Which is more important -- my rights, or your safety?

[wmw999 2,122]

The title says it all.

Of course, then you have to flip the pronouns.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[rushmc 18]

All of our rights are more important

One who give up his rights for safety deserves neither

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[regulator 0]

One who give up his rights for the warm fuzzy feeling of safety deserves neither

fixed it for ya.

[rehmwa 2]

long term thinking response - OUR rights are essential to our safety. Then it gets a bit nuanced depending on how one leans on the community vs individual responsibility spectrum.


short term thinking? screw you and everyone else, keep me safe or give me the illusion of safety - i.e., MY rights are paramount and YOUR rights should be trampled on to give me power over others.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[quade 3]

Absolutism is for the weak minded.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Absolutism is for the weak minded.

True. There may be good reasons for driving with a .34 blood alcohol level.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[wmw999 2,122]

Quote

There may be good reasons for driving with a .34 blood alcohol level.

You should see the passenger!!!

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Absolutism is for the weak minded.

True. There may be good reasons for driving with a .34 blood alcohol level.

See, there can be, in fact, a limit to the amount of something over which is imprudent. The legal limits on BAC are not absolutist. They allow you to have some, but maybe not more than what has been determined by a reasonable discussion to be safe.

Let's have more reasonable discussions and fewer absolute stands.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[OHCHUTE 0]

It's your right to keep me safe. So don't mess up.

[lawrocket 3]

I also noted that Paul's "Absolutism is for the weak minded" comment was not qualified.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,400]

Like they say, your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

Some corollaries -

Your right to pollute ends at my lungs.
Your right to drive ends when it risks the life of me and my family.
Your right to free speech ends when it is used to create panic, injury and death.

[lawrocket 3]

Some more accurate ways of doing it:
Some corollaries -

Your right to pollute ends once my lungs are affected, and it’ll cost you if they are.
Your right to drive ends when the lives of me and my family were interrupted
Your right to free speech exists even when it is used to create panic, injury and death, but you’ll face some severe consequences if it does.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Stumpy 256]

Quote

Your right to free speech exists even when it is used to create panic, injury and death, but you’ll face some severe consequences if it does.

Just curious about how you view this. If there are severe consequences, then surely it's not a right?
If it was, then surely I have the right to murder someone?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[billvon 2,400]

>Your right to pollute ends once my lungs are affected, and it’ll cost you if they are.

Uh, OK. I vastly prefer systems that do not sicken people to begin with, as opposed to systems where sickened people are compensated. To do that you have to do things like put a price on emphysema, COPD, death etc. It can be done; the UK once put the value of a human life at around $2 million and used that number to decide whether to improve railroad grade crossings etc. But I don't think that's a good way to approach the problem.

Or are you referring to fines, legal action etc taken against polluters?

>Your right to drive ends when the lives of me and my family were interrupted

What does that mean? "Interrupted" as in "put in a coma for a decade?" Or "interrupted" as in "five minutes late for the movie?"

>Your right to free speech exists even when it is used to create panic, injury and
>death, but you’ll face some severe consequences if it does.

Sorta meaningless statement there. Similar to saying you have a right to poison anyone you want, but you might face some severe consequences later. Quite literally true but not all that useful.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

The title says it all.

Of course, then you have to flip the pronouns.

Wendy P.

My rights are way more important than things you think might keep you safe.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Just curious about how you view this. If there are severe consequences, then surely it's not a right?
If it was, then surely I have the right to murder someone?

I can speak my mind. I can say whatever I want. There are no banned words because such would be a “prior restraint” of speech. If I give a speech to the black Panthers saying “kill all whiteys” and they go out and kill whiteys then I may face some responsibility for those words, both criminal and in my wallet. If I say those same words to the KKK, I may get my ass kicked. If I say them on the street corner, I may be simply ignored (no harm, no foul).

It’s when damage is caused by these things that responsibility/culpability comes it. And it creates part of the equation: I have the right to say these words. The government won’t stop me from saying them. It’s not even a crime to say these words. But if I do and bad stuff results, I could face some bad bad things. It doesn’t mean that I can’t go to the next Black Panther meeting and do it again and again. I can and I can’t be prevented from speaking (unless I’m imprisoned). But if I’m broke I’ll have a hard time doing it. http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/25/us/klan-must-pay-37-million-for-inciting-church-fire.html

See how the Klan still has the right to incite church burnings? But if they do incite they’ll pay for it?

I have the right to be free of search without probable cause or a warrant. It may mean that I am detained – but not searched – until a warrant is obtained. That’s my right. And it has a cost – delay. I could just consent to a search because I have no drugs or guns and make it easier, but my right is to say “no.”

That, I think, is the confusion with rights. I can pollute my own air all I want. But if I’m a smoker and that smoke impinges on another person, then I am responsible for that harm.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Stumpy 256]

OK - see what you are saying, thanks.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[quade 3]

So, by extension, you think it's just fine for a drunken airline pilot to board a plane just as long as he doesn't attempt to fly it. It's only after he attempts to fly it that he should not be allowed to do so.

That it's perfectly fine for a madman to carry an AR-15 into a movie theater, just as long as he doesn't kill anyone.

That guns should be allowed in court rooms, until after the shooting starts.

Hmmm...

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[regulator 0]

you started this thread off why dont you tell US whats more important?

[winsor 186]

Quote

Absolutism is for the weak minded.

I agree!

Never resort to absolutes!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Or are you referring to fines, legal action etc taken against polluters?

Precisely. After what happened with the Pinto, car manufacturers have learned not to balance the prospective litigation costs versus safety improvements.

>Your right to drive ends when the lives of me and my family were interrupted

Quote

What does that mean? "Interrupted" as in "put in a coma for a decade?" Or "interrupted" as in "five minutes late for the movie?"

There has yet to be a constitutional lawsuit over a car wreck. When a wreck occurs, the responsible person pays for it. If it’s reckless then the person goes to jail or prison. There’s a lot to lose.

Quote

Similar to saying you have a right to poison anyone you want, but you might face some severe consequences later.

It’s pretty close to that, actually. How many murders are prevented by the prospective penalty for it? Having handled many divorces, I can tell you the number is not small.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Stumpy 256]

Quote

It’s pretty close to that, actually. How many murders are prevented by the prospective penalty for it? Having handled many divorces, I can tell you the number is not small.

In which case then the word "right" becomes meaningless surely?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[wmw999 2,122]

I don't think there's an easy black-and-white answer for any given set of rights/safety. We need laws to set guidelines, enforcement for violators (within reason -- I don't think you want speeding laws enforced, after all), and judicial review for the fuzzy cases.

I think that I have every right to associate with whomever I choose, even if it's a gangbanger.

I have a right to own, buy, and sell weapons (just as I would have a right to own, buy, and sell high-performance canopies).

I have the right to wear short skirts and spandex (and the intelligence to know that neither is appropriate outside my bedroom any more).

I also think that every other American, including people who are nothing like me, have the same rights. Some of them are criminals. Some of them are far more law-abiding than I am. I don't think that their color, national heritage, religion, hair length, or choice of tattoos should change that -- even if I think they're fucking morons.

The point is that this is a discussion, and every single person has a different set point for nearly every issue. Recognizing that we all have a right to our opinion, and that sometimes those opinions are incompatible with each other, is a good step in trying to figure out a pathway through this quagmire.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Stumpy 256]

Stop being reasonable!

OBURMER is a MOOSLEM!

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Absolutism is for the weak minded.

Pot meet kettle.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.