Are you aware of the Urban Tree Conservation By-law in Ottawa?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michea
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Laws
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on various absurd laws that seem to lack logical reasoning, such as prohibitions against having an ice cream cone in one's back pocket and dogs barking after 6 pm. Participants speculate on the origins of these laws, suggesting they may have been enacted in response to specific incidents or behaviors. Examples include a law against bringing a lion to the movies, which likely arose from a unique situation that prompted legal action. The conversation also touches on the difficulty of repealing outdated laws and the idea that some laws may have made sense at the time they were created. Overall, the thread highlights the often humorous and perplexing nature of certain legal statutes.
  • #31
StevieTNZ said:
Seriously, needing to pass a law to prevent a successful suing case? You've got to be REALLY backward to go and sue for not being able to bring a lion into a movie theatre. And even more backward to pass a law stating so.

Seriously? The MGM Lion has been growling at movie audiences for many years. Maybe someone thought it was time to have a real lion in the audience growl back.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
In my town they used to tie the alligators to crocodile hitching posts. That's just wrong. Like a frog sitting on a toadstool.
 
  • #33
Jimmy Snyder said:
In my town they used to tie the alligators to crocodile hitching posts. That's just wrong. Like a frog sitting on a toadstool.

So it must have been people from your town that have been coming to my town and doing that. We know better, and so do our frogs!
 
  • #34
Jimmy Snyder said:
In my town they used to tie the alligators to crocodile hitching posts. That's just wrong. Like a frog sitting on a toadstool.
Yes, sadly, scientific and legal rigor means nothing to some people.
 
  • #35
D H said:
And yet we still get people trying to post about 9/11. After being shut down, the inevitable response is "The rules only prohibit 9/11 conspiracy theories. I just wanted to talk about the physical impossibility of the collapse of WT7." Note that we have not added yet another rule to prohibit discussion of the collapse of WT7. Now we just send them packing.

But that does point out one origin of such rules. Someone did something utterly stupid such as blocking a road for hours on end but couldn't convicted because there was no law against blocking a road.

Some of those stupid laws look stupid now but may have made a whole lot of sense when they were written. Twenty years from now our rule against 9/11 conspiracy theories, if it's still present, would look downright stupid. We can easily clean our rules.

Cleaning up is not so easy for legislatures to do so. Some those laws against various sexual proclivities have been found to be unconstitutional: They cannot be unenforced. They nonetheless remain on the books because no legislator in his/her right mind would propose removing them from the books.


Some of those stupid laws appear stupid because the person who compiled the web page stripped the context that makes the law perfectly sensible. I haven't found the text of the Florida law against showering naked. My guess is that the law does not prohibit showering naked in general; it instead prohibits showering naked in an open public shower on Florida public property (e.g., the wall-less, curtain-less showers on public beaches used to rinse off salt and sand).


On the other hand, a lot of time lawmakers are out of touch and do make really stupid laws.
 
  • #36
Furthermore, my guess on the florida law would be that it is a very old law which no one bothered to take off the books which predates the widespread availability of indoor plumbing.
 
  • #37
I predict that one day morality-based laws [eg no drinking, no gambling, no drugs, no prostitution] will seem as silly as some of these.
 
  • #38
Ivan Seeking said:
I predict that one day morality-based laws [eg no drinking, no gambling, no drugs, no prostitution] will seem as silly as some of these.

Laws like these may often be suggested and passed for purely moral reasons, but they also serve such good practical purposes, that I don't think they'll ever look silly.
 
  • #39
SW VandeCarr said:
Seriously? The MGM Lion has been growling at movie audiences for many years. Maybe someone thought it was time to have a real lion in the audience growl back.

If I were a Judge presiding over such a case, I'd tell the person to go live in the wild with lions, if they want to be around them so much.
 
  • #40
zoobyshoe said:
Laws like these may often be suggested and passed for purely moral reasons, but they also serve such good practical purposes, that I don't think they'll ever look silly.

There is nothing practical about them. That's why none of them work.
 
  • #41
What's the latest drug craze that I heard about... snorting bath salt crystals.

So much for bubble baths!
 
  • #42
Ivan Seeking said:
There is nothing practical about them. That's why none of them work.
The laws don't prevent the behavior, no, but they allow something to be done when the behavior becomes problematic. Drunk and disorderly people can be arrested, etc.
 
  • #43
zoobyshoe said:
The laws don't prevent the behavior, no, but they allow something to be done when the behavior becomes problematic. Drunk and disorderly people can be arrested, etc.

I'm not talking about public nuisance situations or threats to public safety, I am talking about the right of choice and trying to legislate morality. Over the years it has become more and more obvious to me that morality laws are neither practical or beneficial. In fact, at this point the entire notion just seems silly and primitive - more akin to the Salem witch laws, or mob rule, than enlightened governance.
 
  • #44
Ivan Seeking said:
I'm not talking about public nuisance situations or threats to public safety, I am talking about the right of choice and trying to legislate morality. Over the years it has become more and more obvious to me that morality laws are neither practical or beneficial. In fact, at this point the entire notion just seems silly and primitive - more akin to the Salem witch laws, or mob rule, than enlightened governance.
I agree with you about legislating morality. It should be clear I only support any of these laws in so far as they allow for nuisances and threats to safety to be taken care of.
 
  • #45
zoobyshoe said:
I agree with you about legislating morality. It should be clear I only support any of these laws in so far as they allow for nuisances and threats to safety to be taken care of.

Absolutely. In fact, one test for a law that I see as inappropriate and ineffective is whether it applies to a so-called victimless crime. While the worlds of drugs, prostitution, and gambling [and formerly moonshine] certainly have victims, time and again the lesson learned is that the laws themselves either create the victims, or they make the situation much worse.
 
  • #46
Ivan Seeking said:
I predict that one day morality-based laws [eg no drinking, no gambling, no drugs, no prostitution] will seem as silly as some of these.

But its the devil!
 
  • #47
chiro said:
But its the devil!

I also believe that is the true basis for some laws. In fact this is obvious as in many States, for example, bars are closed on Sundays. How ridiculous is that??
 
  • #48
SW VandeCarr said:
Being able to elect idiots to govern us is a sacred right we Americans fought and died for.
Yes! USA! USA! :biggrin: :smile:
 
  • #49
I wonder how much is spent enforcing and writing liquor laws. Consider the State of Kentucky.

Local ordinance may vote to permit Sunday sales at restaurants. Sales from 2–4 a.m. only in Louisville. As of 2005 Sunday sales were allowed per state law, but may still be prohibited in some areas by local ordinance (as of early 2006, such a situation existed with smaller cities within Louisville Metro, though these cities have since changed local ordinances).

Alcohol sale restriction and wet/dry (both by drink and package) allowed by both county and city local option. Approximately 53 counties in the state (mostly eastern and southern counties) are dry, all alcohol sale and possession prohibited; 16 "moist" counties (with "wet" cities allowing package liquor sales in counties otherwise dry); 21 counties that are otherwise dry but have communities with local option that allow sales of liquor by the drink or under special exemptions allowing sales at wineries. Majority of wet counties around major metropolitan areas in state (Louisville, Lexington, Covington, Bowling Green).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alcohol_laws_of_the_United_States_by_state

Is that ridiculous or what? I see many examples where the same applies: Tax the stuff to death [to offset the related health care costs] and get rid of the laws regulating personal use. I am quite sure that plenty of otherwise law-abiding citizens in those dry counties break the law daily. Laws like this are just silly.
 
Last edited:
  • #50
Here's a funny one, the US Congress is legally allowed to do insider trading. When I heard that, buy did I have a good laugh.
 
  • #51
laws of physics are definitely the most ridiculous ones I've encountered
 
  • #52
Ivan Seeking said:
What's the latest drug craze that I heard about... snorting bath salt crystals.

So much for bubble baths!

the latest one I heard about is quite disturbing so I use spoiler tags for those who would rather not read about this type of stuff

apparently some people are soaking up tampons with vodka and then shove them up their anuses to let intestinal walls absorb the spirits
 
  • #53
The town where I went to high school had a park donated to the city by someone who stipulated that if the town ever allowed alcohol to be sold there, the park would revert to his heirs. Naturally enough, there is a ring of liquor stores surrounding the town.
 
  • #54
Jimmy Snyder said:
The town where I went to high school had a park donated to the city by someone who stipulated that if the town ever allowed alcohol to be sold there, the park would revert to his heirs. Naturally enough, there is a ring of liquor stores surrounding the town.
That's so cool.
 
  • #55
wukunlin said:
the latest one I heard about is quite disturbing so I use spoiler tags for those who would rather not read about this type of stuff

apparently some people are soaking up tampons with vodka and then shove them up their anuses to let intestinal walls absorb the spirits

This is a good way to insure a day spent on the toilet. By the way, "bath salts" does not refer to literal bath salts. It's slang for this-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mephedrone
 
  • #56
Galteeth said:
By the way, "bath salts" does not refer to literal bath salts. It's slang for this-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mephedrone[/QUOTE]

NOW you tell me!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #57
zoobyshoe said:
NOW you tell me!

You can always go back to huffing spray paint.
 
  • #58
Ivan Seeking said:
You can always go back to huffing spray paint.

Only if they'll let me return $300.00 worth of bath salts.
 
  • #59
zoobyshoe said:
Only if they'll let me return $300.00 worth of bath salts.

For crying out loud! Just go down to the local AARP, find some old hippies and sell the stuff.
 
  • #60
Ivan Seeking said:
For crying out loud! Just go down to the local AARP, find some old hippies and sell the stuff.
That's ridiculous. Old hippies don't retire.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
12K
Replies
26
Views
7K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
11K
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
13K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K