Message from @Zerb

Discord ID: 783883193233309727


2020-12-03 02:24:44 UTC  

I'd lay off the ad homs though.

2020-12-03 02:25:01 UTC  

It is against the rules, but I'm trying to be understanding.

2020-12-03 02:25:36 UTC  

Whithers, please take your meds. It's clearly needed.

2020-12-03 02:25:52 UTC  

@jcheesman123 Hey, that includes you too!

2020-12-03 02:26:12 UTC  

Yes, you do. One must be 12 years old to be able to comprehend point line perspective. If a 10 year old designs a faulty architectural draft of a bridge and it fails they were physically incapable of the comprehension necessary to perform the task. They cannot be held to the same standard as someone that has the capacity.

2020-12-03 02:26:19 UTC  

They are not Ceteris Paribus.

2020-12-03 02:26:29 UTC  

Aha.

2020-12-03 02:26:31 UTC  

Capacity.

2020-12-03 02:26:42 UTC  

Literally the argument I'm making to say people are held to different standards.

2020-12-03 02:26:53 UTC  

No you are not making the same argument.

2020-12-03 02:26:56 UTC  

Weird how you'd include that and only be respectful of it in one way though.

2020-12-03 02:27:12 UTC  

Yes, I am.

2020-12-03 02:27:47 UTC  

You are arguing that because some people choose to be willfully unskilled and willfully ignorant they should be allowed a lower standard of performance when they kill someone than someone that has chosen to be trained.

2020-12-03 02:28:24 UTC  

They are not in positions of authority with the prerequisites of these skills to be in positions of authority.

2020-12-03 02:28:25 UTC  

Hello to everyone

2020-12-03 02:28:30 UTC  

Hello @Gordis65 !

2020-12-03 02:29:25 UTC  

No, I'm arguing that the existing standard is lower for the average American.

2020-12-03 02:29:43 UTC  

Because they are literally the average American.

2020-12-03 02:30:08 UTC  

It is the Act of God dilemma. If a person puts icemelt on their sidewalk to try and make it safer they are liable for the person that fell and broke their hip on their human altered sidewalk. Had they not bothered to alter it, then the fall is an Act of God and they are not liable. You argue that because the police make the effort to be skilled to try and do the best they can, that they must be liable, while the persons that make no effort should be let go.

2020-12-03 02:31:00 UTC  

One standard for the performance of an action. No differentiation on account of persons. No respecter of persons.

2020-12-03 02:31:57 UTC  

I wish we could have a better look at the QR code to see what information it gives when you use a regular QR scanner

2020-12-03 02:32:12 UTC  

No, I make the argument that if you're in a position of power unbidden by rules regular citizens MUST follow (but you don't have to) you need to be held to account for your actions in a higher standard, because the only reason you're allowed to be where you are is because of your capacity to deal with these situations.

2020-12-03 02:32:32 UTC  

Which is much greater than the average person.

2020-12-03 02:32:37 UTC  

Period.

2020-12-03 02:33:12 UTC  

Having authority to act changes nothing. If the performance of the action to be just is X, then all persons must perform that action to X standard. No matter who they are.

2020-12-03 02:33:25 UTC  

No, it absolutely does.

2020-12-03 02:33:46 UTC  

@Maw just jumping in on your discussion, are you talking about the Doctrine of Strict Liability of a professional person ?

2020-12-03 02:34:00 UTC  

No it does not. If you stick your finger in the light socket the light socket does not zap you harder if you are an electrician.

2020-12-03 02:34:09 UTC  

We're talking about holding officers and people in positions of power to a higher standard than the average American.

2020-12-03 02:34:31 UTC  

@Whithers Doesn't zap you harder if your a child either, your point?

2020-12-03 02:35:05 UTC  

The law must be blind. No respecter of persons. All to one standard. All persons are equally obligated before the law.

2020-12-03 02:35:14 UTC  

Any other standard is a double standard.

2020-12-03 02:35:14 UTC  

I agree.

2020-12-03 02:35:39 UTC  

Well police officers get qualified immunity, isn’t that double standards?

2020-12-03 02:35:42 UTC  

If you can hold adults to a higher standard than children, then we can hold police to a higher standard than average Americans.

2020-12-03 02:36:15 UTC  

It's unreasonable to assume every American would get 6 months of police training.

2020-12-03 02:36:28 UTC  

Like I don't even know why this is an argument.

2020-12-03 02:37:29 UTC  

If you create a standard of law that says people are held to a different standard then you will always have a multi-tiered justice system. If the "lower" classes are given license to disregard the law on occasion because of their status then equally it justifies holding those in authority to different and from time to time lesser standards because they are a different caste of persons. There must be and always be the same ethical obligation before the law or justice has no blindfold.

2020-12-03 02:37:40 UTC  

We already have that standard.

2020-12-03 02:37:53 UTC  

@Maw as far as I know that is known as Strict Liability in Tort Law, where the mental element of KNOWINGLY or INTENTIONALLY is not required for criminal behaviour, because a professional person is expected to have that knowledge . . . .not sure Im being entirely clear, do you get my meaning ?

2020-12-03 02:37:53 UTC  

@ReclaimTheLaw, you just advanced to level 3!