A lot of apes transgress against others even with laws against it in place.
That number would be higher without it.
Despite all the technology, apes are still controlled by base instincts, and until the brain is replaced by a computer, it will stay that way.

@ragingloli Hm, okay, maybe I was unclear about my question here. I’m not looking for arguments against my argument, I’m looking for historical evidence supporting the idea that people need laws and restrictions. As in, concrete examples of things that have occurred between 1500–1850.

At this point in history women didn’t vote. That certainly played a large role in women and children not being treated the same as men.

Examples of societal restrictions and laws being necessary
*Alcoholism was high due to no restrictions on how many places could sell liquor
*Women and children suffered due to ^ this (beatings were prevalent)

Are these the types of examples you’re looking for?
Or is it something else @livelaughlove21?

If there are counterarguments to your premise, then by definition that premise is proven faulty and it doesn’t matter how many selectively chosen arguments you gather for it.

It really depends on what you mean by law. For most of our history humans organized themselves without what we tend to think of as government; no authoritarian, top-down power structures enforced social codes. But standards of behavior still existed, usually kept in place by complex social relationships and social pressures. Think consensus decision making, ostracism and banishment for severe transgressors, etc. I think these two broad categories of social organization should be demarcated.

In terms of historical examples, look at the Haudenosaunee Confederacy during the period, which, if I recall correctly, operated less on law than on a series of looser social codes.

perhaps you can find something here that would point to the development of social structures as the American frontier developed

It used to be commonplace for people to vote multiple times come election day.

See if Pitcairn Island fits the bill.

Let’s put it this way.. Without limits and restrictions, we’d still be working from sun up to sun down for a quarter a day and the wolves and sharks would be banging at our door constantly. Politicians would be free to do whatever they want and big corporations would be bragging about record breaking profits.. Sound like today? There is a big difference between the two as the major difference is getting paid a quarter a day.. In today’s world, we’re all unemployed!

I just finish watching “Rise of the planet of the Apes”. Believe that explains it all when it comes to us humans beings needing laws and societal restrictions. Without such we run wilder than apes do.

@jusjokin12 Yes indeedy.. The problem with rules, regulations and laws is that it’s only acknowledged by peaceful humans who adhere to moral character… For the rest of them, it’s a way to rebel and be the animals they are.. Remember, a lock on your door is only there for the honest man.

… Also! If you eliminated the golden calf I’m betting that we’d all be more civil. Gold and money are the culprits that create animalistic behavior. Those who have and those who want to take what those who have. take away gold and there wouldn’t be anything anyone would be interested in stealing.. We need to get back to the barter system but it will never happen because there’s no way to tax barter.