s/o people justifying breaking laws (illegal fireworks)

[Carrie12345]

My take on "breaking the law" is probably about 90% how it impacts (or has the potential to impact) other people, and 10% about the consequences I might face.

 

Do I think I could have 2 drinks and then make the mile drive home down the country road just fine? Yes.  Will I ever bet someone else's life on it? Absofreakinglutely not.

 

I do consistently drive 5mph over the speed limit. Almost every day, I get passed over double yellow lines on winding mountain roads because I'm "only" going 5mph over the speed limit. But I know our roads aren't built for higher speeds, and I see the roadside memorials sprinkled all over my region.

 

My stupid community won't allow chickens.  The odds of getting caught having chickens in my secluded backyard are very slim.  But, if I WERE to get caught, I'd have to find a way to rehome chickens, and that just seems mean to the chickens.

 

My 4lb dog is currently unlicensed because I keep forgetting to send in the stupid form.  I don't have to license my 14lb cat though, and he's the one more likely to kill a human. (Me, specifically.  He's seriously out to get me.) It's totally hypocritical b/c I sure as heck want my neighbor's 80lb monsters licensed, but I don't for one second believe I'm putting anyone at risk for anything but cuteness overload.

 

I want to be the kind of person who is willing to break laws in order to protect or defend others' rights from being violated.

 

 

[creekland]

Oh dear. I have driven through Louisiana and husband did not walk ahead of me waving a flag.

 

As long as we're confessing... me too... but then again, I'm ok with breaking laws that don't make sense so I slept well last night even though I'm a lawbreaker.  :laugh:

Edited July 2, 2017 by creekland

[Guest]

Well... PA appreciates all the tax dollars from nearby states. They are legal to buy here - as long as one is NOT a state resident. They're illegal to use here, so businesses can't sell them to residents - only to people from out of state. Fireworks places are always super busy this time of year, but if I were to go in to buy anything I couldn't due to not having an out of state driver's license. We get the tax dollars though. I guess that's a plus. Those who set them off generally have someone else from out of state buy them - or they have to go to SC to get them (so I've heard).

 

Not all that long ago this policy was challenged in court - and declared fine and dandy. It still kinda boggles my mind TBH.

Yes, and this is so idiotic. It's the scores of people n Carroll County, Maryland driving over the line to buy PA fireworks. I do know lots and lots of people who buy fireworks every year to set off at their summer parties here in Maryland. I personally think it is stupid behavior, partially because of laws, but moreso because it is expensive and dangerous. No backyard party guy can set off fireworks that remotely approach the wonder of a professional display, so why waste a bunch of money and risk your fingers and your neighbor's ire so you can set off five mediocre fireworks? It never made sense to me.

 

To the OP's question, I have told my kids that I don't approve of private fireworks because they are dangerous and not that awesome unless they are professional displays. But we go to parties every summer at which someone sets of fireworks.

[MercyA]

No, it wasn't that I didn't agree with what I was saying or didn't think the ideas expressed were lovely . . . It's more that I don't like the idea of HAVING an oath like that. I think oaths should be reserved for more meaningful relationships. I think forcing allegiance to an oath is creepy, so any time I recite one (to America, to a religious creed, to the Scouts, etc), I have always been repulsed, even when I agreed with every lovely idea expressed. I always hated reciting the Nicene Creed, even when I was a committed and happy Episcopal. I always hated the Pledge all when I was growing up. I still do. I love our nation, but I do not love the demand for a pledge. Yuck. I love singing America the Beautiful -- it's a love song to our country. I don't love reciting the Pledge because it feels more like a shackle used to control and limit us rather than a love song. I wouldn't ask my kids to pledge allegiance to our family, but I still expect and observe loyalty, etc to our family. I made vows on my wedding day. I can't actually think of any OTHER formal/required vows that have ever been meaningful to me. Yuck. 

 

Amen to the bolded. This is a good example, perhaps, of what I meant when I said I obey laws that don't require me to sin or violate my conscience. Were someone to make a law requiring recitation of the Pledge (sadly, not too hard to imagine at the moment), I would not follow it, for many reasons: 

• My first allegiance is to Christ. I can't pledge allegiance to a fallible human government which may ask me to act contrary to my faith.
• Christians are prohibited from making oaths of any kind: "But I [Jesus] say to you, make no oath at all..." and "...Above all, my brethren, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or with any other oath; but your yes is to be yes, and your no, no, so that you may not fall under judgment."
• I can't publicly affirm that there is "liberty and justice for all," when there is not.
• I won't pledge allegiance to a government responsible for many evils.
• I view the flag as a symbol of aggressive military policies with which I strongly disagree.

That doesn't mean I'm not devoutly thankful to live here. I am. But I strongly object not only to reciting the Pledge myself, but to teaching children to say it or any other oath when they don't fully understand the ramifications. 

Edited July 2, 2017 by MercyA

[MercyA]

ETA: I find this thread particularly ironic since this country (I assume most posters hail from the US) was founded on open rebellion against established law and rule.

 

Ironic indeed. But not all Americans think this was a good thing.  ;)

[EKS]

The problem is if other people or their property get hurt. Raw milk affects only those who consume it, not innocent bystanders. Big difference.

Adults are not free to make decisions that affect the well being of other people and their property.

 

And I would extend the other people being hurt by some idiot blowing off his hand with a firework to the people who end up paying for his medical care, directly or indirectly, any unemployment benefits he requires because he can no longer work, and any other government benefits he or his family receive as a result of his injury and its sequelae.  

Edited July 2, 2017 by EKS

[MercyA]

dp 

 

Edited July 2, 2017 by MercyA

[MercyA]

LOL, see, when I see people arguing that one should "follow all the laws", I read . . . somebody has some serious problems with self-control and/or self-direction. I read that as somebody who has been really messed up by a rules-based religion, rules-based household, over-controlling family member, or something else. 

 

I don't use laws as a moral compass. I obey laws AND follow my moral compass. I don't get why the belief that a person should follow the laws seems to make you think that means blind obedience, I just don't get that.

 

Agreeing with the bolded. My obedience is anything but blind. I am not a natural rule-follower. I am naturally rebellious. It is *hard* for me to submit myself to any authority. However, I do it--or do my best to do it--because it is worth it to me.

 

"Then Jesus said to His disciples, 'If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?"

 

If people think me following the edicts of my faith means I have "serious problems with self-control and/or self-direction" or that I have "been really messed up by a rules-based religion," I'm okay with that.   :)

Edited July 2, 2017 by MercyA

[Tanaqui]

 Amen to the bolded. This is a good example, perhaps, of what I meant when I said I obey laws that don't require me to sin or violate my conscience. Were someone to make a law requiring recitation of the Pledge (sadly, not too hard to imagine at the moment), I would not follow it, for many reasons:

 

Happily, this is already settled case law.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Virginia_State_Board_of_Education_v._Barnette

 

I suppose it could be overturned, but I don't think it's very likely, even in today's climate.

[Tanaqui]

And I would extend the other people being hurt by some idiot blowing off his hand with a firework to the people who end up paying for his medical care, directly or indirectly, any unemployment benefits he requires because he can no longer work, and any other government benefits he or his family receive as a result of his injury and its sequelae.  

 

Indeed. And while I don't think it's morally right in a civilized society to say "Well, you sure were stupid, weren't you? No help for you!", it is right to prevent the most obvious of the stupid injuries from occurring.

 

[Guest]

I'd just like to say... I don't speed.

 

The speed limit in west Texas is REALLY high. My car would explode of I tried to break the speed limit. LOL

[maize]

Driving the speed limit when everyone else is speeding actually makes the road more hazardous. It impedes the flow of traffic and causes other drivers to change lanes more frequently which, of course, increases the risk of accidents.

To be fair, a person who drives the speed limit does not *cause* other drivers to change lanes more often--that is entirely the other drivers' choice. Other drivers change lanes because they themselves don't want to be limited to driving the speed limit--this really is on their shoulders not those of the slower driver.

Edited July 2, 2017 by maize

[Lady Florida.]

 

 

ETA: I find this thread particularly ironic since this country (I assume most posters hail from the US) was founded on open rebellion against established law and rule.

 

 They only rebelled after exhausting all legal, peaceful options. It's not like one day they said, "We don't want to be British anymore. Let's start our own country." In fact, for a long time they wanted to remain and considered themselves British subjects. The war for independence was a last resort. 

 

And even when they finally did rebel, they felt it necessary to explain to the rest of the world why they were doing it. That's what the Declaration of Independence actually does. It explains their reasons, point by point, for their separation from Britain.

 

I doubt the people who think it's okay to ignore "silly" laws have gone through all of the above.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Lady Florida.

[Lady Florida.]

2E3

To be fair, a person who drives the speed limit does not *cause* other drivers to change lanes more often--that is entirely the other drivers' choice. Other drivers change lanes because they themselves don't want to be limited to driving the speed limit--this really is on their shoulders not those of the slower driver.

 

^^^This^^^ I don't speed. The few times in my life I did, I got caught and ticketed. So I don't. But it irritates the daylights out of me that someone who is obeying the law is blamed for causing accidents. No, those who choose to break the law (and speed limits are in fact laws) are the ones causing accidents. Just because "everyone" is speeding doesn't mean the person who isn't is the problem. Argumentum ad populum.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Lady Florida.

[Wheres Toto]

No, it wasn't that I didn't agree with what I was saying or didn't think the ideas expressed were lovely . . . It's more that I don't like the idea of HAVING an oath like that. I think oaths should be reserved for more meaningful relationships. I think forcing allegiance to an oath is creepy, so any time I recite one (to America, to a religious creed, to the Scouts, etc), I have always been repulsed, even when I agreed with every lovely idea expressed. I always hated reciting the Nicene Creed, even when I was a committed and happy Episcopal. I always hated the Pledge all when I was growing up. I still do. I love our nation, but I do not love the demand for a pledge. Yuck. I love singing America the Beautiful -- it's a love song to our country. I don't love reciting the Pledge because it feels more like a shackle used to control and limit us rather than a love song. I wouldn't ask my kids to pledge allegiance to our family, but I still expect and observe loyalty, etc to our family. I made vows on my wedding day. I can't actually think of any OTHER formal/required vows that have ever been meaningful to me. Yuck. 

 

I'm not sure why you're so antagonistic, but I'm going to step out of this conversation. I had entered into it in good faith, to share ideas. I'm not interested in continuing a debate that has devolved into this.

 

Take it easy. 

 

Why cross your fingers?  Why not just stand quietly and not say the pledges if you are uncomfortable or opposed to them?   It's not like you're going to get arrested or kicked out of church for not saying them.  

[Χά�ων]

Fireworks are illegal here and the city has repeatedly spelled out why. They have very good reasons for it, including the safety of motorists and extreme fire risks. The laws are not on the books to annoy people, they are there for very good reasons.

 

Rather than breaking the law in front of your children and giving them an excuse that could be applied to significantly more dangerous situations (like driving after a night of drinking), why not reasearch with your children to learn why the law is on the books and, if you still feel that it is not appropriate, take steps to change the law?

[creekland]

Yes, and this is so idiotic. It's the scores of people n Carroll County, Maryland driving over the line to buy PA fireworks. I do know lots and lots of people who buy fireworks every year to set off at their summer parties here in Maryland. I personally think it is stupid behavior, partially because of laws, but moreso because it is expensive and dangerous. No backyard party guy can set off fireworks that remotely approach the wonder of a professional display, so why waste a bunch of money and risk your fingers and your neighbor's ire so you can set off five mediocre fireworks? It never made sense to me.

 

And we thank you for your financial support.   :lol:   (Obviously, not "your" personal, but the general meaning from your fellow Marylanders.)  

 

I got curious how much money our state makes from sales, but google only brought up the law and various articles about trying to change it - wanting to add an extra 10% tax to go toward firefighters, etc, in exchange for making them legal in this state and reaping more money from state residents.  Who knows?  They might do it since they have an underfunded budget right now.  The articles were mostly from last year, but I suspect it's still on many lawmaker's minds, esp this time of year.

[Guest]

Lol

 

Just get laws changed.

 

Gee whiz. Why didn't anyone ever think of this before?

[Lady Florida.]

Lol

 

Just get laws changed.

 

Gee whiz. Why didn't anyone ever think of this before?

 

Well, it does happen even though it isn't easy. Anyone remember the 55 mph federal speed limit during the 70s energy crisis? When the crisis was over the new limits remained People got their states to defy the federal government and get a higher limit, and eventually the federal government went along with it. Of course before 55, 80 was the limit on interstate highways and now it's mostly 70, but speed limits can be changed by citizen involvement. I also know of some speed limits on local roads that were changed through citizen involvement. 

 

The alternative, ignoring speed limits and fireworks laws without attempting to get them changed, isn't the really better option.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Lady Florida.

[creekland]

Lol

 

Just get laws changed.

 

Gee whiz. Why didn't anyone ever think of this before?

 

I wonder if they did - esp since it's all about the money.

 

We've taught our kids "It's All About the Money" is life rule/lesson #1 - tied with "Life isn't Fair, Get Used To It."

 

They won't be getting any more/less tax dollars from us.  I've never bought anything even remotely considered a firework in my life and certainly don't plan to start now.  I have a feeling it would be a sizable amount they'd make though, but perhaps not.  Folks who want to use fireworks already get them from somewhere.  Is it out of state (and therefore $$ would come back to PA) or do they have friends from other states buy them here to give to them ($$ were already here)?  I have no idea.  Would changing the law encourage more people to buy them?  Probably some, but how many?  And is the extra 10% charged enough to offset actual costs when something goes wrong?

 

Tons of questions...

[Catwoman]

Well, it does happen even though it isn't easy. Anyone remember the 55 mph federal speed limit during the 70s energy crisis? When the crisis was over the new limits remained People got their states to defy the federal government and get a higher limit, and eventually the federal government went along with it. Of course before 55, 80 was the limit on interstate highways and now it's mostly 70, but speed limits can be changed by citizen involvement. I also know of some speed limits on local roads that were changed through citizen involvement.

 

The alternative, ignoring speed limits and fireworks laws without attempting to get them changed, isn't the really better option.

I still remember the "55 saves lives" slogan they used when the speed limits changed to 55.

[marbel]

Well, it does happen even though it isn't easy. Anyone remember the 55 mph federal speed limit during the 70s energy crisis? When the crisis was over the new limits remained People got their states to defy the federal government and get a higher limit, and eventually the federal government went along with it. Of course before 55, 80 was the limit on interstate highways and now it's mostly 70, but speed limits can be changed by citizen involvement. I also know of some speed limits on local roads that were changed through citizen involvement. 

 

The alternative, ignoring speed limits and fireworks laws without attempting to get them changed, isn't the really better option.

 

LOL, This is exactly what I was thinking of when people brought up speeding.  Because I do remember that, and I remember having to drive 55 MPH on the I-5 in southern California which has got to be one of the most boring drives ever, and surely was designed for speeds above 55!   I knew people who claimed to get tickets for going 56, though I am a bit dubious about that, though I know there were an awful lot of CHPs patrolling and giving out tickets then. 

[KungFuPanda]

Do people really think buying a kid's meal for an adult is illegal or unethical? It's just a smaller meal for a smaller price. I get the Chipotle kids meal ALL THE TIME because it's PLENTY of food for me.

 

And here's where I confess to my recent criminal activity . . . Last night DH and I committed a crime. At midnight I donned a black hoodie. We rolled our two very full trash cans into our wheelchair accessible van and deposited them in an undisclosed dumpster. SOMEONE (not me) forgot to take out the trash last week, then SOMEONE (not him) decided to clean out the fridge. We're out of town on our trash day next week. We just became outlaws over coffee while we jokingly plotted this and actually carried it out. We're so old and boring that I don't remember the last time we did anything this ridiculous.

 

Stay tuned to see if we're caught and persecuted . . .

[Pawz4me]

Do people really think buying a kid's meal for an adult is illegal or unethical? It's just a smaller meal for a smaller price. I get the Chipotle kids meal ALL THE TIME because it's PLENTY of food for me.

 

Some restaurants around here *very* clearly state on their menus that certain selections are only for kids and seniors. I don't know, but I've always assumed those are priced so that their profit margin is a bit less than on other items, but they do it to entice families and seniors to eat there. Fast food places generally don't care, and for many of them their kids menu is pretty much the same stuff that's on their "value" menu.

 

 

 

And here's where I confess to my recent criminal activity . . . Last night DH and I committed a crime. At midnight I donned a black hoodie. We rolled our two very full trash cans into our wheelchair accessible van and deposited them in an undisclosed dumpster. SOMEONE (not me) forgot to take out the trash last week, then SOMEONE (not him) decided to clean out the fridge. We're out of town on our trash day next week. We just became outlaws over coffee while we jokingly plotted this and actually carried it out. We're so old and boring that I don't remember the last time we did anything this ridiculous.

 

Stay tuned to see if we're caught and persecuted . . .

 

 

 

Ummm . . . not to scare you, but at our previous house we had a handy man we used several times and got fairly friendly with. He did a lot of work throughout the neighborhood and I walked a lot, so I'd see him fairly regularly. He told me one morning he was working alone because his helper was in jail. I asked what he did and he said he put something in a CVS dumpster. They caught him on camera and reported it and the police actually tracked him down and charged him. He didn't have the money to pay the fine so he was spending a few days locked up. I suppose they got an image of his license plate and tracked him that way, but I don't know for sure. Probably needless to say, but the crime rate in that city wasn't very high at the time. The police did have time to tackle stuff like that.

 

(Edited because the quote feature never seems to work right for me lately!! Argh!!) 

Edited July 2, 2017 by Pawz4me

[snowbeltmom]

Fireworks are illegal here and the city has repeatedly spelled out why. They have very good reasons for it, including the safety of motorists and extreme fire risks. The laws are not on the books to annoy people, they are there for very good reasons.

 

Rather than breaking the law in front of your children and giving them an excuse that could be applied to significantly more dangerous situations (like driving after a night of drinking), why not reasearch with your children to learn why the law is on the books and, if you still feel that it is not appropriate, take steps to change the law?

 

Those of us in this thread who don't always follow "silly laws" have taught our kids that they should behave in a manner that does not cause harm to others - our kids don't need a law to determine right from wrong.  Our kids wouldn't consider breaking the law and drinking and driving, not because it is a law, but because it is dangerous and could bring harm to others.

 

In my neighborhood, it is legal to discharge a firearm, despite the fact that we can all see each other's houses.  Years ago, my friend down the street was afraid to let her kids play outside when her next door neighbor was home because he liked to shoot the squirrels in his backyard, and she was obviously terrified that her kids would be shot by a stray bullet.

 

Talking to both the neighbor and the township did nothing: the township told her that the law permitted the neighbor to shoot off his gun regardless of how idiotic and dangerous it was, and the neighbor said that he was within the law and could do what he wanted on his property (He had a little over an acre of land, which is nothing when you are shooting a gun.)

 

Now I believe that this law that permits people in my neighborhood to discharge a firearm in their back yard is "silly".  When my kids were younger, if they would have wanted to have target practice in our back yard, they would not have been permitted to do so because I think this law is "silly"..

 

Also, people have tried to have this law changed, but there is too much resistance by the gun supporters.  My friend ended up moving.

 

[marbel]

Those of us in this thread who don't always follow "silly laws" have taught our kids that they should behave in a manner that does not cause harm to others - our kids don't need a law to determine right from wrong.  Our kids wouldn't consider breaking the law and drinking and driving, not because it is a law, but because it is dangerous and could bring harm to others.

 

<snip>

 

Now I believe that this law that permits people in my neighborhood to discharge a firearm in their back yard is "silly".  When my kids were younger, if they would have wanted to have target practice in our back yard, they would not have been permitted to do so because I think this law is "silly"..

 

<snip>

 

 

I get your main point (and I would not have agree with that law either) but by forbidding your kids from target practice in your yard, you are not breaking the law.  The law doesn't require people to discharge firearms in their yard.    You are simply choosing not to exercise your right to discharge a firearm in your yard (I wouldn't either).  

[Guest]

So, let's philosophy together!

 

http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/moralityandlaw.htm

[snowbeltmom]

I get your main point (and I would not have agree with that law either) but by forbidding your kids from target practice in your yard, you are not breaking the law.  The law doesn't require people to discharge firearms in their yard.    You are simply choosing not to exercise your right to discharge a firearm in your yard (I wouldn't either).  

 

Yes, I know that the law does not require people to discharge firearms in their yard.  My point is that some laws are "silly" and at times my family elects not to follow them.  Just because something is permitted by law, does not mean it is the right thing to do.

 

[creekland]

I get your main point (and I would not have agree with that law either) but by forbidding your kids from target practice in your yard, you are not breaking the law.  The law doesn't require people to discharge firearms in their yard.    You are simply choosing not to exercise your right to discharge a firearm in your yard (I wouldn't either).  

 

The point isn't it being against the law.  The point is being able to use common sense rather than "the law" for our judgment.  Same goes for driving under the speed limit in certain areas.  The law says both are fine.  Our minds say differently.  Same goes for when the law forbids things.

Edited July 2, 2017 by creekland

[Murphy101]

LOL, I did not think to add a caveat about archaic laws with not even a pretense of enforcement.

 

Here's an example: When I lived in Oregon (which was 10 years ago, so things may have changed), there were specific types of fireworks that were illegal. They weren't sold in the state, so people had to go to Washington to buy them (unless they had an illegal source in-state, I guess). It was quite well-known and in theory was an enforced law. But people still acquired them and set them off. We were often worried that something would fly into our field and start a grass fire. I can imagine a young child not knowing but hard to imagine kids above age... 10 or so? not sure about that... wouldn't be aware of it as there were no fireworks to be bought and periodically there were things in the news about it.

 

I know there are some nanny-state laws that are silly, such as raw milk bans. But I still don't get the picking and choosing about obeying current laws, particularly those which have a good basis with regard to safety, property damage, etc.

Either it is a law or it isn't.

 

And one way something stops being a law, or stops being a law that is given any teeth, is when large numbers of people blatantly refuse to obey it. A law that the majority refuse to obey is extremely difficult to enforce without social unrest.

 

In my area, the laws against fireworks were so blanetly ignored that the city got fed up dealing with the constant calls.

 

Now fireworks are legal, but you have to pay for a permit and when you get he permit, you agree to abide by the safety requirements on it. So the city makes money, people have a legal way to do it, and safety information is given and more likely to be followed.

[MaeFlowers]

To be fair, a person who drives the speed limit does not *cause* other drivers to change lanes more often--that is entirely the other drivers' choice. Other drivers change lanes because they themselves don't want to be limited to driving the speed limit--this really is on their shoulders not those of the slower driver.

Well, technically, no, they do not have to change lanes. They could slow down. But, the reality is that more often than not, people will change lanes and their likelihood of doing so would be less if a slow driver hadn't entered the picture. Generally, it is safer to enter a highway and join the pack speed than it is to go too fast or too slow.

[Murphy101]

 

Some restaurants around here *very* clearly state on their menus that certain selections are only for kids and seniors. I don't know, but I've always assumed those are priced so that their profit margin is a bit less than on other items, but they do it to entice families and seniors to eat there. Fast food places generally don't care, and for many of them their kids menu is pretty much the same stuff that's on their "value" menu.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ummm . . . not to scare you, but at our previous house we had a handy man we used several times and got fairly friendly with. He did a lot of work throughout the neighborhood and I walked a lot, so I'd see him fairly regularly. He told me one morning he was working alone because his helper was in jail. I asked what he did and he said he put something in a CVS dumpster. They caught him on camera and reported it and the police actually tracked him down and charged him. He didn't have the money to pay the fine so he was spending a few days locked up. I suppose they got an image of his license plate and tracked him that way, but I don't know for sure. Probably needless to say, but the crime rate in that city wasn't very high at the time. The police did have time to tackle stuff like that.

 

(Edited because the quote feature never seems to work right for me lately!! Argh!!)

My fil keeps a camera on his shop/office/business dumpster and prosecutes violators too. It's not a small fine either. I think is $300? But he got tired of paying for other people's trash every month. And of cleaning other people's disgusting stuff out of it. *shudder*

[KungFuPanda]

My fil keeps a camera on his shop/office/business dumpster and prosecutes violators too. It's not a small fine either. I think is $300? But he got tired of paying for other people's trash every month. And of cleaning other people's disgusting stuff out of it. *shudder*

I admit it wasn't the best plan we've ever had. They won't even need to involve the police. They'd recognize our van since DH frequents this business several times a week. He's a regular customer and good tipper, so I'd be surprised if they did more than give him a hard time. If there's a fine to pay, we'll pay it without complaint. I'll even fess up here.

[Lady Florida.]

LOL, This is exactly what I was thinking of when people brought up speeding.  Because I do remember that, and I remember having to drive 55 MPH on the I-5 in southern California which has got to be one of the most boring drives ever, and surely was designed for speeds above 55!   I knew people who claimed to get tickets for going 56, though I am a bit dubious about that, though I know there were an awful lot of CHPs patrolling and giving out tickets then. 

 

I got one for going 57 here in Florida. As I said, when I speed I get caught. Even if I barely speed.  :lol:  I'm so thankful for cruise control and even use it around town unless traffic is heavy or I'm on a road that has a lot of traffic lights.

[Word Nerd]

In our state you can get a ticket for exceeding the speed limit by one mile, even while passing. It's rare to get a ticket for it, but it's technically illegal here for anyone to pass a car that's going the speed limit, no matter how fast traffic is moving.

[Wheres Toto]

Lol

 

Just get laws changed.

 

Gee whiz. Why didn't anyone ever think of this before?

 

Actually this year, NJ did just start allowing sparklers and ground-based fireworks.  So, it could happen.

[Janeway]

They just need to follow the laws. Where there are laws, the population is usually rather dense so it is not as safe. Drive out to the country where it is likely legal if you want to set them off so bad.

[creekland]

They just need to follow the laws. Where there are laws, the population is usually rather dense so it is not as safe. Drive out to the country where it is likely legal if you want to set them off so bad.

 

You mean on someone else's land?  I could see oodles of problems with this suggestion.  Many of us who live in the country wouldn't take kindly to folks coming out to do random things on our land.  Our insurance company isn't fond of such things either.  We've had to drive people off from fishing in our pond once or maybe twice.  It boggles my mind that someone driving around would see a pond inside a pasture and assume it's "fair game."  Uh no, we stocked it.  The fish in it are ours - and the herons, etc, that come here to fish.

 

For someone who is suggesting "just follow the laws," what you've suggested is, um, illegal.

 

For those who use common sense instead of laws... keep in mind that many rural folks aren't as kind as us in simply telling folks to leave.

[Murphy101]

You mean on someone else's land? I could see oodles of problems with this suggestion. Many of us who live in the country wouldn't take kindly to folks coming out to do random things on our land. Our insurance company isn't fond of such things either. We've had to drive people off from fishing in our pond once or maybe twice. It boggles my mind that someone driving around would see a pond inside a pasture and assume it's "fair game." Uh no, we stocked it. The fish in it are ours - and the herons, etc, that come here to fish.

 

For someone who is suggesting "just follow the laws," what you've suggested is, um, illegal.

 

For those who use common sense instead of laws... keep in mind that many rural folks aren't as kind as us in simply telling folks to leave.

Yes. Going out of city limits doesn't automatically make other people's property open to random public use by strangers. That's not only not legal it is rather aholey behavior and dangerous.

[StephanieZ]

Why cross your fingers?  Why not just stand quietly and not say the pledges if you are uncomfortable or opposed to them?   It's not like you're going to get arrested or kicked out of church for not saying them.  

 

Good grief. I don't actually cross my fingers!! That was a metaphor! I'm not 8 years old, lol. 

 

And, generally, as I age, I've become less concerned about annoying people, so, yes, today I rarely speak the words if I'm not in agreement. I sit, head bowed, and wait. Up until 5-10 years ago, I felt more compelled to go along with the norm and say the words. Now, I'm more at ease in my own skin, so I am comfortable sitting quietly.

 

However, that said, I am always repulsed by hearing the words aloud, so it's not a pleasant experience for me to sit and listen to them.

[Wheres Toto]

Good grief. I don't actually cross my fingers!! That was a metaphor! I'm not 8 years old, lol. 

 

And, generally, as I age, I've become less concerned about annoying people, so, yes, today I rarely speak the words if I'm not in agreement. I sit, head bowed, and wait. Up until 5-10 years ago, I felt more compelled to go along with the norm and say the words. Now, I'm more at ease in my own skin, so I am comfortable sitting quietly.

 

However, that said, I am always repulsed by hearing the words aloud, so it's not a pleasant experience for me to sit and listen to them.

 

I figured you meant it metaphorically.  I just used your words, the question was why pretend.

 

I guess if just hearing it is repulsive, that's harder.  I feel the same way sometimes with Christian-specific prayers and blessings being done at public venues with mixed crowds.

[StephanieZ]

I figured you meant it metaphorically.  I just used your words, the question was why pretend.

 

I guess if just hearing it is repulsive, that's harder.  I feel the same way sometimes with Christian-specific prayers and blessings being done at public venues with mixed crowds.

 

Pretend what? I'm not pretending anything. I'm trying to be respectful of other people's beliefs/prayers/oaths that are apparently important to them, so I'm trying not to be distracting or disruptive or disrespectful, while waiting it out and, in my own head, wondering why on earth people find that beneficial and what's wrong with people that want to say those things . . . all, silently, in my own head. 

 

Yes, it's exactly that same feeling you have in those circumstances. That's exactly it. 

[LMD]

Laws and government exist to protect the rights of people.

If a law infringes those rights, actual rights - not preferences, then I may choose not to obey.

 

If homeschooling becomes illegal in my country, then I will disobey the law because the state will be infringing on my human rights, to raise my children and choose their education, without just cause (like an abuse of the child's human rights)

 

When everything is regulated to the teeth, when people are hamstrung from living a free life, then it undermines the law. If everything is illegal, I become comfortable with subversively breaking the law.

 

Honestly I am quite concerned by the 'cos the guvmnt says so' obeisance in the general population.

[...................]

Well... PA appreciates all the tax dollars from nearby states. They are legal to buy here - as long as one is NOT a state resident. They're illegal to use here, so businesses can't sell them to residents - only to people from out of state. Fireworks places are always super busy this time of year, but if I were to go in to buy anything I couldn't due to not having an out of state driver's license. We get the tax dollars though. I guess that's a plus. Those who set them off generally have someone else from out of state buy them - or they have to go to SC to get them (so I've heard).

 

Not all that long ago this policy was challenged in court - and declared fine and dandy. It still kinda boggles my mind TBH.

I grew up half in PA and had a tough child hood.

 

But one of my most fond memories was my father setting off a huge fireworks display every year. He looked forward to it for months.

 

It seemed so strange how in my new area fire works are illegal. But it's not rural, very densely populated and constant drought conditions as well as numerous very grassy mountains / parklands make it a terrible fire risk.

 

So that makes sense now :)

[creekland]

After just watching NBC New's (Today Show) bit about numerous fireworks injuries... gotta admit... I'm not really sure why anyone uses them.  It's not like one can easily replace fingers or hands (or more) if something goes wrong.  That's not a risk I care to take personally.  YMMV

[Mergath]

Laws and government exist to protect the rights of people.

If a law infringes those rights, actual rights - not preferences, then I may choose not to obey.

 

If homeschooling becomes illegal in my country, then I will disobey the law because the state will be infringing on my human rights, to raise my children and choose their education, without just cause (like an abuse of the child's human rights)

 

When everything is regulated to the teeth, when people are hamstrung from living a free life, then it undermines the law. If everything is illegal, I become comfortable with subversively breaking the law.

 

Honestly I am quite concerned by the 'cos the guvmnt says so' obeisance in the general population.

 

I'm more concerned by the "I can do whatever I want regardless of what the law says and if it endangers or annoys other people they need to suck it up" mindset in the general population.

[vonfirmath]

I would tell my kids that the law applies to everyone. If you don't like a law, then work to get it changed. For us, as Christians, the only time this wouldn't apply would be in a case of the government requiring you to do something or not do something in direct opposition to God's law.

 

Does his mean we never go over the speed limit or transgress the law in other ways? No, but I can't think of an instance that it was a deliberate flouting of a law we disagreed with, and there is an acceptance of the consequence without arguing a right to break the law.

 

Exactly. Thinking a law is "Silly" is not an acceptable reason to break a law. Its a GREAT reason to work to get the law changed.  And that's exactly what I teach my kids.

 

(And I don't think the firework law is silly. I'd be working to keep it on the books. But right now I'm working to get a local curfew law changed because I think it is silly to make it so youth cannot be outside without turning them into lawbreakers.  Laws like this erode respect for the law in general), especially during daytime hours, when there are so many homeschooled kids and teenagers taking community college classes that have very legitimate reasons to be out of school during those hours.  And even at night, I can think of good reasons for being out as well as "nefarious" ones)

Edited July 3, 2017 by vonfirmath

[wendyroo]

I'm more concerned by the "I can do whatever I want regardless of what the law says and if it endangers or annoys other people they need to suck it up" mindset in the general population.

 

Obviously, the "I can do whatever I want" part of that philosophy is just demonstrably true.  People can set off illegal fireworks, rob banks, let their dogs crap in my yard, drive over the speed limit, lie on their taxes, etc.  In most cases, people are physically capable of doing all kinds of illegal things if they want, that is why society enacts consequences for law breaking.  I have no respect for someone who knowingly breaks the law without accepting that they may have to pay the consequences for their actions.

 

In my mind, however, the idea that "other people need to suck it up" is much more closely tied to respect and integrity than it is to following laws.  People can scrupulously follow laws and still be shitty, inconsiderate people.  People can break laws while still being very moral and considerate of their fellow man.  I will always choose to associate with the latter group - those scofflaws!! - rather than the former group.

 

Wendy

[vonfirmath]

I was not just thinking about forest fires, but house fires as well. 

 

House fires are more terrifying to me -- because they happen anywhere. Up in WA, the house next door to our pastors burned down a few years ago on July 4th. The guess is a stray firework. Luckily no one was home.  Every year after July 4th, you hear of houses burning down.  I can choose to obey the law about fireworks and STILL lose my house because of some law-breaker on the next street over who will not even take the responsibility for the damage their fireworks did.

[...................]

I don't know....I guess because where/when I grew up everyone used them, and people knew the risks....and only usually the dads with a lot of experience used them, and no one I knew got drunk and set them off, and there was so much land you could make sure the children were acres away ....I just don't see the big deal.  I wonder if it's the same overreaction to "dangerous" stuff that our society has in general...

 

I'm not willing to break the law to use them, but I don't fear them. I myself would not set them off because I don't have the experience.  But if you're talking about a guy who was taught his whole childhood every year who was taught by his dad, I don't worry.