Overview

• It is tempting to wish that there was a ‘right’ answer for everything. Unfortunately, there are many aspects of fair implementation of the Legal Principle, or any legal system, that reasonable people disagree on. Many grey areas relate to continuums, like the age at which a child becomes a competent adult, for example.
• There are two responses to this reality: either determine the answer by force (fight; ‘might makes right’), or peacefully allow local communities to decide on their preferred reasonable interpretation of the Legal Principle. The 3L Movement is orientated towards global peace, so naturally adopts the latter.
• Most of these issues have a deep legal history (common law) we can draw from as a guide - the heavy lifting has been done and we do not need to reinvent the wheel.

Examples of grey areas

Concepts

• Reasonableness
  • The local community must agree on their definition of the ‘reasonable person standard’. Determining the community’s standards of reasonableness is fundamental to the law of self-defence (i.e. what constitutes ‘excessive force’) and the law of negligence. With each case that the community and jury works through, the definition of reasonableness can evolve. Without a community standard and justice system to determine reasonableness, conflict, vigilante justice or injustice would inevitably ensue, as each defendant would adopt their own definition and effectively be the judge in their own case.
• Substantial Risk
  • There are many potentially risky activities that the local community must determine where the threshold for aggression begins, and create regulations accordingly. For example, what degree of impairment (from mind-altering substances, etc) creates a substantial risk for someone operating a car or heavy machinery. Another example of a substantial risk that would require some degree of regulation would be the transportation of dangerous substance - what constitutes ‘dangerous’ and what proximity to residential areas would be deemed too close.
• Threats
  • Exactly what constitutes ‘substantial’ and ‘imminent’ is subjective. These definitions can be informed by the vast records of historic case law, and refined by new cases over time.
• “Force”, “Fraud” and “Coercion”
  • Complex interpretation issues arise in determining precisely what acts come within the outer contours of the words “force,” “fraud” or “coercion”. Just like common law has helped to define such terms throughout history, case laws will continue to help determine these outer contours over time.
• Competent adult
  • Exactly what constitutes ‘the age of maturity’, ‘being of sound mind’ and ‘not subject to coercion , fraud, or duress’ are for the local community to clearly define.
  • These questions also relate to fiduciary duty. Specifically, when does the responsibility of care-giving end? What exactly is required before it ends? What happens after it ends?

Topics

• Age of Consent
  • Reasonable people disagree about what age constitutes informed and voluntary consent. The local community must determine this from within a reasonable range.
  • The age below which a minor’s request for gender reassignment surgery must always be rejected as unreasonable must also be decided.
• Abortion
  • Reasonable people disagree about when rights begin for the unborn. If a community reasonably believes rights begin at conception, that’s compatible with the Legal Principle, but other communities might draw the line later by also defending the property rights of the mother to determine what is in her body.
• Psychological harm, including cults
  • Whether extreme forms of psychological manipulation, used with intent to deprive a victim of agency and property, amounts to coercion, is an area where reasonable mind can disagree. Threats of physical force are always a breach.
• Weapons - safe firearm ownership
  • Exactly what constitutes being a ‘violent’ felon, ‘mental incompetence’, or ‘technical incompetence’ must be determined for an owner of a firearm to be deemed not to be a substantial risk.
• International borders
  • Precisely what constitutes sufficient evidence of a reasonable suspicion to further detain or probable cause to deny entry to a person at an international border is something local communities must decide. We can say the same about what hearings are required to challenge such determinations, the burdens of proof applicable at those hearings, and the relevant appellate procedures involved.
• Animal rights
  • The extent to which cruelty to animals may be legally prohibited is a matter for local communities to decide.

Legal considerations