7 ms·

Couldn't take the time to park legally then went out of her way to launch a lawsuit against the city. This is not community behavior. It's toxic.

jupp0r 7y ago
Something makes me think that that particular location doesn’t have abundant legal parking options available, which in turn is a community problem. I’m not defending her, but it’s a two sided coin.
- jrs235 7y ago
  Why is it the public's responsibility to provide and offer people space on public right aways to [temporarily] store people's private property?
  - TheGRS 7y ago
    There's a common benefit to having spots available for businesses and other uses. Its sort of why we have parking meters in the first place, so people don't camp spots all day long.
    - jrs235 7y ago
      I get this. But this isn't a community problem. It's a community choice.
  - ohples 7y ago
    For free mind you (at least in this case)
  - jupp0r 7y ago
    For the same reason it's the public responsibility to provide infrastructure to get private property from A to B (roads), protect people's private property (police, military, firefighters), etc. It's just infrastructure.
umanwizard 7y ago
Yeah, this does seem like someone getting away with antisocial behavior. The thing about the US legal system (and other systems derived from English law) though, is that legal rulings aren’t only about the particular case — they establish general principles that will be applied in a variety of future cases. So, if they’re doing their jobs properly, judges should not be thinking of how sympathetic a particular party in a particular case is. One famous example of this is Ernesto Miranda, by all accounts a horrible monster (murderer and rapist). The Supreme Court rightly ignored the distasteful nature of the particular individual, and threw out his confession as having been illegally obtained. That’s why we have what are now called Miranda rights, something practically every liberal can agree is a good thing. (Tangent: in case you were wondering, Ernesto Miranda was still convicted, in the end. The evidence against him was strong enough even without the illegally-obtained confession.)
- rsync 7y ago
  "Yeah, this does seem like someone getting away with antisocial behavior." I think I would agree with you, if she lost ... However, the ruling suggests that her behavior was not antisocial by definition. I have never thought to care about this issue, nor would I spend my time fighting it, but if the constitution is ruled to disallow this behavior her lawsuit was, again, by definition, a socially positive act ...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - magissima 7y ago
    She was still parking illegally, the court just threw out the method they used to catch her.
  - umanwizard 7y ago
    > the ruling suggests that her behavior was not antisocial by definition. The law is not the definition of pro- or anti-social behavior.

jupp0r 7y ago

Something makes me think that that particular location doesn’t have abundant legal parking options available, which in turn is a community problem. I’m not defending her, but it’s a two sided coin.

jrs235 7y ago
Why is it the public's responsibility to provide and offer people space on public right aways to [temporarily] store people's private property?
- TheGRS 7y ago
  There's a common benefit to having spots available for businesses and other uses. Its sort of why we have parking meters in the first place, so people don't camp spots all day long.
  - jrs235 7y ago
    I get this. But this isn't a community problem. It's a community choice.
- ohples 7y ago
  For free mind you (at least in this case)
- jupp0r 7y ago
  For the same reason it's the public responsibility to provide infrastructure to get private property from A to B (roads), protect people's private property (police, military, firefighters), etc. It's just infrastructure.

umanwizard 7y ago

Yeah, this does seem like someone getting away with antisocial behavior. The thing about the US legal system (and other systems derived from English law) though, is that legal rulings aren’t only about the particular case — they establish general principles that will be applied in a variety of future cases. So, if they’re doing their jobs properly, judges should not be thinking of how sympathetic a particular party in a particular case is. One famous example of this is Ernesto Miranda, by all accounts a horrible monster (murderer and rapist). The Supreme Court rightly ignored the distasteful nature of the particular individual, and threw out his confession as having been illegally obtained. That’s why we have what are now called Miranda rights, something practically every liberal can agree is a good thing. (Tangent: in case you were wondering, Ernesto Miranda was still convicted, in the end. The evidence against him was strong enough even without the illegally-obtained confession.)

rsync 7y ago
"Yeah, this does seem like someone getting away with antisocial behavior." I think I would agree with you, if she lost ... However, the ruling suggests that her behavior was not antisocial by definition. I have never thought to care about this issue, nor would I spend my time fighting it, but if the constitution is ruled to disallow this behavior her lawsuit was, again, by definition, a socially positive act ...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- magissima 7y ago
  She was still parking illegally, the court just threw out the method they used to catch her.
- umanwizard 7y ago
  > the ruling suggests that her behavior was not antisocial by definition. The law is not the definition of pro- or anti-social behavior.