To what extent should rules always have consequences?

[Briimstone]

Alright, so we are talking about this in English, so I want to hear the input of TLN on this subject. So...

To what extent should rules always have consequences?

Interpret the question any way you would like.

[Eamonn]

If the rules you break hurt people(s), whether it be emotion or physical, you should face consequences.





I felt so awkward typing that but yeah :).

[Jakerdot]

If rules had no consequences, there would be nothing to keep people from breaking them but morality. Since morality isn't something you can enforce, consequences become necessary for the enforcement of whatever rule/policy is in place.

[chris_cr33p]

i dont get it. but if u breaak the rules u get punished

[Fir3]

To the extent that the rules you are breaking hurt someone else, you should face consequences.

[KRILLIN]

I think as long as the consequences are laid out, they should be enforced no matter what.

[Gruntly]

If you know that what you're doing is wrong, then you should be punished, regardless if it hurts people or not.

The backfire to my way of thinking is that if someone is insane, and does not understand the idea of right and wrong...well, then..yeh. I will go with the 'if you hurt someone' approach.