Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Okay guys, this is a sorta debate thing, I'll give a scenario and you give your two cents, kay?

My first:
Two guys didn't like to wait in line at thier local arcade so they devised a plan. They decided to wait for night to break in and to play, while still paying, the arcade. They tripped an alarm while going in and the police found them at a game. They asked to see I.D. A guy reached o the top of the console to get thier wallets, but an authority shot the man with his shotgun, the shot man lost his leg and the other was paralyzed for life.

1st: Did the two guys really break the law even when they payed to play.
2nd: Was the officer right to shoot them so quickly?

_________________
WRSTLING IS NOT FAKE... Its scripted how would you feel having a 215 pound guy flipping in the air and landing on you?

1: Breaking and entering is a crime, regardless of what they did while inside. This is fact.

Question 1) Yes. They entered private property without permission and did so forcibly. That's breaking and entering.

2) Depends on the situation. If there was no light, the cop might not have known what he was reaching for. Sure, he SAID he was reaching for ID, but he might not have been. However, I'm not sure that's a good reason to shoot someone. I seriously doubt armed and dangerous thugs break into arcades.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

1. Yes, breaking and entering is wrong.

2. The security officer did ask for their ID... what did he think they were reaching for? If they'd reached without him asking them to do anything, he'd be in the right to shoot them.

And maybe they should have explained that their wallets were on the top of the arcade machine, but the guard asked for ID, so they went for ID.

I'd say the guard is at fault.

_________________

1. Yes. Breaking and entering is a crime.
2. No. For no reason should he have shot someone of that age unless he was sure that they were armed.

They are kids, right? I mean, if they're not, why are they at the arcade?

To rob the quarters, duh.

1. Breaking and entering is breaking the law.
2. Sree's point is pretty much what I was gonna say.

_________________

I say it's their own fault for breaking into the arcade in the first place, and they got what was coming to them. Criminals are fair game in Zeno's morality.

Zeno is a ruthless drunken old man. If you deliver his paper, and you you deliver it wrong, boy, you're gonna have a hatchet stuck in some places'll make ya regret settin' his Zeno'stown Paper by the lawn-chair...

_________________

I say yes, they broke and entered. That was by the book what they did, even though they intended to pay.

As for the shooting. I'm thinking that they were dumb for getting into that situation in the first place. As for the event itself, they could definitely have handled it better. They could have had the policeman get the id off the top as they got on the ground or ground equivalent (ie, in a position not to assault the officer) so that he would no that while there was funny buisness going on, it wasn't as funny as he thought. And they could keep use of their legs. Police officers are trained to take shots, after all. It just depends on how trigger itchy this guy was.

My question is this: where is the officer now?

_________________

Dunno... Anyone got any else debates PM them to me...

Second... (New debate)

My school has recently set an interesting school dress code. They have banned any High School, Jr High School, Pro, etc. sports uniforms or insignias in the school. This includes any shirts advertising:
High Schools, Jr Highs, Football Teams, Skateboard Brands, Baseball Teams, Country Sports teams (Like Brazil World Cup Shirts), etc.
They've enforced this due to people fighting over teams (Which hasn't happened once the two years I've been here.) and they're making school players to wear chrch clothes on days of games instead of jerseys.

1. Is this fair
2. Is making the 13-14 year old kids wear church clothes during the week when most of them go to church (Utah Mormonism rules my school) on Sunday too?

_________________
WRSTLING IS NOT FAKE... Its scripted how would you feel having a 215 pound guy flipping in the air and landing on you?

1. No. I mean, it's just sports teams. I might get mad if there was endless Cubs bashing, but I wouldn't start a fight. Still, other people are stupid. It's 10% of the population that makes it so that none of us can have nice things. So why should everyone suffer for the faults of the few?

2. My school has the same thing, but only for football players. But I honestly have no opinion on this.

_________________

1. Your school shows large signs of incompetance

2. Nope, isn't fair.

3. Nope, if you aren't religous, you shouldn't have to wear church clothes. In fact you shouldn't wear church clothes to school anyways.

_________________

All schools show large signs of incompetence, Noid, especially if they're public schools.

Anyway, I understand not allowing sports-related clothing if it starts fights and crap. (Why idiots start fights over such trivial things will always be beyond me. It's not as if liking a different team is a personal attack.) But not allowing the insignia and uniforms of the school's own team is just bizarre. Who on Earth would pick a fight with someone for being on their own school's team? (Well, somebody out there would, but it's not likely to be a problem of epic proportions.)

As a rule, I hate all school uniform policies, though. I had to put up with them for a couple of years at my high school. You had to wear a shirt designed by the school, which only came in white and red -- no other shirts were allowed even if they were the same color -- and you could only wear slacks that were tan, grey (I think), or black. No other colors allowed. In retrospect, I think I should have dared to show up in navy slacks and then point out that the only fights I was getting into were with the administration. Then again, logic must be lost on anybody who would institute such a policy in the first place...



I don't see why. They're not that tied to religion, are they?

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

I'm not going to get into the "fair" issue with dress codes. Mainly because the world isn't fair. The sooner people are taught this (and the dumber and more worthless the issue that teaches it to them) the better off they are.

As for "church clothes", I think the issue is not about religion. When you say "church clothes", people mean "something nice"; not shorts with your butt hanging out, no pants with a million holes or that hang down below your kness, no spaghetti strap tops. Basically "look presentable". Do I like the idea? Honestly, I don't care. I don't go to school anymore. Also, I have to wear stuff like that every day, too, so I don't really like listening to people whine about it.

As for the sports jerseys, I think that's a sad case of a bonehead few ruining it for everyone. It happens in the real world, too. Unfortunately, there are laws against us just shooting the boneheads. Well, there are until I get elected, anyway.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

My take on school uniforms:

Most businesses have dress codes of some kind. Whether it be the certain colored pants and a logo shirt as required by most retail businesses, the suit and ties required by most office jobs, or actual uniforms worn by police, firemen, and military personnel. That being the case, I really see no reason why schools shouldn't have similar expectations from students.

Now, how strict do they need to be? Well, that might actually depend on the school in question. A school in a neighborhood dominated by gangs will likely want to forbid the use of gang colors and such. A school in a warm region might want to forgo ties in favor of short sleeved or pullover shirts, etc. Still, for the most part, I am in favor of uniforms or at the very least dress code requirements. Why? Because I don't want to see teenage girls going to school looking like Britney Slutspears or Parislut Hilton. Or guys going to school with their pants pulled down to their freaking knees.

School is there to help prepare you for the real world, kids. The sooner you learn to accept and live within real world norms, the better off you'll be.

_________________

1. No. It's unfair. If it was a private school it would be, but a public institution has no right to tell you how to dress on public property.
2. I assume you mean nice clothes. I think my first answer answers that too. They should never make you wear or not wear things.


I have the utmost respect for you and your opinions, but I have to disagree:
A) In the real world you usually work for a "PRIVATE INSTITUTION". If the school in question is a public school I have a beef with it. I actually have a beef with any government run organization that dictates how people live their lives.
B..) I would never dress like that, but I think it's bad that the government would tell people how to dress, no matter what way or even at all, on public property. You heard me right, I don't think it's the government's business to enforce morality no matter how accepted it is.
C) What if people don't like societal norms or don't want to follow them? The law shouldn't enforce "norms" on people, no matter what their age.

_________________

Well, those people will have a hard time finding a job, career, or whatever.
I know there are eccentric people out there with good jobs and whatnot, but, in general, "normal" = good.

I'm not sayin' it's right. It's just how the world works. I think Didymus would agree.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

The world works wrong.

I'M GONNA CHANGE THE WORLD!!!

_________________

No argument there, bub.

The mere fact that Paris Hilton is famous more than proves your point.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Actually, the fact that it is PUBLIC property gives them the right. The key word there being "Public", which means that THEY own it, NOT YOU.


Once again, since it is PUBLIC property, they own it, not you. Therefore they do have the right to tell you how to dress when you're on their property. In much the same way that I have the right to tell you to dress nice for dinner at my house if I'm throwing a dinner party, or at my place of business if you work for me.


That's what all governments do. Get used to it. Either that, or go live in a cave or jungle somewhere.


I disagree. They absolutely should. If they didn't, the entire world would be complete chaos. Just think: roads with no traffic lights or signs. There would be wrecks and deaths every few seconds. Or, for that matter, if there were no laws against theft or murder.

But, as stated above, since school property belongs to the school, then the school has every right to dictate within reason student behavior. School uniforms are not outside the boundaries of reason.

But there is a very simple answer: if anyone doesn't like a particular nation's laws, they can either work within the system to change them, or they can go someplace else. Like Alec Baldwin. When he disagreed with Bush' election, he moved to Canada.

What? He didn't? Well, he should have.

Wes, I highly suggest you study up on the concept of social contract. In a nutshell, absolute freedom cannot exist where there are two or more human beings. As such, people in fact need society to impose certain regulations on them to keep them from destroying each other.

_________________

How does not having school uniform destroy someone? I always thought traffic rules and such were there for safety and not just to satisfy wholly subjective morals.

Also, I always thought in a country that is "For the people, of the people, and by the people.". That publicly owned buildings would be owned by the citizens. I guess we do live in a true totalitarian state...

Like I said, I have no problem with private schools and citizens imposing things akin to this on their property, but when a government owned institution does this is when I have a beef.

_________________

Actually, I'm one of those citizens who pays the taxes to buy and maintain those properties. How much of your tax money goes into that? Or do you even pay taxes yet? Seems to me that you're actually benefiting from a service that I help to pay for.

And if you want to see a real totalitarian state, move to China.

_________________

Aren't public schools paid for by taxes? Taxes that come from US, the PUBLIC? Then I say no, its not THEIR right.

_________________

Some people do. :D

_________________

Dewy, policies are usually set by school boards. School boards are usually elected by citizens or appointed by other elected officials. In short, the school board is put into place by taxpaying citizens, who do in fact have the right to communicate with that school board to help determine policy. This is what we call a representational form of government. In short, the citizens as a whole do have the right to determine what is and is not acceptable behavior, dress, etc., based on consensus opinion.

However, this does not give any particular individual the right to simply defy policies that are instituted. Particularly when those involved are minors who are not yet responsible for maintaining those elected or appointed positions on the school board, and do not pay the bulk of the taxes that support them.

_________________

I was being sarcastic on the totalitarian part... Can anybody take a joke anymore!?!

I'm a minor, so I don't really pay taxes yet. I will someday, unless I shoot myself in the head out of stress from what I view as a broken, intolerant, society. Just so you know, I'm still a capitalist so I do think of it as right for me to get a job.

Remember this is all my opinion, which I hold as fact and you don't. So there!

_________________

Seconded.

I agree with Didy on the fact that we have to draw the line and enforce norms on people SOMEWHERE, though. The uniforms exist for a reason.

_________________

Dear People,
Why? What if they don't have the same values that says for them to cover themselves? That's enforcement of morality. Why don't you just go and enforce every religious moral under the sun? Or even better: Make a mandatory state religion.

The fact of the matter is: The government doesn't own me, and has no right to tell people how to dress or live their lives.

Signed,
Wes the Pure Awesome

_________________

Easy with the slippery slope there, Wes.

Telling little girls to not dress like prostitutes is as close as enforcing religion as I am to being taller than Shaq.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

No, the government doesn't own you, or anyone else for that matter. But it does have the right to tell people how to conduct themselves in public. Why? Because it is public. When people interact with other people there must be laws in place to govern how they conduct themselves. Otherwise there would be complete chaos.

One mistake you're making, Wes, is the failure to distinguish the difference between PUBLIC behavior and PRIVATE behavior. Last year, you got snapped back because you were proposing that the government should regulate how people conduct their private lives, and that is most definitely not the case. However, when it comes to public behavior, the government does in fact have the right to dictate people's conduct because that is what governments are for: to regulate public interaction to insure the security, safety, dignity, and - as much as possible - freedom of every individual.

Rule of thumb: what you do in private is your own business, providing you are not violating someone else's person or property in the process. But the moment you step out into public, your behavior or conduct becomes everybody's business, and is therefore subject to common morality and, yes, government regulation.

_________________