Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>         We're explicitly discussing something *not* paid for by taxes.

  It still sounds to me like illegal extortion.

  People don't put themselves into more or less danger depending on who
paid money for protection or not. You cannot justify such selection of
whose life you are going to save or not, based solely on whether that
person has paid you money or not.

  Moreover, deliberately not helping in an emergency situation where you
are capable and able to help is irresponsible and at least here illegal.
If you, for example, see a car accident and just ignore it, if you get
caught you will be fined or even jailed. You are refusing to help even
though you perhaps could. I think the legal term is negligence or something?

  Moreover, not putting out a fire even though you have the means to, and
instead letting it go, is extremely dangerous not only for the house in
question, but all the surrounding houses as well. And not only to the
houses but also the people. Someone can *die* because the firemen refused
to put out the fire. I'd say that constitutes some degree of manslaughter.

  So we have a protection racket, extortion, negligence and manslaughter.
Still not enough to make this practice highly illegal?

  How far it has to go before it becomes illegal?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message