On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 16:50:41 -0000 (UTC), Doc O'Leary
wrote:

For your reference, records indicate that
John B. wrote:

But, how does one determine the circumstances under which one can
selectively disregard the law?

Analyze the *intent* of the law and determine if the infraction violates
that vs. simply the letter of the law. Cars roll through stop signs all
the time, and it generally isn’t a problem because the surrounding
traffic (if any) isn’t usually dangerous, and generally *expects* cars
to behave that way. I honestly have no idea why people in cars then
lose their minds when they see a cyclist behave the same way. Stop
lights and/or blowing through intersections is another matter but, as
others have noted, the main danger there is to the cyclist themselves.

If you steal someone's money can they get a gun and shoot you? I
certainly know people that believe that is justified.

Maybe it is, but maybe it isn’t. Courts exist because the law itself
isn’t a one-size-fits-all system. Death for petty theft seems like an
excessive punishment, but neither does it make sense to equally apply
rules for 2 ton trucks that can travel at 75+mph to human powered
vehicles that carry significantly less kinetic energy.

Or perhaps, it is all right to steal from a large business? Apparently
a rather popular pastime from the care most companies take to avoid
theft by employees.

Again, maybe? Large businesses are often wasteful and/or laws might
exist that prevent them from reasonably handling unused resources. Are
a few half-used office supplies vanishing really going to force a
company into bankruptcy?

No, nor does forgetting to take a company pencil out of your pocket
when you go home at night.

But, on the other hand
https://www.incorp.com/help-center/b...nd-fraud-part1
has it that "Estimates range from $20 billion to $50 billion, making
it one of the most costly and widespread challenges faced in today's
business world."
--
cheers,

John B.