7 ms·

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) be

• namuol 4y ago
  [flagged]
  • setgree 4y ago
    This particular case took place in Canada :)
  • Jeff_Brown 4y ago
    There are drivers like that -- a surprising lot of them, even -- but it's quite a leap to.say drivers are like that.
    • namuol 4y ago
      All that matters is that enough of them are like this.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • dang 4y ago
    Ok, but please don't fulminate on HN. We're trying for something else here, as https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html explains.
• UncleEntity 4y ago
  > To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. It probably is dangerous [0] because people don’t let their kids play in the street anymore so drivers aren’t used to having them there. Not like when I was a kid where we would get ball games going and pause to let the cars pass. People expected kids to be playing in the street so didn’t drive like complete lunatics. Can’t even walk through parking lots anymore and everyone knows that there are going to be people walking around all over the place because that’s what they are designed for. [0] Not advocating trying to scare the neighborhood kids
  • cldellow 4y ago
    From reading the decision and looking at Google Maps: the street is a short, narrow dead-end street in the suburbs. Most of the people who live there have young children who play together. It would be very difficult to accidentally find yourself on this street, driving quickly. Of course, it's dangerous in the sense that anything to do with cars is dangerous. But it seems pretty safe as far as these things go.
    • ElfinTrousers 4y ago
      I live in a much more built up area than this. Mostly small apartment buildings, duplexes and three-deckers. The odd single-family home, usually on the small side. People here still let their kids play in the streets. Not the youngest kids or the busiest streets, but it's not at all unusual to see some kids kicking a ball or playing hockey in the street, or just tooling around on bikes going nowhere.
    • m_0x 4y ago
      > It would be very difficult to accidentally find yourself on this street, driving quickly. As a parent of a 6 years old, I always assume all drivers are not paying attention to the road but rather to their phones when my kid is playing in the street (with supervision because I don't know if he will react quickly to a car coming his way) It sucks, because I used to play in the street without supervision (to my best knowledge). But today, cars are faster and drivers are more distracted.
• Overtonwindow 4y ago
  I would posit that common sense is the antithesis to government. Consider children whose parents are arrested for letting them walk to the park, or the woman arrested for silently praying, in her head, while standing in front of an abortion clinic. Prosecutorial abuse is equally, if not more of a crisis in the world, than police abusing their arrest powers.
  • mywittyname 4y ago
    I have a conflicting opinions on this post. On one hand, I loathe the use of "the government" as though it is some sort of monoblock. There are plenty of people who get into public service as a way to tangibly improve society and the lives of the people. OTOH, you are right that too many people get away with abusing their powers.
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • majormajor 4y ago
      The "some abuses make it worth scrapping the whole thing" thesis is just pure folly. Two parallel possible spins on that: "Restrict the government since otherwise people will abuse government power." "Have a lot of rules and regulations since otherwise people will abuse individual liberties." Both of these make just as much sense on paper to me. On one hand you have examples of government harassment; on the other hand you have people literally being willing to sell other people poison to make a buck. The problem in both cases is the people, not the system. I've come to the thinking that you have to build societal values from the bottom up. You aren't gonna lawyer your way to a perfect system if you are still fostering an environment that encourages people to ignore that system, resist it, and take advantage of each other.
      • marcosdumay 4y ago
        > I've come to the thinking that you have to build societal values from the bottom up. And one way to build those values is by writing some basic rules down, communicating them to everybody, and enforce them. You will never have every single person refraining from taking advantage of something.
• mnkv 4y ago
  Did you read the whole report??? The complainant is essentially stalking his neighbour with surveillance footage, recording any time the neighbour so much as looks in his direction, and keeps a stalker-ish log book with insults. On top of that his wife and his father nearly hit the neighbour's 4 year olds with a car and then say they refuse to slow down. The report says the car was "inches away" from another person and that kid would have been run over! And then the complainant has the audacity to file criminal suit over his neighbour giving him middle finger after he does it first! This story is about basic insanity.
  • belval 4y ago
    I think we are in agreement here, the "basic sanity" is throwing this case out the window. There is nothing sane about the neighbour's behaviour.
  • Gigachad 4y ago
    Guy should lose his license for life for threatening to murder a child with a vehicle.
    • ornornor 4y ago
      You’re obviously not very well acquainted with the utter lack of accountability that anyone benefits from as soon as they sit behind the wheel. Also see the 500$ fines and slaps on the wrist for people who run over cyclists in Toronto. “Whoops didn’t see them” is a valid defense there. For instance: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/01/15/in-our-system-you-can-kill-a-cyclist-pay-500-porter.html https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/01/15/in-our-system-yo...
• hughw 4y ago
  With respect to "sanity", I feel sure the complainant has poor mental health, perhaps a classifiable illness. IANAP.
  • Natsu 4y ago
    Can we really conclude that just because he films his neighbors and tries to run down their kids in the street by never slowing for small children playing and keeps a diary about them and tells the judge the neighbor is out to murder them? Yes, yes we can.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• hackernewds 4y ago
  It's newsworthy because Canada has taken a stance as being the arbiter of free speech in other regards, such as misgendering pronouns https://www.them.us/story/canadian-court-rules-misgendering-human-rights-violation https://www.them.us/story/canadian-court-rules-misgendering-...
  • eyelidlessness 4y ago
    That seems irrelevant but consistent. In both scenarios they’ve affirmed that people have a right to just exist without duress against their existence. Seems obvious to me, but I’m just a he/them who doesn’t want to be hit by asshole drivers being assholes and who freely gives them the finger when they’re dangerous.
• throwawaaarrgh 4y ago
  > I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy Garbage is submitted literally constantly, but some stuff is just upvote-bait, and the mods are pretty lax about pushing anything off the front page unless it particularly irks them
• hutzlibu 4y ago
  "If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity"" Actually, I think "basic sanity" would have been, if the accuser would have been charged with something - as clearly they were the aggressors and actually intentionally endangering children. And the judge seems to think so as well, but it seems all he could do in his position, was to metaphorical throw the case out of the non existing window. (if I am ever charged with something, I hope I am to be judged by someone like him)
  • olliej 4y ago
    > And the judge seems to think so as well, but it seems all he could do in his position, was to metaphorical throw the case out of the non existing window. Judges aren't prosecutors, by design they cannot bring charges against people. Otherwise the prosecutor/judge separation would be a nonsense. > if I am ever charged with something, I hope I am to be judged by someone like him Unless you're a crazed and/or paranoid nightmare neighbour :D
• brailsafe 4y ago
  The suburbs are ironically, but not so surprisingly filled with crazy assholes that feel like the world belongs to them, or otherwise have some absurd levels of entitlement. They feel like they own the sidewalks, or if there's no sidewalks, they own the street and everything on it or not on it in front of their house, they feel like they should control whether or not a marginally higher density building should be built down the street or whether a neighbor can paint their house a different colour. When there's no land left, they want more cul-de-sacs built for them because it's the suburban dream and fuck wetlands anyway, and when there's no social services left, they want new ones built for them at everyone else's expense and they don't really want to be part of a community; they want to be by themselves, on their fat asses, in front of their fucking TV, the only quality of which they understand is how big it is. I absolutely loath that world and never want to return.