|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Jackpine Radical (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:44 PM Original message |
An ethical question... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofthedial (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:46 PM Response to Original message |
1. as long as you don't use explosives |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Eric J in MN (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:46 PM Response to Original message |
2. It would be unethical because... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alcibiades_mystery (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:48 PM Response to Original message |
3. Hypothetically, if said tactic caused the driver to crash and died |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spoony (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 05:04 PM Response to Reply #3 |
8. Hypothetically spot on n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:29 PM Response to Reply #3 |
14. Who is hypothetically liable when someone runs off the road into a TREE? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
VeggieTart (698 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:46 PM Response to Reply #3 |
24. More hypotheticals |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shaniqua6392 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:49 PM Response to Original message |
4. Go for it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BuyingThyme (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:57 PM Response to Original message |
5. Find a way that doesn't cause harm to people or property. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Viva_La_Revolution (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 04:58 PM Response to Original message |
6. or hypothetically... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NanceGreggs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 05:03 PM Response to Original message |
7. Hypothetically speaking ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:31 PM Response to Reply #7 |
15. You're wrong there, Nance. You run off the road for ANY reason, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NanceGreggs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:12 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. Not if your damage is caused by what could be construed ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:27 PM Response to Reply #19 |
20. I respect you eormously but that's just silly. Any number of natural |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NanceGreggs (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 11:23 PM Response to Reply #20 |
31. There is a vast difference between 'innocuous yet ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Yupster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 09:35 PM Response to Reply #15 |
28. Not if a court finds you were negligent |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yewberry (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 05:07 PM Response to Original message |
9. Is there a way |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sweetheart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 05:11 PM Response to Original message |
10. claymores |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FloridaPat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:26 PM Response to Original message |
11. My question when creeps were banging up my mail box. Forget the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Crunchy Frog (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:26 PM Response to Original message |
12. I wouldn't have any problem with it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:28 PM Response to Original message |
13. I would hypothetically put THREE rebars behind them. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Horse with no Name (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:36 PM Response to Original message |
16. Since the signs are technically on your property |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
blogslut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:39 PM Response to Original message |
17. Hypothetically, here's what I would do |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wuushew (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 06:50 PM Response to Original message |
18. A better plan of action would be to buy a camera |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
KoKo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:41 PM Response to Original message |
21. My first instict would be to do what you were hypothesizing.....my next |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
boolean (992 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:45 PM Response to Original message |
22. Yeah. Hypothetical. Suuuuuuuuuuuurrrreeee... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:46 PM Response to Original message |
23. I wouldn't be that subtle. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
boolean (992 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:46 PM Response to Original message |
25. You realize agent Mike is watching, right? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
donco6 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 08:48 PM Response to Original message |
26. I don't see anything wrong with it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
scarletwoman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 09:21 PM Response to Original message |
27. Hmmmm... Why not just very visible pointed stakes? & a warning sign? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hyde (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 09:49 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. It sounds like a plan to me...hypothetically speaking. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Change has come (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 09:41 PM Response to Original message |
29. Such a person may have to repaint the damaged signs. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
in_cog_ni_to (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 11:30 PM Response to Original message |
32. Well, hypothetically, you NEEDED that rebar to hold up the signs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catherine Vincent (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 11:31 PM Response to Original message |
33. Go for it! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OPERATIONMINDCRIME (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun Oct-29-06 11:36 PM Response to Original message |
34. Yes, It Would Be Not Only Terribly Wrong, But Also Terribly Stupid. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 04th 2024, 06:07 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC