5 ms·

I agree that people can commit crimes without getting caught much of the time? I'm not sure if you have a point.

vacri 14y ago
It's a sad world we live in when "sitting in the shade" is called a crime - and imply that it's bad people aren't getting 'caught' for such trivial things. I mean, if we're talking about absurdity of points, you are saying that a single travelling poor man sitting in the shade is something that is worthy of invoking the power of the federal government to combat.
- kstenerud 14y ago
  "sitting in the shade" is not the crime; trespass is the crime. The concept of private property is useful enough on the whole that governments are willing to enforce it, and leave discretion for right-of-access to the owner of said property. This allows the property owner to assess people in terms of risk they pose to said property and either grant or deny access. If said farmer has had problems with transients damaging his property in the past, he will certainly appreciate the right to deny access, with the power of the government backing the decision.
  - vacri 14y ago
    Surely then, this would be the province of the local law enforcement, not something worth summoning in the Feds for.
    - Locke1689 14y ago
      The only person to mention the federal government was you.
      - vacri 14y ago
        but the real owner isn't me, it's the United States government - Locke1689, 5 hours ago I am not an American, but I've been online for nearly 20 years now, and I've seen a lot of US politics pass under the bridge. I've never seen anything that goes contrary to the notion that 'the United States government' is 'the federal government [of the US]'. The two terms are used interchangably in online discourse in my experience. If I am wrong in this, can you please provide me with some links to explain how 'the federal government' of the US is a different entity to the 'the United States government'. I'd be very interested to read them, because it would be a very curious oddity in the way politics are described over there. Does 'the federal government' operate at a higher or lower level than 'the United States government', or do they operate in parallel? It's an intriguing concept.
        argonaut 14y ago
        The fact that you're arguing over the synonymous/non-synonymous semantics of two phrases, rather than actually refuting locke's main point, says a great deal about your argument.
        vacri 14y ago
        Can you please point out Locke's 'main' point, because it seems he's danced around a few topics to me. If you're talking about the parent of my last comment, it should be abundantly clear that I'm saying 'no, you did', which is directly refuting his point, with a quote, no less. The rest was a bit of poetic license called 'taking the piss'.
        Locke1689 14y ago
        What the hell? I hope you're not an American -- if civics and government class has so failed our students i would be extremely disappointed. The government of the united States is exactly that, ranging from the lowest town council member to the President. You do understand the concept of sets and subsets, right? The federal government is a subset of the government. That's why it has that additional qualifier.
        14y ago
  - php_on_rails2 14y ago
    "Sitting on the sidewalk" is a crime in San Francisco -- but it's a petty crime, like smoking weed in public. Cops either don't care, or only care when it's "convenient". When they need to get that quota up! Great illustration on this article.. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sit-lie-law-primarily-enforced-in-Haight-3763521.php http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sit-lie-law-primarily-enf...
- rdouble 14y ago
  Well, at least the farmer didn't just shoot him and invoke the castle doctrine.

vacri 14y ago

It's a sad world we live in when "sitting in the shade" is called a crime - and imply that it's bad people aren't getting 'caught' for such trivial things. I mean, if we're talking about absurdity of points, you are saying that a single travelling poor man sitting in the shade is something that is worthy of invoking the power of the federal government to combat.

kstenerud 14y ago
"sitting in the shade" is not the crime; trespass is the crime. The concept of private property is useful enough on the whole that governments are willing to enforce it, and leave discretion for right-of-access to the owner of said property. This allows the property owner to assess people in terms of risk they pose to said property and either grant or deny access. If said farmer has had problems with transients damaging his property in the past, he will certainly appreciate the right to deny access, with the power of the government backing the decision.
- vacri 14y ago
  Surely then, this would be the province of the local law enforcement, not something worth summoning in the Feds for.
  - Locke1689 14y ago
    The only person to mention the federal government was you.
    - vacri 14y ago
      but the real owner isn't me, it's the United States government - Locke1689, 5 hours ago I am not an American, but I've been online for nearly 20 years now, and I've seen a lot of US politics pass under the bridge. I've never seen anything that goes contrary to the notion that 'the United States government' is 'the federal government [of the US]'. The two terms are used interchangably in online discourse in my experience. If I am wrong in this, can you please provide me with some links to explain how 'the federal government' of the US is a different entity to the 'the United States government'. I'd be very interested to read them, because it would be a very curious oddity in the way politics are described over there. Does 'the federal government' operate at a higher or lower level than 'the United States government', or do they operate in parallel? It's an intriguing concept.
      - argonaut 14y ago
        The fact that you're arguing over the synonymous/non-synonymous semantics of two phrases, rather than actually refuting locke's main point, says a great deal about your argument.
        vacri 14y ago
        Can you please point out Locke's 'main' point, because it seems he's danced around a few topics to me. If you're talking about the parent of my last comment, it should be abundantly clear that I'm saying 'no, you did', which is directly refuting his point, with a quote, no less. The rest was a bit of poetic license called 'taking the piss'.
      - Locke1689 14y ago
        What the hell? I hope you're not an American -- if civics and government class has so failed our students i would be extremely disappointed. The government of the united States is exactly that, ranging from the lowest town council member to the President. You do understand the concept of sets and subsets, right? The federal government is a subset of the government. That's why it has that additional qualifier.
        14y ago
- php_on_rails2 14y ago
  "Sitting on the sidewalk" is a crime in San Francisco -- but it's a petty crime, like smoking weed in public. Cops either don't care, or only care when it's "convenient". When they need to get that quota up! Great illustration on this article.. http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sit-lie-law-primarily-enforced-in-Haight-3763521.php http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Sit-lie-law-primarily-enf...
rdouble 14y ago
Well, at least the farmer didn't just shoot him and invoke the castle doctrine.