Jump to content

Weird Laws


Thaiyotakamli
 Share

Recommended Posts

some are untrue.

 

Japan :

Japan requires citizens between the ages of 45 and 74 to have their waistlines measured once a year and potentially seek medical attention.. no fines or imprisonment

 

Singapore:

 ban on importing chewing gum into Singapore, except for medicinal purpose

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finlands law on computing fines based on % persons income makes a lot of sense.. but need to have min fine for those without income..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finlands law on computing fines based on % persons income makes a lot of sense.. but need to have min fine for those without income..

This is actually not weird. They had an explanation for it... Which is basically the rich tend to ignore If the fine is small amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Thai law sounds reasonable because the dollar notes are plastered with faces of Thai Kings

Actually all notes in the world shouldnt step on it. Its illegal afaik

 

But for zimbabwe we can step on it to clean the shoe since its cheaper than tissue paper lol

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Twincharged
Is it illegal to fill a water cup with soda?
 
 
I drink beverages daily, and have read at least one product label.
 
 
Originally Answered: Is it illegal to ask for cups for water at a restaurant but instead fill it with a beverage?
 

Yes, it is technically a crime. Albeit a small one, petty theft is still theft.

In Colorado, theft of anything under $500 is considered a class 2 misdemeanor, the lowest level of theft which can be committed, and is classified as “petty theft.” Punishment for a class 2 misdemeanor in Colorado is a minimum sentence of three months and a $250 fine, and a maximum sentence of 12 months and a $1,000 fine. (§ 18-1.3-501(1)(a).)

Pretty amazing that you can be sentenced to three months in jail and have to pay a $250 fine for not paying $1 for a drink cup to use in the soda machine.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indonesian woman gets jail after exposing philandering boss

 

LOMBOK, INDONESIA (AFP) - An Indonesian woman who exposed her cheating boss has been slapped with a six-month jail term for her trouble.
 
The Supreme Court's shock ruling overturned an earlier court decision that had cleared the woman, Baiq Nuril Maknun, of breaking a controversial law against spreading indecent material.
 
"I'm saddened and shocked by this sentence," Maknun's husband Lalu Muhamad Isnaini said on Friday (Nov 16) in reaction to the ruling, which was issued last week.
 
The odd case stretches back to 2012 when Maknun recorded a conversation in which the principal of the school where she worked on the island of Lombok revealed graphic sexual details about an affair he was having with another colleague.
 
Co-workers of the school administrator - who herself had rebuffed the principal's repeated advances - later convinced Maknun to release the recording in a bid to expose the man's history of lecherous behaviour, according to her lawyer Joko Jumadi.
 
"The principal shared very graphic details about his affair with the school's treasurer in the recording," he told AFP.

 

In response, the principal fired Maknun and filed a complaint with the authorities.
 
Maknun was initially cleared of the charges by a local court in Lombok, next to holiday hot spot Bali.
 
But, last Friday (Nov 9), Indonesia's top court reversed that decision, finding her guilty of violating the electronic information law and sentencing her to six months' jail along with a 500 million rupiah (S$47,100) fine.
 
The 36-year-old Maknun told local reporters that the ruling was unfair.
 
"I'm just a victim - what did I do wrong?" she said at the time.
 
The court did not give reasons for its verdict.
 
The prosecutor's office in Lombok told AFP on Friday it is reviewing the case before Maknun begins her sentence.
 
Indonesia's corruption-riddled justice system has long been criticised for the quality of its rulings, while the electronic information law itself has come under fire for being too vague and open to misuse.
Link to post
Share on other sites

'Stealthing': Singapore set to jail or cane people who remove condom during sex without consent
 
 

Singapore's parliament may make the practice of “stealthing” – the act of non-consensually removing a condom during sex – illegal, in a landmark bill that also addresses revenge porn and upskirting.

The Criminal Law Reform Bill will, if passed, change the country's penal code "to ensure that it remains relevant and up-to-date", according to the city state's Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).

"The bill introduces a new offence criminalising the procurement of sexual activity where consent is obtained by deception or false representation regarding (a) the use or manner of use of a sexually protective device, or (b) whether one is suffering from a sexually transmitted disease," a spokesperson for the department said in a statement.

People convicted of stealthing could be imprisoned for up to 10 years, according to the bill's current text.

Those found guilty could also be caned.

Rape crisis organisations around the world have condemned stealthing as a sex crime which negates consent, but a 2017 study suggests that the deception is a commonly practised one.

Singapore's government introduced the proposed legislation in parliament on 11 February for its first reading.

If passed unchanged it will also criminalise the act of non-consensually taking an image or recording of a person's genitals, a practice often known as 'upskirting'.

Lawmakers also hope to criminalise revenge porn, including the act of threatening to distribute an intimate image of a person to cause them "humiliation, distress or alarm".

The draft legislation follows a landmark case in Switzerland where in 2017 a man was convicted of rape after he removed his condom during sex with an unconsenting partner.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who had been stealthing will now be buying the lowest quality condom that might break easily. Then how?

 

When we enact laws which affect ordinary citizens lives, they got to think carefully before they are passed.

 

Eg PMD - how many times did they changed their rules.

 

 

 

Taking photos - if for defense purposes accidentally taken upskirt photos how? Today there are so many government cameras all over. I am sure many upskirts were taken. Since the cameras were placed there intentionally, will it be considered intentional too. To prevent overcrowding of prisons why not enact a law banning women from wearing skirts.

 

 

 

'Stealthing': Singapore set to jail or cane people who remove condom during sex without consent
 
 

Singapore's parliament may make the practice of “stealthing” – the act of non-consensually removing a condom during sex – illegal, in a landmark bill that also addresses revenge porn and upskirting.

The Criminal Law Reform Bill will, if passed, change the country's penal code "to ensure that it remains relevant and up-to-date", according to the city state's Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA).

"The bill introduces a new offence criminalising the procurement of sexual activity where consent is obtained by deception or false representation regarding (a) the use or manner of use of a sexually protective device, or (b) whether one is suffering from a sexually transmitted disease," a spokesperson for the department said in a statement.

People convicted of stealthing could be imprisoned for up to 10 years, according to the bill's current text.

Those found guilty could also be caned.

Rape crisis organisations around the world have condemned stealthing as a sex crime which negates consent, but a 2017 study suggests that the deception is a commonly practised one.

Singapore's government introduced the proposed legislation in parliament on 11 February for its first reading.

If passed unchanged it will also criminalise the act of non-consensually taking an image or recording of a person's genitals, a practice often known as 'upskirting'.

Lawmakers also hope to criminalise revenge porn, including the act of threatening to distribute an intimate image of a person to cause them "humiliation, distress or alarm".

The draft legislation follows a landmark case in Switzerland where in 2017 a man was convicted of rape after he removed his condom during sex with an unconsenting partner.

 

 

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...