Ignoring the Law

[Griff]

The mayors around the country who are marrying gay couples are in most cases ignoring laws which are on the books and being praised for it. Is a willingness to break laws they dislike, the real differance between the left and right? Or as a society are we all growing contemptuous of the layers of law being foisted upon us? Is it okay to break the law because you think its wrong?

I'm not much of a lawbreaker but there are many really absurd laws on the books that the proponents of seem to expect us to follow. From my group of friends, the lefties while supporting much more new legislation, are the same folks who ignore laws already on the books. Don't get me wrong, I'm an anarchist at heart but I'm wondering if the consensus is that rule of law is over so I can start building a new way of life free from your mandates.

[Happy Monkey]

It is indeed OK to break the law if you disagree with it, but you must expect to suffer the consequences. Civil disobedience doesn't work fast enough to protect the first group from prison, and if the first group gives up rather than go to prison, then the civil disobedience has a lesser chance of working at all. The goal of civil disobedience isn't anarchy, it is to change the law.

[Undertoad]

They did a great job of ignoring the law in post-Saddam Iraq and it was helpful to this ex-Libbie to see what an armed society does in the face of complete lack of rule of law. I don't think I would want to live in such a situation and don't think it would feel very free. Sure looks like it was helpful to have Democracy prodded at them and that it would never have evolved naturally into a desireable society.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Never's a long time, UT. Desirable is pretty subjective, too. What they have been living with for 2 thousand years is not desirable to us, but they may be comfortable with it. At least the adult males.

It is indeed OK to break the law if you disagree with it, but you must expect to suffer the consequences.

Or dress up like Indians, then throw the tea in the harbor.

[elSicomoro]

What seems to happen in cases like this is that someone put themselves out there. They know the risks, but persist in spite of them. During the Civil Rights Movement, it was Rosa Parks. During the current situation, it's Gavin Newsom.

And in these kinds of situations, the stars just seem to align at the right time. Newsom has only been in office a few months, the issue has been simmering for a few years now, the MA Supreme Court ruling came out, San Francisco is a gay-friendly city and it's both a city and county (like Philadelphia).

Imagine what would happen if no one ever stuck their neck out...where we would be not only as a country but as a society?

[Griff]

Everyone thinks about the Rosa Parks/ Paul Revere set, but what about when you "know" you are right but in retrospect you're really evil, say a hood wearing whitey in 1876 Mississippi, making sure reconstruction fails? A more contemporary and less clear cut one would be property owners ignoring stupid or just inconvenient enviromental laws. I just wanted to make sure that everyone agrees that law and government are irrelevent, since we're going to pick and choose the rules we follow. I also want to bait the left a little on their constant rule making for others when they fully support ignoring any law they dislike.

[elSicomoro]

Gavin Newsom and Rosa Parks trying to win rights for certain people did not interfere with the lives and rights of others, IMO. Blacks being allowed to sit in the front of the bus and gays getting married aren't really hurting anybody. Joe Bob in the Klan outfit was trying to prevent Willie the former slave from being on the same footing as himself. You ignoring an environmental law could cause damage to the soil beyond your property line and pollute the air that thousands of others breathe.

Nice try, Griff. I'm going to give you a B+ for effort.

[Griff]

You're really not gonna let me start a shit-storm here, are you.

[elSicomoro]

I think I deserve props for serving that up libertarian-style.

[elSicomoro]

(EDIT: Was testing whether I could delete a post on the main board. Apparently, I cannot.)

[Griff]

Originally posted by sycamore
You ignoring an environmental law could cause damage to the soil beyond your property line and pollute the air that thousands of others breathe.

See you missed a spot here. My favorite example would be the state mandated septic systems which are not as effective as composting toilets and are so expensive that folks avoid improving their existing systems when they are failing. Those are two places where the enviromental laws make the enviroment worse.

[elSicomoro]

Let me do some research on this, bud, before I get back to you. Unfortunately, I'm not overly familiar with either setup.

[elSicomoro]

Okay...based on my research, it would seem that composting toilets make more sense. Although, they don't seem to address the issue of greywater very well. Not to mention, I don't know what township you're in, so I don't know what kind of regulations they have regarding waste disposal.

(Griff, your issue seems to be more with your township than the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth seems to be cool with composting toilets. Why can't you install one?)

[Griff]

It looks like they updated the acceptable systems two years ago. We still have the problem in greywater disposal. You have to have a septic tank and a minimum mound 60% the size of a full system for your lot. There is some variation based on whether your township is COG but you can't duck this expense if you're going with composting toilets.

8. Greywater Systems
The treatment of greywater requires the same methods of sewage disposal used in soil-based onlot
disposal systems. Occasionally, the applicant may wish to separate “blackwater” (domestic human
waste) from “greywater” (washwater etc.) in order to reduce the amount of absorption area needed.
The use of “blackwater” treatment systems such as composting, chemical, recycling and incinerating
toilets or privies (proposed in conjunction with water under pressure), must meet the following
conditions for the treatment of greywater:
A. An onlot system meeting Chapter 73 standards or other approved method of sewage disposal
must be installed to treat greywater flow from the structure. Septic tank installations must
consist of either a two-compartment rectangular tank or two rectangular tanks in series and
must be in conformance with Chapter 73, Section 73.31. Aerobic tanks used must be in
compliance with Chapter 73, Section 73.32.
B. Only the absorption area may be reduced by up to 40 percent as a compensation for the use of a
non-flush toilet alternative. No reduction of septic tank sizing is allowed.
C. If planning is required, general soil and site suitability must be conducted in accordance with
Chapter 71, Section 71.62.
D. When a blackwater treatment system is proposed for use in conjunction with a greywater
system in a subdivision, the provisions of Chapter 71, Section 71.63(f)(1) apply, i.e. the site
and soil suitability testing must be sufficient to document the availability of an area for a full
sized system.
E. An SEO that has successfully completed the appropriate DEP-sponsored continuing education
course that included this specific technology may independently review the design and issue
the permit for systems approved under this listing.

[Griff]

Clivus Multrum is the outfit to deal with for composting toilets. They also have greywater systems which actually work, unlike sand mounds which aren't really designed to handle greywater without humanure.