Must people allow others to break the law?

Great Debates
21

As a practical matter, I agree completely with yoijimboguy:

As an ethical matter (and in reply to the thread’s subject), in most cases it isn’t your place to try and stop someone else from breaking the law. The only time that I would consider it your responsibility is (a) when you have a sufficient grasp of what’s going on in a situation, and (b) you have a responsibility to the person who might be harmed.

For example: if you see two people brawling in the middle of the street, you don’t have an immediate ethical obligation to break it up. You don’t know what the fight is about; some guy you see getting beat up just might deserve it. Contrast this with the rape case Goo mentioned; in that situation it was pretty clear what was happening, and assuming that what was happening was clear from your vantage point, you might have an ethical obligation to step in (or at least, it would not be unethical for you to).

You might also have an ethical obligation in that case because the girl is a person who, presumably, it is within your power to help; generally, I would say you have an ethical obligation to help another person who is in serious jeopardy unless you or some other innocent person might suffer serious harm in attempting to do so (or unless there are other special or mitigating circumstances). In a rape situation, it’s clear whose rights are being violated by whom. In the brawl case, that is not clear, and since your involving yourself might place you in the situation of actually violating someone else’s rights mistakenly, it would be unethical of you to do so.

I would argue that for my first requirement; for the second, I would say that there are some people you owe a responsibility to, and some that you don’t. You probably would have a responsibility to protect any innocent person that you encountered from death or serious injury (again, barring mitigating circumstances), but beyond a situation that obvious, your responsibility is limited. Would you report someone you knew to be cheating on her taxes? Would you tell someone not to loan his stuff to someone else you knew to be irresponsible? Is it your responsibility to tell your aunt not to lend your cousin money because you know he’ll just use it to get high?

So generally, to determine whether or not you have an ethical responsibility in a situation, you need to be sure you know enough about it to be able to make a sound judgment, and it has to be a situation where it’s actually your business to be doing anything at all.

As for the question about driving, I would say you have no responsibility whatsoever to move if you are driving the legal limit and someone wants to go past. You might want to do it for practical considerations (road rage, personal safety, etc.), but not because you’re ethically required to do so. In that sense, I don’t agree that the objections presented would force you to move.

For the objection about the law requiring slow traffic to move over, I would agree that that is meant for traffic moving under the speed limit. If you’re travelling the speed limit, you are the “faster traffic.” If traffic coming faster than you is riding your tail, they’re violating the law; you’re not mandated to give up your right-of-way to someone who legally doesn’t have it. (Again, practical considerations may make you want to do this, but I would argue that the law doesn’t.)

Also, in no way does faciliating speeding by moving out of the way make you responsible for something that might happen as a result. YOU aren’t speeding. If you weren’t there at all, they would still be speeding. Your presence is entirely incidental to their speeding or what happens as a result of it; YOU are not responsible for the consequences of an act you had no willing part of, ethically or otherwise (their speeding, not your allowing them to)—at least, not in a case like this. As was mentioned, you aren’t law enforcement. Taking that responsibility onto yourself is not a requirement and almost assuredly is more trouble than it’s worth.

For a similar reason, just because you don’t know WHY they’re speeding does not mean you must give up your right-of-way to allow them to do it. There IS no way for you to know, unless they’re waving some kind of sign or something. Without the system of right-of-way driving would be chaotic; you are not under any obligation to yeild it to someone because they MIGHT have a good reason to be in a hurry.

I would definitely agree with Goo:

22

We’ve got one sandwiched in here. Don’t speed up! :smiley:

23

kniz, :smiley:

But I must say, I have never honked or flashed my lights at a person in front of me. I do think they are idiots, and arrogant, and irritating, and if they weren’t in a hurry then they should take the friggin’ side-roads and get out of my way because I drive when I have somewhere to be, but I’m not about to go nuts over the whole affair, either. :slight_smile:

24

Speed limits aside, if I can pass you on the right then YOU are in the WRONG LANE. Period.

If you are doing the speed limit in the left lane and the right lane is full of equal speed traffic, you are within the law… HOWEVER, you are BEING DISCOURTEOUS. Driving courtesy states that you use the left lane to pass slower traffic and then move right to allow faster traffic to pass.

If you choose to be discourteous and sit there blocking me, I will (first) politely flash my lights at you. If you continue to be discourteous I will become more “enthusiastic” in my efforts to get by. If it’s possible and not likely to cause an accident I might even pass you on the right and rudely cut you off. Why? Well I don’t really have any other way of telling you that you’re being a jerk (you can’t hear me yelling obscenities).

Lets not pretend that this is about speed limits. I think it can be generally asserted that if you are driving the speed limit (in good weather, in a car, not truck, non-construction zone, etc) you are definitely in the minority most places.

What it’s usually about is laziness, ignorance and (mostly) CONTROL. IOW (IMHO) people who like to do the speed limit in the left lane are either control freaks(enforcers), too lazy to move over or just plain stupid (in that order).

25

Real life example: My wife went into labour with our second child; on the way to the hospital things were moving rather fast with the contractions, so I put my foot down a little (it was about 8pm on a weeknight and there wasn’t much traffic around).
On one country lane, I attempted to overtake a car, but the driver pulled into the middle of the road and stopped me doing so, I slowed down and tried again, but the same result, he then slowed down to an absolute crawl (less than 10mph) for the remaining length of the road, refusing to let me pass, adding about ten minutes to the journey time.
(we did make it to the hospital, but just in time - 10cm dilation).

26

In any case, I heard a very wise piece of advice about the whole traffic thing which was (words to the effect of) People behind the wheel generally have far too elevated a view of what constitutes their right of way and far too little of what constitutes a safe and sensible action.

27

Here in Atlanta Ga. almost everyone drives 75 to 80 MPH (even during rush hour). And every day more accidents are caused by people trying to force everyone to drive how they see fit. Wile someone speeding may cause an accident your job is not to prevent it but to prevent it from happening to you. Getting out of there way is the best way to keep it from being you that they hit! The only thing I hate worse than enforcers are those assholes who hind it nessary to weave in and out of traffic that is already going 70 + MPH. By the way flashing your lights is not rude it is the way you are supposed to let someone know that you wish to pass, it is you who is being rude and endangering everyone by hoging the road and forceing people to pass on the right. I have seen long lines ot cars (15 or more ) have to pass some lard ass on the right.:wally

28

Hayduke, you are wrong about just about everything in this thread.

Including Wisconsin traffic law. If you care to download the "Rules of the " (page 19), it explicitly states:
"On a road with two OR MORE lanes travelling in the same direction, stay in the right lane except to pass. On roads with three OR MORE lanes travelling in the same direction, stay as far to the right as practical".

Remember this. If you EVER learn to drive, it might be on the test.

29

That’s meant to read the “Rules of the Road” (an acrobat download).

30

Best you read up on the Wiswconsin Motorist’s Handbook:

http://www.dot.state.wi.us/dmv/pdf/rules_road.pdf

On multi-lane roads, the left lane is for passing.

31

It’s also illegal to go above the speed limit to pass someone. If you have to exceed the limit to pass, you shouldn’t be passing. Legally speaking of course. So if someone is going 65 (the limit), you shouldn’t be passing them. According to the law, anway. We got a ticket for that once. Not that I agree, but since we are talking about the law …

32

lead follow or get the ---- out of the way!!!

Most maggots hanging out in the left lane seem to be out of touch with thier environment.

I believe some just believe that since they pay taxes too, they should get to try that part of the road.

If sombody is on your ass, then there is a good chance that your ------- up!

And NO I won’t tailgate (there are lots more things I want than just the faster lane!). When I detect brain damage, I will use the blink horn.

Don’t be the start of raod rage. Do what you can to make things FLOW as smoth as possible.

enough rarein’ for now. but i only looked at this thread because i could detect, well you know:(

33

tadc wrote:

I assume you mean “if I can pass you on the right without speeding up.”

34

NO.

If there is space in the lane to your right, enough space for me to pass you, then YOUR CAR SHOULD BE OCCUPYING THAT SPACE.

Otherwise your are being discourteous and obstructing traffic.

Speeding doesn’t enter into it. It’s possible to drive courteously and speed simultaneously. It’s also possible to drive discourteously and drive the speed limit simultaneously.

35

drachillix, my point is that when presented with someone in a hurry, granting that it is unlikely that it is for a good reason, I just don’t know! So I will give the benefit of the doubt, and get out of the way.

I’m glad you live in an area with ER’s fully staffed with emergency medicine certified docs, but that is not the way of it all over. Many of our small hospitals have ER and floor coverage by a GP or FP, who can suddenly get swamped pretty quick, and need back-up fast! Try juggling a status asthmaticus 3 year old with falling O[sub]2[/sub] sats, no IV access, then have a shocky GI bleeder get brought in, in the back of a mini-van. BTW, Flight For Life is grounded due to inclement weather. Add an acute chest pain, and you need help!!! Your lone LPN can only do so much. I want my back-up to arrive with all due haste, not delayed by some self-authorized enforcer.

In my 20 years in the biz of medicine working in places as varied as 4 million people urban areas with sophisticated shock-trauma units, down to rural townships with populations of 3000, and long, long distances between hospitals, I think I know of what I speak when I say “sometimes ya gotta hurry up”.

36

tadc has it right - you should never be passed on the right because if there’s space to your right, you should move into that space. If there’s any passing-on-the-right taking place, the blame belongs to the guy being passed. Absolute speed doesn’t affect this: there are time when the guy doing 10mph should be in the passing lane (when the other cars are doing 5mph); there are times when the guy doing 90 should be in the right lane (when it’s free of traffic).

A point about speed limits: You’re not supposed to exceed them, but most people do – there are plenty of highways where 85% of the vehicles are over the limit. So most of those who are saying “This guy has no right to pass me - he’s speeding” are really saying “My brand of lawbreaking is sensible and rational, but this guy who wants to go 3mph faster - he’s a dangerous nut .”

Society clearly views speeding as a different form of transgression than theft, assault, etc - witness how it’s dealt with by the legal system. So I don’t buy the moral equivalence argument: I applaud someone who’d interfere with a thief or rapist, but I see no virtue in the guy parked in the passing lane, exasperating his fellow drivers while deriving scant benefit.

This is an area where Europeans are way ahead of the U.S. Their lane discipline is simply far better than ours. You can drive for a week in Germany and rarely see a left lane hog or a pass on the right. The main reason is that they have a shortage of space and a strong need to make good use of the roads they have room for. We have grown up with a different idiom, but we’re ripe for the realization that always having one more lane than you really need is a luxury we can no longer afford.

Hayduke - without being heavy-handed can we ask politely that you consider broadening your view before you start driving? Talk to some truckers - they certainly aren’t perfect, but they typically understand how traffic works (and why sometimes it doesn’t). Wisconsin, like just about everywhere else, already has enough out-of-it drivers. Dare to be different - drive competently.

37

As far as I’m concerned, the most important thing is not the speed limit, but the flow of traffic. Anyone going below or above the flow of traffic is a danger. If traffic is going along at a constant 75 mph, then that is the safe speed at which to drive. If traffic is going 75, and someone wants to obey the posted limit and drive 65, while everyone zips past them, then they are a danger. However, if traffic is going 75, but some yahoo wants to go 85, and is attempting to do so by passing constantly and weaving in and out, then that yahoo is a danger to me and to every other driver on the road. Bottom line is if everyone keeps to the flow of traffic, then it’s much safer. Going either below or above the traffic flow is stupid and dangerous, and puts everyone at unnecessary risk. Obviously there are exceptions, like emergencies, but normally everyone should stick to the flow of traffic.

38

The trouble with Airbeck’s approach comes when you have vehicles that can’t match the speed that the traffic is flowing, like heavy trucks in hilly terrain. You either have to ban such trucks, equip them with enormous engines, ot come up with a scheme that tolerates a considerable speed differential.

“Keep right except to pass” is just such a scheme. It works better than any other. It does require drivers to be alert both to what’s ahead and what’s behind and overtaking, but with a little practice that’s really not too difficult.

Heck, Italian drivers (who in some ways seem to deserve their reputation as urban maniacs) manage it just fine. I’ve been on a moderately busy autostrada and seen underpowered 3-wheel trucks doing 70 kph passed by Ferraris at 200. It works surprisingly well.

39

Hayduke Lives!!,
I have a question and I’m not exactly sure where to post it without starting a new thread or hijacking an old one. So…I guess I’m hijacking this one.
I’ve read a number of your threads and I’m curious about something. Why is it that you’re so concerned about following the law of the land in every exacting detail and yet, at the same time, rebel against your parents? You call them the warden and the general, right? Why is it that 65 means 65 means 65 and woe to anyone who tries to go 66 on your watch, but when it’s not a statute but a command from a different authority figure, one who controls the house you live in, then it’s ok to disobey? Or at the very least it’s ok to complain about the laws they set down?

I’m not arguing with your viewpoint, I’m just trying to understand where you’re coming from here.

40

While we’re on the background questions, what was your ticket for? Was it a driving without a licence offense or something unrelated?