PS: most legal systems are full of redundant and bizarre regulations waiting for a spring cleaning that never comes.
I am sure there are other countries where the punishments are not well balanced between the fines and the prison time, but that really seems quite extreme in Japan. If we add the psychological trauma and social stigma to the loss of job and revenues, one month in prison would, in my eyes, be equivalent to at least 100,000€. Definitely not the same as a 70€ fine!
I used to carry around a swiss army knife in my pocket most of the time when I was a child. I grew up in the countryside and also often had a survival knife when I played in the fields or forests around my house (yes, I grew up watching movies like Rambo and Commando). It's sad to think that Japanese kids are not allowed to do that and few of them learn to fend for themselves in the wild. How things have changed since the first half of the 20th century. It reminds me of that Japanese solider who survived in the jungle of the Philippines for 30 years after WWII ended as he thought the war was still on. Not sure how many young Japanese people would be able to do that nowadays if they can't even make a camp fire, cut sticks to make arrows and spears, set traps, go fishing and all the other basic everyday stuff kids in the West learn to do by age 9. (or was it just me?)Honestly, most offences listed in the 軽犯罪法 are punishable in other legislations, too. Obviously, Japan is stricter regarding weapons and objects that could be used as weapons. Wikipedia's listing doesn't specifically mention screwdrivers, but knives (heavily regulated, with a legal length of six centimetres for all bladed instruments), iron bars, and other objects that could harm a person's life. So yes, a large screwdriver can be a deadly tool, as can a 10cm-long pair of scissors—no objections from me here. It is forbidden to carry potentially harmful instruments "hidden" or "without justifiable reason"—no complaints. Public urinating, defecating, and spitting: are minor offences in most countries.
Would you seriously envisage it for 100,000€ if that meant that you had to stop working for a year and would have a conviction record? Even if it had no impact on my earnings or criminal record, I would never want to be locked up in jail even for a month. In my case, I would prefer to pay the 100,000€ (and make sure never to return to that county ever again).100,000€ a month? Lock me up, buttercup!
Exactly.I don't know why walkie-talkies are categorically forbidden in Japan. In other legislations, they are heavily regulated in terms of frequencies and bandwidth to not interfere with law enforcement, civil aviation, and other public services.
I know and I agree with those laws. I have never spat or urinated in public and, to give you an idea of what it means for me, I consider that using a public urinal with strangers next to you is urinating in public. So, by my personal standards, almost all men should be locked up, if the law states that urinating in public is punishable by prison time. I think that the problem here is the difference of mindset and sensitivity between myself and Japanese lawmakers (or even the general public). Let me explain.Public urinating, defecating, and spitting: are minor offences in most countries.
I don't know about Japan but I think imprisonment is typically used against repeat offenders or those who can't pay. (Essentially criminalizing poverty which I don't agree with but on the other hand a monetary penalty for somebody who is penniless is not a deterrent.)- What I find extremely objectionable in Japanese law is that they would even consider imprisoning people by any misdemeanour. A civilised country should never resort to prison sentences for minor offences or misdemeanours. Whether many people are convicted and imprisoned each year or not is irrelevant. It's more of a ethical issue, like death penalty (which I favour by the way, but only for war criminals and terrorists, not for other crimes, even an isolated murder - but that's another debate). I would not give the judge the choice between a fine and a prison sentence for a misdemeanour. It should always be a fine and the fine should be proportional to the offender's income (as they do in Finland, for example), so that there is a real incentive for wealthier people to avoid misdemeanours. For example in many European countries rich people (multimillionaires) just don't care about speeding fines as it almost doesn't affect them compared to their overall wealth. That's why fines to be proportional to wealth and/or income.
I think you do need to differentiate what the law says versus its application. It does matter whether the law is applied or not.In my eyes, countries that send people to prison for minor offences or misdemeanours are tyrannies. Most people in Western countries (strongly) object to people being arrested and imprisoned in undemocratic countries like Russia, Iran, North Korea, China or Saudi Arabia for criticising the government (or religion in Iran and Saudi Arabia). But is it any better to imprison people for relieving themselves in nature when no public toilet is available. Unfortunately that is exactly what the Japanese law says, whether the law is applied or not. So, on paper at least, Japan is less free than these five countries that have been heavily criticised by the West for so long. It's not a matter of opinion. The law is the law. It exists. If they don't want to be criticised for it by foreigners, they should change it to something more reasonable (namely scrap the mention of prison sentences for misdemeanours).
That is a very interesting concept and food for thought. That lawmakers have some duty to fix problems by revising laws and whatnot.I believe that in any democratic country it is the duty of lawmakers not just to make new laws but also to get rid of bad laws that are antiquated, cause more problems than they prevent, or unnecessarily restrict personal freedom. Unfortunately I do not know any country that has a perfect legal system. What is certain is that some countries have more "junk laws" than others. There is a whole website dedicated to Stupid Laws around the world.
- I completely agree that public spitting, urinating and defecating in public should be illegal (although not necessarily in nature in the middle of nowhere if there is no toilet available, which in a country like Japan, is about 90% of the territory.)
- Legal revision is an immense undertaking that needs years of preparation and political consensus across all political factions. It's a slow, tedious, and cumbersome process and usually of low priority, as a plethora of other, more pressing political, social, and economic issues take priority. I agree with you that - ideally - antiquated laws should be discarded in a timely fashion.
My country still has stipulations dating to the 18th century - in legalese Maria-Theresian German that we used to mock in law classes.
- A lot of countries impose prison sentences for misdemeanours. It's not only Japan.
with small crimes like misdemeanours and such, you have to take into account that the people busting you for it are just that, people. i think spitting is gross. keep your bodily fluids to yourself. so if i were a cop and saw some kid spitting habitually or as an insult, id arrest them or reprimand them in some way but if i saw the same guy spit and asked "why did you spit?" they could respond with "a bee few into my mouth" or "a blueberry i ate tasted funny" and id let that slide.
Petaris made the point already but no 2 crimes are the same. peeing in a public forest wont have the same punishment as peeing on the Eifel tower. it would technically be the same crime but the consequences would differ.
as for crimes like having a "dangerous weapon" it really depends on your justification for having it on you and the person busting you. you could have a legit reason to carry a cleaver, you could be a butcher or chef taking your tool to work but there's also the matter of discretion on the officers part. they could be a robot that does everything by the book and doesn't take the nuances into account.
The lowest level of misdemeanor in my state doesn't have a minimum punishment but the maximum is $500 or 93 days in jail.Can you give me examples are countries that have prison sentences for spitting in public, cutting the line, carrying scissors in one's bag, or "stealing" trash from a bin or a rubbish bag? I am really interested to know if there are other countries than Japan for these things.
I don't think laws usually have exceptions encoded in them do they? That's what the court system is for. Either you pay the citation or fight it in court. I don't agree with the duty-bound part. Police in Japan and most places have a lot of discretion about such things.The problem with Japanese law is that it does not mention (AFAIK) that having a good excuse for spitting exonerates someone from the punishment. The way the Japanese law is written, if a bee flies in your mouth, you spit it and a cop sees you, he is duty-bound by the law to issue a fine.
I'm sure the police would accept most sensible excuses. Like maybe you're delivering tools to somebody. Or you just bought it as a gift or whatever. But if they are to the point where they are searching your bag, there's either a real problem or they are looking for an excuse to hassle you.From what I gathered, in Japan the only valid justification for carrying even a screwdriver (not a weapon in itself), is to have a job that uses screwdrivers. Otherwise you are screwed. (sorry, couldn't help the pun)
How about the rich folks, like the former US president, who have the money to just jam up the system indefinitely? Where does that fall on the spectrum of how well "the laws" work?
Have you heard of civil forfeiture? If the police in the US notice you have a lot of money, they can just take it, in it's up to you--at your expense--to then prove that it's clean and you did nothing wrong.
How about being a person of color in the US? It's well-established that some groups, to put it politely, suffer from undue police attention.
Drug laws vary all over the world, what do you think about that? I think I've read that Koreans, upon returning from a country where certain drugs are legal to use, can be tested if under suspicion--hair samples and the like--and if positive can then be prosecuted.
And spitting and chewing gum? Have you ever read up on Singapore?Or the caning there as a punishment?
The US have one of the highest incarceration rate in the world - far higher than dictatorships and totalitarian regimes.
Clearly there is something wrong with your criteria. Where is the map for Best Countries to Live for Gun Collectors?The US is definitely not a good reference. It's the kind of place where I would never live. I have been analysing and comparing countries for over 20 years and the US consistently ranks as the worst place to live in the "developed world". You can check the hundreds of comparison maps I have made for Europe and the USA in case you have a doubt.