|
|
|
|
|
|
by derefr
6225 days ago
|
|
|
If a law can be violated in secret (meaning that there are no public side-effects), and "for one's explicit benefit" (meaning that the private side-effects are entirely positive) then it is most likely a consensual crime. There is already a very good case[1] for not specifically violating, but rather just completely disregarding the existence of, such laws. [1] http://www.drugsense.org/mcwilliams/www.mcwilliams.com/books... |
|
|