Generally speaking, many laws here are similar to those in force where we come from. I think we can agree that it is not permitted to do a withdrawal from a bank where you have no account, taking advantage of underage individuals, driving faster than the posted speed limit or strolling down the beach with the absence of beach attire etc.
The enforcement of the laws in the DR, be that as it may, is an entirely separate discussion and not related at all to the rules of law being enforceable (selectively or otherwise).
I have read of old and obscure laws in other countries that one couldn't possibly be expected to know about. One such example would be the need to have someone walk in from of your horse drawn carriage carrying a lantern when driving down Main St. I'm safe from over zealous prosecution under this law because I do not own a horse or a carriage. I am sure that there are some pretty obscure laws still in effect in this country too. One might be able to find some if their Spanish comprehension is sufficient to parse "Spanish legalize" and they have lots of time on their hands.
Lots of countries have information available for the travelling public. Home govts in many cases point out travel requirements, peculiarities of local customs and general sage advice for surviving your vacation unscathed. Individual travelers need to seek out this advice on their own but it is readily available if they go looking. In some cases, warnings include advice not to travel somewhere at all. However, if you are determined to go, no one will stop you.
If swimming in the ocean, driving while impaired or fornicating at a public war memorial is illegal, then those who undertake these activities are subject to arrest and detention. Regardless of whether the law has ever been enforced in the past or even if it will never be enforced again in the future. A warning would sure be nice but is not required. Lament all you want about the fairness of selective enforcement or the obscurity of the law in question or even the logic behind a law, you are still subject to it.
It should be a fairly straight forward assumption that if a certain activity can be thought of as being outside the norm or inherently risky, there is a good chance that there is a law dealing with that activity. Many legal systems have catch-all laws that can be brought to bear in the absence of a specific law. Eg, public mischief, disturbing the peace, conduct unbecoming etc.
This whole discussion should be a nonissue because we all know that ultimately we are responsible for our actions and decisions. It is however, common practice to attempt to justify what we do because our upbringing has taught us that it is always someone else's fault. There was no sign saying "don't jump off this cliff" so we blame the property owner who should have installed a fence and posted signage indicating that gravity is in full effect at that location.
Darwin had the right idea, but even that law seems to be subject to selective enforcement much of the time...
The enforcement of the laws in the DR, be that as it may, is an entirely separate discussion and not related at all to the rules of law being enforceable (selectively or otherwise).
I have read of old and obscure laws in other countries that one couldn't possibly be expected to know about. One such example would be the need to have someone walk in from of your horse drawn carriage carrying a lantern when driving down Main St. I'm safe from over zealous prosecution under this law because I do not own a horse or a carriage. I am sure that there are some pretty obscure laws still in effect in this country too. One might be able to find some if their Spanish comprehension is sufficient to parse "Spanish legalize" and they have lots of time on their hands.
Lots of countries have information available for the travelling public. Home govts in many cases point out travel requirements, peculiarities of local customs and general sage advice for surviving your vacation unscathed. Individual travelers need to seek out this advice on their own but it is readily available if they go looking. In some cases, warnings include advice not to travel somewhere at all. However, if you are determined to go, no one will stop you.
If swimming in the ocean, driving while impaired or fornicating at a public war memorial is illegal, then those who undertake these activities are subject to arrest and detention. Regardless of whether the law has ever been enforced in the past or even if it will never be enforced again in the future. A warning would sure be nice but is not required. Lament all you want about the fairness of selective enforcement or the obscurity of the law in question or even the logic behind a law, you are still subject to it.
It should be a fairly straight forward assumption that if a certain activity can be thought of as being outside the norm or inherently risky, there is a good chance that there is a law dealing with that activity. Many legal systems have catch-all laws that can be brought to bear in the absence of a specific law. Eg, public mischief, disturbing the peace, conduct unbecoming etc.
This whole discussion should be a nonissue because we all know that ultimately we are responsible for our actions and decisions. It is however, common practice to attempt to justify what we do because our upbringing has taught us that it is always someone else's fault. There was no sign saying "don't jump off this cliff" so we blame the property owner who should have installed a fence and posted signage indicating that gravity is in full effect at that location.
Darwin had the right idea, but even that law seems to be subject to selective enforcement much of the time...
