RE: Law or Anarchism? New Ruling for the Safety of Humans

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Law or Anarchism? New Ruling for the Safety of Humans

in law •  8 years ago 

The state should not dictate what people do with their cell phones..It seems like another revenue source for the state.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  
  ·  8 years ago (edited)

@automaton I dislike a lot of laws. (understatement) but texting while driving im a hazard on the road.
However the fines are ridiculous here in The Netherlands, and should be much, much lower.

I do not really have an opinion on how high the fines shall be; Maybe they shall be based on income, like in Finland. Maybe fines shall be something else, not money at all, but work some hours for the community.

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

I had for the last 9 months for a € 1000,- fines. I really try to do normal, just wrong place wrong time.

  • Didn't steal
  • No violence or what so ever
  • No fraud
  • Didn't put any one in danger.

That should be enough to get no fines.

Indeed, I rather did some community work. I'm not a fan of rich people should pay more. But "shake me down" for 1000 euro in 1 year is ridiculous.

Peace :)

WOW, 1.000 Euro is a whole lot! I know I had more fines while driving cars years ago. Mostly speeding, usually on roads without other cars, ie no real increase of danger. At one point the total sum of fines got so high that I decided to buy a car with a small engine and learn to use the cruise control at maximum allowed speed. Since then, I hardly get fines anymore and it didn't ruin my mood other than I like the fact I don't spend money on fines anymore :)

hehe:) Enough is enough I guess, before you know it you are full time working to pay of your fines. And its much more fun to have cruise control then those stupid fines.


600 euro of those fines where an icing on the cake, after arresting me twice innocent. All because I had the same colour jacket, and they had to arrest somebody. My hair is almost a half of meter long, they searched for a guy with short hair :S

Few months later, when they call the police because of a weed smell around my house, the police officer came to check if I wasn't growing weed. He told me, I really didn't understood why they arrested you. But we have to arrest somebody, or else it would not be cool for the victims.. (is up to you if you believe me)

i.m.o. They arrest somebody who can not pay a decent lawyer. Just to boost their figures. According to an expert whom I saw on t.v. They have to boost their figures, because they fail to fight crime, period. 70% of the cases they can not solve, or stay untouched in the computer.

Now the real suspect is still free, all those money wasted to arrest me.

  • 6 police officers to arrest me (in total)
  • 2 rechercheurs (don't know the Enlish word)
  • 4 prisons guards
  • 1 Lawyer (paid by the state)
  • 2 Prosecutors (don't know the English word)

And this happens all day every day. But if it wasn't for them I don't know if I were on Steemit. Everything happens for a reason I guess :)

WOW, this is an incredible story! I somehow can imagine the police need to arrest somebody just to show the public they do something, but to arrest just like anybody without a hint of proof is really crazy! I'm totally against any wrong doing, also by the police and law system. Although when somebody is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the police and law system should do their work, but to go after innocent people without any proof that is just the world upside down.

thanks. I dont want to sound dramatic. But it will effect your daily life.

I think we need "police" in a sense that we need people that are willing to even risk their life to serve the society. But slowly but surely it's more the police against the civilians. Which I really dislike the police and the people should be one.

the police and the people should be one

Agree

I kinda agree with you, but when someone kills someone else by being careless, shall we just allow anybody to do whatever? Someone walking on the pavement cannot protect him or herself from just anybody driving a car, bicycle or whatever dangerous vehicle being careless.

It still happens regardless of the law...see California. Yet, the state uses the excuse of protecting it's citizens in order to generate a revenue stream.

the problem is why they do it, not that they do

Not sure if I understand what you try to say. In the end it is the distraction that can cause dangerous situations, regardless why the driver is distracted.

in the end if the logic behind the driver choosing to be distracted was rectified it would never happen

I certainly think there are individuals in politics who think like that, ie use fines as a form of taxes, and income to the state. However, I do think other individuals and politicians try to create a more safe environment for all of us to live in. I certainly do not believe everybody, or even the majority part of the state have 'bad' in mind and want to 'screw' the society.

the problem is the reason people use phones while they drive, not that they do.

Not sure if I understand what you try to say. In the end it is the distraction that can cause dangerous situations, regardless why the driver is distracted.

If state is the owner of the road, it can decide the security measures.
Private roads could be different

please be joking

It depends, what happens if the Islamic State is the owner of the road?

private property can only exist through a state

Exactly, property is a concession on state's control (use of the force). All the iusnaturalist law vision on property is bullshit, it is a simple "social" contract... whatever it means

Meme time again:

so why say private roads could be different if they are essentially the same thing

  ·  8 years ago (edited)

Because I love messing around with conservatarians

o

The same thing? You make the rules on your own road on private property. Go can go as fast as you manage to go, traffic rules only apply on the public streets and roads.

But most people don't have the acres needed to have use for a road in their garden if they are lucky enough to have a garden.

oh so you don't understand the different types of property.

this video explains it well

"The same thing? You make the rules on your own road on private property. Go can go as fast as you manage to go, traffic rules only apply on the public streets and roads."

you become the government of that private property. Literally the only difference is who is in charge.

"without owners who will build the roads"

roads can either be collective property or owned by a newly created state in the form of the capitalist.

You can do what ever you want on your private circuit in your backyard, traffic wise that is.