1

Topic: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Idea in the following. Whether you admissible consider scale introduction in Russia compensating penalties, i.e. such, which purpose payment of elimination of harm for a society. We admit, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty. http://rsdn.org/poll/6518 the author: Nik Date: 11.03 20:34 Question: whether you admissible Consider scale introduction in Russia compensating penalties, i.e. such, which purpose payment of elimination of harm for a society. We admit, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty.

2

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: and for air still the tax did not enter? A wide field for activity

3

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, wl., you wrote: wl.> and for air still the tax did not enter? A wide field for activity And write that if you where will spoil - I should get money and compensate it, or live in a pigsty. There is such point.

4

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Idea in the following. Whether you admissible consider scale introduction in Russia compensating penalties, i.e. such, which purpose payment of elimination of harm for a society. N> it is admissible, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty. N> http://rsdn.org/poll/6518 the author: Nik Date: 11.03 20:34 Question: whether you admissible Consider scale introduction in Russia compensating penalties, i.e. such, which purpose payment of elimination of harm for a society. We admit, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty. The tax! = the penalty. To levy the tax about dogs and this money to start up on arrangement of platforms in region is a norm. To levy the tax because penalties to collect laziness it it is wrong. I already pay for the content of territory and cleaning of garbage and to me without a difference whence this garbage undertakes and that it from itself(himself) represents. The state can launch propagation what to remove for pupils abruptly, to teach it to do to start police cynologists. It is possible certainly horse to make, give penalties a command of police and it quickly intimidates the people receipts on payment that start to remove . Only it is all somehow incorrectly. The tax further away from a civilization throws off us. People will consider that for all already  and it is possible not to be exhausted at all.

5

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, karbofos42, you wrote: K> the Tax! = the penalty. To levy the tax about dogs and this money to start up on arrangement of platforms in region is a norm. To levy the tax because penalties to collect laziness it it is wrong. At me in a post generally the tax is not present a word. K> It is possible certainly horse to make, give penalties a command of police and it quickly intimidates the people receipts on payment that start to remove . Only it is all somehow incorrectly. Aha, on European somehow, . Did not stick to the Russian in purity and convenience to live - such silly habit prevents to sit then in an entrenchment.

6

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> It is admissible, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty.  you so much penalties  to pay cleaning. In current realities. And here if you give to the population the right that if it catches "" receives half of penalty the problem by itself dares.

7

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Real 3L0, you wrote: N>> It is admissible, dog breeders do not remove for dogs, but to walk among excrements obviously as though not so pleasantly. It is necessary  someone who will urgently remove them that 90 % of the population did not suffer, and payment of these cleaners to produce from penalties from those whom caught behind brothel cultivation. I.e. we monthly collect statistics and: (payment of cleaners + payment of cost of catching) / number caught == to the size of the penalty. R3> Her you so much penalties  to pay cleaning. In current realities. R3> and here if you will give to the population the right that if it catches "" receives half of penalty the problem by itself dares. I about means did not speak, is faster about a validity. The proportion between aspiring to freedom and to the order is interesting.

8

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

As a whole I would support idea, but there is opened a question on how to increase number of the caught infringers, not to reach marasmus of type one infringer pays operation of all yard keepers of the country. Though as a whole system self-regulating: the catch infringers less, the there will be a penalty more and that it will be more terrible"it, it is pleasant to me.

9

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb> As a whole I would support idea, but there is opened a question on how to increase number of the caught infringers, not to reach marasmus of type one infringer pays operation of all yard keepers of the country. Speech not about implementation details. Such penalties always on top restrict, naturally. vsb> though as a whole system self-regulating: the catch infringers less, the there will be a penalty more and that it will be more terrible"it, it is pleasant to me. Well it and works.

10

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, karbofos42, you wrote: K>> the Tax! = the penalty. To levy the tax about dogs and this money to start up on arrangement of platforms in region is a norm. To levy the tax because penalties to collect laziness it it is wrong. N> at me in a post generally the tax is not present a word. It is guilty, something I blunted with the tax. K>> it is possible certainly horse to make, give penalties a command of police and it quickly intimidates the people receipts on payment that start to remove . Only it is all somehow incorrectly. N> aha, on European somehow, . Did not stick to the Russian in purity and convenience to live - such silly habit prevents to sit then in an entrenchment. I consider that the state should be put in formation and raise a standard of living of people. I believe that the formed and brought up people do not want to soil. At first we create conditions, voluntary the majority of people comes over to the light side (where remove  for pupils), and then already irresponsible residuals is overtaken by the fixed horse penalties.

11

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, karbofos42, you wrote: N>> Aha, on European somehow, . Did not stick to the Russian in purity and convenience to live - such silly habit prevents to sit then in an entrenchment. K> I consider that the state should be put in formation and raise a standard of living of people. I.e. you suggest to take money (even more money) from me and to put them in formation ? I categorically against - am better to take from them, from those who cannot without it is at once or upon. And if cannot pay - let live with  the led out ghettoes, on them I am ready to be thrown off. K> I believe that the formed and brought up people do not want to soil. But you suggest them to pay for those who wants? Measures should work in a complex, never will be such that all behave correctly, consider that one third of society will be always destructive. K> At first we create conditions, voluntary the majority of people comes over to the light side (where remove  for pupils), and then already irresponsible residuals is overtaken by the fixed horse penalties. And what hinders to combine? Practice shows that passage suddenly appears almost quick - clever  at once, stupid - it is not a pity.

12

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

You cleaning of the dog excrements want to give it  on-analogy with a parking in Moscow? Penalties and so already is... Only yard keepers of a shit do not remove...

13

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Bjorn Skalpe, you wrote: BS> Penalties and so already is... Only yard keepers of a shit do not remove... Because yard keepers in one side, penalties - in another. And I system of penalties generally would regulate the most part of behavior of a society - instead of fits in prisons and unsuccessful belief on hundred times it is not necessary what badly to arrive.

14

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> I about means did not speak, is faster about a validity. The proportion between aspiring to freedom and to the order is interesting. Well, against your idea can be only cattle (and 99 our %  - cattle). In what a question? In level  our cattle?

15

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

N> And I system of penalties generally would regulate the most part of behavior of a society - instead of fits in prisons and unsuccessful belief on hundred times it is not necessary what badly to arrive the Problem that penalties for excrements (2500 roubles), for smoking and for drinking on children's playgrounds (2500 roubles) - are, and the police and those who should fix is not present...

16

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Hello, karbofos42, you wrote: N>>> Aha, on European somehow, . Did not stick to the Russian in purity and convenience to live - such silly habit prevents to sit then in an entrenchment. K>> I consider that the state should be put in formation and raise a standard of living of people. N> I.e. you suggest to take money (even more money) from me and to put them in formation ? I categorically against - am better to take from them, from those who cannot without it is at once or upon. And if cannot pay - let live with  the led out ghettoes, on them I am ready to be thrown off. Well, our elite now and lives. Were fenced off by fences, sit on the millions, and children to live send for a hillock. To be enclosed in formation is not only less dog , but also it is less  different in streets, the medicine is better, that is better and it. The ghetto on the contrary only aggravates a situation. K>> I Believe that the formed and brought up people do not want to soil. N> but you suggest them to pay for those who wants? Measures should work in a complex, never will be such that all behave correctly, consider that one third of society will be always destructive. The state all is constructed on injustice. Healthy workaholics pay as a result for sick idle invalids. In penalties I do not see anything complex. Start to fine in streets and in parks - will spoil at entrances since there suddenly police does not appear. K>> at first we create conditions, voluntary the majority of people comes over to the light side (where remove  for pupils), and then already irresponsible residuals is overtaken by the fixed horse penalties. N> and what hinders to combine? Practice shows that passage suddenly appears almost quick - clever  at once, stupid - it is not a pity. I for the smooth, considered complex approach. Wanted, that in cities became purer: adjusted to this business the legislation and to realize. Threw a stub, the dog or the child spoiled dropped ice-cream - pay the penalty. All these single initiatives look as any collection of a tribute from those who did not hear about changes. It turns out as a result that the dog spoiled on a lawn which motorists transformed in , from a dog lover the horse penalty, and to automobile owners of anything. If the purpose - to raise money in treasury it is necessary sharply to start to fine for  pupils. If the purpose - to make well it is necessary to fine all for all offenses, and differently it is many it will be perceived as "did not carry". Fined not because it is guilty, that is why that did not carry and got.

17

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Bjorn Skalpe, you wrote: N>> And I system of penalties generally would regulate the most part of behavior of a society - instead of fits in prisons and unsuccessful belief on hundred times it is not necessary what badly to arrive BS> the Problem that penalties for excrements (2500 roubles), for smoking and for drinking on children's playgrounds (2500 roubles) - are, and the police and those who should fix is not present... Aha, but this problem is solved, but here already on voting it is visible that to solve its half of programmers (a part of the population with the high income and formation) do not want. I.e. it is considered normal, - that if caught, is guilty, and if is not present - that it is possible to spoil.

18

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

At first create conditions for  pets! For example at us on 100 thousand city only one platform for ! Here will be in each microdistrict on a platform then will not be  where not ! And that at once to forbid and not ! It is necessary to observe interests of all sides. You were got by dog lovers? What to sense to arrange here votings? Go to local administration, to local deputies, complain, achieve that they passed the appropriate local law. It is regulated by local laws of each subject of local government, it is not necessary to go to the State Duma Then also dog lovers begin to move and go to kick administration on a subject of the device of platforms, and the problem will be solved! Without improbable penalties and pressure in a society. Only in administration all and without you know it, and understand that in what results, that is why we have that that we have.

19

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Alfarn, you wrote: A> At first create conditions for  pets! For example at us on 100 thousand city only one platform for ! What for you got a dog if you have no place to walk it?

20

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Alfarn, you wrote: A> At first create conditions for  pets! Take and create. This business of your region. And to cleaning of excrements for dogs and as to suppression of remaining bestial behavior it is relations has no. P.S. Amuses as the standard claim that  that the people did not litter in the street - it is necessary  to put at every turn, and differently type excuse. And then time, somebody enters the penalty in 10000 for the thrown stub and becomes pure, as in a museum, without everyones  at every turn.

21

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

K> What for you got a dog if you have no place to walk it? Because I have the right.

22

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Nik, you wrote: N> Aha, but this problem is solved, but here already on voting it is visible that to solve its half of programmers (a part of the population with the high income and formation) do not want. I.e. it is considered normal, - that if caught, is guilty, and if is not present - that it is possible to spoil. You understand, I for example do not spoil. I do not have dog, I do not litter in the street, always I throw out in urns. And even if in Pjaterochke I will see that any goods roll on a floor - I will lift and I will suppose on a shelf. Simply because I . But here to fine the person for that it is is specific it did not make, I consider  and monstrous. From it carries any mutual responsibility, camp  and still the horse-radish knows than worse. It clears in people all the worst - total mutual hatred, suspiciousness, pseudo-informing.

23

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

N> P.S. N> Amuses as the standard claim that  that the people did not litter in the street - it is necessary  to put at every turn, and differently type excuse. N> and then time, somebody enters the penalty in 10000 for the thrown stub and becomes pure, as in a museum, without everyones  at every turn. But  that in the street is, to me personally  to find  does not make.

24

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, anonymouse2, you wrote: A> But here to fine the person for that it is is specific it did not make, I consider  and monstrous. Aha, it is rigid as in Europe. A> from it carries any mutual responsibility, camp  and still the horse-radish knows than worse. It clears in people all the worst - total mutual hatred, suspiciousness, pseudo-informing. Precisely, but I all the same like to live in pure civilized country where I do not need to suffer because of different  which words do not reach more. I consider absurd idea that good people should is system to suffer because of the bad. If you spoiled - that receive help that you  and pay for . And if you do not spoil - you it in any way does not affect that, only expenditure it is less and to live better.

25

Re: Whether penalties <voting> are admissible

Hello, Alfarn, you wrote: N>> P.S. N>> Amuses as the standard claim that  that the people did not litter in the street - it is necessary  to put at every turn, and differently type excuse. N>> and then time, somebody enters the penalty in 10000 for the thrown stub and becomes pure, as in a museum, without everyones  at every turn. A> but  that in the street is, to me personally  to find  does not make. And I here saw places where  was not present, but also the garbage is not present. And at us  is, and the earth on half from  consists.