Should you report Cannibis dealing?

[Timsup2nothin]

That's fair I guess.

But what if you, as a disabled person let's say, witness an ongoing violent attack in the street? Would you not then call the police?

So there are two premises at work in this hypothetical that I disagree with.

Premise one is that calling the police is somehow not meeting violence with violence. Many people who say 'of course I would call the police' refuse to acknowledge that. Their 'call the police' is a response that they can run right past their conscience and sit down to diner with their white hat on. The truth is that I could hypothesize numerous 'ongoing violent attacks in the street' and couple them with hypothetical outcomes that would suggest calling the cops was a regrettable escalation. One example: when I was in high school my best friend and I routinely settled our differences with an air clearing wrestling match. Inserting men with guns would have been of no benefit to anyone. An authoritative voice shouting "get off my lawn" would have been far more appropriate.

Premise two is that 'call the police' is the only access to violence that a citizen has, or should have...even a disabled citizen. If there was a fight on the street in front of my girlfriend's house that I thought needed to be broken up I have access to numerous violent avenues for accomplishing the task, some of which don't require my personal attention, and almost all of which would be preferred over calling the cops because they would be more appropriately matched to the circumstances and have quicker response times. That would still be true if I were disabled, unless I was so disabled I didn't have any way to know there was anything going on in the first place.

 

[Borachio]

Hmm. My instinct is not to call the police under any circumstances, so we're probably broadly in agreement.

I still can't help feeling that calling the police might be the most appropriate response in certain circumstances though.

 

[warpus]

If calling the police when it's warranted is violence, then pooping when you have to go is violence.

 

[Borachio]

Yes. But then you've got to say when it's warranted.

Going for a poop when it's not warranted can be very dangerous both for yourself and casual passersby.

 

[Zelig]

"I will call people who if you do not comply with my wishes will seize your property, incarcerate you, or possibly shoot you dead as a doornail,"

Straw man.

The only way sidewalk cleaners get escalated to violence is if you very deliberately escalate to violence.

 

[BvBPL]

A code enforcement officer is violence. He isn't going to shoot you over the sidewalk, but he will start the process of taking things away from you, incrementally, for noncompliance until the truly dedicated to noncompliance wind up dead clutching a rifle on a Montana ranch.

That said, not clearing the snow off of your sidewalk is also violence because it limits the ability of your neighbors to utilize the public sidewalk.

Not clearing off your sidewalk is also immediately violent because if you fail to clean your sidewalk then everyone else is immediately denied use of that sidewalk in contrast to the code violation officer whose violent removal of your things is deferred in time.

What's more, not clearing off your sidewalk effects physical harm to other people whereas the code violation officer is not going to.

If reporting on a neighbor for not clearing her sidewalk is violence then it is far less violent than the choice of the neighbor not to clear her sidewalk in the first place.

 

[Triewd]

Hmm. My instinct is not to call the police under any circumstances, so we're probably broadly in agreement.

I still can't help feeling that calling the police might be the most appropriate response in certain circumstances though.

I can give you an example of when I lived somewhere else:

Its late afternoon and I hear a bunch of banging noises downstairs like slamming doors and a bunch of shouting then a noise and a vibration like something or someone hitting the wall some more carry on then someone loudly screaming:

GET THE OFF OF ME NOW!!

several times followed by silence.

I get out the phone and I think should I call the police? I thought about it for 5 Mins

then I do so.

I describe what happened to the person on the phone and at the end of the conversation she says "police are already on their way"

Now how many off you in this situation would phone the police?

Read spoiler below:

Spoiler :

Police turned up knocked on door she was less than happy demanded to know who had phoned the police (they did not tell her) the police verified she was ok then left a few mins later the emergency services person phoned me and told me it had been an argument between brother and sister it later turned out her 'Brother' had left almost immediately after me phoning the police

 

[Farm Boy]

That said, not clearing the snow off of your sidewalk is also violence because it limits the ability of your neighbors to utilize the public sidewalk.

Not clearing off your sidewalk is also immediately violent because if you fail to clean your sidewalk then everyone else is immediately denied use of that sidewalk in contrast to the code violation officer whose violent removal of your things is deferred in time.

What's more, not clearing off your sidewalk effects physical harm to other people whereas the code violation officer is not going to.

If reporting on a neighbor for not clearing her sidewalk is violence then it is far less violent than the choice of the neighbor not to clear her sidewalk in the first place.

Enforcement by its nature is force. Not that English makes sense, but it's right there in the word, conveniently enough, this time. Negligence, while fully capable of resulting in physical harm, does not share the same fundamental characteristic. Not even willful negligence. One can be lazy and negligent about the sidewalk. One can be ignorant and negligent about the sidewalk. One can be incapable and negligent about the sidewalk. Calling the dudes to force your neighbor to stop being a miserable/lazy/disabled/ignorant/tardy arsewad about the sidewalk? Different. Unless, I suppose, one was intentionally icing the sidewalk to make it more likely for somebody to get hurt. But that's not simply a code violation anymore.

If you want to cut it down enough that a violent fall is violent whether its intentional or negligent, ok then. I'll stipulate that my earlier use of the word violence was limited to the intentional kind. The kind done with malice, well intended or otherwise.

 

[Borachio]

I can give you an example of when I lived somewhere else:

Its late afternoon and I hear a bunch of banging noises downstairs like slamming doors and a bunch of shouting then a noise and a vibration like something or someone hitting the wall some more carry on then someone loudly screaming:

GET THE OFF OF ME NOW!!

several times followed by silence.

I get out the phone and I think should I call the police? I thought about it for 5 Mins

then I do so.

I describe what happened to the person on the phone and at the end of the conversation she says "police are already on their way"

Now how many off you in this situation would phone the police?

Read spoiler below:

Spoiler :

Police turned up knocked on door she was less than happy demanded to know who had phoned the police (they did not tell her) the police verified she was ok then left a few mins later the emergency services person phoned me and told me it had been an argument between brother and sister it later turned out her 'Brother' had left almost immediately after me phoning the police

Well, I'm not sure what I'd have done. But at first sight, if I was properly worried about it, I think I'd have gone downstairs, tapped on the door, and called out "Is everyone alright in there?"

A lot depends on what sort of people the neighbours are, though. If they've impressed me with their general demeanour as being people who like to be left to get on with it, I'd likely have left them to get on with murdering each other as they please. Don't people have the right to murder each other as they please? To some extent?

Still, I'm not at all sure where the line really does lie between being a concerned public-spirited citizen, who'd call the police for sake of other people's protection, and respecting other people's right to privacy.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Straw man.

The only way sidewalk cleaners get escalated to violence is if you very deliberately escalate to violence.

Tin man. Wicked Witch. Is there some reference to the Wiizard of Oz that I missed somewhere up thread?

Meanwhile, violence escalates. Just the fact that you used the word escalate is a tacit acknowledgement that your call was the inception point of the violence (nod to the people who are saying that blatantly denying access to a public sidewalk by leaving it covered with ice may be a violent act, but I'll debate that later).

I don't understand why you are so squeamish about this. I've already acknowledged that I have all sorts of violence at my command, and not a shred of conscience about using it when I believe it is warranted. You do the same. What is the big deal? I might not approve of your methods, but if you thug up your neighbors they aren't my neighbors so I don't see why my approval matters.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, back at the idea that leaving the ice is an act of violence against passers by.

I seldom make the leap of associating inaction as a violent act. I could be persuaded that they guy who just gives a flat no when reminded that clearing the bit of sidewalk in question is his responsibility could be considered to be committing a violent act with the denial.

That likely would be the real world equivalent to the hypothetical 'exhausting of the fully optimized requests.' At some point the flat 'no' would be clearly identified as an act of violence in itself, and met with appropriate violence in return.

 

[Borachio]

How can saying "no" be an act of violence? I can't see how saying anything is an act of violence.

Sure, if you ring the police and they come round and beat you up in the back of a van until your spine breaks...

... that could be interpreted as unleashing an act of violence. But merely speaking into a phone isn't an act of violence in itself. And most people don't expect the police to do anything but talk, some more, to an asocial neighbour.

Don't the police have trained negotiators for this sort of thing?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

How can saying "no" be an act of violence? I can't see how saying anything is an act of violence.

Sure, if you ring the police and they come round and beat you up in the back of a van until your spine breaks...

... that could be interpreted as unleashing an act of violence. But merely speaking into a phone isn't an act of violence in itself. And most people don't expect the police to do anything but talk, some more, to an asocial neighbour.

Don't the police have trained negotiators for this sort of thing?

In the case of the icy sidewalk, the city sends round some code inspector. In some cities the code inspector may knock on the door, in mine they would just take pictures.

Be it by knock on the door or written notice, some citation for non compliance is issued, with a threat of fines, generally, or in this situation according to Zelig threat of "we will hire someone to do it." My experience is that that means they have a list of 'approved contractors' who they pay ten to twenty times the going rate, then bill you. The process of getting on that list has always been a mystery to me, but I suspect it involves contributions to the mayor's campaign fund or right of birth. Most calls to code inspectors are generated by people on that list rather than random rats passing by.

Should you not pay, out of obstinance or inability, then your property is seized, in the form of a lien followed by forfeiture procedures.

Should you not depart the forfeited property, men with guns will come and escort you off of it. Should you resist enough, you will be shot.

The "well, if you had just complied with my wishes sooner none of that would have been necessary" defense does not change that this is the violence being perpetrated in order to get ones own way.

 

[Borachio]

I can see that. (Except that I still don't see how speech is violence.)

But aren't you just as much an advocate of violence as anyone else?

And if speech is violence (a radical possibility, imo), what then?

Is non-violent communication, therefore, an impossibility?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I can see that. (Except that I still don't see how speech is violence.)

But aren't you just as much an advocate of violence as anyone else?

And if speech is violence (a radical possibility, imo), what then?

Is non-violent communication, therefore, an impossibility?

I would say that on the 'advocate of violence' scale I meet or exceed all expectations. I am opposed to hypocritical "I'm not violent, let me call the cops" positions, and to the initiation of violence, but not opposed to violence in general as I strongly and openly advocate for meeting violence with violence.

On the 'speech as violence' question, I don't see a question, generally, though the specifics of "no I will not clear the ice off my sidewalk" are murky.

Generally "do this or I will beat the holy snot out of you with this bat" is speech, but I doubt you would deny that it is violence given that it is obvious coercion. So the general claim 'speech isn't violence' I think is dispatched.

"No I won't drop what I'm doing and clear the ice off the sidewalk" does not seem to me to be violence in any way. However, if the context is that the ice on the sidewalk presents a danger and the responsibility for the removal of the ice is clearly established then there may be an argument that refusal amounts to violence, or at the very least callous disregard for responsibility for the safety of others. In any event I would have not the slightest twinge of conscience if I pestered them about it until they tried to force me to stop and then beat them down.

 

[Borachio]

Yes, I'd deny that "do this or I will beat the holy snot out of you with this bat" is violence.

I have heard someone say to his son (on the phone) "do what your mother tells you or I'll murder you when I get home". And let me tell you, his small son just giggled back down the phone.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yes, I'd deny that "do this or I will beat the holy snot out of you with this bat" is violence.

I have heard someone say to his son "do what your mother tells you or I'll murder you when I get home".

You are opting for coercion by threat of violence is not in itself violence. You present an example in which the threat of violence is (?) undeniably facetious. However the reality is that to the target of coercion the threat may be taken seriously, though the violent consequences as imagined by the son probably would not amount to "murder."

But the fact remains that if the threat is deemed totally non viable there is no effective coercion. So for the coercion to be effective there must be a presence of genuine violence, at least sufficient to be perceived by the victim of the coercion.

 

[Borachio]

Oh, I agree absolutely. And that's my point. The speech doesn't constitute the violence at all.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Oh, I agree absolutely. And that's my point. The speech doesn't constitute the violence at all.

Constitute, no. Contain and communicate, yes.

 

[Commodore]

So I had an experience today in which I could have been a snitch and chose not to. I don't think it's worth it's own thread and it seems like it could be relevant to the general discussion here, so here it is:

Today while visiting my parents I was hanging out in my parents' back room with my father just enjoying the sunshine. All of a sudden we heard a commotion and saw a guy running through one of the neighbor's backyard. He was running from two other men who caught up to him, tackled him and proceeded to savagely beat him while yelling profanity at him. The whole time the man being beaten was yelling "I swear I didn't do it!" This went on for about a minute or so before a woman who seemed to be the girlfriend of one of the attackers broke up the beating.

Now this whole time, my father and I stood there watching and the thought never even crossed our minds to assist the man being beaten or to call the police. In fact, the first thought that crossed my mind when I saw what was happening was "Well, he must have done something to provoke the attack." I also took note of the racial harmony and cooperation that took place as one of the attackers was white and the other was black.

So what do you guys think? Were we wrong to just sit there and watch it happen? I guess the way I see it is: one, it was none of our business; and two, even if we did call the police it wouldn't have done any good. Our view of the incident wasn't the best, so it's not like we could have provided very good descriptions of the attackers or the victim. Not to mention, by the time the police would have shown up, all parties involved would have been long gone.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

My rule is: If I have no idea what the situation is to begin with, inviting men with guns into the middle of it is unlikely to benefit anyone. I would make a point of meeting people in your folks' neighborhood though.