Preventing over-regulation while protecting rights

Judicial & legal trash collection

Judiciaries constantly recognize and invent new rights for people. However, these rights in aggregate crush new businesses. Therefore, mechanisms to remove problematic regulations are necessary.

The rule

Small businesses have the right to take the government to court on a rule, that's blocking them from doing business or as a defense in a lawsuit against them.

Namely, any small business may challenge any regulation, if that regulation or right:

• Is presently hindering the activity of that business* and one of the letters A, B, C… is also true.

  • *The business has been in operation for at least three years.

  • *The business has a turnover of at least three average salaries of a person per year.

• A) Requires the majority of capital to go toward legal compliance in a non-CC** field.

• B) Is improperly tailored in a way that harms the ability of small businesses to compete with larger businesses.

• C) Gives an advantage to a criminal than to an honest business in a non-CC field.

• D) A reasonable business owner starting a small business could not reasonably comply with the right/law.

• E) The law is no longer relevant for the purpose for which it was created.

• F) Common individual responsibility must not be replaced by law.

A jury decides if the rule or law must be retailored to fit a more appropriately sized business or scrapped. Its recommendations are then sent to the counter-law body, mentioned later.

Extended rules

• Charities and nonprofits may also challenge rules in the same manor.

• Bottom 80% must be challenged by the government and is taken to be true by default on the evidence presented by the small business.

• Small businesses which are essentially owned by larger businesses, in which either the majority of capital comes from larger businesses, or the owners of larger businesses, those businesses cannot challenge these laws. One should look at how modern nations categorize independence in business and apply that to this.

The exception (CC)

The government is allowed to designate specific fields like nuclear power as a field of catastrophic consequences (CC)**. Such designations must be the great exception and must be found to have catastrophic, widespread consequences.

This exception may be challenged in court in the same judicial process.

For every designated CC field, that same government must designate 50 fields of equal scope as non-CC.

A) Rule of majority capital, effort

Starting businesses is hard enough. If the majority of capital required to start a business, or the majority of effort in a particular field of business is legal compliance, then that law must be struck down, or retailored to a business that can afford to comply.

B) Improperly tailored

When a law gives a leg up to a large business with legal compliance and has no pressing reason to be tailored to a lower level, then the law or right must be retailored to businesses that can actually afford to comply.

C) Criminal advantage

If the law creates perverse incentives that disproportionately disadvantage honest business owners who want to keep the law, then the law must be dealt with according to the dictates of the jury.

D) Cannot reasonably comply

A person can hold in their mind only so many regulations, especially when those regulations overlap and have impacts on changing fields. When with the help of modern tools one cannot reasonably comply with the law then the law must be changed or simplified or made more accessible until it complies with human limits.

F) Common individual responsibility

Every person has the responsibility to use their own mind when judging the circumstances presented to them. Laws and rights may enhance the ability of a person to take individual responsibility, but may not place the full burden of that responsibility on a small business.

If a reasonable person could think through the situation and come up with the correct decision the law must not compensate for a lack of reason if the business warned them about the danger.

For example, a local neighborhood gym may not be held liable if a person voluntarily lifts weights that are far too heavy for their skill level since common sense dictates that one must not push one's own body beyond one's own limits if a warning about that matter was placed in the gym.

However, if the business’s products or services are designed for children, then the reasonableness factor needs to be shrunk to the size of the mind.

Counter-law body

The counter-law body is a judiciary focused on tailoring laws so that the energy of society is not sapped by the quantity of law. Inasmuch as the judiciary and legislature of a society create new laws, the counter-law body sits in opposition to both of these.

The counter-law body tracks all the laws that apply to a particular field and retailors them to comply with the aforementioned rules in order to prevent lawsuits before they happen, or acts in response to lawsuits after a plaintiff wins.

The battlefield

The judiciary that creates rights for people and the legislative body which creates new laws battle with the counter-law body with the counter-law body acting as a check on these two.

Both are equally resourced in dealing with the cases in question.

The battlefield definer

This body determines the scope and procedure of the cases that the small business take against their government in order to streamline the process as much as possible.