4 ms·

> are not permitted since these would not fall under this code The thing is, the law/code only matters if it is enforced. I have little faith this will be enfo

> are not permitted since these would not fall under this code The thing is, the law/code only matters if it is enforced. I have little faith this will be enforced enough to be a deterrent when much more important things like shoplifting, bike or phone theft have effectively been decriminalized by lack of enforcement. Edit: to be clear I am just playing devil's advocate here. I am in favor of "right to roam" laws, just pointing out that restrictions in the law by themselves don't mean anything unless they're followed up by adequate enforcement to deter the prohibited behavior and systemic changes to make said behavior unnecessary in the first place (in case of homelessness for example).

readyman 2y ago
Scotland doesn't have the extreme levels of inequality that result in extreme levels of shoplifting, and therefore the shoplifting comparison doesn't hold up.
- UberFly 2y ago
  Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Poverty still isn't a green light to commit crimes though. There are plenty of places to seek help legally. Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else.
  - OJFord 2y ago
    > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. ...relative to others with less of that; hence an inequality.
    - Gormo 2y ago
      It's absolute poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness that constrain people's circumstances and influence their decisions. How similar or dissimilar a person's circumstances are to those of strangers they have no relationship with are not relevant.
  - Schnitz 2y ago
    The problem is the large amount of people with nothing to loose and no realistic path to a better future. If your day to day reality is as bad as jail, you might as well shoplift or camp illegally or whatever. What are they going to do? House and feed you?
    - chaostheory 2y ago
      There are plenty of government programs and nonprofits that help the needy. They work for 80% of the homeless. The issue with the chronically homeless who make up the other 20% is that they refuse the help because they don't want to follow rules such as curfews and no drugs & alcohol. The main reason for this is that most of them suffer from mental illness. This is a medical issue.
      - readyman 2y ago
        You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. Also, the US is incapable of even reproducing itself, which falls far short of my definition of "works."
        chaostheory 2y ago
        I'm not forgetting them. They fall into the category of 20% of the homeless who are mentally ill, and who need to be supervised in a safe medical facility. However, we cannot do that without their consent, and they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. I'm also not sure that these people, suffering from mental illnesses like schizophrenia, are cognizant enough for giving consent.
        QuarterReptile 2y ago
        >However, we cannot do that without their consent >they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. ...because of the underlying mental illness. Do you really believe that you can get consent from this group of people who you say should be in medical facilities, when they have self-sorted into that group mostly by being too unwilling or unable to conform to any rules or structures?
  - readyman 2y ago
    >Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Inequality is absolutely the correct term. The rich wield their means to exploit the poor. Without the rich, the poor are not exploited and poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness all decline. Every. Single. Time.
  - antisthenes 2y ago
    > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Just curious where you think those last 3 things stem from. Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality due to bad policies (lack of social safety nets). > Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else. Right, part of crime is cultural, and part is economic. But culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities.
    - gottorf 2y ago
      > Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality If the first half of your statement is true, then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? > culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities Similarly, it's rather the other way around; lack of access to economic opportunities is caused by a culture that values human capital less. Of course, the two compound over time; but history is empirically full of examples of minority cultural groups that were discriminated against (whether legally, socially, or otherwise) but nevertheless succeeded economically due to the culture placing a high value on human capital[0]. [0]: Sowell, T. Discrimination and Disparities.
      - thaumasiotes 2y ago
        > then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? As stupid as the idea that inequality in itself causes these problems is, it doesn't have trouble explaining why this would only happen in developed countries. Historic levels of inequality, including urban "anyone can easily see that their downstairs neighbor is a hundred times richer than they are" inequality, were much greater than modern ones and involved a lot less social pathology; maybe look in that direction. > What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? Looking for a root cause seems unnecessary for this question; mental illness can easily just cause poverty directly.
  - __loam 2y ago
    This is a stupid take, frankly. Lots of crime in major American cities would go away if much more affordable housing was available. High cost of living causes poverty and stress, which can lead to drug use and mental illness. It's very obvious that these things are related.
    - SoftTalker 2y ago
      We tried building solid but low-frills housing developments in major American cities that impoverished people could live in for basically no cost. They became crime-infested hellholes.
    - nullc 2y ago
      If low cost housing is the silver bullet that solves the whole issue why doesn't the existence of low cost housing elsewhere solve the problem? The one time cost of transport to those locations would be insubstantial and irrelevant.
- Nextgrid 2y ago
  I'm not even sure inequality/poverty is the main driver. If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation. It's just that for a long while, enforcement or the illusion of there being enforcement mostly kept everyone in order, but nowadays the illusions are breaking down. More and more people are pushing the boundaries and realizing that no actual enforcement is happening, so why should they stop? We see the same in white-collar crime where companies constantly push the boundaries in blatant bad faith and this keeps happening because the illusions that kept everyone in order have broken down and actual enforcement isn't sufficient to deter the bad behavior. Keep in mind that shoplifting isn't merely a survival issue, there are "professionals" who steal for resale.
  - nathan_compton 2y ago
    "If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation." True sociopath logic, my man. Most people do not base their actions on some kind of spreadsheet where they are optimizing for economic success. Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie. Most people are pretty chill and don't want to screw around with other people's livelihoods regardless of legal consequences.
    - Nextgrid 2y ago
      > Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie How do you then explain every company out there being hostile to their customers and constantly pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable, or even things like wage theft which is surprisingly common? Or is there a double-standard here, where individuals are supposed to act in good faith but companies are not just allowed to be assholes, but rewarded for doing so by the market and lack of adequate law enforcement actions? It's true that morality and good-faith behavior has mostly kept things working well, but it's clear that morals and good faith alone isn't good enough since there are entities that abuse the system so laws and enforcement should be there. If it's not, then I'm not going to be particularly angry about the little guys acting antisocially when the entire economic system is encouraging & rewarding it. Look at it from an IT security perspective: it's great that most users are acting in good faith and are not trying to exploit your system, but you still need to plan for the worst and make sure your system can survive hostile encounters. The same should apply to our legal system.
madeofpalk 2y ago
In the countries that have this, such as Scotland or Sweden or Switzerland, how much of this is actually a problem?
- soco 2y ago
  Switzerland here: depends what kind of property. A large garden? The owner will likely call the cops on you for trespassing as soon as you show up (and they will come). A meadow some place up in the mountains? The rule is you camp after sunset and decamp at sunrise, but as with every remote place, if nobody sees you... Picking berries the same: it's stealing (Mundraub, yes in CH is still illegal) so in the smaller garden you'll be seen and probably reported but otherwise you'll be luckier.
posterman 2y ago
Tell me you don't know what decriminalization means without telling me you don't know what decriminalization means.
UberFly 2y ago
The law would definitely be abused like renter's laws are abused now.
__loam 2y ago
It seems to have been working in the UK for centuries.
mrmanner 2y ago
> The thing is, the law/code only matters if it is enforced. I have little faith this will be enforced enough to be a deterrent But the same would be true whether roaming is legal or not?

readyman 2y ago

Scotland doesn't have the extreme levels of inequality that result in extreme levels of shoplifting, and therefore the shoplifting comparison doesn't hold up.

UberFly 2y ago
Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Poverty still isn't a green light to commit crimes though. There are plenty of places to seek help legally. Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else.
- OJFord 2y ago
  > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. ...relative to others with less of that; hence an inequality.
  - Gormo 2y ago
    It's absolute poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness that constrain people's circumstances and influence their decisions. How similar or dissimilar a person's circumstances are to those of strangers they have no relationship with are not relevant.
- Schnitz 2y ago
  The problem is the large amount of people with nothing to loose and no realistic path to a better future. If your day to day reality is as bad as jail, you might as well shoplift or camp illegally or whatever. What are they going to do? House and feed you?
  - chaostheory 2y ago
    There are plenty of government programs and nonprofits that help the needy. They work for 80% of the homeless. The issue with the chronically homeless who make up the other 20% is that they refuse the help because they don't want to follow rules such as curfews and no drugs & alcohol. The main reason for this is that most of them suffer from mental illness. This is a medical issue.
    - readyman 2y ago
      You're forgetting the tremendous number of homeless who simply die. Also, the US is incapable of even reproducing itself, which falls far short of my definition of "works."
      - chaostheory 2y ago
        I'm not forgetting them. They fall into the category of 20% of the homeless who are mentally ill, and who need to be supervised in a safe medical facility. However, we cannot do that without their consent, and they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. I'm also not sure that these people, suffering from mental illnesses like schizophrenia, are cognizant enough for giving consent.
        QuarterReptile 2y ago
        >However, we cannot do that without their consent >they will not give their consent in the majority of cases for the same reasons that they refuse help from government programs and non-profits. ...because of the underlying mental illness. Do you really believe that you can get consent from this group of people who you say should be in medical facilities, when they have self-sorted into that group mostly by being too unwilling or unable to conform to any rules or structures?
- readyman 2y ago
  >Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Inequality is absolutely the correct term. The rich wield their means to exploit the poor. Without the rich, the poor are not exploited and poverty, drug abuse, and mental illness all decline. Every. Single. Time.
- antisthenes 2y ago
  > Inequality isn't the correct term. It's poverty, drug abuse and mental illness. Just curious where you think those last 3 things stem from. Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality due to bad policies (lack of social safety nets). > Crime is as much a cultural problem as anything else. Right, part of crime is cultural, and part is economic. But culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities.
  - gottorf 2y ago
    > Drug abuse and mental illness are much more prevalent in those worst off economically. Poverty (in developed countries) is almost always a result of inequality If the first half of your statement is true, then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? > culture is also determined by lack of access to economic opportunities Similarly, it's rather the other way around; lack of access to economic opportunities is caused by a culture that values human capital less. Of course, the two compound over time; but history is empirically full of examples of minority cultural groups that were discriminated against (whether legally, socially, or otherwise) but nevertheless succeeded economically due to the culture placing a high value on human capital[0]. [0]: Sowell, T. Discrimination and Disparities.
    - thaumasiotes 2y ago
      > then why do the billions of people subsisting on a few dollars a day around the world do not have society-wide problems with drug abuse and mental illness? Or are you implying that this causation only happens in developed countries? As stupid as the idea that inequality in itself causes these problems is, it doesn't have trouble explaining why this would only happen in developed countries. Historic levels of inequality, including urban "anyone can easily see that their downstairs neighbor is a hundred times richer than they are" inequality, were much greater than modern ones and involved a lot less social pathology; maybe look in that direction. > What can you do to refute the idea that instead of drug abuse and mental illness being caused poverty, the same factors that predispose one to drug abuse and mental illness also predispose one to poverty? Looking for a root cause seems unnecessary for this question; mental illness can easily just cause poverty directly.
- __loam 2y ago
  This is a stupid take, frankly. Lots of crime in major American cities would go away if much more affordable housing was available. High cost of living causes poverty and stress, which can lead to drug use and mental illness. It's very obvious that these things are related.
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    We tried building solid but low-frills housing developments in major American cities that impoverished people could live in for basically no cost. They became crime-infested hellholes.
  - nullc 2y ago
    If low cost housing is the silver bullet that solves the whole issue why doesn't the existence of low cost housing elsewhere solve the problem? The one time cost of transport to those locations would be insubstantial and irrelevant.
Nextgrid 2y ago
I'm not even sure inequality/poverty is the main driver. If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation. It's just that for a long while, enforcement or the illusion of there being enforcement mostly kept everyone in order, but nowadays the illusions are breaking down. More and more people are pushing the boundaries and realizing that no actual enforcement is happening, so why should they stop? We see the same in white-collar crime where companies constantly push the boundaries in blatant bad faith and this keeps happening because the illusions that kept everyone in order have broken down and actual enforcement isn't sufficient to deter the bad behavior. Keep in mind that shoplifting isn't merely a survival issue, there are "professionals" who steal for resale.
- nathan_compton 2y ago
  "If there is no penalty for shoplifting then it just makes sense to shoplift no matter your financial situation." True sociopath logic, my man. Most people do not base their actions on some kind of spreadsheet where they are optimizing for economic success. Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie. Most people are pretty chill and don't want to screw around with other people's livelihoods regardless of legal consequences.
  - Nextgrid 2y ago
    > Many people, I hazard to guess most, base their behavior on some sort of pile of moral ideas and/or general bonhomie How do you then explain every company out there being hostile to their customers and constantly pushing the boundaries of what's acceptable, or even things like wage theft which is surprisingly common? Or is there a double-standard here, where individuals are supposed to act in good faith but companies are not just allowed to be assholes, but rewarded for doing so by the market and lack of adequate law enforcement actions? It's true that morality and good-faith behavior has mostly kept things working well, but it's clear that morals and good faith alone isn't good enough since there are entities that abuse the system so laws and enforcement should be there. If it's not, then I'm not going to be particularly angry about the little guys acting antisocially when the entire economic system is encouraging & rewarding it. Look at it from an IT security perspective: it's great that most users are acting in good faith and are not trying to exploit your system, but you still need to plan for the worst and make sure your system can survive hostile encounters. The same should apply to our legal system.

madeofpalk 2y ago

In the countries that have this, such as Scotland or Sweden or Switzerland, how much of this is actually a problem?

soco 2y ago
Switzerland here: depends what kind of property. A large garden? The owner will likely call the cops on you for trespassing as soon as you show up (and they will come). A meadow some place up in the mountains? The rule is you camp after sunset and decamp at sunrise, but as with every remote place, if nobody sees you... Picking berries the same: it's stealing (Mundraub, yes in CH is still illegal) so in the smaller garden you'll be seen and probably reported but otherwise you'll be luckier.

posterman 2y ago

Tell me you don't know what decriminalization means without telling me you don't know what decriminalization means.

UberFly 2y ago

The law would definitely be abused like renter's laws are abused now.

__loam 2y ago

It seems to have been working in the UK for centuries.

mrmanner 2y ago

> The thing is, the law/code only matters if it is enforced. I have little faith this will be enforced enough to be a deterrent But the same would be true whether roaming is legal or not?