Author Topic: Morality of snitching (Read 2431 times)

glaston · « **Reply #15 on:** December 10, 2014, 03:52:57 AM »

Another false thread 77reg?

"Snit-ching"

Yiddish
snits 'fruit cut for drying,'

Esp after I caught you out with your 'UZI' remark the other week in another thread.

Alien/E.T. Go Home
Pointy finger >>>>

poche · « **Reply #16 on:** December 10, 2014, 04:07:52 AM »

Quote from: awkwardcustomer

ggreg said,
Quote

So if someone was stealing millions in an organised fraud from the US Treasury, you would not report them?

Correct, I would not report them.

Quote

Would you report a neighbour who drilled into a bank vault and stole several million dollars but did no violence to anyone? The bank are insured by the Treasury so the net effect is the same.

As above. I would not report them.

Quote

Why is non-violent theft of public monies a special case? Or why is violence or physical harm a special case. Both are mortally sinful acts. Both against the Ten Commandments.

This is a very good question. I expect I would be in the wrong for turning a blind eye to the activities you describe, both morally and legally, although the police and the courts would not be able to prove that I knew what was going on and chose to say nothing.

I have to admit that part of me would be saying - go for it - to the people you describe. That is probably a moral failing on my part, evidence of a secret admiration for anyone who manages to get one over on a thoroughly corrupt government and banking system. If they were stealing from individuals, however, I would not be nearly so ready to turn a blind eye.

You are right that non-violent theft of public monies is against the Ten Commandments. It's just that the government and banking system does it all the time.

What would you do, ggreg, in the cases you cite? Would you inform on those people?

My question is how would one know about tax fraud or drilling into a bank vault if that person is not in some way complicit in the crime itself?

ggreg · « **Reply #17 on:** December 10, 2014, 04:22:31 AM »

Simple Poche. People talk. They show off their wealth.

That is often what puts the cops or the IRS onto them.

There was once a man who forged banknotes. However he simply produced enough for his own needs, lived well, enjoyed fine wines, good food but was not outwardly ostentatious. Simply always had money because he could print as much cash as he liked.

He was never caught. He confessed in a memoir which was read after his death.

Very disciplined criminals are few and far between and they are rarely if ever caught.

ggreg · « **Reply #18 on:** December 10, 2014, 04:50:13 AM »

Quote from: awkwardcustomer

ggreg said,

What would you do, ggreg, in the cases you cite? Would you inform on those people?

I am trying to work that out. Hence the discussion about what the decision depends on.

A reasonable and fair, system of prospection, justice and rehabilitation for one thing, judged by some standard or other. I doubt I would inform on someone in North Korea, unless they were a serial killer and perhaps not even then, since the North Koreans tend to put their children, mother and father and extended family into the gulag too. I suppose one would have to balance how many people they were likely to serially kill.

Weighing up the gravity of the crime, plus the chance of a repeat offence versus the harm to third parties of someone going to jail such as children deprived of a good mother and father. On the other hand, if the mother is a drug addict and the prison is going to help her kick the habit then the children might be better off.

It is actually a pretty complex soup to navigate through.

I don't buy the idea that the system is so corrupt in the UK or the USA that we should not engage with it or owe it no loyalty. Sure there are bad parts, but there are lot of good parts too. I am not sure that on aggregate it was ever significantly better than it is today. That might simply be the grass is always greener flaw that humans fall into.

Perhaps it is not even meaningfully comparable.

At various times Europe had political corruption, assignations of royal heirs, kings with strings of lovers and concubines, serfdom, superstition, filth, disease, child slavery, trial by combat, ducking stools, high religious offices bought and sold and the mentally handicapped were basically tossed into asylums and left to rot.

We have abortion and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity today but some of these other ills are much lessened.

We erect memorials to men who valiantly died in World War I which was a morally pretty ambivalent war. The opposing countries, one could argue, must have been pretty sick and the system pretty screw up to send so many young men to their deaths? And for what?

The system we live in today give us a lot of freedoms relative to the past. We are free to marry who we wish, free to believe in what we wish, we are free to contracept or have a large family. We don't live in a North Korea. For our society to function there has to be a trust between government and governed. Far from perfect, I agree, but it will never be perfect.

My question is whether by staying silent about certain crimes you make society a little better or a little worse?

ggreg · « **Reply #19 on:** December 10, 2014, 06:19:22 AM »

Would anyone on this forum tell the authorities if they had reason to suspect that someone was an illegal immigrant working in the United States?

On the one hand they are not a violent threat to anyone or a threat to children. But they have broken the law and in some cases they are depriving Americans of a job.

Let's assume a family of Mexican's move next door, they are agnostic, the teenagers dress like hoodlums, the father smells of pot and disappears for months at a time, does not appear to have any legitimate source of income but rents the house next door for cash. The mother is on welfare, you hear from a neighbor, but drives a 2 year old SUV. They have loud parties, leave trash in the yard but other than this keep themselves to themselves. They are an annoyance but not a threat. Would you report them.

Or, you know of a business that employees illegal workers in your town. The business owner through hiring cheaper labour has expanded and now owns 12 dry cleaning and commercial laundry locations in your state and buy all accounts his customers are very happy with the service. This has, however, put Americans out of work.

If you don't report such a business then what is the point of complaining about the government not doing enough about illegal immigration? You after all are not assisting them when you can. On the other hand, the business is not doing anything violent or harming children. They are simply not obeying an arbitrary employment law.

claudel · « **Reply #20 on:** December 10, 2014, 07:11:24 AM »

Quote from: ggreg

… Very disciplined criminals are few and far between….

Just so! (See below.)

Quote from: ggreg

… There was once a man who forged banknotes. …

This strikes a chord. My father's paternal uncles were all crooks (all of them died before I was born in the mid-forties), and several of them were anything but petty. The most gentlemanly and least physically dangerous of them was a man whom his brothers and associates nicknamed Rube—because that's what he was ("Rube" is an old crooks' demimonde slang term; look it up if you're interested).

Uncle Rube was by all accounts a world-class forger. According to both my father and my grandmother (who incidentally liked Uncle Rube the best of all her in-laws: "he was a sweet man"), when he came out of the slammer for the third time, half a dozen New York banks offered him a job that involved nothing more than coming into the office a few hours a week to look at and give his expert opinion on questionable-looking bills that had been deposited. Their true aim, of course, was to buy him off and thus, hopefully, keep him from returning to his old "profession."

As my grandmother put it, Uncle Rube turned the banks down flat for no other reason than that the very idea of working for a living in the straight world was simply too much for him to handle. Within a year of becoming free again, finding himself short of cash, he returned to his backup occupation as a "dip" (a pickpocket). Unfortunately, though he was a great forger, he was a lousy dip. He was caught with his hand in someone else's pocket and arrested almost immediately, and as a three-time loser, he was automatically sentenced to life in prison, where he very soon after died.

Quote from: ggreg

Would anyone on this forum tell the authorities if they had reason to suspect that someone was an illegal immigrant working in the United States?

I would. Not that it would do much good, alas.

Meg · « **Reply #21 on:** December 10, 2014, 09:00:43 AM »

Quote from: ggreg

Let's assume you knew a married couple, non-Catholics who had four youngish children and stable or even a "happy" marriage.

But they were involved with a crime. What would you blow the whistle on them for, and how would you make the decision ? What factors would you consider?

Here are some examples of possible crimes of different natures so you can base your justification or demonstrate where and when and why one might tell on them versus when one would not.

1. They grow dope (Cannabis) in a state where it is illegal and sell it to adults and make a five figure profit (say $20k per year) which they spend on supporting their family. So they are not getting rich from this but they are subsidising their family. If you object to cannabis then let's assume they brew beer and sell it without a licence, though as far as you know do it responsibly and with regard to human health.

2. They run a legitimate business but fiddle their taxes and pay thousands less than they should. Not simply tax avoidance but tax evasion.

3. They are engaged in tax fraud where they are creating false IDs and invoices and claiming large amounts from the IRS in say welfare benefits. Not merely not paying taxes, but stealing by fraud money they have absolutely no claim over.

Finally, assume that they have been convicted and already spent 3 years in jail only to come out and access some squirrelled away stash of at least several hundred thousand dollars, which you are 99.9999% certain is from their crimes since they don't have other jobs. Do you grass them up such that they go back to jail for second stretch for money laundering or failure to disclose their assets after their previous conviction?

What's the moral basis for making a decision to grass someone up? Is there something like a just war theory to decide what warrants you snitching on them? Do you take into account the corruption of the government, justice system and the fact that any taxes paid are more likely to be spent on illegal wars than anything just and and good.

Someone on SD suggested that because money was "imaginary" and the financial system a gigantic pyramid scheme that no objective moral evil was being done by them stealing millions when the government prints hundreds of billions to bail out the banks. Do you agree with this line of reasoning?

Greg,

Have you talked to the family (or at least the father in the family) about your concerns?

ggreg · « **Reply #22 on:** December 10, 2014, 02:42:27 PM »

Yes, to the extent I reasonably could.

But the problem is that they come from an alien culture where corruption is endemic.

It's like trying to explain to an African truck driver why he should remain chaste.

poche · « **Reply #23 on:** December 10, 2014, 10:36:57 PM »

Quote from: ggreg

Simple Poche. People talk. They show off their wealth.

That is often what puts the cops or the IRS onto them.

There was once a man who forged banknotes. However he simply produced enough for his own needs, lived well, enjoyed fine wines, good food but was not outwardly ostentatious. Simply always had money because he could print as much cash as he liked.

He was never caught. He confessed in a memoir which was read after his death.

Very disciplined criminals are few and far between and they are rarely if ever caught.

You are right. Smart people don't talk. But then others wouldn't know about it.

poche · « **Reply #24 on:** December 10, 2014, 10:46:20 PM »

Let's assume a family of Mexican's move next door, they are agnostic, the teenagers dress like hoodlums, the father smells of pot and disappears for months at a time, does not appear to have any legitimate source of income but rents the house next door for cash. The mother is on welfare, you hear from a neighbor, but drives a 2 year old SUV. They have loud parties, leave trash in the yard but other than this keep themselves to themselves. They are an annoyance but not a threat. Would you report them.

I wouldn't have to complain. there are enough busybody neighbors who would do it for me. I remember about 15 years ago I was looking at houses. I was at this one house. There was an elderly couple across the street working in their yard. The wife came over to me and asked me what I was doing. I told her I was looking at houses and this one was for sale. She went on for around 45 minutes. When she was finished I left with the impression that I could sell drugs, I could run a brothel, I could do just about anything I wanted as long as I ekpt the grass cut and the yard looking nice it would be ok with her. As far as she was concerned the lowest pond scuм were those people who didn't keep up the appearance of their yards.

poche · « **Reply #25 on:** December 10, 2014, 10:56:15 PM »

Or, you know of a business that employees illegal workers in your town. The business owner through hiring cheaper labour has expanded and now owns 12 dry cleaning and commercial laundry locations in your state and buy all accounts his customers are very happy with the service. This has, however, put Americans out of work.

How would we know the immigration status of the people in those locations? We can conjecture but we could be wrong. The employer had to keep records. The government may come down and do a ssweep of an area looking for "illegal" immigrants, but then inevitably they wind up taking away legal immigrants also. I have seen it before. Also sometimes in their eagerness to "sweep the streets of these people they have also deported American citizens of ambiguous racial identity. It isn't fair.