All actions have consequences

• All of us are free to live our lives as we choose. However, there are consequences for those choices.
• ‘Live and let live’ means choosing to treat others decently, including the mandatory minimum requirement not to aggress.
  • Aggressors face formal (legal) consequences.
  • All human interactions create social consequences:
    • Treating others excellently fosters high-trust relationships that result in positive social consequences.
    • Treating others poorly yields negative social consequences.

Consequences flow diagram

graph TD
  Free(**You choose...**) ==> Interfere(Aggress; prevent others <br>living as they choose) & Letting(Allow others to choose how <br>they live their lives...)
  Interfere ==> Legal(Legal consequences: fines, <br>restitution or jail)
  Letting ==> Anti-social(... but fail to treat <br>others decently) & Decent(... and treat others <br>decently) 
  Anti-social ==> Social(Social consequences: <br>potential exclusion)
  Decent ==> Benefit(Enjoy the natural reciprical <br>kindness of others. <br>Live and let live!)
  %%%LinkColours%%%
  linkStyle 0 stroke:red
  linkStyle 1 stroke:green
  linkStyle 2 stroke:red
  linkStyle 3 stroke:orange
  linkStyle 5 stroke:orange
  linkStyle 4 stroke:green
  linkStyle 6 stroke:green
  

Legal consequences: when aggressing violates the 3L Principle

• When we prevent others from living as they choose, we violate the Live and Let Live Principle. Such serious interferences include:
  • initiating nonconsensual physical force (like punching someone or stealing their car),
  • fraud,
  • coercion,
  • creating substantial risks (like reckless driving),
  • obstructing justice,
  • breaching a valid contract,
  • engaging in unreasonable conduct causes harm,
  • or breaching a fiduciary duty.
• This is where the law steps in. We cannot tolerate aggressing if we want a free and peaceful world. Therefore, some formal consequences are mandatory, such as fines, restitution, or, in extreme cases, jail or prison, which are appropriate to protect freedom and restore justice. Most civil cases require a ‘preponderance of evidence’ as the standard of proof to establish guilt.
• ‘Ignorance of the law is no excuse’, which is why we must urgently align the law with common sense and abolish all the laws against victimless crimes.

Social Consequences: When Behavior Undermines Peace

• Social consequences apply when our behavior doesn't amount to aggressing but still goes against the spirit of live and let live. Examples include:
  • someone rude, intolerant, uncivilized, or close-minded,
  • neighbors who shout ugly insults at each other but stay on their own property,
  • Or anyone generally failing to act as an excellent human.
• Because we are dealing only with social consequences, each person is entirely free to determine for themselves exactly what conduct qualifies for a social consequence. They’re not breaking the law by aggressing, but they’re not exactly fostering the peace and goodwill we’re aiming for with the 3L Movement.
• Immoral conduct that does not amount to aggressing never justifies or warrants legal consequences. That’s crucial. We’re not about forcing people to be nice or jailing them for bad manners.
• Social consequences we might bring against immoral people include choosing not to;
  • do business with them,
  • Invite them to social gatherings,
  • or even acknowledge them in public.
• Ultimately, acting immorally is not a good strategy to win friends or achieve commercial success.
• There are positive consequences for being a decent person, too. Communities might encourage better behavior by rewarding kindness—say, praising a neighbor who mediates disputes—or gently discouraging divisiveness, like declining to engage with someone who spreads hate. These social consequences are about personal and community freedom to associate with those who share our values, not about punishment or formal legal consequences.

Benefits of this simple approach