4 ms·

>No one would suggest you should just not visit a neighborhood if people there attacked you. I would absolutely suggest that. I'd advise you right now not to e

>No one would suggest you should just not visit a neighborhood if people there attacked you. I would absolutely suggest that. I'd advise you right now not to e.g. take a trip to the south side of Chicago. What are you suggesting? That the government has an obligation to proactively prevent crime? How is that to be done? Martial law? You can't have the freedoms you enjoy and complete safety. It's the price we pay, and it's worth it.

PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
>I would absolutely suggest that. For the sake of the person's safety that should be suggested, but where does one draw the line at such suggestions? College aged women are safer if they don't drink alcohol, so should that be the official statement of a university? What about saying that if they stay with a male guardian, they will be safer than if they don't? If that statement is true, should it be an official policy statement made to increase safety?
- EpicEng 8y ago
  >College aged women are safer if they don't drink alcohol, so should that be the official statement of a university? If they're under 21 probably, yeah. At 21 and above, like always, you have to be careful of what situations you put yourself in. That's not victim blaming, it's reality. Malicious people will always exist and women will always be at a physical disadvantage. >What about saying that if they stay with a male guardian, they will be safer than if they don't? If that statement is true, should it be an official policy statement made to increase safety? No, it should not be a rule because the government should not limit a woman's right to travel as they see fit. Don't you see the problem with this line of thinking? Safety at the cost of freedom is a mistake.
  - PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
    >No, it should not be a rule Sorry for the confusion, I didn't mean for it to exist as an actual rule, just as an recommendation by the institution in question. Such as a campus police department giving out safety tips.
    - EpicEng 8y ago
      In that case I suppose I don't really care. I care about the limitation of freedom, not suggestions. If this were simply a suggestion then sure, why not? Who cares, people may do as they like. It may be something that catches our attention for a news cycle or two, but it's not a big deal.
  - anigbrowl 8y ago
    What if the price of my freedom is your safety?
    - Nasrudith 8y ago
      If dealing with one to one going with any absolutism's logical extreme is batshit insanity that suggests murdering absolutely everyone else to ensure that your safety/freedom is never potentially compromised is the only option. The actual details are nuanced and the general line is 'freedom to swing your arms ends at my face' from general reciprocity and sustainability - freedom to cause harm unilaterally (distinct from self-defense) damages overall freedom as well in the same sense that a power vacuum can lead to less freedom as the strong dominate.
      - anigbrowl 8y ago
        Here's an example from today's news of what a cop (and I) considered to be a true threat of violence but which the defendant maintains (so far) that he was trying to prove a point about workplace safety. http://nixle.us/AMTQ6?fbclid=IwAR1pRErR6-CuOjvULJWJDSSKLISJ_5-b3DmXzNdAumoT-rvlspAJDei1QQU http://nixle.us/AMTQ6?fbclid=IwAR1pRErR6-CuOjvULJWJDSSKLISJ_... So far this person hasn't committed any violent acts and I'm willing to stipulate that his stated grievance is founded in fact, though it may or may not have been his actual motivation. Have his free speech rights been infringed?
pessimizer 8y ago
> I would absolutely suggest that. I'd advise you right now not to e.g. take a trip to the south side of Chicago. What are you suggesting? That the government has an obligation to proactively prevent crime? Short of legal penalties, how is that done? Martial law? I'm trying to figure out if you're suggesting that police be withdrawn from places likely to have crime. It certainly aligns with the idea that the police should ignore direct verbal or written threats to people's safety.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  >I'm trying to figure out if you're suggesting that police be withdrawn from places likely to have crime. It certainly aligns with the idea that the police should ignore direct verbal or written threats to people's safety. I have no idea how you arrived at that. The point is that we already have laws against violence and harassment. What is being successful is to limit freedom in an attempt to _proactively_ prevent such crime. That's where you get into trouble. More harm than good comes from protecting people from the big bad world. History has shown time and time again that no one can be trusted with the power to control our thoughts and movements.
kevinmchugh 8y ago
My wife are at home on the south side of Chicago right now. I've got 9 people coming for a party tonight. What do you advise we do?
- bigcostooge2 8y ago
  Sell your house. You live in the ghetto.

PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago

>I would absolutely suggest that. For the sake of the person's safety that should be suggested, but where does one draw the line at such suggestions? College aged women are safer if they don't drink alcohol, so should that be the official statement of a university? What about saying that if they stay with a male guardian, they will be safer than if they don't? If that statement is true, should it be an official policy statement made to increase safety?

EpicEng 8y ago
>College aged women are safer if they don't drink alcohol, so should that be the official statement of a university? If they're under 21 probably, yeah. At 21 and above, like always, you have to be careful of what situations you put yourself in. That's not victim blaming, it's reality. Malicious people will always exist and women will always be at a physical disadvantage. >What about saying that if they stay with a male guardian, they will be safer than if they don't? If that statement is true, should it be an official policy statement made to increase safety? No, it should not be a rule because the government should not limit a woman's right to travel as they see fit. Don't you see the problem with this line of thinking? Safety at the cost of freedom is a mistake.
- PurpleBoxDragon 8y ago
  >No, it should not be a rule Sorry for the confusion, I didn't mean for it to exist as an actual rule, just as an recommendation by the institution in question. Such as a campus police department giving out safety tips.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    In that case I suppose I don't really care. I care about the limitation of freedom, not suggestions. If this were simply a suggestion then sure, why not? Who cares, people may do as they like. It may be something that catches our attention for a news cycle or two, but it's not a big deal.
- anigbrowl 8y ago
  What if the price of my freedom is your safety?
  - Nasrudith 8y ago
    If dealing with one to one going with any absolutism's logical extreme is batshit insanity that suggests murdering absolutely everyone else to ensure that your safety/freedom is never potentially compromised is the only option. The actual details are nuanced and the general line is 'freedom to swing your arms ends at my face' from general reciprocity and sustainability - freedom to cause harm unilaterally (distinct from self-defense) damages overall freedom as well in the same sense that a power vacuum can lead to less freedom as the strong dominate.
    - anigbrowl 8y ago
      Here's an example from today's news of what a cop (and I) considered to be a true threat of violence but which the defendant maintains (so far) that he was trying to prove a point about workplace safety. http://nixle.us/AMTQ6?fbclid=IwAR1pRErR6-CuOjvULJWJDSSKLISJ_5-b3DmXzNdAumoT-rvlspAJDei1QQU http://nixle.us/AMTQ6?fbclid=IwAR1pRErR6-CuOjvULJWJDSSKLISJ_... So far this person hasn't committed any violent acts and I'm willing to stipulate that his stated grievance is founded in fact, though it may or may not have been his actual motivation. Have his free speech rights been infringed?

pessimizer 8y ago

> I would absolutely suggest that. I'd advise you right now not to e.g. take a trip to the south side of Chicago. What are you suggesting? That the government has an obligation to proactively prevent crime? Short of legal penalties, how is that done? Martial law? I'm trying to figure out if you're suggesting that police be withdrawn from places likely to have crime. It certainly aligns with the idea that the police should ignore direct verbal or written threats to people's safety.

EpicEng 8y ago
>I'm trying to figure out if you're suggesting that police be withdrawn from places likely to have crime. It certainly aligns with the idea that the police should ignore direct verbal or written threats to people's safety. I have no idea how you arrived at that. The point is that we already have laws against violence and harassment. What is being successful is to limit freedom in an attempt to _proactively_ prevent such crime. That's where you get into trouble. More harm than good comes from protecting people from the big bad world. History has shown time and time again that no one can be trusted with the power to control our thoughts and movements.

kevinmchugh 8y ago

My wife are at home on the south side of Chicago right now. I've got 9 people coming for a party tonight. What do you advise we do?

bigcostooge2 8y ago
Sell your house. You live in the ghetto.