bbauska wrote:Not defensive, just stating fact. Glad you liked it.

I never said I liked it either. I have not taken the time to watch the onion piece and so have no opinion either way.

I asked a question about the context of posting it here and in each response to me you have made an asssumption about what I said and replied that, rather than the actual text.

Sigh...

danivon wrote:

bbauska wrote:Not defensive, just stating fact. Glad you liked it.

I never said I liked it either. I have not taken the time to watch the onion piece and so have no opinion either way.

I asked a question about the context of posting it here and in each response to me you have made an asssumption about what I said and replied that, rather than the actual text.

Sigh...

Kind of like assuming I was defensive...

You make even the simplest gestures of kindness and humor proffered to the site difficult.

Sigh...

bbauska

The mother was VERY irresponsible. See RickyP and I can agree!

But she did nothing illegal bbauska.
What does that say about the law that allowed her to be irresponsible, and organizations which would encourage people to take advantage of those laws?

rickyp wrote:bbauska

The mother was VERY irresponsible. See RickyP and I can agree!

But she did nothing illegal bbauska.
What does that say about the law that allowed her to be irresponsible, and organizations which would encourage people to take advantage of those laws?

Irresponsibility is the wrong threshold for the design of laws.

Ray Jay wrote:

rickyp wrote:bbauska

The mother was VERY irresponsible. See RickyP and I can agree!

But she did nothing illegal bbauska.
What does that say about the law that allowed her to be irresponsible, and organizations which would encourage people to take advantage of those laws?

Irresponsibility is the wrong threshold for the design of laws.

Well spoken, as always, Ray Jay.

If irresponsibility were illegal, there would be a great many more people in jail...

rayjay

Irresponsibility is the wrong threshold for the design of laws

I disagree. Responsibility is the basis for liability laws.

Responsibility refers to the care and consideration a person has for the outcome of their actions. It can also refer to a person’s accountability for an outcome to which their actions have contributed, together with any legal obligation they may have to repair any damage caused, as in the company director accepted full responsibility for the consequences of her action

To be liable (for something) means to be legally responsible for something, as in he lost his case and was found liable for damages. A liability is a legal obligation, as in he denied any liability for the damage

.

http://www.translegal.com/exercise/2518

bbauska

If irresponsibility were illegal, there would be a great many more people in jail

.
There are plenty of laws that have to do with people's responsibilities to themselves and others.

It is irresponsible to drive to excessive speed on highways. Speed limits and laws were brought in to being to try and enforce responsibility.
It is irresponsible to introduce medicines into general use until they have been adequately tested and found safe for use. This responsibility is enforced in law and regulation.
It is irresponsible to sell poorly constructed buildings that might crash down in mild earthquakes. Building Codes were introduced to enforce this responsibility in law.
Where this woman lived it was legal for her to carry a gun in the way she did... You say it was irresponsible. According to law it wasn't. Is the law inadequate or poorly constructed if it encourages this irresponsibility?

It is irresponsible to serve your heavy child 2 deserts every day.
It is irresponsible to eat so your BMI is over 30.
It is irresponsible to smoke if you have young children.
It is irresponsible to be late for school or work.
It is irresponsible to post on Redscape when you should be working.

rickyp wrote:
bbauska

If irresponsibility were illegal, there would be a great many more people in jail

.
There are plenty of laws that have to do with people's responsibilities to themselves and others.

It is irresponsible to drive to excessive speed on highways. Speed limits and laws were brought in to being to try and enforce responsibility.
It is irresponsible to introduce medicines into general use until they have been adequately tested and found safe for use. This responsibility is enforced in law and regulation.
It is irresponsible to sell poorly constructed buildings that might crash down in mild earthquakes. Building Codes were introduced to enforce this responsibility in law.
Where this woman lived it was legal for her to carry a gun in the way she did... You say it was irresponsible. According to law it wasn't. Is the law inadequate or poorly constructed if it encourages this irresponsibility?

Wrong.
Speed limits were enacted for SAFETY.
Medicines are tested first for SAFETY (yes, even the ones tested on animals; thank you very much PETA)
Building codes are made for SAFETY

As for the gun law? Did the law ENCOURAGE (!) irresponsibility?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_limit
Speed limits are usually set to attempt to cap road traffic speed; there are several reasons for wanting to do this. It is often done with an intention to improve road traffic safety and reduce the number of road traffic casualties from traffic collisions. In their World report on road traffic injury prevention report, the World Health Organization (WHO) identify speed control as one of various interventions likely to contribute to a reduction in road casualties. (The WHO estimated that some 1.2 million people were killed and 50 million injured on the roads around the world in 2004.)[n 1] Speed limits may also be set in an attempt to reduce the environmental impact of road traffic (vehicle noise, vibration, emissions) and to satisfy local community wishes for streets usable by people out of cars. Some cities have reduced limits to as little as 30 km/h (19 mph) for both safety and efficiency reasons.[10]

http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm143534.htm
The FDA's Drug Review Process: Ensuring Drugs Are Safe and Effective (Article title)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Building_code
A building code, or building control, is a set of rules that specify the minimum standards for constructed objects such as buildings and nonbuilding structures. The main purpose of building codes are to protect public health, safety and general welfare as they relate to the construction and occupancy of buildings and structures.

rayjay

It is irresponsible to serve your heavy child 2 deserts every day.
It is irresponsible to eat so your BMI is over 30.
It is irresponsible to smoke if you have young children.
It is irresponsible to be late for school or work.
It is irresponsible to post on Redscape when you should be working

.
So what.
It doesn't disprove the point that many laws are passed to codify responsible behavior. It just proves that some irresponsible behaviors aren't against the law.
Even some of the behaviors you've just listed There are for instance: truancy laws. And in several jurisdictions smoking is banned when there are children in the car...

If all people could be relied upon to behave responsibly in all situations, there would be no need for laws to codify that behavior.
And the law were discussing, the legal right for "open carry" hand guns, codifies a behavior (makes legal) that has been called irresponsible. Is the law not then also irresponsible?

bbauska

Wrong.
Speed limits were enacted for SAFETY.
Medicines are tested first for SAFETY (yes, even the ones tested on animals; thank you very much PETA)
Building codes are made for SAFETY

If everyone could be relied upon to behave responsibly in these matters without the force of law ... then we all would be safe.

bbauska

As for the gun law? Did the law ENCOURAGE (!) irresponsibility?

apparently.

Ricky:

rayjay

It is irresponsible to serve your heavy child 2 deserts every day.
It is irresponsible to eat so your BMI is over 30.
It is irresponsible to smoke if you have young children.
It is irresponsible to be late for school or work.
It is irresponsible to post on Redscape when you should be working

.
So what.
It doesn't disprove the point that many laws are passed to codify responsible behavior. It just proves that some irresponsible behaviors aren't against the law.

Perhaps we should review the definition of the word "threshold". Do they offer ESL courses in Canada?

rayjay

thresh·old (thrĕsh′ōld′, -hōld′)
n.
1. A piece of wood or stone placed beneath a door; a doorsill.
2. Either end of an airport runway.
3. The place or point of beginning; the outset: on the threshold of a new era.
4. The point that must be exceeded to begin producing a given effect or result or to elicit a response: a low threshold of pain

ray

Irresponsibility is the wrong threshold for the design of laws

Only for the first three meanings of the word.
But for many laws its the whole point...
Examples on top of those mentioned that might be even more obvious?
- reckless endangerment (at what point does that begin)
- the parental responsibility act (at what point has a parent failed their responsibilities)
- landlord responsibilities act (what are the defined limits of a landlord's responsibilities?)
- condominium corporation responsibilities act ....
- laws regarding incorporation of businesses......

i could go on... law in fact, is often about defining the limits of responsibility and only responsibility. That is where are the thresholds?

If a person following a law to its letter, is said to be irresponsible, then isn't the law itself irresponsible?

Bbauska I've always wondered if you knew how to source things. Well done.

Ricky, you are being purposefully obtuse. Why?

If a person following a law to its letter, is said to be irresponsible, then isn't the law itself irresponsible?

Why don't you test that hypothesis by smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day and eating until you weigh 400 pounds?

http://judiciallearningcenter.org/law-and-the-rule-of-law/

Laws are rules that bind all people living in a community. Laws protect our general safety, and ensure our rights as citizens against abuses by other people, by organizations, and by the government itself. We have laws to help provide for our general safety.

Nothing about responsibility there either.