Necessity knows no laws

“Necessity knows no laws” is Ragen’s claim that survival can demand an exception to the inner family’s ban on crime. In his exchange with Arthur, the phrase becomes more than a defense of lawbreaking: it tests how a shared rule can account for danger, protection, and the family’s unstable control of consciousness.

Definition and Use

Ragen introduces the expression while acknowledging that he is criminal, violent, and antisocial. His point is conditional: he could find himself in a situation where crime is necessary for defense or survival. The phrase states that necessity may outweigh ordinary legal prohibitions; it does not present lawbreaking as an unrestricted permission.

The Rule and Its Exception

Arthur first insists that there must be no breaking of the law and no crimes, including so-called victimless crimes, for any reason. Ragen’s appeal forces the rule to confront a case in which strict obedience might leave the family unable to defend itself. After considering the argument, Arthur grants Ragen an exception based on his strength and power: Ragen may hurt others only in self-defense or in defense of women and children. He may also commit victimless crimes or crimes necessary for survival. This narrow permission is framed as a protector’s responsibility, not a general right shared by the others.

Limits and Significance

Ragen softly accepts the idea of rules, but immediately points to a practical limit: during mix-up periods, personalities may steal time without knowing what is happening. Arthur agrees that the family cannot prevent every failure and identifies stability—and preventing those periods—as part of the challenge. The exchange therefore leaves the expression in tension with the family’s code: necessity can justify a carefully bounded exception, while confusion can make it difficult to know when rules are being followed or violated.