Our Sponsors
____________________
Note: Comments are moderated so be sure that your responses are expressed in a respectable and friendly way. We are here to express our thoughts toward controversial issues, not to scold or defame anyone. Watch what you say, and remember that by using this site, you agree to our Terms Of Use and Privacy Policy.
American citizens know and understand that while traveling abroad they are subject to local laws of the country they are visiting. If you don't want to end up in an Iranian prison for accidentally crossing the border, or a North Korean camp because you were involved in investigative journalism then DON'T GO THERE!
People are not robots. There's no way you are or can look up all the local laws of the country you are visiting before going there. If you're an American citizen and you violate a stupid law of another country which you had no idea about and may be innocent in the process, then the American government has a responsibility to protect you.
The argument of ignorance of the law is not considered a defence against legal penalties (try telling a cop that you didn't know how fast you were going or what the speed limit was when speeding for instance, this argument will generally not be effective).
There is no way for a local American citizen in many cases to know whether or not they are in violation of local laws in the United States within an expanding and voluminous legal code here, nor are all of our enforceable laws given to police and prosecutors the discretion to impose necessarily sensible. We operate from an assumption of innocence rather than guilt, partly for this reason to avoid frivolous prosecutions and arrests but mostly so the government or other aggrieved parties must attempt to make a case that we committed an actual infraction. If a person violates a law, here or even in another country, it does not matter that the law is stupid or we would not pass it here.
We have no obligation to defend people who violate local laws outside our jurisdiction (we do have an obligation constitutionally to defend people who are charged in our jurisdiction). However it might be fair to appoint counsel for their defence or to argue diplomatically for the release into US custody. It would not be fair to make for automatic recall of criminal violations committed in some other country's jurisdiction. It might follow that if we have no obligation to follow local customs or laws ourselves when under those laws, then it would be difficult, or at least morally questionable, to want to get foreign visitors and/or workers to follow our local laws. I suppose if your argument is that we should present such severe restriction on travel to this country that we resemble North Korea, that may be fine. As the problem of foreign and unmonitored visitations would be rare enough to deal with in specific circumstances. But that is decidedly not an advantageous method of governing trade and movement of labour or commerce (as one could readily observe from the relative status and success of the US vs the DPRK) and it is decidedly not a fair way to deal with the problem of enforcing laws on people living under our jurisdiction.
No one is saying that people, or Americans are robots Jared. But as a responsible adult, you must prepare yourself before going to a foreign nation, or some unknown territory. At best you just lose a bit of money. At worst you end up like that fool Chris McCandless when he trekked unprepared into Alaska. It is your responsibility as an adult to ensure you understand of most basic laws overseas. What side of the road do you drive on, and can you make right turns on red. Can you buy alcohol in shops after sunset. Most car rental agencies even give you pamphlets with local laws and driving restrictions. If you get in trouble for not doing even a minimum amount of research that's your own fault. Nobody forced you to go over there.
I agree. If you go to someone else's country, you should follow their rules. And if you don't know their rules, find out what they are before you set foot in their country.
People need to get rid of this sense of entitlement that they seem to have. The fact that you are an American citizen gives you rights in THIS country. Not in another country. Citizenship is designed to give you rights and privileges while you reside in the of which you are a citizen. It is not designed as some diplomatic immunity crap where you can go to someone else's country and automatically become an asshole over there.
You break the law. You face the consequences. Grow up!
Everyone who enters another country is usually advised of the local laws by that countries customs agents upon entering . . . I said usually, not all the time by all the countries.
Most laws are nothing but common sense . . . that is except Shariah law, which in my opinion makes no sense at all – and yes, I have been in countries that are governed by Shariah law.
As long as most tourists act in a decent manner, using common sense and common courtesy, you will have nothing to fear from any foreign law enforcement agencies – except Shariah law.
Each and every sovereign nation has the right to enact any laws that that nation desires, and that includes Shariah law. Anyone within the boundaries of that nation, wether a citizen of that nation or not, are subject to those laws.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that anyone would think that they should be exempt from another nations laws while in that country just because they are a citizen of another country.
What, in your opinion, constitutes Shariah laws?
I think you will find that there is not a single set of what in fact constitutes "Shariah law", so I'm curious which branch of Islamic jurisprudence you are actually concerned over.
A lot of what most Western assumptions of what makes up "shariah" is in fact local custom rather than religious instruction.
So now you have become an expert on the Quran?
Most of the Qur'an is not actually law, IIRC, but is rather a book of history. Much of Islamic jurisprudence comes from the hadith (sp?), which is a book of collected sayings of Muhammed. And as Sun Tzu pointed out, much of "Islamic" law is not really "Shariah", but rather tribal laws.