Are you a snitch?

[Gail]

Okay, here's the deal-

The police in Victoria, BC, want citizens to report drivers who are texting or otherwise using their cellphones as they drive (both are illegal here).

They want people to, first of all, gesture through their windows to the driver at fault, that they see them and to please hang up and pay attention to the task at hand.

Then they want the gesturing ones to have their passengers to take a photo of the offending driver and their license plate in order to report them.

Would you be a willing participant in this venture?

[LifeHiscost]

Living close to a large city in California and very aware of some disastrous results of road rage, I would probably give consideration to the specific circumstances prevailing.

God cares!

[Liz]

This made me LOL, I'd always heard how polite Canadians are, so the gesturing would actually get the person to put their phone down?

Here one gesture, would lead to a different type of gesture, which would lead to yet another gesture, then road rage would happen.

[Gerr]

Do you use your cellphone to call or text the police?

[debbym]

not if i had to do this while driving. and if the offenders are driving, and i am not, i would think they would be lost in traffic very quickly.

[Naomi]

As it is with many good ideas, there is a huge difference between theory and practice.

Answer: NO

[M. T. Cross]

I certainly appreciate the thought behind what they are trying to do, but it won't work

That said, I think the punishment for texting and driving should be the same, or stiffer, than it is for drinking and driving.

[Kevin H]

I remember driving back before the driving and cell phone was illegal, While not something that you saw every day, there were about a dozen times that I saw a hand talker using the phone. One hand was holding the phone the other hand was moving the way hand talkers do and thus neither hand was really on the wheel except or maybe a quick tap with the talking hand. I saw it often enough to know that was an issue out there. As I hear about phone and accidents I wonder what present of them are the hand talkers compared to those who keep one hand on the wheel.

Of course the texting needs your hands and eyes.

[joeb]

The only thing I would ever turn anyone in for drunk driving, and then they have to be obviously incapable of driving safely, and that's not because I'm judging them. I've been guilty of DUI many times in my life. I was just fortunate enough not to get caught or get in a wreck while DUI.

I know a lot of people who deal drugs. Would I turn them in? No. I don't think a Christian gains any credibility by being a stool pigeon.

What I see the cops in BC doing is actively trying to get the general public to become stool pigeons for them. They will start with something like this, and then gradually build the public's tolerance to this type of thing until they have an entire population of stool pigeons who will inform about anything on anybody. That's what the Nazi's did and they ended up with a population in which parents couldn't trust children and children couldn't trust parents. Siblings couldn't trust each other. Nobody could trust anybody for they were all stool pigeons of the state. That is a terrible way to live and this action by the BC police is a relatively "harmless" way to get people used to informing on others.

[Gordon1]

Yes Joeb, we have become very familiar & connected as a society. Cell phones & cameras would have been a boon to the Nazi regime. They tapped IBM for the best technology of the time, hence the numbering system of the death camps..

We are descending into the same morass where all citizens will feel it a duty to report on their neighbours for the Fatherland (patriotism). This is where each of us will have to consider our loyalty - either to God or to man.

For example..

"The law of the land requiring us to deliver a slave to his master, we are not to obey, and we must abide the consequences of violating this law. The slave is not the property of any man." 1 Testimonies 202.

Naomi Wolfe describes the dangers of this trend.

Ten Steps to Fascism:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

[M. T. Cross]

It could all be a great scheming conspiracy, or possibly, just possibly they are trying to curb on of the most dangerous driving hazards there currently is.

[Gordon1]

Both..

[CoAspen]

We have some here that believe everything in life is a great conspiracy....they're every where......they're every where......quick hide under the bed!!!!

[M. T. Cross]

What if they are under the bed too though?

THERE IS NOWHERE TO HIDE!!!!!!!

[debbym]

we have had several auto deaths in our community in the last year, tragic deaths, because of texting while driving.

if this concern about being reported by other drivers inhibits someone and saves a life, great going.

[LifeHiscost]

we have had several auto deaths in our community in the last year, tragic deaths, because of texting while driving.

if this concern about being reported by other drivers inhibits someone and saves a life, great going.

I'm not sure there is a rational way of staying a free nation while becoming a nation of snitches, except for all returning to Divine principles of conduct. Maybe it would be good for more of us to read this as a warning, at least until the only eternal government there will ever be is set in place.

Ten Steps to Fascism:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

God cares!

[Ted Oplinger]

Originally Posted By: debbym

we have had several auto deaths in our community in the last year, tragic deaths, because of texting while driving.

if this concern about being reported by other drivers inhibits someone and saves a life, great going.

I'm not sure there is a rational way of staying a free nation while becoming a nation of snitches, except for all returning to Divine principles of conduct. Maybe it would be good for more of us to read this as a warning, at least until the only eternal government there will ever be is set in place.

Ten Steps to Fascism:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/apr/24/usa.comment

God cares!

I read that article - it's an old one written in the last years of President Bush, when Bush Derangement syndrome was all the vogue. Fast forward 6 years, and and honestly run down this checklist that the current president ran against. Not only has the structure Bush is accused of creating not been dismantled, it is actively being used by the current party in the Whitehouse. The same apparatus is used in every state REGARDLESS of which party is in power. Points 1, 2, 4, and 6 are used on a widespread scale in the US, which leads to a breakdown of 10.

Just to use this article as a springboard, LHC...

Snitching (also known as "the anonymous tip") - an act which is different from reporting you are witness to an actual crime in progress - always begins with some good-feeling campaign on a point which many people see is a public problem, and want to see such behavior discouraged. It gives people a righteous feeling they've done their good duty to society. However, here in the US, it undermines erodes away one of the basic pillars of the rule of law: the right of the defendant (aka, the one snitched on) to face the accuser (aka, the one doing the snitching) as a matter of due process of law. By your snitch, the accused is to be punished, without having to appear as a witness in the process, or just as bad - having to use their resources to defend against is seen as a spurious snitch.

And, with time, it metastasizes to cover emotional-laden crimes -domestic disturbance/violence, child abuse, and the like. It gradually builds from there. The truth is, people don't mind in cooperating with tyranny - so long as it is not THEY THEMSELVES who are the target of the authorities. That is how the conditioned subjugation mindset develops. Authority MUST be right, the individual in question MUST have been guilty for the behavior triggering the snitch's call to the authorities.

This attitude undermines love and trust, as evidenced in any country having to endure a police state society. No society will long endure a status quo marked with no trust among family and neighbors. Love cannot exist in a vacuum of trust.

The response to a snitch's call is not a polite investigation - it is an assumption of guilt which more often than not produces a greater and greater impact in a person's life - as the path is tread, some pay with their life due to a snitch. How many of these snitch's reports are false reports, designed only to enhance a snitch's credibility, get back at some anonymous person they got crossways with, or - most tragic - misunderstood what really was going on? Regardless, the anonymity of the snitch is held sacrosanct - for "protection" - and there is no recourse if YOU are the one snitched on and YOU are innocent.

What begins as little stuff, always graduates to bigger stuff - pretty much follows the same path as lying. If one is not willing to face the one they "snitched" on, they've got no business making the initial report. One snitch will destroy the trust normally given to many surrounding a person...just as major breaches of trust and betrayals make the subject unwilling to trust again.

If I see a crime in progress - I will report it as a crime, then show up in the witness box to confirm what I observed. Snitching - no. There is a reason tattle-tales aren't respected in most segments of civilized societies.

To use the situation in the OP...what begins as seemingly harmless (in this case, snitching on cell phone usage behind the wheel: I saw xxxx doing the behavior you are outlawing) graduates to "crime investigation" (snitching that there is suspected "crime in progress": the car in front of me is not driving "normally" - it must be cell phone use), which in turn graduates further down the path to arrest first, investigate later ("the authorities are arresting you for xxxx" - You have been pulled over for possibly driving while texting - handover your phone and allow us to see when your last hang-up/text send time-stamp is).

This sequence spills over to not-so-little behavior. Love grows cold pretty quick, in an age and society where self-control and personal responsibility to each other as well as self is deemed counter-productive to the people.

Here in America, we are already conditioned to think it is normal for the authorities to use snitches, and think that disastrous consequences for false snitching is just another headline in today's news.

I guess I have witnessed too much of the bad effects of "snitching" to agree it is a good thing.

Food for thought there.

[CoAspen]

So.....we have heard the 'hue and cry' when someone sees a crime being committed but turns away because they don't want to be involved. If you are in a state or local that makes texting and driving a crime, that should not or should be reported?

Quote:

The police in Victoria, BC, want citizens to report drivers who are texting or otherwise using their cell phones as they drive (both are illegal here).

What about if you see someone not in control of their vehicle or obviously drinking? Report or not report?

The topic is about reporting a crime, not about political, conspiracies or other believed/real loss of freedoms. It is beginning to sound like people believe in 'levels' of what crimes should be reported. A car in the hands of a distracted person is every bit as lethal as gun or other weapon.

[Ted Oplinger]

So.....we have heard the 'hue and cry' when someone sees a crime being committed but turns away because they don't want to be involved. If you are in a state or local that makes texting and driving a crime, that should not or should be reported?

Quote:

The police in Victoria, BC, want citizens to report drivers who are texting or otherwise using their cell phones as they drive (both are illegal here).

What about if you see someone not in control of their vehicle or obviously drinking? Report or not report?

The topic is about reporting a crime, not about political, conspiracies or other believed/real loss of freedoms. It is beginning to sound like people believe in 'levels' of what crimes should be reported. A car in the hands of a distracted person is every bit as lethal as gun or other weapon.

This is not talking about politics or conspiracies - this is talking about the basic accountability one has for another, whether in committing the crime, or seeking justice due. I do think this subject, like many others, gets wound up in emotions really fast.

I wasn't the one first using the word, "snitch" - that is the title of the thread! I simply delineated there is a marked difference between reporting a crime, and snitching, and used the article LHC provided as my springboard. BAD things happen when "snitching" to avoid getting involved becomes the normative, rather than something to be ashamed of. It appears that you might be getting tripped up on my separating the two, CoAspen, though I did try to make the distinction clear. My apologies if I failed to do so.

If my local police are requesting I report a behavior coded as criminal, and should I decide to report such activity observed, THEN I must report it AND involve myself as a witness in the due process. Snitching avoids this altogether.

Snitching, to me, is the same thing as saying one is not their brother's keeper - that one's brother/sister is not worth your time and care to get involved, for whatever reason, because a snitch wants no personal accountability for whatever they report to the authorities.

I am convinced the Bible tells us to stand up for and defend the disadvantaged - which means taking a personal risk on behalf of the victim of crime. If I am that victim (i.e., their reckless driving has placed my car/passengers in jeopardy), then I am to come forward to the one I am accusing of committing the act with my evidence.

As for cell phone usage/texting - it is one of my pet peeves. It is just as dangerous here in Texas as it is in British Columbia. If it became a punishable crime here in Texas, and I saw a case I wanted to alert authorities to, yes, I am going to take the time and do my civil duty in reporting the a crime, and not merely snitch. There, I will present eyewitness testimony and pictures to back up the claim.

Trouble is, "snitching" allows one to abdicate their civil duties in favor of the easy path - avoidance of confrontation, time taken out of one's busy schedule, etc., etc. Here in the US, the underlying principle to be able to face those who accuse you was absolutely meant to cause the accuser to pause and make their case. There were no out's put in place for intimidation, lack of time, emotional hardship, etc.

If one believes another person to be a clear and present danger to others, and that behavior is outlined in the criminal code - then by all means REPORT IT. But this means exercising a civil responsibility and claiming a stake in the process and being willing to responsibly confront the one your are accusing of that crime with your evidence and testimony. Snitching, for whatever reason, avoids these things.

Snitching avoids both responsibilities under the "safety" of anonymity. It's always thought to be good...until it happens to you. When it happens to you, the injustice is immediately apparent...particularly if it is a fabricated snitch, or a snitch with no evidence.

It's not whether I care enough to let authorities know about a matter - the question is, do I care enough about it to actually get involved into the process as I ought to?

Hope this explains my thoughts better, CoAspen.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Snitching, to me, is the same thing as saying one is not their brother's keeper

In "snitching", the brother you are being careful for, is the one that will be harmed if the one snitched on continues their behavior without being stopped. Because in today's society it is not uncommon for people warning of dangerous conduct by another, to be immediately put into a dangerous position, far outstripping the safety of another that has the potential for harm, the better part of wisdom is to draw the attention of those who legally have the necessary firepower to address the issue. That's why we have policemen and women. In snitching there is no guilt concluded or associated by the authority called on, until the party receiving the attention shows themselves having a guilt complex.

When we all are required by law to carry a firearm, as one town in Texas had a city ordinance requirement for all adult citizens to do, maybe then it might be the better part of wisdom to brandish the weapon indicating the need of a change of behavior, instead of snitching.

At this point in most of U.S. society, uncontrolled personal behavior hasn't quite reached that point of necessary vigilance, although after reading the news of the multitude of victims of the green river serial killer, I don't believe that time is far off.

God cares!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

We have some here that believe everything in life is a great conspiracy

Far better we wait, as we have, until 40,000,000 annually of totally innocent, incapable citizens are put to death for the sins of the older generation as some believe.

God cares!