Comments on: There Goes The Neighborhood

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 19:10:27 +0000

“Ted Kazinsky the extremist environmental mail-bomber was turned in by his family”

This is why i love having intelligent fact based discussions around here.

“For a non-killing example you can turn to any number of family members including MOMâ€™s who have turned in their sons when they are into drugs”

I’d try to find them help. This may or may not involve the cops. I’m sure it would depend on the parent.

By: Raymond

Raymond — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:45:30 +0000

I don’t think we really have to worry about slums anymore with yesterday’s ruling by the Krispy Kreme Court. With there 5-4 ruling in favor of private to private property theft being allowed, whenever you see a slum, just go to the city, buy the slum for cheap and then sell it to Wal-Mart or build a golf course on it.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:45:08 +0000

Yep. If someone commits a felony and I know about it you bet.

Ted Kazinsky the extremist environmental mail-bomber was turned in by his family.

For a non-killing example you can turn to any number of family members including MOM’s who have turned in their sons when they are into drugs. I have two daughters and if they wouldn’t stop doing drugs I’d do the same.

By: Tiffany In Mpls

Tiffany In Mpls — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:35:21 +0000

I wonder would you turn in your own cousin, if they were undocumented and here in the US, non-legally, Baklava??

Just curious…

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 18:02:21 +0000

“Answer to #3 contradicts #”

I won’t say it concerning all of them. I won’t say concerning just ones related to me. That doesn’t contradict. I could simply believe that it applies to a set of criminals which is not all of them, but not exactly the ones related to me.

Take this example: I could not say it concerning Dick Nixon. I could say it conerning Daniel Ellsberg. And I could say it concerning my cousin.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:48:37 +0000

# 1)We really just treat her like any other person.â€

#2Is that what youâ€™ll say concerning all law breakers? No

#3) Or just ones related to you? No as well.

Answer to #3 contradicts #1. To solve the contradiction you can’t say “I donâ€™t think itâ€™s that much of a crime”, because it IS a crime. It doesn’t matter that you don’t.

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:32:24 +0000

“If â€œno as wellâ€ then there is a contradiction”

I won’t say that concerning all criminals, and I won’t say it concerning just the ones related to me. Perfectly consistent. I won’t even say it everytime a criminal is related to me either.

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:30:02 +0000

If “no as well” then there is a contradiction. Go back and look if you don’t understand. I’m done here.

Have a good one.

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 17:14:32 +0000

“You skipped the second question: Or just the ones related to you? ”

No, as well.

“You are sheilding by not providing the name and/or not reporting the crime to the authorities”

I don’t think it’s that much of a crime. You really think it’s shielding that I don’t post the name — anonymously — on the web?

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:55:15 +0000

You skipped the second question: Or just the ones related to you?

Actus asked, “what sheild am I providing”

You are sheilding by not providing the name and/or not reporting the crime to the authorities.

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:39:23 +0000

“Is that what youâ€™ll say concerning all law breakers?”

No.

“So, as a future officer of the court, how do you justify shielding a criminal, actus? ”

What shield am I providing by telling you my cousin is undocumented?

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:39:36 +0000

Actus wrote, “We really just treat her like any other person.”

Is that what you’ll say concerning all law breakers? Or just ones related to you?

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:17:20 +0000

soooo, the law only matters when you can use it to your advantage, and can be ingnored when inconvienent? You might have a bright future in politics ahead of you.

By: Chris Roberts

Chris Roberts — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 14:43:35 +0000

Spare yourselves, actus and I went round and round on this topic a month or two ago. He doesn’t mind his cousin being here illegally but again, for posterity:

So, as a future officer of the court, how do you justify shielding a criminal, actus?

By: actus

actus — Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:01:28 +0000

“Are you or others taking steps to make this woman legal, or just keeping her under wraps?”

We really just treat her like any other person.