I posted the following text elsewhere in an effort to explain why laws are made, and what they arise from...
The laws were not made so much to direct the actions of good people, as they were made to limit the actions of the bad; because every good law can trace its origins directly to the actions of bad people. Thus, laws are made not only for the sake of good people, so that they may know how they may live on friendly terms with one another, but also for the sake of those bad people who refuse to learn to live as one above the animals and beasts of the field, whose pride is in the act of defecation in the most civil of places, and who can not be instructed, subdued, or reasoned with to do otherwise.
Do you agree, disagree, or have a different perspective on the Origin of Law?
Depends on the law in question.
So you might vote "Other"?
I suppose.
Some laws are created to serve interests.
Hmm ... maybe that's the origin of "bad" laws ... I'm sure it must be.
Well, I agree with most of it in principle but laws are more often than not passed too late to have the desired effect. They also have no effect on those who do not think they can get caught and sending someone to jail makes it more likely to commit crimes when you get out. It has major flaws but since I don't get why someone would willingly hinder another, I cannot think of a better alternative.
It is my opinion that the idea of 'law' (which is just a posh word for 'rules') arises from the need both to restrict behaviour that would damage the immediate group and to reinforce vested interests.
One only has to look at the behaviour of other social species to see that they follow certain rules that protect the group as a whole and the heirarchy within it. Rule making/following has obviously evolved independently in different kinds of creature so must confer an advantage over complete anarchy.