RoR: Forum

To jump in here:

I think there are a lot of principles at work here, and how to apply them entirely depends on the context. Obviously American police officers are by no means essentially like Nazis or any other totalitarian police state. No need to beat that dead horse. But there comes a point where a police officer cannot blindly follow orders and Ryan addresses this, such as the case if the country becomes a totalitarian nation, and the law is used to subjectively brutalize citizens, e.g. to round up certain unwanted dissidents or a minority to be imprisoned or executed for no real crime. But for far less draconian laws, such as some traffic laws (by the way I'm in the minority here that believes some traffic laws are actually needed?), a police officer cannot simply chose to ignore enforcing such a law lest he quit his job or be fired. A police officer may not like enforcing certain traffic laws, but if he wishes to keep his job, he must decide whether it is worth losing a job over ticketing someone for what is otherwise a minor crime who's only punishment is a small fine, while allowing him to stay employed as a police officer to arrest thieves and violent offenders. The benefits of being a police officer, getting to arrest initiators of force, outweigh the costs of enforcing less desirable laws. Not to mention, if we are to accept the premise that the police ought to selectively choose which laws to enforce and which to not enforce, is this applicable in any context? As Ryan points out, obviously if we are talking about Hitler and his S.S, the police officer has a moral obligation to fight the law, and not enforce it. But what about the context of our society? Should police officers selectively decide for themselves which laws to enforce and which ones to ignore? Do we trust the police with our current laws to make such a call? The law in that context becomes less about objectivity, and more about the subjective whims of the police officer. Maybe it is moral to ticket someone for making a wrong K-Turn in traffic. Maybe making such a move in traffic endangers other motorists and a good argument can be made that endangering the lives of others is an initiation of force. But now we are saying hey it's up to the police officer to decide whether that is true. I think there is a line that needs to be crossed before a police officer, or any citizen for that matter, goes on strike against the state. Until that happens, a police officer is not committing any moral transgression by upholding the law.

Post 61

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 2:59pm

Sam, Jeff, Tibor,

Depending upon the operating system, the browser, and the html code the programmer used, you can usually hit the letter 'n' for New Mexico (when the drop down box is selected) - it will bring up Nebraska, don't despair, just hit the 'n' again, and again, and again, (cycling down the list of 'n' states) and there you go!

Jeff should only have to hit the 'w' key once, since Washington is at the top of the states starting with that letter.

I have no solutions for any of the other peeves, but I do share them. Especially the badly designed web sites that seem to have been created by amateurs - stupid ones at that - and those awful automated phone systems... "Thank you for holding, we recognize that your time is important" - like Hell they do. And what about the phone systems that ask you to enter your phone number, like they didn't have caller ID, or to enter an account number and then when you finally get a person on line, the first thing they ask for is your account number. Sheesh!

Post 62

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 3:29pm

If it matters so much, move to Arizona.

Peace out, yo.

(Edited by Ted Keer on 12/30, 3:32pm)

Post 63

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 3:47pm

Steve:

I agree with your two comments about automated telephone systems. I find these to be at the top of my list of annoying abuses of technology. I hope that businesses wake up and realize that they can gain an advantage by offering better customer telephone support as their competitors continue to offend their departing customers with their "concern for out time" and their "appreciation of our business".

Following up on something Tibor mentioned, I recently got a recommendation for a good bookseller on the internet and I went to the site and ordered a pile of books. They have no telephone number and rely only on email support. This is the first time I have used such a business - I typically refuse to deal with anyone that will not divulge a full address and phone number. Well, I wish I had not violated my own policy. My order is "lost". I got no email confirmation and nothing has been charged to my credit card. I have written to them twice about this and have received no reply in either case. With email, you are completely at the mercy of the other party who can simply ignore you if they choose. Additionally, email can get lost in spam filters, so no one can be sure that the other party is even seeing your message. Hey John, they are over in Falls Village, CT. Can I hire you to go over and "get their attention" for me? :-)

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 64

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 4:34pm

I can't stand it when people park their shopping cart in the middle of the damn isle. It's about the rudest thing to me, I swear.

Post 65

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 4:48pm

Ditto with the shopping carts. There is so much more at the grocery store that a little thought could set right, I can't begin to list it all. Like virtually doing one's personal banking at the checkout!

(Edited by Machan on 12/30, 4:50pm)

Post 66

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 5:03pm

Ah, the shopping cart - is funny, but when I am with cane thumping along with my cart, they always move theirs out of the middle..... :D

But the checkout counter - ahh - there's where see red sometimes... indeed...
is why prefer the techno thing and check myself out...

Post 67

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 5:07pm

I have to say, and I know this is weird, that people taking a long time to decide what they want at fast food joints really aggravate me. Especially if they start asking what things are, such as if the burger in the picture with lettuce has lettuce.

Post 68

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 8:39pm

I'm buying a cane.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008 - 11:50pm

John Armaos: "... I think there are a lot of principles at work here, and how to apply them entirely depends on the context. ... a police officer is not committing any moral transgression by upholding the law."

I did not agree with everything in all of that, but I sanctioned it because it was the first time that I have ever known you to express six sides of the same issue in one post. It's complicated and touches on the most basic personal issues of the social contract, without which we might as well all live as hermits in the forests. Best wishes to you, John, for a prosperous new year.

Post 70

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 12:01am

TSI: A very young officer was murdered in this state after a traffic stop a few days ago. It's horrible, so I'm wondering why the level of force during traffic stops hasn't been increased due to this obvious risk. He isn't the first, and he won't be the last ...

Right. That was one of the links that RKR provided in a post above.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,473442,00.html
Hey, wow. A police officer treating a minority kid like a fellow human being, just drove him to the house to see if he could get a parent involved. Good thing that kid decided to do the right thing and shoot that cop. Unjust swine like that deserve what they get, right?

You two might come to terms on this if you stay engaged.

Post 71

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 1:55am

My initial idea was to list some pet peeves that are purely personal, even "subjective." But from the start I went astray because I also listed complaints that could be justified and thus stopped being subjective, based on personal tastes, idiosyncrasies, likes and dislikes. And by now most folks are coming up with stuff that justifiably irks them and where blame is often involved. Still, it is interesting to just stick to those pet peeves that have nothing to do with evaluation! Like squeaky voices or receding hairlines and such.

Post 72

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 4:34am

TSI: A very young officer was murdered in this state after a traffic stop a few days ago. It's horrible, so I'm wondering why the level of force during traffic stops hasn't been increased due to this obvious risk. He isn't the first, and he won't be the last ...

Right. That was one of the links that RKR provided in a post above.

Mike, I wasn't going to address Ryan's "words in my mouth" offering, but what do you think about raising the level of force during routine traffic stops to avoid this kind of terrible thing? If it's justifiable against seniors playing poker, then surely it's justifiable on the road during a stop for a broken light, speeding, tail-gating, or seat belt.

If Ryan addressed this, I missed it.

Post 73

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 10:26am

I get annoyed at drivers who think that they get to decide whether or not I will change lanes. See, the lighting of my directionals is NOTICE that I will now merge into their lane, in front of them—yet somehow they seem to think it is a REQUEST that they may accept by easing back or reject by speeding up to close the gap. No doubt the latter perceive ME as “cutting them off” when I move over.

Post 74

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 11:14am

That is indeed how most now consider it, Jon... so get a Hummer and jack them off the road if they try to jerk ye...;-)

Post 75

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 11:47am

Pet Peeve:
Folks who get mad at folks on the road. It's really none of my business.

I used to get real mad at folks on the road. They cut you off, and such. But now I get mad at folks who get mad -- folks who scream and yell, give you the finger, and tail-gait you as part of their juvenile tantrums. It's really none of my business to get mad at folks who get mad. Not having good control of their own lives, they take it out on the road (where they're in a safe, steel cage) -- trying to control others, or constantly seeking to just be heard and respected in a world filled with existential angst.

Drivers with road rage are like monkeys in cages that go berserk when the lab technician walks by with food. I don't know how to justify my getting irked by their behavior. I mean, it's their own life and choice in a matter -- not mine -- but it still somehow bothers me.

Complaint:
Artsy or just cosmopolitan folks who proclaim to me that they're real intelligent and mature and whatnot, yet get all huffy and puffy the moment you attempt to honestly disagree with them on something.

It's a kind of post-modern, intellectual arrogance which cannot tolerate dissent. Like infants who've learned to read and write and draw and paint and sculpt (or have developed a refined sense of taste for reading, writing, drawing, painting, sculpting, etc) -- they've got talent coming out of their ears but relatively no psychological maturity. The idea that they're even a little bit morally deficient (and should build some character) is revulsive to them.

Ed

p.s. Because I write much stronger than I speak or personally present myself to others (and folks here who've met me can attest to that), I do NOT just walk up to someone and blurt out that they're woefully deficient as a human being! Instead, I drop hints that they're woefully deficient.

:-)

Just kidding.

My writing can make folks believe that I'm terribly moralizing in real life, but it just ain't so. Instead, I realize that every time I point the finger at one of my peers in judgment, that three fingers are pointing back at me.

Peikoff said Rand was -- in one respect -- the easiest person in the world to get along with. Rand cut-off more relationships than you can shake a stick at (because of eventually passing moral judgment on these others). I have no qualms with that, whatsoever. She presented herself to others benevolently. That is all that matters. It's not whether you're everyone's friend, it's whether you're both just AND benevolent.

It's been my experience that -- in spite of my "strong" writing -- I'm not terribly difficult to get along with, either. "GET to know me!" [SNL skit?]
(Edited by Ed Thompson on 12/31, 11:11pm)

Post 76

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 11:54am

Another one is when I am trying to leave a business onto a one-way right next to a light. The light turns red and cars are still going 30 by me, slamming on their brakes at the light. The lanes stack up this way and I can’t get in. The light turns green and they all go, none willing to let me out. The light turns red, and they stack up again, I can’t get out.

Heaven forbid I would assert myself upon the next red. They have nothing to do but stop for the red ahead of them, but they react like I am the crazy one when I come out into the road.

Post 77

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 1:13pm

Jon,

That is a terrible, terrible injustice (I'm not kidding). I fear this thread will get "hijacked" into a highway morality thread (please excuse the pun), but I have to say that I had a bad experience with folks "holding you up."

I was working at UPS on a night-shift, going to work at 10pm at night. I lived on college campus and a game had just got out. Thousands of folks were walking out of the stadium. The first time that my traffic light turned green and I couldn't go (because tons of folks were walking across the street), I didn't think anything of it. Instead, I thought to myself:

"It's cold outside. These folks are just trying to get to their cars. They're ignoring the traffic signal, but they'll let me go the next time the street light turns green for me.

Certainly, what they won't do, is to keep walking across the street for cycle-upon-cycle of green and red lights -- making me late for work. Especially, if I honk on the next green light.

And, even if I honk and nothing happens, and I'm getting late for work, then I will be able to rev my engine and let them know that I really need to get to work -- and that them waiting 3-5 seconds for me to drive off won't cause them any measurable harm. Certainly they'll let me go then."

That's not how it went that day. Instead, I lost my cool and mowed down the entire crowd in front of me -- leaving a trail of bloody bodies in my path ...

No, that's not how it went, either. That was just my sick fantasy of a ruthless, existentialist demand for respect.

Instead of things happening where I got a measure of respect, or where those failing to respect me got run over -- Mad Max style -- by my 4000-lb car; when I finally got through I hit the gas hard and got a traffic violation from a cop who had been there the whole time (though I couldn't see him behind the crowd).

If a cop was there the whole time and didn't direct traffic -- then what am I getting this ticket for? It's like blaming banks for the recession or something.

At least I had the partial excuse of a traffic ticket to show my boss when I arrived late for work that night.

:-)

Ed
(Edited by Ed Thompson on 12/31, 1:16pm)

Post 78

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 1:34pm

The idea that they're even a little bit morally deficient (and should build some character) is revulsive to them.
.......

No - it's that they not figure morals have anything to do with them - is all relative, ye see... ;-)

Post 79

Wednesday, December 31, 2008 - 2:36pm