3 ms·

Littering? Why is amazon not fined for this? If abandoning parcels is just "cost of doing business" then someone needs to step in and make it too expensive to

Littering? Why is amazon not fined for this? If abandoning parcels is just "cost of doing business" then someone needs to step in and make it too expensive to still be worth it. Fine them for littering and/or the cost incurred by the building to rectify the situation. This might actually be something for small claims court. The building can pay to dispose of/deliver the packages and take Amazon to small claims to recover costs.

floatingatoll 5y ago
Same reason people with leafblowers aren’t fined for all the litter they blow off of private property into the public sidewalks and roadways. Because there isn’t enough political will to argue that what they’re doing is wrong, in the face of how desirable the convenience is to the electorate.
justin66 5y ago
> Littering? Why is amazon not fined for this? Asking someone to either throw the items away or keep them is the exact opposite of littering. > This might actually be something for small claims court. The building can pay to dispose of/deliver the packages and take Amazon to small claims to recover costs. Since Amazon told them they could keep the stuff or throw it away, they'd have to go to some elaborate lengths to actually suffer damages as a result of what Amazon did.
- sandworm101 5y ago
  >> or throw it away For a commercial enterprise, throwing something away is rarely free. And if there are electronics in those boxes, proper disposal might take more than a modicum of effort.
  - justin66 5y ago
    I expect even the judges in a small claims court get exasperated by having their time wasted over piddly shit. "Save me, I have to deal with the free stuff I just got from Amazon!" certainly falls into that category.
throwawaylinux 5y ago
It probably doesn't meet statutes for littering. E.g., https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=374.4 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... > As used in this section, “litter” means the discarding, dropping, or scattering of small quantities of waste matter ordinarily carried on or about the person, including, but not limited to, beverage containers and closures, packaging, wrappers, wastepaper, newspapers, and magazines, in a place other than a place or container for the proper disposal thereof, and including waste matter that escapes or is allowed to escape from a container, receptacle, or package. They could make a law specifically for this type of dumping, Amazon would probably lobby against it and it would sway about zero voters, and the cost to enforce would probably be greater to the public than if they just dealt with it especially if these companies wanted to be uncooperative about it.
- sandworm101 5y ago
  Fun littering factoid: https://medium.com/knowledge-stew/when-nasa-received-a-400-fine-for-littering-9b2e37f0bbc5 https://medium.com/knowledge-stew/when-nasa-received-a-400-f... "Around July 19, 1979, the US space agency team that was in western Australia searching for debris was issued a citation for littering by the Esperance Shire Council in the amount of $400. Though the citation was in jest, the council hoped NASA would pay the fine as a gift for their museum. They didn’t pay. But the fine was finally settled on behalf of NASA in 2009 by a radio host named Scott Barley of Highway Radio when he got his morning listeners to donate the funds."
  - 0xdeadb00f 5y ago
    Why the fuck didn't NASA pay? Surely they can spare $400 for a joke?
    - sandworm101 5y ago
      Admission of liability. The next rocket might be far more dangerous, the next fine far more costly.
    - 5y ago

floatingatoll 5y ago

Same reason people with leafblowers aren’t fined for all the litter they blow off of private property into the public sidewalks and roadways. Because there isn’t enough political will to argue that what they’re doing is wrong, in the face of how desirable the convenience is to the electorate.

justin66 5y ago

> Littering? Why is amazon not fined for this? Asking someone to either throw the items away or keep them is the exact opposite of littering. > This might actually be something for small claims court. The building can pay to dispose of/deliver the packages and take Amazon to small claims to recover costs. Since Amazon told them they could keep the stuff or throw it away, they'd have to go to some elaborate lengths to actually suffer damages as a result of what Amazon did.

sandworm101 5y ago
>> or throw it away For a commercial enterprise, throwing something away is rarely free. And if there are electronics in those boxes, proper disposal might take more than a modicum of effort.
- justin66 5y ago
  I expect even the judges in a small claims court get exasperated by having their time wasted over piddly shit. "Save me, I have to deal with the free stuff I just got from Amazon!" certainly falls into that category.

throwawaylinux 5y ago

It probably doesn't meet statutes for littering. E.g., https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=374.4 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio... > As used in this section, “litter” means the discarding, dropping, or scattering of small quantities of waste matter ordinarily carried on or about the person, including, but not limited to, beverage containers and closures, packaging, wrappers, wastepaper, newspapers, and magazines, in a place other than a place or container for the proper disposal thereof, and including waste matter that escapes or is allowed to escape from a container, receptacle, or package. They could make a law specifically for this type of dumping, Amazon would probably lobby against it and it would sway about zero voters, and the cost to enforce would probably be greater to the public than if they just dealt with it especially if these companies wanted to be uncooperative about it.

sandworm101 5y ago
Fun littering factoid: https://medium.com/knowledge-stew/when-nasa-received-a-400-fine-for-littering-9b2e37f0bbc5 https://medium.com/knowledge-stew/when-nasa-received-a-400-f... "Around July 19, 1979, the US space agency team that was in western Australia searching for debris was issued a citation for littering by the Esperance Shire Council in the amount of $400. Though the citation was in jest, the council hoped NASA would pay the fine as a gift for their museum. They didn’t pay. But the fine was finally settled on behalf of NASA in 2009 by a radio host named Scott Barley of Highway Radio when he got his morning listeners to donate the funds."
- 0xdeadb00f 5y ago
  Why the fuck didn't NASA pay? Surely they can spare $400 for a joke?
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    Admission of liability. The next rocket might be far more dangerous, the next fine far more costly.
  - 5y ago