I certainly get all that, and it makes a ton of sense when looked at in a certain light. I'm just pointing out that it can be a slippery slope. And I do think that laws against theft are more than just bureaucracy. And you can hear this same argument, same line of thinking applied in other cases of vigilante justice that are not quite as benign. I'm all for neighbors helping neighbors, but then, when it comes to actually working outside the legal system, who determines what's copacetic and what ain't? It doesn't have to be cold, slavish adherence to "bureaucracy" vs. altruistic, good samaritan neighbor. As when Dane ends his saga with "I hope we can all find more warmth in our hearts" it skews things a bit, implying that those who would do anything else are big old uptight play by the rules authoritarian meanies with no heart. I think it was possible to be concerned and neighborly about this situation without someone taking matters literally into their own hands. But really, I must go. I'm needed elsewhere to defend fenders and rim brakes from the infidels. And to look for a job.
On Tuesday, February 6, 2018 at 12:28:56 PM UTC-5, Deacon Patrick wrote: > > Something I’ve not seen in this discussion yet, and the reason I waited to > post to this thread until an outcome was known, is that the local knowledge > (including the “feel” of something just being off) can allow one to take > action as a close neighbor that in a different block would be foolish. It > is entirely possible the actions of a good neighbor, because they know the > info on the ground, can appear to be a vigilante, when in fact they are > being neighborly. The proof here is 1) the bike was stolen; 2) lots of > effort when itno reuniting the bike with the owner, at the expense of > neighbor; 3) bike returned to the neighbor. Had the bike not been stolen, > it would have still likely ended up with its owner — because of the care of > the neighbor. I have benifited greatly from the care of neighbors and hope > I’ve helped a few myself. This is the gift and wonder of subsidiarity in > action — and why people helping people as directly as possible trumps (can > I say that anymore without being political?) bureaucratic solutions. > > With abandon, > Patrick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
