Should you report Cannibis dealing?

[BvBPL]

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.

What you're forgetting is that the homeowner has a responsibility to clear the snow from her walk. So it goes from being simply lazy, to being lazy in a manner that ignores her duty, to (perhaps) being willfully lazy in light of the fact that her other neighbors in the community have shoveled their walks and she's the outlier.

What's more, the responsibility to clear one's walk isn't a surprise to anyone. It's not a case of, say, a party asking his neighbor to stop burning leaves in her lawn on a given Saturday because he's throwing a lawn party that day that she didn't know about.

Plus an unshoveled walk can be really, really dangerous.

So, yeah, it's violence if we are using the relatively low standard for violence that encompasses calling a code enforcement officer within its definition. The homeowner isn't drumming her fingers together sinisterly while watching out the window, hoping that people will fall on her walk, but a pure malice standard is too narrow a definition.

--

Consider the subtext that violent acts are morally unacceptable. That's the argument that's being made here about calling the cops after all.

Let's say you are at the switch for a railyard and there's a railcar screaming down the tracks. If you don't throw the switch it will run into a school bus full of children, but if you throw the switch it will change the track and the railcar will safely come to a stop.

If you say that a choice not to change is the tracks is not technically violent because it is inaction rather than action, not changing the track is still not morally acceptable.

Even if you don't accept that choosing not the shovel is violent then it is still morally unacceptable in the same manner that not changing the track is morally unacceptable.

 

[Zelig]

Yeah. Since when you used it that meaning clearly didn't apply I thought Wizard of Oz. I suppose I should have guessed you were just mistaken. Glad you found that reference though.

You made up a quote, ascribed it to me, it did not accurately describe my position.

I guess that's less of a straw man than a straight up lie.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

What he means is that most people define violence as what is done to them and never by them.

The world is full of people who firmly believe that "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," isn't violence on their part just because their hands are clean at the end of the day. I find that revolting so I point it out regularly.

You made up a quote, ascribed it to me, it did not accurately describe my position.

I guess that's less of a straw man than a straight up lie.

Feel free to demonstrate how I ascribed that quote to you.

Or feel free to apologize for this false accusation about me lying.

Or feel free to continue shredding your own credibility, as I find that pretty amusing.

 

[Berzerker]

If we share a common hallway then it is both our hallways. If you, in your apartment, are smoking a fat bone and stinking up the hallway than you are trespassing on my hallway.

so it aint your hallway, somebody else owns it

 

[BvBPL]

So what?

 

[Berzerker]

I already explained what, complain to the person who owns the hallway

 

[BvBPL]

Whatever, man.

Tell me something interesting instead of unoriginal stuff like that.

 

[Zelig]

Feel free to demonstrate how I ascribed that quote to you.

"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,"

If not ascribed to me or my views, how is it relevant?

Or feel free to continue shredding your own credibility, as I find that pretty amusing.

Have you noticed there are literally zero people in this thread who agree with you?

 

[Hygro]

Mars, all Tim is saying is that you are employing the threat of violence and depravation by using the police, and you keep resisting that claim. It's not asking much. Tim says he prefers to work with his neighbors more personally and organically, and says you'd rather not.

And he's right about that.

 

[Zelig]

Mars, all Tim is saying is that you are employing the threat of violence and depravation by using the police, and you keep resisting that claim. It's not asking much. Tim says he prefers to work with his neighbors more personally and organically, and says you'd rather not.

And he's right about that.

1. I'm not using the police.

2. I'm suggesting the method which is least likely to result in actual violence.

3. His solution to any neighbors who appear to be making note of his address is to "immediately classify as a rat, and deal with appropriately." - hardly personal and organic.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

1. I'm not using the police.

2. I'm suggesting the method which is least likely to result in actual violence.

3. His solution to any neighbors who appear to be making note of his address is to "immediately classify as a rat, and deal with appropriately." - hardly personal and organic.

Actually, since I am clearly taking a stand against the sort of violence by proxy that appeals to so many one would assume that my dealing with rats would in fact be personal and organic.

Meanwhile, agreement and credibility are entirely different things. Since you routinely volunteer to provide me education I have not asked for, I will do the same for you.

My position is a radical one, in the opinions of most people. Therefor I do not receive much agreement. Your position is actually typical, which is why the "quote" I used seemed to be attributable to you under a sort of shoe fits generality. Being a fairly typical position, most people can be counted on to agree with it without giving it much thought. My objective, of course, is to provoke people to think. They still may not agree with me, but at least the next time they play the proxy violence card they may pause a moment and acknowledge what they are doing.

As to credibility, that is purely individual. I have said the same thing, in slightly varying ways, from page one of this thread to this. I have not veered away from unpleasantness with hypothetical "optimized requests" while making clear that I had no willingness to consider wasting time on any request at all. I have not called anyone insane. I have not defined the term rat on one page and used it differently on another, nor shifted what I had made clear that I meant by "proxy violence." I have not run screaming "straw man straw man" into that good night, then produced an explanation of the term that demonstrated clearly that no such straw man was present. And up until this post, where my patience with your patronizing belief that you are somehow in a position to educate me I have resisted the urge to respond in kind.

Now, I am well aware that I have not created widespread agreement that violence, if needed, is best done without proxies. But I am confident that I would have widespread agreement that my credibility has come through intact. Are you? Really?

 

[Berzerker]

Whatever, man.

Tell me something interesting instead of unoriginal stuff like that.

if it was unoriginal you'd understand the difference between your hallway and somebody elses but that distinction seems foreign to you

 

[Timsup2nothin]

3. His solution to any neighbors who appear to be making note of his address is to "immediately classify as a rat, and deal with appropriately."

Speaking of straw men...thanks for providing the reference material as well as this exceptional example. The "solution" you refer to has nothing to do with "any neighbors". It had to do specifically with how I would handle the situation of cops at my door about ice on the sidewalk, which is to watch for who takes the requisite notes to call the cops on me again the next time there is ice on the sidewalk.

By leaving out the context you convert an effective rat hunting technique into an appearance of an open season on the neighbors. Since obviously it is easier to denounce an open season on the neighbors than it is a rat hunt when the existence of the rat has already been established this was a textbook straw man argument. Since you had just provided the reference I assume the example was provided as illustration, but in case anyone missed it I am here to help.

 

[BvBPL]

if it was unoriginal you'd understand the difference between your hallway and somebody elses but that distinction seems foreign to you

That's a bizarre test for novelty.

 

[Borachio]

I have not run screaming "straw man straw man" into that good night

Thank you, Mr Dylan Thomas!

 

[Farm Boy]

... but a pure malice standard is too narrow a definition.

Yet it's the applicable difference between the competing views here when somebody is too much of a little arsemonster to consider code enforcement/punishment to be the appropriate first step before exploring a social request or interaction. Caveat for people with mental disorders that exist such that social requests are impossible yet complaints to code enforcement are not.

 

[BvBPL]

Then the difference isn't sufficient to create a contrary moral obligation.

 

[Zelig]

Speaking of straw men...thanks for providing the reference material as well as this exceptional example. The "solution" you refer to has nothing to do with "any neighbors". It had to do specifically with how I would handle the situation of cops at my door about ice on the sidewalk, which is to watch for who takes the requisite notes to call the cops on me again the next time there is ice on the sidewalk.

Nope.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Nope.

You really believe that there is a significant difference between code enforcement officers and cops?

Try being on the receiving end sometime. You'll learn.

Meanwhile, it would certainly be unfortunate if anyone you have sicked the cops code enforcement officers on sees them as cops, so please be cautious.

 

[Farm Boy]

Then the difference isn't sufficient to create a contrary moral obligation.

Save for the fact that malicious neighbors make fecal-quality neighbors. But true, it's a free country, there is no enforceable obligation not to be a ****.