babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
What I am saying is that we are connected and our actions, all of our actions, have consequences.
I am aware that car theft is a problem and I do not want to lose my vehicle or have it involved in a tragedy, from my perspective obviously I am not responsible if someone steals my car when it is locked but if I know that car theft is a problem and the general public has been informed that they should not leave vehicles idling then if I do so I do so it is my feeling that I have some responsiblity.
It even seems that there is a law in Manitoba to that effect. That law would appear to recognize that the public must take responsiblity for their vehicles because these days they are as effective as loaded guns at killing people.
"That said, I still haven't seen anything that somehow links the idling vehicle with the vigilante. Is it just a given, and should it be, that if you leave property unattended you're not only responsible for what someone does with that property (including STEALING IT FROM YOU) but also responsible for what third party bystanders choose to do??"
My remarks were specific to the Winnipeg deaths.
I am not talking about legal responsilibity.
"It may make it easier for a car theif, just as a woman walking alone might make it easier for a rapist, but you really need to give your head a shake if you've somehow internalized the idea that you're responsible for criminals victimizing you. "
I can't be bothered to spend my time denying the reality of the world that I live in, of course the person who had their car stolen is a victim but a victim with responsiblity, if they had taken the time to lock the car it is quite likely that two people would be alive today.
As to the vigilante, lol, no not so far but for me this is not about logic, it is about my heartfelt emotion that if I was the driver of that vehicle then I would feel badly that I had put my convenience before the safety and well being of my community.
While I realize I am new to this board and perhaps my last comment seemed snarky it was not my intention.
Well, I suppose people internalize all kinds of things, but let me say again, if someone steals something of yours, it's not your fault. Certainly you could do yourself a service by trying to prevent theft, but it's not ever your fault. It's the fault of someone taking something that they know is not theirs.
But let me give you a for-instance: a husband asks his wife if he can borrow her car, and then he hits a pedestrian while driving it.
What, if anything, is her culpability. Assume that the car is registered in her name.
I would say it's not her fault at all. You?
OR, if some guy hadn't decided to play Deputy.
That, to me, is where the culpability of the truck driver ends. Was he really supposed to have anticipated the reckless action of some vigilante in chasing the person who stole his truck? As far as I can see, that's the real cause of these deaths, and it's connected to the truck theft only tangentially. There's nothing that I can see that made the vigilante give chase other than his own free will.
Now we want to penalize someone for contributing to a situation that might make an individual decide to take the law into their own hands, as well as assign blame for anything that happens as a direct result of that individual's decision?
I agree, not my fault, but taking responsiblity is not about fault it is about owning my piece in the consequences.
There is a great difference between lending a vehicle to someone, I have a choice about that, and leaving a vehicle running unattended to be taken by someone I would never lend it to.
As I said, my remarks were about the Winnipeg incident.
So in other words, if you choose to lend a vehicle to someone and they hit someone, it's not your fault, but if they steal that vehicle and give you no choice in the matter, it's your fault?
Wouldn't choosing to lend my vehicle to someone make me MORE culpable than simply choosing not to lock my vehicle??
As I said, this is not about fault, I never used the word except to agree with you that it would not be my fault. What I have attempted to talk about is responsibility.
What is the difference between a registered car and a registered gun? The car or van had gas in it so it was loaded right? Don't try to infer that guns are more dangerous than vehicles cuz I'm sure more people get killed with cars than guns.
Yes but not intentionally.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Call Me Dave!
I read somewhere that more people die in hospitals than at the hands of murderers. Did you write that article?
Then let's emphasize here on what the topic is trying to show us. It means it's a sort of advise or caution, specifically to people driving.
Btw, this article reminds me a lot of situations about robbing cars, car parts (link to ad deleted by moderator), so we need to be more careful.
petty, I am wondering why you provided a link to an advertisement? How is that relevent to this thread?