<p>Of course it generally does not progress this far, but occasionally it does. Is it so bad to try to prevent one of these rare accidents from occuring? According to you, selt belts are useless since an argument for selt belt would be dark lighting -> rainy day -> someone makes a turn and doesn’t see the car coming -> crash car -> selt belt prevents death. Generally, it does not progress this far right? So if I argue that you should buckle up, my argument would be ridiculous hmm?</p>
<p>I pointed out your spelling mistake as a sidenote to show that your logic is as weak as your spelling. But thank you for the sentiments; I’m sure I will have a wonderful time in college. I’ll be staying away from people like you.</p>
<p>So you’re saying that I shouldn’t drink because I’ll die of alcohol poisoning. I’m not going to live my life in fear of some rarity that could happen (I mean this in general, not with regard to drinking). When I drink I stop myself when I feel I need to. Sometimes other people will stop me and I’ll listen to them. Yes, something could happen to me, I know that. I generally am pretty responsible, however, and try not to exceed my limits. What happened to Matt is absolutely tragic, and should be a wake up call to people, but I’m not going to stop drinking entirely. I might be more hesitant to let my friends go to sleep after a night out, however. </p>
<p>No, seat belts and alcohol are different. They don’t serve the same purpose and people engage in them for different reasons. You can compare alcohol and other mind altering substances, but I don’t really think seat belt and alcohol are comparable. I don’t really use seat belt to have a good time. Putting my seat belt on is a harmless action that could prevent death, big deal. Obstaining from drinking is not like wearing a seat belt. </p>
<p>You’ll be staying away from a majority of the campus, have fun.</p>
<p>Your logic is as weak as your use of my one spelling error that you used to generalize my entire spelling capability.</p>
<p>We should probably stop arguing, though, since we will never agree.</p>
<p>If you read my original example, you will see that I am saying that someone who is underage and therefore possesses alcohol illegally should not be in posession of alcohol, because there is a CHANCE that he will incur an alcohol-related incident (which includes but is not limited to alcohol poisoning), and that this chance is greatly heightened by the fact that this person is underage, and from past experiences underage drinkers are less responsible and thus an alcohol-related incident is more likely.</p>
<p>I’m saying that in the case that an underaged drinker is in posession of alcohol, snitching is responsible because it prevents a possible harmful incident from occuring.</p>
<p>Buckling your selt belt and prohibiting underaged drinking are both laws, if I remember correctly, and both serve the main purpose of providing a safer environment for the surrounding parties.</p>
<p>But thank you for twisting my words and making crude generalizations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is the smartest thing I’ve heard you say all day. I need to get off CC.</p>
<p>'…no one likes a snitch, honestly. You will get nowhere in life if people can’t trust you."</p>
<p>There is a grand irony in this statement…‘honestly’. Who do you want to trust you - the cheaters? Why do cheaters cheat if not because they think it will get them what they want? Are you going to continue working in whatever capacity side by side with this person without wondering if they are going to stick a knife (figurately) in your back next. Will you only report cheating if it affects you directly? How will you know when it might affect you? Senario: You work for a construction company who won the contract on a low bid. The building is built with substandard materials so the company can still make money. You were aware of the materials because you worked on the site and saw it. You said nothing because you need your job. The building falls. A person you love is killed. Was someone else’s cheating your business? Another - a man and a woman, married to each other, are your close friends. One of them has been cheating on their spouse and using you as an alibi for the time that person was with their lover. Does this position make you a better friend to either or no friend OF either? Is it any of your business? Does it involve you?
If you are aware of cheating and don’t attempt to stop it you are condoning it. Ethics matter. The Golden Rule matters. Leave the world a better place than when you entered. </p>
<p>i always thought snitch/rats/whistlers were so called when they ratted for personal benefit, w/ this definition in mind, i have to say that rats are the least honest and most despicable</p>
<p>otherwise, if they rat for their own morals, it causes resentment but i really dont feel their less of a person</p>
<p>if they report sth b/c they feel its the best way to serve the person, then it isnt ratting and should be taken as good intentions</p>
<p>maybe not currently, but historically, this is the case. It was thought that it was ok to cheat because of the battlefield mentality… win, even if it means not fighting fairly. Doing whatever you need to in order to accomplish the objective.</p>
<p>please do not jump to inaccurate conclusions. I do not believe my statement was prejudiced either.</p>
<p>wow about the whole having alcohol means you will hurt yourself by drinking it thing. . . that’s along the same logic lines as someone should take away your car because you could get in an accident, or taking away kitchen knives because you could cut yourself. . . a 19 or 20 year old is no more likely to drink dangerously than a 21 year old.</p>
<p>Here are three arguments showing why it is good to turn in cheaters.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>If you lost people’s trust because of it, you’re going to lose the trust of those people who either cheat or (actively or passively) support cheating. These people’s trust should be less important to you because they themselves are not as trustworthy. People whose trust ought to be more important are not going to trust you less because you turned in a cheater; they might even trust you more because you had the guts to do it.</p></li>
<li><p>This one is a little bit more philosophical. I argue that the ideal state of the world is one in which no one cheats. Furthermore, everyone has a duty to do what they can to bring the world closer to its ideal state. Therefore, everyone has a duty to turn in cheating if it comes to their attention.</p></li>
<li><p>Cheating is morally wrong. I don’t think anyone can argue otherwise. If you become aware of it and fail to report it, you are complicit in it. It’s almost as bad as if you had helped someone make their crib sheet.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>There’s nothing wrong with “snitching”. You shouldn’t pick on people who report cheating; they’re just doing the right thing.</p>
<p>Although, if corporations are all 100% benign creatures that can never do harm, who really needs snitches? I suggest those people decrying snitches go to that fantasy world, while we in the real world enjoy their contributions.</p>
<p>UNDERAGE drinking. And I said that there is a chance. A big enough chance so that it should be prohibited. Why don’t we let 14-year-olds drive? Or 12-year-olds? If a 14-year-old tries to drive heck yeah his/her parents are going to take the car away. Why don’t we let 5-year-olds play with knives? HMMM. Yeah. Stop twisting my words.</p>