Dumblaws in Finland

1. If you have an TV on use, you must pay "TV-license" what is almost 170 euros per year.

2. If you rape someone, but you don´t use hard violence or threats, you are only guilty for "forcing to sexual conduct".

3. If you get fines, the number of money, what you must pay, counts for your incomes.
So if you are poor you can get 60 euros fines when someone who are very rich must pay 60 000 euros.
Here is many examples for rich peoples who had fined almost 100 000 euros becouse they had drived too fast.

[Phreakmeister]

I think the last law isn't that dumb at all. What fines are meant to do, is to make you feel that you have been misbehaving. And someone who has 1 million dollars will feel 10$ less than someone who has 10,000$. So I don't think that law is all that dumb.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?

[Sjax]

Wellcome to the board Mellulib. Its great to have another scandinavian here.

We have to pay licence for our TVs in Denmark as well.

[Enforcer]

I like the last law, too, 'cept if you're "poor" you'd be spending your money on other things then a car, with which you speed

------------------
SQUARE RULES!!!!!

WEIRD AL YANCOVIC RULES!!!

WHAT WOULD LIFE BE WITHOUT RPG's?????

RPG-LESS OF COURSE...WE CAN'T HAVE THAT...

[Idnew]

Welcome Mell. In any country I think it's pathetic to punish the wealthy just because they are wealthy. All laws should be the same no matter what the income.

------------------
(ô¿ô)Proud member of the Dumb Laws Mod Squad so watch it!*smile*

Attitude Ajustments Gladly Performed(ö¿ö)

My Home Spot (http://members.tripod.com/~freeatlast_3/Doing_Whatever.htm)

Brain Mania (http://www.brainmania.com)

Cosmic Coffee Shop (http://pub83.ezboard.com/bcosmiccoffeeshop)
Meet The Squad (http://www.geocities.com/idnew52/Mod_Squad_Poster.htm)

[Sjax]

Idnew, the idea is to punish people equaly. A fine on $500 will not mean anything to a wealthy man, but it might destroy a poor mans finances. A fine on 1 months salary will be an equal punishment.
This way I think it is a very fair punishment.

------------------
It is amazing what little harm doctors do when one considers all the opportunity they have.
(Mark Twain)

As a fellow Finn I have to say I didn't find the first and the third of the above mentioned laws that stupid at all. The tv licence is annoying, but then again, most of the countries I know of have a tv licence of some sort. I don't like it just like I don't like the taxes - complain, complain and pay.

But teh rape law is really strange. We have mild and hard rape in our law - like it makes any difference for the victim! Actually I think the less violent rape might be even more traumatic, the victim has to feel guilty for not fighting back.

BTW, we have no trespassing laws here - and we consider the trespassing laws of England and USA violation of basic human rights...

------------------
Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental.

[This message has been edited by mallachd (edited April 28, 2002).]

[Idnew]

Mell and Mall.....I can see where I'm going to have confusion.

I'm all for the no tresspassing law.....if you have a sign up even the law can't come on your property without a warrent.....therefore they can't disturb our parties.

------------------
(ô¿ô)Proud member of the Dumb Laws Mod Squad so watch it!*smile*

Attitude Ajustments Gladly Performed(ö¿ö)

My Home Spot (http://members.tripod.com/~freeatlast_3/Doing_Whatever.htm)

Brain Mania (http://www.brainmania.com)

Cosmic Coffee Shop (http://pub83.ezboard.com/bcosmiccoffeeshop)
Meet The Squad (http://www.geocities.com/idnew52/Mod_Squad_Poster.htm)

Originally posted by Phreakmeister
I think the last law isn't that dumb at all. What fines are meant to do, is to make you feel that you have been misbehaving. And someone who has 1 million dollars will feel 10$ less than someone who has 10,000$. So I don't think that law is all that dumb.

------------------
Do you believe in death after life?


Hi, I'm Scandinavian too!

Here in Sweden we have that TV licence too, but only approxemately 57 % of the population actually pay it... You can watch TV anyway... It exists because the state owned channels have no commercial breaks

[@gen]

Originally posted by Idnew
Mell and Mall.....I can see where I'm going to have confusion.

I'm all for the no tresspassing law.....if you have a sign up even the law can't come on your property without a warrent.....therefore they can't disturb our parties.


I think this will clear the tresspassing law.
http://www.vyh.fi/eng/environ/naturcon/everyman/manindex.htm

Regarding TV licenses... my observation is that the TV stations based on license payment have much more intelligent programmes than those who have to get income only from commercials. I definitely prefer Scandinavian or German license TV to Spanish commercial TV!!! (I don't even mention what's going on on the other side of the Atlantic!)

...instead of being a dumb law, it's a law preventing dumb tv stations.

[Phreakmeister]

During a recent poll in Italy (as far as I know, Italy doesn't have a tv licence), the outcome was, that the viewers find the commercials more uplifting, exciting and interesting than the programmes...

(I have seen some Italian tv-shows, and they're more than right)

[Mysko]

Finnish Alcohol law came into force 1994 and rules:

20 § : Alcohol may only be served in munincipalities where the local council has given permission to this.

21 § : Alcohol may be served only by one (company) that has the licence for this. ..... The licence may be given to the ones (companies) that are considered to have required qualifications. .... Alcohol may be served only in places accepted by the authorities that give the serving licences. ...

22 § : Drunken people may not be allowed to enter to the place where alcohol is served. Customer, who behaves disturbingly or who is clearly drunk, must be removed from the local.
The alcohol served in the local must be consumed in the place. Served alcohol or the alcohol brought to the place for serving may not be sold retail or taken outside of the local.
...

24 § : Alcohol may not be served to:
1) people younger than 18 years;
2) people behaving disturbingly or that are clearly drunk; or
3) if there is a reason to suspect that the alcohol will be misused.

(So, if i swear at the waiter or the customers, the waiter has not only a legal reason to ignore me, but is also PROHIBITED from selling drinks to me? And, what again is the definition of "misusing" alcohol...)

Funny enough, even if those two last points are constantly ignored, rest of the law is followed strictly. The result is that the bar terraces are "fenced", and there is a guy standing on the door watching that the drinks are not taken outside. And everyone thinks that it is perfectly normal...

[Mysko]

Finnish penal law, according to my law book 1995.

10. chapter, crimes against the religion
1 §:
Blasphemy: Who publicly mocks the God, shall be sentenced for fine or jail maximum 2 years.
2 §:
Breaking the peace of religion: Who publicly mocks or dishonours something that a religious community in Finland keeps holy, shall be sentenced for fine or jail max one year.

(Mocking Allah gives one year, mocking God gives 2?)



16 chapter, crimes against authority and public order
8 §:
Who publicly in a crowd or in a public written or other media suggests or tries to request other to commit a crime, shall be sentenced for fine or jail max one year.
Who suggests / requests others to commit mass destruction ..... shall be sentenced to jail minimum 4 month and maximum 4 years.

("Go Bush, bomb Afganistan! Bomb Saddam! ... jailed? me? Hey, what happened to the freedom of speech??)


Okay, I know that I am reading the law book as the Devil reads the Bible, just couldn't resist.. ain't that what lawyers are for? ;-)

[Phreakmeister]

In The Netherlands, it is illegal for a church marriage to take place before a marriage for the law.

Insulting anyone may result in 2 years in prison, but insulting the king or queen may result in 5 years in prison
(So much for equality before the law)

Insulting the head of a befriended nation may lead to 2 years in prison. From 1871 to 1940, the Netherlands and Germany were befriended. Therefore insulting/protesting against Adolf Hitler could lead to imprisonment in those days...

[Mysko]

In Finland one is not allowed to use any weapon against an attacker even if he/she has a clear intention to cause you severe physical harm.

Meaning: if you are a young girl and about three times bigger bad guy is attacking you and shouting "I'll rape you and then I'll kill you", using a pocket knife in the situation is probably considered as excess of justifiable defence. If someone attacks you with bare hands, you are allowed only to fight back with bare hands.

[Mysko]

A real example From northern Finland:

A man has habitually beaten up his wife for years and years. One day he sits watching the TV when the wife comes to room with a knife. "Hit, if you dare", shouts the man, and the wife hits. Man dies. Wife gets 9 years for manslaughter.

In one case that I read in a paper a man has been beating up his wife, jumping on her chest, throwing her around etc, and then gets a bit tired, drags her by hair to kitchen to drink a glass of water before continuing. Wife reaches for a kitchen knife and stabs the man. She was sentenced for ex excess of justifiable defence and got several years penalty in jail. Just for using the knife...

[Mysko]

Just for comparison another real story:

40-year old womand and 49-years old man had lived together three months. They used alcohol a lot, the woman used drugs as well. They fought daily, and the woman usually had black eye or broken lips.

The woman used to tell about the abuse to her friend. February 1998 she told "I have been beated up before, but nothing like this!". She had trouble to walk, both eyes were black and she had lost hearing in one ear. She went to the hospital and got a datum for operation.

In the morning the man called an ambulance for the lifeless woman, but there was nothing to be done anymore. She died.

The higher court said that there was no proof of this kind of beating. The man had told that he only pushed the woman towards the window, and he got judged according to that.

According to the doctors the death happened mainly because of the first beating. She had got a brain damage then that caused the death.

According to the higher court the man had caused her death with his carelessness. He got 3 years 6 months for aggravated assault, assault and causing a death. The sentence was harshened because of the man had a history of violent crimes which showed his indifference before the law, according to the judgement.


P.S. If someone who knows Finnish is interested in the HS article, it can be found at http://www.helsinginsanomat.fi/arkisto/juttu.asp?id=20010422ER1

[Mysko]

Now I found the article about that I talked about earlier, the one where woman stabbed the violent man.

During the assault she had tried to flee several times but she was always caught and the assault continued. Doctor had said that her life was in danger because of he had been stryping her, and jumping on her chest could have caused serious damage to her body. However, the court judged that her life was not in immediate danger, though she had a reason to expect the assault to continue. She got 7 years.....

In the higher court the judgement changed to excess of justifiable defence for 4 years 6 months.

It is in the same article.... Finns, follow the link =)

[FTale]

There's also a difference whether you commit a crime against the country or a person.

Some activists stole dogs from a goverment laboratory. The dogs were there for experimental purposes. The activists were sentenced to pay heavy fine or go to jail. At the same time, a man stabs his girlfriend to chest and wounds her seriously. The guy gets a small fine.

Who would you rather face in a dark alley? An activist who has stolen dogs ar a man who has stabbed her girlfriend?