But that is not true, most countries have what is called prosecutorial discretion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutorial_discretion
The police can, for the most part, decide whether or not to enforce laws. They can also choose not to investigate certain crimes as they simply don't have the time to look into absolutely everything.
Furthermore, if police had to literally enforced every law on the books to the letter, they would not be able to drive or walk down the street without having to arrest people constantly.
I sometimes wonder if this would be a net benefit in the long term. My hunch is that after a week or two of people being constantly arrested, and the accompanying collapse of society, there’d be a push to repeal laws that aren’t relevant anymore and revise those that were overly broad.
Yeah I agree, its kind of silly that we allow ancient irrelevant and overly broad laws to stay on the books, especially in most societies that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. For example, in Canada, the police can issue a DUI if you have a BAC exceeding the limit for driving up to 2 hours after you have parked your car. If they literally went to every bar and drinking establishment (or door to door) and enforced that to the letter, it would be changed in quite a hurry.
> Furthermore, if police had to literally enforced every law on the books to the letter, they would not be able to drive or walk down the street without having to arrest people constantly.
It sounds to me that addressing that problem at the enforcement level, as opposed to the legislative level, is the wrong place to address it.
