What to do about neighbours who smoke dope?

Forums › Off topic › What to do about neighbours who smoke dope?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

BDFL - Memuneh
80661 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41078

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2411980 3-Feb-2020 17:11

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace.

Police forces are not deputised to use violence. They will try other courses of action first. And even so, using violence as a means to settle things can't be done as they aren't jury and judge.

As for the armed forces, the defence should be the first priority, otherwise it would be no different than an attacker using gratuitous violence.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2411982 3-Feb-2020 17:15

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace.

Since when have our police been "deputised to use violence" as a method to settle disputes?

This thread was silly from the start. It's gone from 1950s reefer madness fantasy to 1850s cowboy and western fantasy and vigilantism, I'm out.

FineWine

3115 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2447

Trusted

Nurse (R)

Lifetime subscriber

#2411997 3-Feb-2020 17:42

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace. I don't think I could ever possibly put it better than Heinlein when he said:

"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion [that violence never settles anything] is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

I would be careful quoting Robert A. Heinlein who was a science fiction writer and mainly a socialist but later became a libertarian. Though I do have 50 of his books. Socialism runs through the majority of his books and your quote above is from Starship Troopers which was most definitely based on a socialist militarist or even a fascist society with all that those societies bring or does not bring to its populations.

Whilst the difficult we can do immediately, the impossible takes a bit longer. However, miracles you will have to wait for.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2412008 3-Feb-2020 18:33

FineWine:

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace. I don't think I could ever possibly put it better than Heinlein when he said:

"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion [that violence never settles anything] is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

I would be careful quoting Robert A. Heinlein who was a science fiction writer and mainly a socialist but later became a libertarian. Though I do have 50 of his books. Socialism runs through the majority of his books and your quote above is from Starship Troopers which was most definitely based on a socialist militarist or even a fascist society with all that those societies bring or does not bring to its populations.

I'm well aware of where the quote came from. I venerate Heinlein and also own many of his books and my political worldview has definitely been influenced by his writing, Starship Troopers in particular.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2412014 3-Feb-2020 19:16

freitasm:

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace.

Police forces are not deputised to use violence. They will try other courses of action first. And even so, using violence as a means to settle things can't be done as they aren't jury and judge.

As for the armed forces, the defence should be the first priority, otherwise it would be no different than an attacker using gratuitous violence.

If you or I were to use a mace, as taser, a trained attack dog, or a firearm on another person, we'd be charged with committing acts of violence. A duly deputized police officer carrying out their duties will not, because they are deputized to _commit violence_ when needed to enforce the law and protect the peace.

As for the armed forces, defense of _what_ is the question. Do we just defend ourselves? Do we defend our allies? Do we defend 'our way of life and western democracy'? Do we defend oil? If another country is invaded by an aggressor should we help them? If we do help them, are our armed forced not committing legally mandated acts of violence against the opposition? If they win, their use of violence has settled whatever drove them to attack in the first place, alternatively if we defend the invaded country and win then has not violence settled things as well? Violence is not inherently bad. Violence without a morally justifiable reason.. That's another story (albeit a very subjective one!)

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80661 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41078

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2412015 3-Feb-2020 19:17

Please leave the politics and ideologies out of this thread.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2412239 4-Feb-2020 09:14

Sorry folks, I'll shut up now :-P

Handsomedan

7770 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7408

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2412362 4-Feb-2020 11:48

Getting back on topic...

I think it's interesting that OP mentioned the situation of the many caravans and multiple tenancies late in the piece - I would've led with that because I think it's important.

A group living in a caravan, on a property (assumedly in the suburbs) with other caravans and a main dwelling being the landlord residence makes for a different read.

It feels..."alternative" in lifestyle and outside the norm...so therefore I think they may see their behaviour as perfectly acceptable.

I think the angle of a friendly chat over the fence just politely asking if they could smoke somewhere else on the property as the smoke tends to go into the kids rooms and they don'y like it and it affects their health may be the best way to approach it in the first instance - regardless of your other feelings toward their general demeanor and behaviour. Hopefully they'll simply see that you're not anti-smoke, just concerned for your kids' health.

If not - you know you can always take an other approach later.

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15472

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2412368 4-Feb-2020 11:53

I don't think mentioning health is going to help. Most dope smokers I know get defensive if you suggest health as an issue with dope-smoking, many believing it's "good" for them.

Saying you don't like it, and mentioning it goes into the kids rooms, should be enough for reasonable people. If that doesn't work, the health angle won't either. Esp if they have kids of their own.

alasta

6891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3365

Trusted

Subscriber

#2412371 4-Feb-2020 11:58

The disadvantage of talking to them first is that they will know it was you who subsequently called the police/council/landlord.

If you go straight to the authorities in the first instance then they are unlikely to be able to guess who made the complaint.

Handsomedan

7770 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7408

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2412412 4-Feb-2020 12:18

alasta:

The disadvantage of talking to them first is that they will know it was you who subsequently called the police/council/landlord.

If you go straight to the authorities in the first instance then they are unlikely to be able to guess who made the complaint.

Well...there is that.

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

landcruiserguy

776 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 137

#2412984 5-Feb-2020 12:25

freitasm:

@Lias:

Pay some other large hairy non nice people to *cough* have a quiet word *cough*

Pray tell, why violence would be a viable solution?

I think they are suggesting that someone fresh from a flight from Whuan province should go and cough on them. 14 days later, problem solved (unless cannabis has undiscovered anti viral properties).

landcruiserguy

776 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 137

#2413017 5-Feb-2020 12:49

FineWine:

Lias:

If violence never settles anything, then why do we have armed forces and police forces that are deputized to use violence to keep the peace. I don't think I could ever possibly put it better than Heinlein when he said:

"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion [that violence never settles anything] is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms."

I would be careful quoting Robert A. Heinlein who was a science fiction writer and mainly a socialist but later became a libertarian. Though I do have 50 of his books. Socialism runs through the majority of his books and your quote above is from Starship Troopers which was most definitely based on a socialist militarist or even a fascist society with all that those societies bring or does not bring to its populations.

Starship troopers is a very popular book among the US military. I think they like the fascist part and the theme that only soldiers get to become citizens.

We are getting off topic but this is interesting. The armed forces and police do keep peace through actual or threatened violence. Think about it. If you didn't pay your taxes you would eventually get a fine. If you don't pay the fine you eventually get arrested. If you resist the arrest they the police use violence to force you to comply. This can be escalated up to deadly force if you resist hard enough.

If this penalty didn't exist, I for one, would not pay my taxes. I don't have any objection to the principal of taxes, I just don't agree with the things they are spent on so if there was no penalty I wouldn't pay them.

In order for this principal to exist (deterrence) the threatened use of force must be overwhelming so that the other party has no realistic chance of winning. If they had a realistic chance of winning they would consider if the fight is worth it. If they don't think they have any chance of winning then the fight is prevented.

It's this reason that nuclear weapons exist. They don't exist to be used, they exist so that they other guy knows if he uses his it will be the last thing he does. If this balance gets upset (e.g. someone builds a missile defense system so that they can survive the first strike) then war becomes more likely.

So in summary:

Nuclear weapons are defensive weapons. They have to be demonstrated that they can be used so that the other guy knows but they are intended to never be used.
Missile defense systems are offensive weapons. They give you a better chance of surviving an counter attack which increases the chance you will launch a attack.

How does all this relate to dope smoking neighbors? You shouldn't use violence against these people because a) It's not what nice people do and b) it won't work because you don't have an overwhelming threat of force that will create deterrence.

It's worth noting that deterrence is what keeps the peace between drug gangs (they can't use the police). They violence that they inflict on people must be visible and horrible so that it deters others.

There are two wars. The war against drugs and the war for the control of drug sales. The first war enables the second (nobody fights gang wars for the right to open a bottle store).

This book explains the whole thing much better than I can:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chasing_the_Scream

So vote yes in the referendum. Not because you like weed or think that it's harmless. Vote yes because it reduces violence, removes income from criminals and increases tax revenue. It lets problem uses seek treatment and lets non problem users get on with their non problematic lives.

Smoke blowing over the fence is annoying but so is second hand smoke from hipsters vaping and unrestrained cats crapping in my yard. You have an annoying neighbor problem, not a weed problem.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#2413050 5-Feb-2020 13:45

landcruiserguy:

Starship troopers is a very popular book among the US military. I think they like the fascist part and the theme that only soldiers get to become citizens.

You make some interesting points and I am a Heinlein fan (who isn’t?), but I think you are slightly misunderstanding the use of violence.

There is a difference between violence and coercion. Coercive force is pinning an uncooperative suspect to the ground and having six burly police officers sit on him. By applying overwhelming force (not ‘violence’), a person or group can be made to do something they don’t want to.

Violence is obtaining compliance by bashing the subject. I believe this is fundamentally different than coercion. There are many forms of coercion, such as persuasion, bribery, physical restraint, threats of deprivation. There is only one form of violence.

I believe nuclear weapons and Mutual Assured Destruction are insane. That they haven’t been used until now is just dumb luck. The US system of government is breaking down because a tyrant has taken over and is changing the balance of power. A madman or leader without morals like North Korea’s Kim might well unleash a suicidal attack for irrational reasons. Any dictator in ultimate control is capable of that. Deterrence doesn’t mean a thing.

I agree that pot should be legalised. It should have happened a long time ago.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2413204 5-Feb-2020 17:21

@landcruiserguy I'd love to discuss this further, but people got triggered by my post(s) and Freitasm told me to shut up, so I'm shutting up :-)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7