiring tips to make up the majority of a position's income is ridiculous, but very difficult to change.

I see what you mean

Fun fact: Pyramid Schemes (now called MLMs) cannot be made fully illegal because they are pure expressions of capitalism. In order to make them fully illegal they would have to admit the entire system is a scam, which they obviously aren't willing to do since they benefit from it.

I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding your comment, but killing animals for pleasure alone is already largely illegal in Western countries. And that includes hunting. You aren't allowed to just hunt an animal for fun and then leave it unharvested. It is hard to enforce, obviously. But you can definitely be charged for killing deer, moose, ducks, even fish, without a license and at least the intent to eat it. For example, you can't kill a bear, cut off its paws or gall bladder, and then throw the carcass in the bush. You also can be charged for killing or treating an animal inhumanely or in a way that causes it distress. That theoretically applies to all animals, including pets, livestock, aquariums, wildlife, and even small animals like mice and bats.

Oh shit! He's on to us.

There is no ethical way for an individual to possess a billion dollars. The amount of harm an individual would have to cause to attain and retain assets of that magnitude should not just be criminal; it should be a capital offense.

I don't think it should be illegal. It should just be laughed off and not be taking seriously.

Careful, son, you might cut yourself on all that edge.

Where do we draw the line what is or isn’t a religion? If you have definition, try applying it to Pastafarianism, Communism, Budhism and a bunch of other ideas and practices from Asia.

Personally, I prefer to go with a super simple and completely arbitrary list definition. If it’s on my secret list, it’s a religion. If not, it’s a philosophy.

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

Parents who dont know how to be parents having one or multiple childs is the same

Yeah pet licenses should definitely be a thing

For example rabbits shouldn’t be alone.

This is why I got a hamster, instead of rats. They LIKE being alone.

And SO MANY HAMSTER CAGES you buy in pet stores, recommended by pet store employees are WAY too small for them. So many of the wheels you can get for them are too small and give them back problems. If you buy something retail for a rodent, get the thing for a one size bigger rodent! Some of the things PetSmart markets for Syrian hamsters for instance are criminally small, enough to amount to cruelty.

But taking my hamster and putting him in the wild would be like taking a dude who lives in a five bedroom condo with a private swimming pool and an indoor gym and free door dash twice a day and sending him to live in a cave in the woods and telling him he should be grateful he gets to live free, the way he was meant to.

Pictures to prove my money is where my mouth is:

https://lemmy.starlightkel.xyz/pictrs/image/1c88b11b-6824-47a3-8d32-341a9ba86e87.jpeg

https://lemmy.starlightkel.xyz/post/128358

That's all for ONE hamster.

EDIT: Also... fuck hamster balls. Hamster's have very very poor vision, so they can't really see anything outside the ball. They're rolling around in a confusing environment with very poor ability to gauge the outside world. If you put a hamster in one of these, you have no idea if it's freaking out or stressed out or having a good time... but it IS rolling around in absolute ignorance of where it's going or what it's bumping into and if you pick it up and move it around it has very little understanding of what's happening.

Dogs on chains are outlawed in Croatia.

Nuclear energy is significantly greener than coal and oil, IIRC. As well, there are a lot of places where it can be hard to get enough energy from renewable sources like hydro and solar.