Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!lsuc!sickkids!mark
From: mark@sickkids.UUCP (Mark Bartelt)
Newsgroups: ont.general
Subject: Lawbreakers (was Radar Detectors (was Highway Driving Rules))
Summary: Yeah, it's in the wrong newsgroup, but so were the other 70+ articles
Message-ID: <264@sickkids.UUCP>
Date: 16 May 89 11:06:14 GMT
References: <9584@watcgl.waterloo.edu> <3217@looking.UUCP> <3225@looking.UUCP>
Reply-To: mark@sickkids.UUCP (Mark Bartelt)
Distribution: ont
Organization: Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto
Lines: 58

In article <3217@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:

>                                     it's worth remembering that amongst
> the worst kind of laws are the laws that everybody breaks.   [ ... ]
> Who comes to a full stop, for example?  Nobody.

Brad, don't you think that this sort of disingenuousness, when recognized,
will tend to make people take your arguments less seriously?  If you had
noted that many drivers ignore some traffic laws, you'd be right on target.
If you'd asserted that *most* drivers ignore some traffic laws, I suspect
that you'd probably still be correct.  But the claim that *all* drivers do
so is patently ludicrous.  I know several people who follow the law to the
letter, including full stops at stop signs and adherence to speed limits.
They claim to, at least, and always have whenever I've ridden with them.
Generalizations are usually wrong.  When you try to make them all-inclusive,
they're guaranteed to be wrong.

In article <9584@watcgl.waterloo.edu> kim@watsup.waterloo.edu (Kim Nguyen) writes:

>                                                          there must be
> something wrong with a law if most people don't adhere to it.

Perhaps.  But then why isn't the law changed?  Actually, the question that
interests me more is the following.  Consider these three statements:

   (1)  I frequently drive 10 or 20 mph over the speed limit, for the
        simple reason that it gets me where I'm going more quickly.

   (2)  I often cheat on my income taxes, for the simple reason that
        it leaves me with more money to spend.

   (3)  I like to shoplift, for the simple reason that it permits me
        to acquire more possessions at a lower cost.

I suspect that many people would find nothing remarkable about #1, whereas
most people would find #2 ethically questionable, at the very least, and
would be rather shocked by #3.  But what's the difference, really?

I've known a number of people who have expressed (if not verbally, at least
by their actions) the attitude that "Everyone should obey all the laws, all
the time; except me, and I get to ignore the ones that I think are silly."
By and large (here we go with silly generalizations again!) I've found this
attitude to be far more prevalent among Americans than Canadians.  But it's
clear that there are loads of counterexamples to the generalization.

Finally, ...

In article <3225@looking.UUCP> brad@looking.UUCP (Brad Templeton) writes:

> In this case, all they are goading you into doing is hitting the breaks.
> Hardly a crime!

God, I hope not!  Isn't hitting breaks what you do when you want getty to
reissue the login banner at a different baud rate?  I do it all the time!

Mark Bartelt                          UUCP: {utzoo,decvax}!sickkids!mark
Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto   BITNET: mark@sickkids.utoronto
416/598-6442                          INTERNET: mark@sickkids.toronto.edu