Amid the widely held belief that Casey Anthony got away with something related to the death of her daughter, quite possibly murder, it's easy to see the public appeal to enact what people are referring to as "Caylee's Law". As someone pointed out on the news earlier this morning, if the legal requirement that parents/guardians inform authorities of a missing child after 48 hours (or inform them of a child's death within two hours) had been in effect, Casey Anthony wouldn't be getting out of jail soon. That may be true, but I have to wonder if that in itself makes it a good idea.
Serious offenses against decency like what happened to Caylee Anthony should make us stop, think and react. That doesn't necessarily mean that this reaction should be a new law. In a way, the sheer egregiousness of the Casey/Caylee situation is what makes me question the value of a law enacted in reaction to its aftermath.
I don't reflexively see any law as a dagger to the throat of my personal liberty. However, I do believe that laws should serve to address at least somewhat broadly-based concerns in protecting the public. To my knowledge, there isn't an epidemic (in Florida or elsewhere) of parents not reporting missing children for weeks at a time. The public sentiment for this kind of law seems to be more about trying to achieve some vicarious sense of justice to make up for what wasn't achieved in the courtroom. That emotionally charged backdrop doesn't automatically make a law wrong, but it at least raises the question of whether making that law is right.
No comments:
Post a Comment