Good stuff. It's difficult to get inside the head of someone who feels they can just motor down the wrong side of the road into oncoming traffic because it suits them and then nudge their car into a person who objects. What a piece of work.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:10, Share, Reply)
I'm ambivalent.
The motoring infraction is clearly totally unacceptable. Indeed, the relevant authority has, rightly, installed an island in the middle of the road with an elevated curb in order to prevent people from driving in the wrong lane to take the right turn before it is reasonable to do so. However I am always deeply uncomfortable with vigilantism in pretty much any form. I consent to be policed by the police, and I expect traffic enforcement to come from an agency granted authority by the state. I do not consent to be policed by another citizen acting with no legal authority. He may be righteous, but life isn't always about being right. If someone breaks his jaw, I frankly think he's got it coming. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:38, Share, Reply)
The motoring infraction is clearly totally unacceptable. Indeed, the relevant authority has, rightly, installed an island in the middle of the road with an elevated curb in order to prevent people from driving in the wrong lane to take the right turn before it is reasonable to do so. However I am always deeply uncomfortable with vigilantism in pretty much any form. I consent to be policed by the police, and I expect traffic enforcement to come from an agency granted authority by the state. I do not consent to be policed by another citizen acting with no legal authority. He may be righteous, but life isn't always about being right. If someone breaks his jaw, I frankly think he's got it coming. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:38, Share, Reply)
I look forward to this brave new future where 25% of my salary goes on council tax, to pay for a bobby standing on every single corner.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:41, Share, Reply)
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:41, Share, Reply)
Yes. I also know that most of it is unmonitored and overwritten daily.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 22:38, Share, Reply)
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 22:38, Share, Reply)
I disagree
I wish more of us had a sense of community and called the baddies out.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:55, Share, Reply)
I wish more of us had a sense of community and called the baddies out.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 20:55, Share, Reply)
The Stasi had 1% of the population as registered informers.
Still, the GDR was a charming destination for a cycling holiday.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:07, Share, Reply)
Still, the GDR was a charming destination for a cycling holiday.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:07, Share, Reply)
Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.
John Stuart Mill
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:02, Share, Reply)
John Stuart Mill
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:02, Share, Reply)
What laws should we stop citizens from breaking, and what laws should we turn a blind eye to?
Do you check your neighbours are not muddling up their recycling?
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:10, Share, Reply)
Do you check your neighbours are not muddling up their recycling?
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 21:10, Share, Reply)
obviously
the ones that exist to prevent injury or damage to property.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 22:10, Share, Reply)
the ones that exist to prevent injury or damage to property.
( , Mon 17 Jun 2019, 22:10, Share, Reply)
reduce the risk of injury, not prevent it
there is a difference. It not like going slightly under the speed limit makes you bulletproof, but driving slightly over it causes death. there's no moral question
laws like road laws are sometimes enacted with some supporting science, sometimes with fairly arbitrary justification, but generally enacted because they are intended to reduce the risk of accident or mishap. The thing about risk is that it's often a trade-off between rights and acceptable risk, and that level is subjective. Some people might prioritise being able to drink over the increased risk of accident. Some countries have zero alcohol, others like Brazil see it as unconstitutional to breathalyse
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 5:46, Share, Reply)
there is a difference. It not like going slightly under the speed limit makes you bulletproof, but driving slightly over it causes death. there's no moral question
laws like road laws are sometimes enacted with some supporting science, sometimes with fairly arbitrary justification, but generally enacted because they are intended to reduce the risk of accident or mishap. The thing about risk is that it's often a trade-off between rights and acceptable risk, and that level is subjective. Some people might prioritise being able to drink over the increased risk of accident. Some countries have zero alcohol, others like Brazil see it as unconstitutional to breathalyse
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 5:46, Share, Reply)
sure
but i'd say that the law that makes it a crime to drive down wrong side of a road exists to prevent a head-on collision, not reduce the risk of it.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 7:41, Share, Reply)
but i'd say that the law that makes it a crime to drive down wrong side of a road exists to prevent a head-on collision, not reduce the risk of it.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 7:41, Share, Reply)
there is a law, there are still head-on collisions. So it clearly doesn't prevent them
If there had been a breakdown blocking the lane, would you wait patiently behind the broken down car until it was repaired or towed, rather than cautiously (though illegally) moving into the oncoming land to turn right? Most people would accept that sensible risk. I don't mind people wanting to be law abiding, but being absolutist over things like road laws somewhat ignores their intent
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 10:25, Share, Reply)
If there had been a breakdown blocking the lane, would you wait patiently behind the broken down car until it was repaired or towed, rather than cautiously (though illegally) moving into the oncoming land to turn right? Most people would accept that sensible risk. I don't mind people wanting to be law abiding, but being absolutist over things like road laws somewhat ignores their intent
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 10:25, Share, Reply)
Just remember to say the magic words "cancer patients" whenever you get caught doing something illegal, the police will apologise and let you on your way.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:20, Share, Reply)
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:20, Share, Reply)
my own approach (in London) is to start an apology and then interupt myself by saying "Weren't you in Hendon in XXXX?"*
in the hope of establishing some sort of connection that might tempt them to let me off, based on a brief period I spend developing eLearning at the police training college and having two hour lunches every day due to non-existent supervision of us contractors
redacted for privacy
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:36, Share, Reply)
in the hope of establishing some sort of connection that might tempt them to let me off, based on a brief period I spend developing eLearning at the police training college and having two hour lunches every day due to non-existent supervision of us contractors
redacted for privacy
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:36, Share, Reply)
We all have the legal authority via a citizens arrest
"A civilian also has a broader (if somewhat vaguer) common law (i.e. judge-made) power of arrest where there is a "breach of the peace", which itself is not really a crime, but can be said to occur whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or, in his presence, to his property, or where a person is in fear of being harmed through an assault, affray, riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance."
Looks like what was happening there no?
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:19, Share, Reply)
"A civilian also has a broader (if somewhat vaguer) common law (i.e. judge-made) power of arrest where there is a "breach of the peace", which itself is not really a crime, but can be said to occur whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or, in his presence, to his property, or where a person is in fear of being harmed through an assault, affray, riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance."
Looks like what was happening there no?
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 11:19, Share, Reply)
I missed the bit were he placed him under a citizens arrest, probably because it didn't happen.
It looked absolutely nothing like a citizen's arrest. You're just making shit up now. I'm placing you under a citizen's arrest for talking shit. Don't move. The police will be along shortly.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 15:25, Share, Reply)
It looked absolutely nothing like a citizen's arrest. You're just making shit up now. I'm placing you under a citizen's arrest for talking shit. Don't move. The police will be along shortly.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 15:25, Share, Reply)
You said he had no authority. He did and could have used that excuse.
( , Wed 19 Jun 2019, 12:56, Share, Reply)
Citizens do have the legal authority to stop each other from breaking the law.
I'd also be more likely to trust a that citizens arrest was appropriate than one effected by the police, for the simple reason that the police have protections against the consequences of either fucking up or outright breaking the law, which regular citizens do not have. Citizens will typically only step in if it is 100% clear they're provably in the right, whereas the police can do pretty much whatever the fuck they like and get away with it.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 18:50, Share, Reply)
I'd also be more likely to trust a that citizens arrest was appropriate than one effected by the police, for the simple reason that the police have protections against the consequences of either fucking up or outright breaking the law, which regular citizens do not have. Citizens will typically only step in if it is 100% clear they're provably in the right, whereas the police can do pretty much whatever the fuck they like and get away with it.
( , Tue 18 Jun 2019, 18:50, Share, Reply)