Subject:
|
Re: Ticket prices going up
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 21 Jan 2003 18:49:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
628 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Larry is 100% correct here. His uncharacteristic succinctness is probably
> just his not wanting to get sucked back into OTD, just as I do not wish to
> be sucked back in either.
>
> But the law must actually be more than merely "just." It has to make sense
> in the way it is conceived and articulated in law, the manner in which it is
> intended to be understood by those subject to the law, and in the manner in
> which it is enforced.
>
> There is an enormous problem with the concept of the "infraction" on land.
> I would tend to argue that you have either committed a crime or not. If it
> is agreed that a crime has been committed, I would then argue that you have
> either commited a misdemeanor or a felony -- that there is no other category
> of crime for which you can be held responsible in a free society. To all
> crimes there must be witnesses and evidence that proves guilt beyond a
> reasonable doubt.
>
> The move towards reliance on machines that will do all of this work is
> obviously very wrong-headed. If machines could capture the essence of
> things then we wouldn't even need the "real world." The problem is this:
> filmed violence looks convincingly real until you realize that all of those
> punches thrown by the stunt men don't even connect -- in fact, the violence
> is filmed in such a way to simulate the reality of violence without actually
> enacting the violence, sound effects are added in later to increase the
> illusion.
>
> I happen to just have seen "The Minority Report" last night and I think that
> it is interesting to imagine all the ways we could really screw up people's
> rights if we wanted to do so. Of course, I am still hoping against hope
> that we actually do not want to live under 24/7 surveillance. Then again,
> most people are so stupid that they actually think that having the wolf
> guard the henhouse is a good idea -- we do still have Shrub in the White
> House after all...
>
> -- Hop-Frog
And again, I would concur with you, Richard--systems should not 'rule' the
individual, and Justice should not be left up to machines.
But two of the most vocal folks on the side of 'science' are doing away with
science when science interferes with their lives (at least that's how it
seems to me).
If you have a camera that is using some sort of laser measuring device that
can determine if a car is doing 101 kph or above, and will only take a
picture of said automobile if the auto is doing more than 101 kph, then
where is your arguement? The machine didn't make the law, the machine is
not changing the law. The machine, as all machines *should* be, is a tool
for us to use to maintain safety, integrity, and whatever else you wish to
call it. If the law changes, then we reprogram the machines. Put the speed
limit up to 120 kph if the studies warrant that 120 is better and safer.
But if not, then drive the safe and better speed limit.
Again, the camera does not cause accidents. The camera does not cause the
end of civilization. The camera takes pictures of people breaking the law.
Since traffic violations are not punishable by jail time, afaik, and, as the
law is currently set up, only bills the offender with monetary damages
and/or demerit points on his or her license, there is no situation that I
can see where this is a bad idea.
I was once, okay, many times, told that I'm part of the slippery slope
contingent that loves to take an idea right to the extreme situation. What
I am reading is that this is exactly what others are doing now. When I read
'Red Light Cameras cause accidents' I wonder what happened to all that
presumed 'critical thinking'? The camera *caused* the accidents? Did the
camera go and reprogram the lights? did the camera stomp on your gas pedal
so you ended up hitting the car in front of you?
What did the camera do, exactly, to cause these accidents?
I also appreciate the effort of folks so they don't get bogged down into the
quagmire, where there will be 'weeping and gnashing of teeth'. That said,
if there is a legitimate debate, or things you want to say, say it. Say it
or do away with ot-d. When folks are scared or apprehensive about posting
in here, what's the point of having the group at all?
Of course, there are those that are at that point already. So there you are.
Dave K
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Ticket prices going up
|
| (...) Larry didn't say the cameras cause accidents. He said the use of the cameras causes accidents. One the one hand, I see the appeal of a totally automated ticketting system. On the other hand, I wonder who is going to apply human judgement. What (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Ticket prices going up
|
| (...) I'm not scared, I'm not apprehensive, I'm just busy. Not SO busy that I wasn't willing to toss one post in, but busy enough that I wanted to keep it short. It's a large topic, it's been visited before, etc. As for doing away with ot-d, I (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Ticket prices going up
|
| (...) I am fascinated by this thread. I consider myself one who is generally lawful and generally appreciative of law and codes of conduct. Yet, I admittedly do not adhere to speed regulations while operating motor vehicles or heavy equipment. Be it (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Ticket prices going up
|
| Larry is 100% correct here. His uncharacteristic succinctness is probably just his not wanting to get sucked back into OTD, just as I do not wish to be sucked back in either. But the law must actually be more than merely "just." It has to make sense (...) (22 years ago, 21-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
23 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
