Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
What strange bedfellows this thread has wrought. If there is a previous thread where I agreed with Frazzled and Seaward, and disagreed with Sebster; it is unknown to me.

Well, given your earlier post I'm not sure we're disagreeing.

And you missed the strangest one - I'm agreeing with Monster Rain in this thread. Truly the end times are upon us.

I was thinking the same thing.

We've been agreeing a lot lately, now that I think about it. Herb lore and whatnot.

 sebster wrote:
I don't think there's going to be too many instances of police spotting something that the person didn't know was illegal. I don't, for instance, think the police are so expert in their jobs that they can identify on sight stolen goods that have been fenced to the homeowner.

I'm not talking about a person suddenly discovering something was illegal, I'm talking about the police making a mistake. For example, maybe one of them thinks they recognize some stuff that was stolen recently because they were involved with the case. Now you're in legal trouble and you'd better hope you saved the receipt. Or let's say there was a robbery recently, you kind of match the description of the suspect, and oh look, that shirt on top of the laundry pile looks like the one the victim described. Even if you're completely innocent you're now a suspect, and you really don't want to be in that position.

But, like I said, this could all be avoided with severe limits (only something as extreme as a dead body/bomb/etc) on what the police can use as evidence if they invoke their emergency power to enter your property. However, in the absence of those limits, it's an entirely rational decision to decide that you will under no circumstances allow the police to enter your property without a warrant.

I mean, really, when it comes to things the police might spot, we're talking about drugs. And then the homeowner will know full well that they're illegal, and then tell the police quite sensibly that they can't use the house.

Or let's say your friend left something out and you didn't know about it. Congratulations, now you're going to jail.

 whembly wrote:
Hey! I thought that was when you agreed with me on some things. o.O

When was that?

Outside of stories that have (R) and (D) at the end of people's names we agree all the time


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I was thinking the same thing.

We've been agreeing a lot lately, now that I think about it. Herb lore and whatnot.

I have to admit I read your posts in that herb lore thread and thought 'hey Monster Rain's posts are a lot of fun when he's on my side'


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:
I'm not talking about a person suddenly discovering something was illegal, I'm talking about the police making a mistake. For example, maybe one of them thinks they recognize some stuff that was stolen recently because they were involved with the case. Now you're in legal trouble and you'd better hope you saved the receipt. Or let's say there was a robbery recently, you kind of match the description of the suspect, and oh look, that shirt on top of the laundry pile looks like the one the victim described. Even if you're completely innocent you're now a suspect, and you really don't want to be in that position.

I don't know, dude. That just seems a really, really long bow. I mean, 'sure people would be benefitted by my helping, but there's a chance if I let you in that an officer might mistake some piece of property that I bought legally for something that was stolen in a wholly unrelated incident' is a real stretch.

I mean, really, when it comes to things the police might spot, we're talking about drugs. And then the homeowner will know full well that they're illegal, and then tell the police quite sensibly that they can't use the house.

Or let's say your friend left something out and you didn't know about it. Congratulations, now you're going to jail.

 sebster wrote:
I don't know, dude. That just seems a really, really long bow. I mean, 'sure people would be benefitted by my helping, but there's a chance if I let you in that an officer might mistake some piece of property that I bought legally for something that was stolen in a wholly unrelated incident' is a real stretch.

That depends on how much you trust your local police. If you live in the town in the OP I'd say it's pretty reasonable to be afraid that the idiots running the local police department could jump to conclusions and the best thing to do is refuse to have any unnecessary interaction with them. Or, to give another example, if you're black and live in the wrong place I'd certainly understand not wanting to let the police in under any circumstances.

 Peregrine wrote:
If you live in the town in the OP I'd say it's pretty reasonable to be afraid that the idiots running the local police department could jump to conclusions and the best thing to do is refuse to have any unnecessary interaction with them.

That's always the best policy. Interacting with the police when not required to, the best you can do is break even, but you risk losing. Not interacting with them? You break even, but don't run the risk of losing.

Or let's say your friend left something out and you didn't know about it. Congratulations, now you're going to jail.

Who the hell would be friends with someone who does something illegal? and moreover, why in earth wouldn't they report said friend to the police...

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Who the hell would be friends with someone who does something illegal? and moreover, why in earth wouldn't they report said friend to the police...

Lots of people. If you can't figure out how someone could be friends with someone who smokes pot, for example, you're really missing something.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Who the hell would be friends with someone who does something illegal? and moreover, why in earth wouldn't they report said friend to the police...

Lots of people. If you can't figure out how someone could be friends with someone who smokes pot, for example, you're really missing something.

The fact that they haven't informed the police that their friend is breaking the law speaks much of their moral character. Its that sort in lazy, selfishness that is causing society as a whole to deteriorate. Would you not inform the police if they murdered someone?

I'm willing to bet a significant number of these police officers who act like rogues where caused through years of being held back by red tape and a lack of support by the public at large. Years of this can really change a persons outlook and behaviour.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

The fact that they haven't informed the police that their friend is breaking the law speaks much of their moral character. Its that sort in lazy, selfishness that is causing society as a whole to deteriorate.

So if you see one of your friends smoking a joint you call the cops on him?
If you see one of your friends speeding or breaking ANY traffic law you call the cops on them?

Do you call the cops on your friends when they throw a piece of paper on the floor instead of the trash can as well? How about if they jaywalk?

You must be a really swell guy to know!

So if you see one of your friends smoking a joint you call the cops on him?
If you see one of your friends speeding or breaking ANY traffic law you call the cops on them?

Do you call the cops on your friends when they throw a piece of paper on the floor instead of the trash can as well? How about if they jaywalk?

You must be a really swell guy to know!

I take it you would never report a friend for: theft, murder, terrorism, rape, etc?

Law is the law no matter how trivial.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

So if you see one of your friends smoking a joint you call the cops on him?
If you see one of your friends speeding or breaking ANY traffic law you call the cops on them?

Do you call the cops on your friends when they throw a piece of paper on the floor instead of the trash can as well? How about if they jaywalk?

You must be a really swell guy to know!

I take it you would never report a friend for: theft, murder, terrorism, rape, etc?

Law is the law no matter how trivial.

At this point, for your sake, I really, really hope that you are just trying to troll everyone.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
The fact that they haven't informed the police that their friend is breaking the law speaks much of their moral character. Its that sort in lazy, selfishness that is causing society as a whole to deteriorate. Would you not inform the police if they murdered someone?

Can you really not see the difference between a minor victimless "crime" like smoking pot and murder?

I'm willing to bet a significant number of these police officers who act like rogues where caused through years of being held back by red tape and a lack of support by the public at large. Years of this can really change a persons outlook and behaviour.

Too bad. If they can't handle the job they should quit. Their frustration with not being able to enforce the law to their own satisfaction does not justify abusing their power, just like I'm not justified in shooting my neighbor because I'm tired of them playing loud music and the police won't put them in prison.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Law is the law no matter how trivial.

And legalism is not a valid ethical system.

Can you really not see the difference between a minor victimless "crime" like smoking pot and murder?

Same justification could be applied to anything. Smoking pot leaves the smoker a victim, and anyone else who has to breathe it in. If we pick and choose which laws to follow, why follow any?

Too bad. If they can't handle the job they should quit. Their frustration with not being able to enforce the law to their own satisfaction does not justify abusing their power, just like I'm not justified in shooting my neighbor because I'm tired of them playing loud music and the police won't put them in prison.

Of course it doesn't justify it. Why bother doing the job's duties however.

And legalism is not a valid ethical system.

Neither is the absence of all morals and ethics.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Same justification could be applied to anything.

No it can't, because the justification for reporting a murderer is based on the fact that murder harms another person, while the justification for reporting a pot smoker is based entirely on blind obedience to the law.

Smoking pot leaves the smoker a victim, and anyone else who has to breathe it in.

Sorry, but all the evidence is against you. Smoking pot is no worse than smoking cigarettes (which is completely legal), so any attempt at justifying punishment based on self-inflicted "harm" is a joke. And of course that's on top of the absurdity of throwing someone in prison for damaging their health. I'm pretty sure that spending time in prison is going to be far worse for someone than the effects of smoking pot.

Also, it's not exactly hard to go smoke outside where nobody else has to breathe it in, just like people have found ways of having social groups that contain both people who smoke cigarettes and people who do not.

If we pick and choose which laws to follow, why follow any?

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

Neither is the absence of all morals and ethics.

Do you really not understand that there's a big difference between not reporting your friends to the police over minor "crimes" and having a complete absence of morals and ethics?

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
To be 100% clear on the quote Sebster is so upset about. I have no moral, ethical or legal obligation to expose to any possible reprisal, danger, damages or any thing else that might occur, myself, my family, or my property in any way, shape, or form by allowing police officers to use it as they see fit. It is my home. Not a police barracks, or good place to stick a police marksman, an LP/OP, or like the Cops in the OP apparently a good place to kick your boots up, eat a snack and enjoy the AC if you aren't me or one of my guests.

Chances are if a cop can convince me of the need, and asks nicely, I'll probably help. Hell I might even make lemonade and bake a cake. Show up waving your badge and demanding access to my property, demanding I willingly compromise my safety and privacy? Get stuffed.

KM has the way of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Or let's say your friend left something out and you didn't know about it. Congratulations, now you're going to jail.

Who the hell would be friends with someone who does something illegal? and moreover, why in earth wouldn't they report said friend to the police...

Do you always obey ALL traffic laws?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

So if you see one of your friends smoking a joint you call the cops on him?
If you see one of your friends speeding or breaking ANY traffic law you call the cops on them?

Do you call the cops on your friends when they throw a piece of paper on the floor instead of the trash can as well? How about if they jaywalk?

You must be a really swell guy to know!

I take it you would never report a friend for: theft, murder, terrorism, rape, etc?

Law is the law no matter how trivial.

Wow, and I thought I was an all black and white kind of guy.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

The fact that they haven't informed the police that their friend is breaking the law speaks much of their moral character. Its that sort in lazy, selfishness that is causing society as a whole to deteriorate.

So if you see one of your friends smoking a joint you call the cops on him?
If you see one of your friends speeding or breaking ANY traffic law you call the cops on them?

Do you call the cops on your friends when they throw a piece of paper on the floor instead of the trash can as well? How about if they jaywalk?

Mr Hyena wrote:I take it you would never report a friend for: theft, murder, terrorism, rape, etc?

Law is the law no matter how trivial.

Thank god. That whole thing with all these people agreeing with each other who would not normally be, and expanding upon their opinions in stances in ways best described as "reasonable"... I almost forgot where I was for a moment. Thankfully someone came along to conflate the most minor misdemeanors in our criminal justice system with capital murder and terrorism to remind me.

 Peregrine wrote:


No it can't, because the justification for reporting a murderer is based on the fact that murder harms another person, while the justification for reporting a pot smoker is based entirely on blind obedience to the law.

There most definitely are victims in any drug related scenario. If you look through the rose colored glasses and ONLY look at the smoker, sure there's no harm no foul. But what about the money that bought those drugs? Now it's in a tunnel heading towards cartels or other wicked bad groups out there who commit things like murder.


I'm not saying that you should report every pot smoker you've ever smelt, but if you witness a deal going down you should definitely report it. It's also not blind obedience to the law, especially since (having been witness to someone reported drug use) LEOs generally will not move anywhere if you say that a group of people are clearly using pot (or other drugs).

That is a circular argument.

If drugs were not illegal, the money paid for them would not be going to criminals.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

I'm willing to bet a significant number of these police officers who act like rogues where caused through years of being held back by red tape and a lack of support by the public at large. Years of this can really change a persons outlook and behaviour.

This sounds like a buddy cop film waiting to happen. Maybe you should pitch your idea to Hollywood? I hear remakes are big right now.

Surely it would be more straight forward to get them on regular criminal charges instead of the whole 3rd amendment thing?

This thread managed to go full stupid, now I can get popcorn.

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

"injustice" is a word used by the guilty.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

"injustice" is a word used by the guilty.

Oh yea he be trollin!

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

"injustice" is a word used by the guilty.

Sorry, but you're just coming off as some sort of extremely facist Judge Dredd cross right now.

Then again, considering what I recall of your previous arguments and political leanings, I can't say I'm entirely surprised.

 Ketara wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

"injustice" is a word used by the guilty.

Sorry, but you're just coming off as some sort of extremely facist Judge Dredd cross right now.

Then again, considering what I recall of your previous arguments and political leanings, I can't say I'm entirely surprised.

I know Judge Dredd is intended as satire, but honestly, its actually a good political/social structure to adopt in context of a rising population.

The only Fascism I support is Dakka Fascism.

Edit: User was baned for this post.

BANE!!!!

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Is the concept of an unjust law really that hard to understand?

"injustice" is a word used by the guilty.

Sorry, but you're just coming off as some sort of extremely facist Judge Dredd cross right now.

Then again, considering what I recall of your previous arguments and political leanings, I can't say I'm entirely surprised.

I know Judge Dredd is intended as satire, but honestly, its actually a good political/social structure to adopt in context of a rising population.

Troll like typing detected.

I think he actually thinks that way.

It's astounding I know.