'Two wrongs don't make a right' comes to mindif we're going to communicate through the medium of cliches.
It would probably be better to drop the cliches and make a nuanced argument, though. Should the police break the law, in a crisis, in order to uphold some other laws? On the face of it, that seems a logical contradiction. It says that one law is more important than the other. Then again, this is possibly true. Both ways of breaking the law are presumably undesirable, though, or supposed to be, otherwise they'd be legal. So what are you actually advocating, that the police do break the law, or that they stick to it, or that they're not treated too harshly if they break the law with good intentions? I suspect you're arguing for the last thing: which is what actually happens, for the police, and for anybody else who breaks the law with good intentions, too. I don't imagine Mofaha would be opposed to lenient treatment of people who break the law in that way, either.
(,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:22,
archived)
It would probably be better to drop the cliches and make a nuanced argument, though. Should the police break the law, in a crisis, in order to uphold some other laws? On the face of it, that seems a logical contradiction. It says that one law is more important than the other. Then again, this is possibly true. Both ways of breaking the law are presumably undesirable, though, or supposed to be, otherwise they'd be legal. So what are you actually advocating, that the police do break the law, or that they stick to it, or that they're not treated too harshly if they break the law with good intentions? I suspect you're arguing for the last thing: which is what actually happens, for the police, and for anybody else who breaks the law with good intentions, too. I don't imagine Mofaha would be opposed to lenient treatment of people who break the law in that way, either.
No, i'm not advocating that.I believe anyone who breaks the law should face justice, police or public. What I'd like is that no-one broke the law. What i'm getting at is the criminals who say 'OK I mugged 20 old ladies but that copper hit me while I resisted arrest! The police are evil and shouldn't be allowed to do that'. Which is actually quite a common statement.
(
TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:33,
archived)
So to clarifyyou think the police really shouldn't be allowed to do that (assuming there's a law against it) - but they aren't evil. Is that correct?
(,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:36,
archived)
?I don't get your clarification. No, the police are not evil, and yes, if they break the law they should face the consequences. But I also don't expect them to be superheroes. I fully expect that here and there a mugger will get a punch that is illegal. I'm not a mugger so won't lose too much sleep.
( TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:44,
archived)
Just trying to work out what the disagreement was.I thought at first you were arguing about what should or shouldn't be allowed, but now it seems more as if the subject was "how likeable are protesters?".
(,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:59,
archived)
Absolutely.In a just society, motive and intention would be taken into account when dispensing justice.
(
mofaha ┐( ˘_˘)┌ ʅ(́◡◝)ʃ,
Tue 9 Aug 2011, 18:53,
archived)