Regulations are charged with almost every aspect of human conduct. Because this is, in several ways, an overpowering obligation, there must be some laws that appear weird. Again, some regulations made sense when passed for the first time but then turned out to be superseded with time. Several such laws are so ingrained in individuals’ minds that they can still affect their behavior. This paper talks about some of those laws, which include:
- It is illegal to deny someone a drink of water.
- Seven women can’t live together.
- The green light for street racing
It is illegal to deny someone a drink of water:
No one knows the origin of the Arizona law that makes it unlawful to deny someone a glass of water. Even after being reiterated for years, such a law does not exist. Even though it is not officially unlawful, it is common sense (Runyon, 2020). Individuals in remote places will habitually leave a hose with water by the gate to block strangers from having a valid reason to come to their property. If someone stands before your door and asks for refreshment, it will be right to allow them some water. But can you imagine a man sentenced to prison for refusing to invite a religious missionary into his home for a glass of water? Arizona has many laws, but no single law makes it illegal to deny someone a glass of water (Runyon, 2020). Even though everyone who grew up in Arizona considers this anecdote a fact, no one can prove the government’s ruling. Without a doubt, many laws in Arizona touch on water.
Nevertheless, there is no single law referencing offering someone a water glass. It is just immoral and unpleasant. The golden rule does not support such acts (Cade, 2020). It is legal, though. Several sources discredit this myth. As per the Arizona Legislative Council, state attorneys’ staff, with the obligation of drafting a law for lawmakers of the state and updating the statute books of the state, couldn’t find any law of such a kind in the statutes of Arizona (Cade, 2020). This has become the most pressing problem in the political discourse as it relates to human rights, homelessness, and access to public spaces; supporters put forth this as a feature that underlines the value of compassion and care because, after all, it is an elementary need for everyone, which makes it thus a universal right (Cade, 2020). This “law” is particularly important for social justice and equity promotion, as it respects everyone’s basic dignity and human rights, regardless of their sociocultural status.
However, opponents argue that such laws are duplicitous in that the deprivation of water to a person in need is already being taken under other existing laws, such as assault or negligence. Yet, in this viewpoint, the law is the symbol rather than the substance, which may serve just as a statement of principle rather than a practical solution to the problem of water access.
Regrettably, an AZ law of this kind is a step in the right direction, given that it is intended to provide for the basic needs of its residents. Legislative actions highlight the necessity of such an approach in the conditions of global water scarcity, which have become a real concern and a serious threat to humanity due to climate change and population growth. As we are coming up against complicated environmental and social problems, such regulations are timely reminders of the values and fundamental principles of our legal system and society.
Seven women can’t live together:
Undeniably, Arizona legislators have passed some weird laws; nevertheless, people try to make up more strange legislation each day. In the county of Maricopa in Arizona, for instance, it’s extensively believed that over six women must not live together (Antognini, 2021). If they do, they have to be up to no good; particularly, they must be running a brothel. This is the mindset that led to this outrageous borough legend. However, not later than the 1960s, the locals in the Phoenix area accepted it as truth. The myth is the main reason behind the University of Arizona State sorority houses.
It is essential to note that Arizona regulations limit the number of individuals living together. However, such laws have nothing to do with gender (Antognini, 2021). For example, in Tempe, more than three people who are not related cannot live in the same home. This law is intended to inhibit many individuals from filling a comparatively small place. In the event you, as well as other all-female band members, want to live together in a Phoenix house, you will be allowed, and the assumption will be that you intend to start a brothel. Nevertheless, there is a possibility of not being allowed due to the sheer number of mates in the house, irrespective of sexual category.
The principle, rather, asks what role this law should play in modern society. Unlike in the past, where gender roles were clearly defined and living arrangements were perceived conservatively, we have concepts that amend such laws today (Antognini, 2021). These days, very many people live in different arrangements; for example, men and women can both live in the same house. This practice is widespread and is now considered acceptable. The law prohibiting seven women from living together appears archaic and out of sync with modern-day values. Thus, it emphasizes that auditing laws already in effect is necessary to ensure the latest public and societal values and norms are implemented (Joseph, 2021). The fact that the law is still there despite being unenforced shows how much law-making can be laggard to social progress.
During this time of reflection, this law causes rethinking about the broader implications of laws, which are becoming outdated. While it might seem like a harmless or unimportant regulation, such laws can maintain stereotypes and slow down the process towards a society, with more people accepting, repeating, and amending legislation. As such, the present culture should be a priority in formulating a legal system that promotes a situation that reflects the desires and aspirations of modern society.
The green light for street racing:
There is a common violation of traffic laws in Arizona that is a lot more severe than people expect. The name of this law is the exhibition of speed, or racing. Speed exhibition is a class 1 misdemeanor, the greatest misdemeanor offense classification (Nieves, 2022). Again, it has 8 points that would go on your license. This becomes a felony if you are convicted twice within two years. It’s that serious. It must be dealt with properly. Although it is illegal and dangerous nationwide, street racing is on the rise. Arizona is ranked second out of all states for drivers violating illegal street racing (Nieves, 2022). The Department of Police in Phoenix reports that street racing incidents increased from 388 to 6216 in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
Although Arizona already has rulings making street racing unlawful, Governor Doug Ducey signed a new bill on July 9, 2021. The bill, SB 1533, inflicts new fines on all people’s streets running in Phoenix and the other parts of the state, and it was affected on September 29, 2021. Supporters think that it is through creating the racing zones, which will be designed events for racing, that the state will be able to regulate and manage these events better; hence, the safety of all will be guaranteed (Naylor, 2023). The law recognizes the existence of an illegal street racing subculture and has been striving to deal with this phenomenon through a mixture of governance and management. In contrast, some critics say that despite the creation of these venues, speed racing can be very unsafe and have unexpected consequences. They say it creates a loose sentiment about the acceptability of such actions, which may expose people to risky behavior beyond the marked areas. Another legitimate worry is the great demand for law enforcement resources, which will need to monitor and regulate such events, leaving them with fewer personnel to provide the necessary protection. This act brings into the limelight the need to understand the relationship between public safety, individual civil liberties, and the state’s governance of dangerous activities (Naylor, 2023). The aim of this law may be to correct the dangers linked with illegal street racing. While Arizona strives to manage street racing through appropriate regulations, the process of constant evaluation and adaptation of the law to find a good balance between providing recreational opportunities and ensuring public safety will be the key.
In conclusion, laws specific to Arizona about water rights, housing, or racing on the streets reflect the state’s legal system and prevailing culture. When we focus on these laws, we can see that they are not only legal artifacts but also allow us to reflect on past and present social norms, values, and priorities. The fact that it is against the golden rule to deny someone water means that society shows its attention to human rights and the primary needs of people, considering the arid climate conditions that predispose them to dehydration and various health problems in the future. The policy prohibiting seven women from residing together is extremely symbolic of old-fashioned gender norms and, more than that, serves as an alarm that laws should be regularly reconsidered and updated to correspond with modern standards. Under specific circumstances, the more sensitive issue of street racing is a morally mixed and tricky topic involving public safety, individual rights, and the state’s role in regulating the actions, whose results could be life-threatening. Navigating this maze of legislation, we should look at the laws under consideration from a historical point of view, their present relevance, and any impact they will have on society. Arizona’s particular laws are great testing grounds for the legal institutions and the society where these laws exist. In this way, we can contribute to debating and distilling legal changes, improving society, and unraveling the intricate interplay of legislation and cultural history.
References
Antognini, A. (2021). Nonmarital Contracts. Stan. L. Rev., 73, 67.
Cade, J. A. (2020). ” Water is Life!”(and Speech!): Death, Dissent, and Democracy in the Borderlands. Ind. LJ, 96, 261.
Joseph, A. S. (2021). A modern trail of tears: the missing and murdered indigenous women (MMIW) crisis in the US. Journal of forensic and legal medicine, 79, 102136.
Naylor, R. (2023). Awesome Arizona: 200 Amazing Facts about the Grand Canyon State. University of New Mexico Press.
Nieves, N. A. (2022). StreetRacing Latinidad: The Ethnoracialization of Latinx Wellesley Students.
Runyon, N. (2020). ANALYSIS OF WATER LAW AND WATER CONSERVATION IN ARIZONA.
write