3 ms·
When people fixate on the untaxed ciagarettes thing, what's often going on is an implicit assumption that once someone has an interaction with the police, it's
by superuser2 12y ago
When people fixate on the untaxed ciagarettes thing, what's often going on is an implicit assumption that once someone has an interaction with the police, it's just inevitable that the police will summarily execute them.
That's stupid. We can debate the laws too, but you should be demanding police that enforce the laws with due process and respond to threats proportionally. If you're thinking, "well, once the police suspect someone of violating regulations, of course they're going to kill him" then we're never going to get anywhere.
- angersock 12y agoWhen police fixate on the criminal thing, what's often going on is an implicit assumption that once someone has an interaction with a suspect, it's just inevitable that the suspect will attack. See how that works? As for the rest, go look up Warren vs. District of Columbia. The police are not there to serve and protect.
- superuser2 12y agoThen programmers are not there to write good software, firefighters are not there to fight fires, doctors are not there to cure diseases, etc. There is a huge difference between being "there" to do something, and going to prison or paying out a massive judgement because you weren't successful.
- angersock 12y agoNo, read the case: they are literally not required to do their jobs--in contrast with the other professions you listed.
- rayiner 12y agoSigh. The word "duty" as used in the case is a term of art in tort law. It doesn't just mean you have a generic obligation to do your job, as it does in common parlance, but it means you can be legally liable for someone's damages in a tort lawsuit. If programmers had a "duty" to do their jobs, most software companies would have been sued out of existence. Software companies would get sued over every bug that caused people to lose time or money, and would be liable not just for the purchase price of the software, but if they were found to be negligent in writing-in that bug, would be liable for the actual damage suffered.
- angersock 12y agoThanks for the clarification.