3 ms·

Laws are about enforceability, not individual outcomes. Your doing what you're doing stabilizes a culture where there can be no consequences for anyone in this

by patcon 5y ago

Laws are about enforceability, not individual outcomes. Your doing what you're doing stabilizes a culture where there can be no consequences for anyone in this domain, because there's no clear line of enforcement. What's a low-wage enforcement officer expected to do in this context you advocate, where people "mind their own dog's abilities" and only get fined when some clear violation occurs? Are they supposed to fine people only when they see dogs chasing birds, or scarring a fearful child, or jumping up on an elderly person, or any number of other things with unclear lines? No, you just outlaw dogs off-leash, and allow the $20/h enforcement officer to clearly execute their pro-social task. The anti-social behavior get fined.

admax88q 5y ago
So basically the parties that are actually the problem are too hard to find, so we target everyone who fits into a similar category.
- bradleyjg 5y ago
  Yes, because we don’t have infinite enforcement resources we need to decide if we are going to prioritize type I errors or type II. Given the balance of harms minimizing type II errors (i.e. requiring leashes where they aren’t necessary) seems the better choice.
diggan 5y ago
To be fair, walking your dogs without a leash in the city of Barcelona is already illegal. You can walk past the police and they won't do anything though, unless your dog is not behaving, then they'll use the law to give you a fine for not having a leash. So while it's setup like you say it is, in theory, what you think cannot happen is what happens in practice. Same with public drinking and other laws. The police usually look the other way unless you are abusing it somehow, being too drunk, loud or otherwise annoying. Sitting in the park with a bottle of wine is fine and won't end up with you getting a ticket, even though it's illegal. At worst they'll tell you to stop whatever you're doing, and if you follow their command, that's the end of the situation. Maybe the big difference here between law officers in Spain (Barcelona at least) and wherever you're based, is how strict they actually enforce the laws. Here is maybe a bit laxer, which also fits in with the whole culture here, and it's represented in how law officers behave as well.

by patcon 5y ago

admax88q 5y ago

So basically the parties that are actually the problem are too hard to find, so we target everyone who fits into a similar category.

bradleyjg 5y ago
Yes, because we don’t have infinite enforcement resources we need to decide if we are going to prioritize type I errors or type II. Given the balance of harms minimizing type II errors (i.e. requiring leashes where they aren’t necessary) seems the better choice.

diggan 5y ago

To be fair, walking your dogs without a leash in the city of Barcelona is already illegal. You can walk past the police and they won't do anything though, unless your dog is not behaving, then they'll use the law to give you a fine for not having a leash. So while it's setup like you say it is, in theory, what you think cannot happen is what happens in practice. Same with public drinking and other laws. The police usually look the other way unless you are abusing it somehow, being too drunk, loud or otherwise annoying. Sitting in the park with a bottle of wine is fine and won't end up with you getting a ticket, even though it's illegal. At worst they'll tell you to stop whatever you're doing, and if you follow their command, that's the end of the situation. Maybe the big difference here between law officers in Spain (Barcelona at least) and wherever you're based, is how strict they actually enforce the laws. Here is maybe a bit laxer, which also fits in with the whole culture here, and it's represented in how law officers behave as well.