Looting

I don't suppose you'll give a damn, but just to note that I'm probably only one of several hundreds (maybe thousands?) of Canadians you've offended the hell out of. Canadians of both/all political stripes, I'd guess.

Adam Smith, Midland, ON

OK, I'm sorry to the Canadians for the slap in the face. Your country IS an excellent example of how the US should be taking care of our citizens with health care and overall support for the welfare of their citizens. The misguided reference to Canada was simply that lawlessness in ANY society should and must not be tolerated and if you feel that in the current situation the victims are facing down south that "anything goes" then please leave our US society to some other place on the earth. SORRY CANADA your are Great Neighbors.

Store owners who open their doors and give away the food, water etc or even who are victims themselves of people who have removed from their store the necessities to live should simply be thankful for the opportunity to have the store in the first place. We should open our hearts and resources to help the people suffering in any way possible.

I stand firm in my conviction that what goes around comes around in the end. If people are looting anything except the elements needed to survive then they are stealing. That is very simple to understand and because some young thugs are abusing the opportunity AND certain liberal media outlets are sensationalizing these poor people's suffering I went off the deep-end when I said move to Canada. Again my apologies to our friends up north.

Pedroman

"Looting" should be "steeling" (since it's a metalworking newsgroup thus rendering it ON topic. However, I think what the President was saying is that if these victims were to act civil that these items could have been confiscated by the local government (or whomever is in charge) and dispersed appropriatly instead of everyone for themselves. That being said, people are people, they're not going to wait and rely on someone else to take care of their needs since they literally have nothing but the clothes on their bodies left. Letting people steel necessities sort of makes sense in such circumstances, but steeling rationaly would be better for everyone. As far as swiping electronics and other valuables, that was simply stupid. There is no way to parlay that into money in that area. This is a worst case scenerio that SHOULD have been thought about (huricanes are not uncommon in that area and they are below sea level!). Our government has given us all a false sense of security by making us believe that there are worst case scenerio plans set in place.(clearly, there was not) I think if i were in that situation, a gun and ammo would have been on my looting list first, then water and food. The whole thing sucks and my heart breaks for ALL those people. I sent my check out this morning.

walt

And all the people who lived there knew that. Just as all the people who live on the San Andreas Fault know about the potential for disaster. They are gambling - big stakes - that it won't happen in THEIR lifetime.

Our government has given us all a false

Most of us hedge our bets and don't count on the government for basic survival. As I recall, the federal government is supposed to be for national defense and regulation of trade. I'd prefer they stuck to that, at least until they get the hang of it. As for the NO local government, I think we've seen the measure of their worth. Watch you don't step on a pin from those police badges on the sidewalk.

As for looting a gun first, shame on you if you don't already have one.

Yes. What is "moral" varies some in various religions and cultures, but stealing isalmost universally regarded as immoral ("wrong"). A moral person either anticipates needs, finds a moral way, or begs.

Few would not behave "imorally" if necessary to survive, but that doesn't make it moral.

Is this the same guy from FEMA who, when asked by a reporter about the looting said,"This is not the time for that"? I couldn't help but wonder just exactly when he thought it was the_right_time for looting.

It's not for me to speak for my countrymen, but personally, apology heartily accepted. I admit to being surprised and heartened by your response. I usually stay right out of the political debates in this and other fora, in part because advise is always easier from outside, and it is Americans that have the responsibility and cost (politically, and in all other regards) for American policy, (not to say that the rest of the world may not take collateral damage when you get it wrong). However in the current circumstance, I'd like the American majority in the group to know we (our family, in any case) have been concerned and rivetted by the events unfolding, probably in a way that is not too different from your own reactions. I was relieved that the Canadian Prime Minister was prompt in offering any help that Canada could provide. I understand that the pride of the US administration will only cause them to accept that help, if they really feel that it will be material.

On the subject under debate I'm pretty much on both sides: I share the reaction of many along the lines of "where is the personal responsibility"? But I also know that we all want mercy for ourselves, even as we call for justice for others. I can easily imagine making the (stupid) decision to stay with my house, (I love the home I'm sitting in as I type this, which was hard-won). It would be great if the rescue effort can arrange for the stupid decision of many, to be fatal for the irreducible minimum.

I don't like to offer gratuitous advice, and do so seldom, but I will weigh in with this: the people of the US should make this a uniting force rather than a dividing one, if they can. It was partially the use of "liberal" as an epithet in your post that I was responding to. There has been so much demonization of the other side in recent US politics, that the public officials have gotten off easy. I'm a conservative, in the tradition of Edmund Burke, and a liberal in the tradition of John Mills. I'll admit to some socialism, of the school of Tommy Douglas (a Canadian you won't have heard of, but whose values you esposed in the first couple of sentances quoted below. A "balanced books" socialist.) I'll admit to a dash of Anarchism, of the schools of Kropotkin, Godwin, and Tucker (call it "libertarian" if you prefer). 9-11 brought all Americans together, albeit briefly, this current disaster is probably a bigger show than 9-11. Your public officials may be too venal and self-serving to call you to pull together in the same harness, but you should collectively call one another to do so (and the rest of your allies, including us, as well). It is way too easy for both of your parties to play you off against one another. I've travelled a lot in your country, and done a fair bit of business there. I know for a fact that Republicans and Democrats love the US, almost to a person. It is time for conservatives to drop "liberal" as an epithet, and for liberals to drop all the myriad epithets they have for conservatives. And for both to condemn vigorously the public figures that divide rather than unite you.

That is my political post for the year.

Our best wishes for you all, and especially for those in the effected region.

Adam Smith Midland, ON

"Pedro" wrote in message news:fE2Se.306000$_o.219270@attbi_s71...

No. You have committed a crime, but the circumstances might favor your being excused for committing it. You might also earn some "Brownie points" in the future by making restitution if/when you are able to do so.

-jc-

People ought not to have to depend on the cops (or the military) to defend against looters. Sadly, "gun control" has created that dependency....

-jc-

AMEN!

-jc-

I was relieved that the Canadian Prime Minister was prompt in

And I think our government should graciously accept any and all help, just as it is accepted from us when other countries are in need.

You keep hearing about the "ugly Americans". Can our refusal to "stoop so low" to accept help from other well meaning nations do anything but make us appear all the uglier?

I was genuinely touched to hear so many nations cared enough to offer assistance, many of which could likely use the funds to better their own suffering people.

Harold

The problem is that the message sorting takes place in the reader's computer--not at the server. So messages can wind up in all kinds of different arrangements depending on what newsreader, what settings, and some other shit. Most of the newer newsreader programs can sort by the references header, which mostly solves the problem, but many still just use the article number. The article number for any one message depends on the server it's sitting on. In the case of your message, which I'm replying to, it's

690016. Dave message, which you're replying to, is 689981. Article number 690014, which is as close to "just before" your message as any that actually appears in rcm on my server, is actually a message by Don Foreman Message-ID: Sometimes a message won't even propogate to some servers due to some technical problem along the line. It's possible for you to see articles on your server that other people never see on theirs, so no amount of pointing them in the right direction will help. Try to keep in mind that not everyone will see the newsgroup laid out in the same way you see it. That's why people quote at least some of what they're replying to. It's not required, but it is polite. Granted, Dave's message was rude as all hell, so if you want to be obstinate with him, more power to you. (:

"Morality is a complex of principles based on cultural, religious, and philosophical concepts and beliefs, by which an individual determines whether his or her actions are right or wrong. These concepts and beliefs are often generalized and codified by a culture or group, and thus serve to regulate the behaviour of its members. Conformity to such codification may also be called morality, and the group may depend on widespread conformity to such codes for its continued existence. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral "

If the culture or group deems stealing acceptable under some set of circumstances, then it is moral. If they don't, then it is not.

Concensus among this group seems to be that it should be acceptable for them to steal what they need and also OK to shoot (kill) others for trying to steal from them. That's back-to-the-jungle morality.

The doper in need of a fix and the corporate thief obsessed with money feels their need no less acutely than a person struggling to survive in a disaster or war zone. Mazlov's pyramid. It is moral among dopers and corporate thieves to steal: it's even an admired behavior and skill. It's easy to be moral: just pick a suitable moral standard, modify as necessary.

The eagle doesn't worry about morality when it steals the fish from the osprey. It eats, osprey doesn't unless it can catch another (which the eagle may also steal), tough shit. Eagles have no morals. Morals are not necessary for their survival. Their pea-sized brains can't begin to understand the concept.

No previously-well-fed person ever starved in a week though they would get hungry and uncomfortable in a day or two. Katrina was not yet a week ago.

It is absurd (and dangerous to the concept of morality) to redefine morality for a transient condition. No religion does that, Christian, Jew or Muslim. People will do what they think they must, but it's absurd, dangerous and unnecessary to redefine morality for a transient event. That would reduce the concept of morality to a matter of convenience or exigency, which would trivialize it to the point of making it meaningless.

Desperate people commit immoral acts when they feel the need to do whatever they do supercedes any need to act morally. That's different from law. Moralists can forgive moral transgressions or not, the courts can forgive crimes or not. They're separate matters.

I think it's important to maintain some constant definition of what is moral and what not.

Succinctly said.

The last terrorist attack on US soil was when exactly?

Watch TV today?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

Yes, indeed.

and?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 02:04:56 -0500, the blithe spirit Don Foreman clearly indicated:

I'm still waiting to hear how many looters are caught, killed, cooked, and fed to the hungry before FEMA et al get off their collective asses and get in there with help.

.-. Life is short. Eat dessert first! ---

Comprehensive Website Development

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 09:34:28 GMT, the blithe spirit Gunner Asch clearly indicated:

Do you mean 9/11 or subsequent Shrub/Repub/Demo/Red Cross negligence? (Isn't "doing nothing" considered a terrorist act in this case?)

Just Maria Sharapova winning her tennis game, and then listening to some Sirius Contemporary Jazz. Why do you ask?

I did view the Chicago Tribune's collection of pics from NO but saw very little about FEMA. The exception was a picture of a guy in a FEMA jacket who was on the phone. No "DHS to the rescue" pics at all.

ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, CNN, and MSNBC are not in my vocabulary for obvious reasons. BBC is a bit less slanted but still bogus.

I DO like how you sidestepped answering any part of the questions. If you can't answer them, just say so. I'll understand, G. ;)

.-. Life is short. Eat dessert first! ---

Comprehensive Website Development