Unethical ways to save money

[GuitarStv]

Guitarstv, you are using a laypersons dictionary in discussion of legal concepts.  See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_(law)

An offense has a factual aspect “did you drive faster than the posted speed limit?” And a legal aspect “do these fact amount to breaking the law?”.  As stated I agree it’s unethical to lie about facts.  But pleading of not guilty is not a statement of facts.  It is more akin to saying “prove it”

Fundamentally, I don't really see much distinction here.  From the article you posted (which does not correspond with your interpretation at all):

'"Guilt" is the obligation of a person who has violated a moral standard to bear the sanctions imposed by that moral standard. In legal terms, guilt means having been found to have violated a criminal law'

When asked if you are guilty or not in a case where you are fully aware that you violated the moral standard of speeding, it is dishonest to respond 'not guilty'.  Saying 'not guilty' is saying that you shouldn't bear the sanctions (in this case typically a fine) because you didn't do the crime.  It's not telling the court to "prove it".

No, the legal system's approach of innocent until guilty is a fantastic idea!  But that's referring to how the court and legal system treat you.  If you committed a crime, you know that you did it.  There's no need for proof to yourself.  Claiming that you're not guilty of the crime is therefore dishonest/unethical.

I know that? Hell, no. The law (especially case law) is enormously complex. I don't know that, you don't know that.

I am not a lawyer specialized in this area, therefore I am not qualified to determine whether I broke the law or not. Innocent until proven guilty.

Claiming you understand the law without passing the bar and specializing in that area is unethical.

Let me get this straight.  You are driving in your car.  You see the posted speed limit.  You drive faster than the limit.  You are pulled over for speeding - resulting in a ticket.  But you don't know that you've broken the law unless you have a law degree specializing in speeding tickets?

You really think that way?

Who says the speed limit was set legally?
Who says the speed study was performed correctly?
Who says the sign met notification requirements?
Who says the sign was placed in the proper location?
Is there a history of racial/gender/etc discrimination in enforcement?
Did the officer actually measure the wrong vehicle?
Was the equipment out of calibration or used outside approved parameters?
Et cetera.

I'm not a lawyer. There are tons of reasons the speed limit or its enforcement might not be legal at all.

I guess that my premise assumes the operator of the vehicle is paying attention to what he or she is doing.  That would mean being aware of the speed at which his/her vehicle is operating and paying attention to the posted signs.  If you see a sign saying that the speed limit is 50 and you operate your vehicle at 70, I feel that you are morally obligated to plead guilty to a speeding ticket.

If you honestly believe that the ticket was received unfairly (due to discrimination, equipment malfunction, etc.) then by all means, fight the ticket.  If you're unsure if you broke the law because you were operating your vehicle in a negligent manner (distracted, playing games on your cell phone, drunk, high, etc.), I think that you should mention that to the court when making your plea.

[Boofinator]

Guitarstv, you are using a laypersons dictionary in discussion of legal concepts.  See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_(law)

An offense has a factual aspect “did you drive faster than the posted speed limit?” And a legal aspect “do these fact amount to breaking the law?”.  As stated I agree it’s unethical to lie about facts.  But pleading of not guilty is not a statement of facts.  It is more akin to saying “prove it”

Saying "prove it" when you have committed a crime is, in my opinion (and apparently that of many others), unethical. It's basically akin to not owning up to your actions. Sure, it's not illegal to plead "not guilty" when you know full well you are guilty, but I think that has more to do with the limitations of a court in the first place to determine guilt or innocence with 100% certainty (and as mentioned earlier, being found guilty by a court following a plea of not guilty usually results in a harsher sentence).

Similarly, if I break somebody's window and nobody sees it happen, the ethical thing would be to own up to it, not to say "prove it".

[RyanAtTanagra]

Saying "prove it" when you have committed a crime is, in my opinion (and apparently that of many others), unethical. It's basically akin to not owning up to your actions. Sure, it's not illegal to plead "not guilty" when you know full well you are guilty, but I think that has more to do with the limitations of a court in the first place to determine guilt or innocence with 100% certainty (and as mentioned earlier, being found guilty by a court following a plea of not guilty usually results in a harsher sentence).

Similarly, if I break somebody's window and nobody sees it happen, the ethical thing would be to own up to it, not to say "prove it".

I think people are getting ethical confused with legal.  Just because something is legal to do doesn't mean it's ethical (and vice versa).

[solon]

Charge your external battery pack at work, then use it to charge your phone at home overnight.

[RyanAtTanagra]

Charge your external battery pack at work, then use it to charge your phone at home overnight.

Haha, my phone easily lasts all night even if I'm playing on it, so I only charge it at work!  I've never considered this unethical though, everyone charges their phone at work.

Though I could do this to get through the weekend which isn't a bad idea...

[MyAlterEgoIsTaller]

Charge your external battery pack at work, then use it to charge your phone at home overnight.

I do that one.
I blame the influence of my elementary school teachers.  They were all back-to-the-land types of the 70s, who were living in their half-finished home-made houses with no electricity or water.  All of them had wet hair during homeroom, because they took showers in the school's locker rooms - with their spouses and toddlers.
At least I'm only charging my own battery pack.

[Milkshake]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

[GuitarStv]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

[Milkshake]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

But not reporting it is a violation of law, whether you think it matters or not. It's a fact. Just like if I go 5 over, I don't think it's going to make an appreciable difference to the safety of others on the road, but it's still a violation of law.

[RyanAtTanagra]

Everything is a spectrum.  I hope you don't bother recycling or trying not to drive anything except a Ford F-350 because unless you're dead you're harming the environment, so why bother even trying.

[GuitarStv]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

But not reporting it is a violation of law, whether you think it matters or not. It's a fact. Just like if I go 5 over, I don't think it's going to make an appreciable difference to the safety of others on the road, but it's still a violation of law.

If I'm charged with failing to report that amount of found money in a court of law, I'd plead guilty.  I'd also argue that the whole court case is stupid and a waste of everyone's time . . . but I wouldn't lie and say 'not guilty'.

[Milkshake]

If I'm charged with failing to report that amount of found money in a court of law, I'd plead guilty.  I'd also argue that the whole court case is stupid and a waste of everyone's time . . . but I wouldn't lie and say 'not guilty'.

Even if they charge you with Tax Fraud with a possible penalty of 5 years in prison? Pleading "Not Guilty" is your only recourse to fight charges like this.

Everything is a spectrum.  I hope you don't bother recycling or trying not to drive anything except a Ford F-350 because unless you're dead you're harming the environment, so why bother even trying.

I hope you know that I am merely playing devil's advocate here, not saying that a reasonable person should be reporting every literal penny on the sidewalk. But I also think the government has the responsibility to prove its citizens are guilty of any crime they charge someone with, and prove it within the confines of the law.

[RyanAtTanagra]

I hope you know that I am merely playing devil's advocate here, not saying that a reasonable person should be reporting every literal penny on the sidewalk. But I also think the government has the responsibility to prove its citizens are guilty of any crime they charge someone with, and prove it within the confines of the law.

Yea and I'm on the fence myself.  You could also argue it's unethical to give the government any more money than they already have, considering what they do with it.  So pleading guilty could always be the unethical move.

[EscapedApe]

It's not telling the court to "prove it".

I don't know how they do things in Canada, but in the United States, "not guilty" means "prove it".

The only time the burden of proof is shifted from the accuser to the accused is in the special case of the "affirmative defense".

[anonymouscow]

I've seen a few gas stations that offer a discount if you pay in cash. I'm surprised that more businesses have not thought to use this model. They could make more money while also charging the customer less.

Typically the contract the merchant signs with the CC company requires that the posted price be the credit card price. Merchants can provide a cash discount, but cannot charge a credit card surcharge.

With gas stations, this is pretty straight forward. On their sign, they can say "Cash payment - 10 cents off per gal" or whatever, so the cash price is just as salient as people are driving by as the "posted" price. With other kinds of merchants, it's more difficult. If you're a convenience store, the customer has already decided to pay the $4 posted price for their bag of chips when they bring it to the register, so you might slightly incentivize cash payments, but then you'd also be giving up some additional profit on people who were going to pay cash anyways without the discount, so it's a finer line to walk.  Plus, cash management isn't free, even if it is cheaper than CC fees most of the time.

I went to store recently that had a sign saying they charged a 25 cent fee on all transactions, but also offered a 25 cent discount for cash purchases. So basically they charged a fee for CC purchases but didn't call it that. I don't know if that would fly though if they got caught.

For a long time minimum CC charges were against the merchant terms, but plenty of small shops still did it and “got away with it”.

Yep, convenience store I worked at had a $3 minimum purchase amount.

The vending machines at work now have a little label saying the prices posted are cash prices and if you use credit/debit/GooglePay/ApplePay there is a $.10 surcharge per transaction. I would think that violates CC agreements and it makes me know I won't be purchasing from the machines.

Are you sure they use the word surcharge? Even if it does, does it really bother you that much not to use it? Ten cent cash discount vs ten cent credit card surcharge, in the end it’s the same thing regardless of how it’s worded.

[GuitarStv]

If I'm charged with failing to report that amount of found money in a court of law, I'd plead guilty.  I'd also argue that the whole court case is stupid and a waste of everyone's time . . . but I wouldn't lie and say 'not guilty'.

Even if they charge you with Tax Fraud with a possible penalty of 5 years in prison? Pleading "Not Guilty" is your only recourse to fight charges like this.

It doesn't matter what the punishment is.  If I'm guilty of the crime, then pleading 'not guilty' seems immoral to me.  That's a lie.  Also, not sure about your courts in the US . . . but certainly around here I don't believe that any judge would send me to five years in prison for tax fraud of under 1$.

Everything is a spectrum.  I hope you don't bother recycling or trying not to drive anything except a Ford F-350 because unless you're dead you're harming the environment, so why bother even trying.

I hope you know that I am merely playing devil's advocate here, not saying that a reasonable person should be reporting every literal penny on the sidewalk. But I also think the government has the responsibility to prove its citizens are guilty of any crime they charge someone with, and prove it within the confines of the law.

I also believe that the government has the responsibility to prove its citizens are guilty of any crime they charge someone with, and prove it within the confines of the law.  But that's unrelated to my own personal moral obligations.

It's immoral of me to lie in an attempt to get out of the punishment that I deserve for a crime I know I committed.

[Milkshake]

It doesn't matter what the punishment is.  If I'm guilty of the crime, then pleading 'not guilty' seems immoral to me.  That's a lie.  Also, not sure about your courts in the US . . . but certainly around here I don't believe that any judge would send me to five years in prison for tax fraud of under 1$.

...

It's immoral of me to lie in an attempt to get out of the punishment that I deserve for a crime I know I committed.

Despite the government's flawless record of perfect impartiality, I guess I don't trust the system enough to hang my future solely on the reasonableness of another person who has no vested interest in me. I'll take the immoral hit every time on that one. Not guilty, I plead the 5th and call my lawyer.

[Boofinator]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

We've already established that illegal does not imply unethical, and vice versa. Declaring the pennies on your eyes is the height of asininity.

If you'd like to compare apples to apples, please give us an example that involves a substantial amount of money on the table, the government directly informing that you owe said money in the name of the law based on the evidence presented, and you full-well knowing you owe that money but insisting "prove it".

Do you know who else says "prove it"? The Weinsteins, Cosbys, etc, etc, etc. Certainly these people are within their legal rights, but how many people would agree that their defense of their actions is ethical?

But I also think the government has the responsibility to prove its citizens are guilty of any crime they charge someone with, and prove it within the confines of the law.

You are absolutely half-right here. How much proof is necessary if someone admits guilt? (I believe in a criminal case, this threshold is passed when the grand jury recommends that criminal charges be brought.)

[Milkshake]

If you'd like to compare apples to apples, please give us an example that involves a substantial amount of money on the table, the government directly informing that you owe said money in the name of the law based on the evidence presented, and you full-well knowing you owe that money but insisting "prove it".

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

[Boofinator]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

[GuitarStv]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

I don't think that the law is always in concert with moral behavior.  Is driving 1 km/h over the speed limit illegal?  Yes.  Is is immoral?  No.

But if I get stopped while breaking the law speeding, I feel morally obligated to confess to my actions and take the punishment that is handed out.  To do otherwise is to shirk responsibility for your actions.

[Milkshake]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

I don't think that the law is always in concern with moral behavior.  Is driving 1 km/h over the speed limit illegal?  Yes.  Is is immoral?  No.

But if I get stopped while breaking the law speeding, I feel morally obligated to confess to my actions and take the punishment that is handed out.  To do otherwise is to shirk responsibility for your actions.

Fair enough. Well said.

[slappy]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

In the case of speeding, it's not the fact of whether or not there is a victim. It's the fact that there could be a victim based on your actions.

[GuitarStv]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

In the case of speeding, it's not the fact of whether or not there is a victim. It's the fact that there could be a victim based on your actions.

Eh.  This gets into tricky territory.

I use resources simply by existing.  There are too many people using resources, causing strain on the planet's ability to keep other people alive.  Am I morally obligated then to end my own life?  There could be a victim based on my existing.

[Boofinator]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

In the case of speeding, it's not the fact of whether or not there is a victim. It's the fact that there could be a victim based on your actions.

I don't disagree. That's why we have laws and appropriate punishments. If I speed too much, in addition to paying a bunch of money in fines, I will also have my license taken away. And if I kill somebody owing to reckless speed, I possibly face manslaughter charges.

But the increased risk to safety that results from speeding doesn't necessarily make it unethical. There is a far greater risk to safety from just driving to begin with, and very few people would call driving unethical behavior. I think where it crosses the line into unethical behavior is when you feel that you seriously start endangering other people (given that ethics are fairly subjective, this threshold will be different for different individuals).

But to get back to the point, speeding is a civil infraction, and it is the police's responsibility to enforce the law, not an individual citizen's. So no, I wouldn't report myself speeding any more than I'd report somebody else speeding. On the other hand, I've been tempted to report vehicles with obviously intoxicated drivers, but I haven't yet.

By the way, kudos to individuals who never break any laws. Though I don't feel it necessarily makes you an ethically superior person over someone who does.

[slappy]

I don't have an example here, but the flip side of this coin is that anyone who has ever committed a crime has the moral obligation to report it to the police, and the authorities can decide what punishment is deserved.

Or is it only immoral if you deny it after you're confronted?

It depends on the crime. If there isn't a victim, I don't feel one has the obligation to report it, as there is nobody to make amends to.

In the case of speeding, it's not the fact of whether or not there is a victim. It's the fact that there could be a victim based on your actions.

I don't disagree. That's why we have laws and appropriate punishments. If I speed too much, in addition to paying a bunch of money in fines, I will also have my license taken away. And if I kill somebody owing to reckless speed, I possibly face manslaughter charges.

But the increased risk to safety that results from speeding doesn't necessarily make it unethical. There is a far greater risk to safety from just driving to begin with, and very few people would call driving unethical behavior. I think where it crosses the line into unethical behavior is when you feel that you seriously start endangering other people (given that ethics are fairly subjective, this threshold will be different for different individuals).

But to get back to the point, speeding is a civil infraction, and it is the police's responsibility to enforce the law, not an individual citizen's. So no, I wouldn't report myself speeding any more than I'd report somebody else speeding. On the other hand, I've been tempted to report vehicles with obviously intoxicated drivers, but I haven't yet.

By the way, kudos to individuals who never break any laws. Though I don't feel it necessarily makes you an ethically superior person over someone who does.

I think MMM would say driving is unethical. ;)

[SwordGuy]

Could y'all just beat the dead horse on a different thread.    'Cause unless someone comes up with a hilariously funny example, I'm over it.

Your honor, I'm guilty of being seriously bored.  :)

[TomTX]

I guess that my premise assumes the operator of the vehicle is paying attention to what he or she is doing.  That would mean being aware of the speed at which his/her vehicle is operating and paying attention to the posted signs.  If you see a sign saying that the speed limit is 50 and you operate your vehicle at 70, I feel that you are morally obligated to plead guilty to a speeding ticket.

Lets follow this to its logical conclusion.

How often have you gone in and turned yourself in for speeding? Every driver has done it, even if inadvertently.

Or would you only do it if someone else caught you doing it?

It would seem you would feel morally obligated to go turn yourself in either way, and plead guilty.

Right?

[dragoncar]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

Ok this will be my last lick since thread welcome has worn out.  I can respond further via pm if you like.

Your position is that lying is wrong (you consider a not guilty plea to be lying).  I don’t see how signing a tax return with known material omissions is not also lying and therefore unethical by your own standards

[Boofinator]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

Ok this will be my last lick since thread welcome has worn out.  I can respond further via pm if you like.

Your position is that lying is wrong (you consider a not guilty plea to be lying).  I don’t see how signing a tax return with known material omissions is not also lying and therefore unethical by your own standards

I can't believe you are fighting on this hill. Not reporting less than a dollar in found income, which amounts to something like 10¢ in taxes, is probably saving the government money in the amount of labor time that may be required (on average) to review that extra document.

I would be willing to bet, if you posed this "moral dilemma" to IRS agents, they would say to a man, "Well, technically you're supposed to report everything, but if you think we care about 10¢ you need to get a life. I mean, shit, you're allowed to round your taxes to the nearest dollar."

The equivalent in this case is you have unreported income (say: tips, side gig, found, whatever) that amounts to roughly a speeding ticket's cost worth of taxes. Somehow the IRS finds out about it, audits you, and asks you to back pay these taxes. Your response: "Prove it. Innocent until proven guilty by a court of law."

[GuitarStv]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

Ok this will be my last lick since thread welcome has worn out.  I can respond further via pm if you like.

Your position is that lying is wrong (you consider a not guilty plea to be lying).  I don’t see how signing a tax return with known material omissions is not also lying and therefore unethical by your own standards

Ah, I see what you're driving towards.  The lying alone isn't what I'm so concerned about.  If you lie to your wife that the dress she has picked looks great because you know she just bought it and really likes it and don't want to upset her, I don't see that as a moral failing.

Clearly the reason why someone is making a decision is an important part of the moral judgement.  With the lying in court thing, I'm lying in order to avoid responsibility for my actions.  With the tax return I'm lying because it doesn't make any material difference (and also because I don't track the pennies found on the street for each fiscal year, so wouldn't be able to give a truthful answer).

But yes, if you consider lying at all to be a moral failing then there's no difference between the tax return, the not guilty plea, and the dress.

[TomTX]

I'll note GuitarStv is responding to the silly IRS example (IRS doesn't even deal in pennies for tax returns) instead of turning himself in for speeding.

[MissNancyPryor]

Anyone hear of someone picking up a free turkey dinner meal kit his week? 

Regionally they gave out about 8000 of them yesterday (they provide the raw turkey plus ingredients for all the fixings) and I wonder what percentage of those folks didn't really need the support.  Only a proof of address was required, not income.  Some people can't resist doing a scam and will send their adult kids to pick up extra turkeys even though they have no intention of making their own.  Just sad to think about. 

I will pretend they were all actually needed and sleep better, or at least presume the amount of scamming is a vanishingly small percentage.  Being cynical is no way to live. 

[ketchup]

Anyone hear of someone picking up a free turkey dinner meal kit his week? 

Regionally they gave out about 8000 of them yesterday (they provide the raw turkey plus ingredients for all the fixings) and I wonder what percentage of those folks didn't really need the support.  Only a proof of address was required, not income.  Some people can't resist doing a scam and will send their adult kids to pick up extra turkeys even though they have no intention of making their own.  Just sad to think about. 

I will pretend they were all actually needed and sleep better, or at least presume the amount of scamming is a vanishingly small percentage.  Being cynical is no way to live.

That's pretty slimy.  I like to think that while scammers do exist, it's not enough to make such a project counterproductive.  Hopefully.

[GuitarStv]

I'll note GuitarStv is responding to the silly IRS example (IRS doesn't even deal in pennies for tax returns) instead of turning himself in for speeding.

Sorry, I missed your reply.

Again, I'd have to argue that it depends on the crime.  I don't honestly think there's a benefit in turning myself in for doing 1 kph over the limit.  At one point in my youth I was caught speeding and the officer said "Son, we don't give a damn if you're doing ten over, but when you're doing forty over we pretty much have to stop you."  (I was lucky not to have my car impounded then and there . . . but I didn't lie and pretend that the officer was wrong to stop me.)  Failing to turn yourself in for minor speeding violations is more about not wasting everyone's time than trying to shirk your responsibility.

On the other hand if I hit someone, I would certainly stay at the scene of the crime and try to get medical attention for the person.  To do otherwise is certainly immoral and would be shirking of responsibility.

[TomTX]

Got it. Speeding is only unethical if you get caught.

[GuitarStv]

Got it. Speeding is only unethical if you get caught.

No.  Extreme stuff can certainly be unethical.  Going twice the limit through a school zone for example seems likely to cause harm and would classify as unethical.  So I don't do it.  This seems easier than doing it and then having to report myself to the police for unethical behaviour.

[TomTX]

Got it. Speeding is only unethical if you get caught.

No.  Extreme stuff can certainly be unethical.  Going twice the limit through a school zone for example seems likely to cause harm and would classify as unethical.  So I don't do it.  This seems easier than doing it and then having to report myself to the police for unethical behaviour.

So if nobody's seriously endangered it's not unethical. If I'm going 5 MPH over the limit, while most traffic is going that fast or faster - you're fine with me pleading "not guilty" for the ticket, right?

[GuitarStv]

Got it. Speeding is only unethical if you get caught.

No.  Extreme stuff can certainly be unethical.  Going twice the limit through a school zone for example seems likely to cause harm and would classify as unethical.  So I don't do it.  This seems easier than doing it and then having to report myself to the police for unethical behaviour.

So if nobody's seriously endangered it's not unethical. If I'm going 5 MPH over the limit, while most traffic is going that fast or faster - you're fine with me pleading "not guilty" for the ticket, right?

No.

As previously mentioned - if I'm caught breaking the rules, lying to avoid the punishment I legally deserve is unethical because it would be dodging responsibility for the actions I took.  In that situation I'd admit my guilt and then try to explain the circumstances to the judge (was going with the flow of traffic).  If I'm fined for it - so be it.  That's the price I pay for breaking the rules and getting caught.

[SwordGuy]

And no, you don't need to make "just one more comment".   

[Buffaloski Boris]

Almost this exact example happened to me. I was in Virginia for a business trip, it was late at night, and I was hungry. The fast-food restaurants were to the left from my hotel, but it was a right turn only out of the hotel. I took the right turn and then planned to make a U-turn at the next available opportunity. When I hit the next intersection, I stopped and waited for the light to change. There was one other car facing the other way, but otherwise the six-lane highway and adjacent mall were empty. I proceeded to make the U-turn when I got the green arrow, and then was quickly pulled over by the police cruiser who was that other car. Apparently in my dazed state, I had seen the no U-turn sign but failed to register it.

So this was clearly a bullshit ticket, but what was there to fight? (Plus I wasn't flying back to Virginia for the privilege.) I wrote out the check to the "Nazis of Virginia", and it was cashed.

Virginia loves driving taxes. Sorry you got tagged. If it’s any consolation, we peasants who live in Virginia get tagged with driving taxes as well.  I just got assessed again last week.

Oh and the ethics of pleading “not guilty“ never really enter into the equation: in Virginia, you’re guilty. It’s just a question of whether you want to spend the time and court fees in addition to the fine to be told you’re guilty by a magistrate. You saved money by not wasting your time.

[soccerluvof4]

Going to a fast food place and asking for a water cup to get your beverage in at the soda fountain vs paying for the beverage.

[talltexan]

No, the legal system's approach of innocent until guilty is a fantastic idea!  But that's referring to how the court and legal system treat you.  If you committed a crime, you know that you did it.  There's no need for proof to yourself.  Claiming that you're not guilty of the crime is therefore dishonest/unethical.

I know that? Hell, no. The law (especially case law) is enormously complex. I don't know that, you don't know that.

I am not a lawyer specialized in this area, therefore I am not qualified to determine whether I broke the law or not. Innocent until proven guilty.

Claiming you understand the law without passing the bar and specializing in that area is unethical.

Let me get this straight.  You are driving in your car.  You see the posted speed limit.  You drive faster than the limit.  You are pulled over for speeding - resulting in a ticket.  But you don't know that you've broken the law unless you have a law degree specializing in speeding tickets?

You really think that way?

How about this example:

I went grocery shopping at 10:00 in a town with a population of ~150k. As you leave the parking lot to get back on the main road, there is a sign stating, "No Left Turn." There's no traffic on the road, so I turn left and get pulled over as a result.

My argument is this: that sign is there to prevent people from holding up traffic exiting the parking lot when the road is busy. If the road is not busy, the sign's purpose is moot. Had I received a ticket, I would have made an argument that the law was stupid and did not need to be followed in those circumstances.

Almost this exact example happened to me. I was in Virginia for a business trip, it was late at night, and I was hungry. The fast-food restaurants were to the left from my hotel, but it was a right turn only out of the hotel. I took the right turn and then planned to make a U-turn at the next available opportunity. When I hit the next intersection, I stopped and waited for the light to change. There was one other car facing the other way, but otherwise the six-lane highway and adjacent mall were empty. I proceeded to make the U-turn when I got the green arrow, and then was quickly pulled over by the police cruiser who was that other car. Apparently in my dazed state, I had seen the no U-turn sign but failed to register it.

So this was clearly a bullshit ticket, but what was there to fight? (Plus I wasn't flying back to Virginia for the privilege.) I wrote out the check to the "Nazis of Virginia", and it was cashed.

Sounds like you tried to do something unethical to keep the check from getting cashed. Fits in with this thread perfectly.

[Cranky]

For everyone saying pleading not guilty is unethical when you know you broke the law: I hope you report every penny you find on the sidewalk to the IRS, because ALL income is subject to being taxed and to not report it is illegal and thus unethical.

I don't report each penny that I find on the sidewalk (that's not going to make an appreciable difference to my income given that it amounts to less than a dollar a year).  But if I had a windfall of say, a couple grand . . . yeah.  That should be reported on your income taxes.

But not reporting it is a violation of law, whether you think it matters or not. It's a fact. Just like if I go 5 over, I don't think it's going to make an appreciable difference to the safety of others on the road, but it's still a violation of law.

If I'm charged with failing to report that amount of found money in a court of law, I'd plead guilty.  I'd also argue that the whole court case is stupid and a waste of everyone's time . . . but I wouldn't lie and say 'not guilty'.

Found money on the sidewalk is a gift from the universe, and nontaxable as such. ;-)

[dragoncar]

Spam your stupid blog to reputable forums

[Boofinator]

No, the legal system's approach of innocent until guilty is a fantastic idea!  But that's referring to how the court and legal system treat you.  If you committed a crime, you know that you did it.  There's no need for proof to yourself.  Claiming that you're not guilty of the crime is therefore dishonest/unethical.

I know that? Hell, no. The law (especially case law) is enormously complex. I don't know that, you don't know that.

I am not a lawyer specialized in this area, therefore I am not qualified to determine whether I broke the law or not. Innocent until proven guilty.

Claiming you understand the law without passing the bar and specializing in that area is unethical.

Let me get this straight.  You are driving in your car.  You see the posted speed limit.  You drive faster than the limit.  You are pulled over for speeding - resulting in a ticket.  But you don't know that you've broken the law unless you have a law degree specializing in speeding tickets?

You really think that way?

How about this example:

I went grocery shopping at 10:00 in a town with a population of ~150k. As you leave the parking lot to get back on the main road, there is a sign stating, "No Left Turn." There's no traffic on the road, so I turn left and get pulled over as a result.

My argument is this: that sign is there to prevent people from holding up traffic exiting the parking lot when the road is busy. If the road is not busy, the sign's purpose is moot. Had I received a ticket, I would have made an argument that the law was stupid and did not need to be followed in those circumstances.

Almost this exact example happened to me. I was in Virginia for a business trip, it was late at night, and I was hungry. The fast-food restaurants were to the left from my hotel, but it was a right turn only out of the hotel. I took the right turn and then planned to make a U-turn at the next available opportunity. When I hit the next intersection, I stopped and waited for the light to change. There was one other car facing the other way, but otherwise the six-lane highway and adjacent mall were empty. I proceeded to make the U-turn when I got the green arrow, and then was quickly pulled over by the police cruiser who was that other car. Apparently in my dazed state, I had seen the no U-turn sign but failed to register it.

So this was clearly a bullshit ticket, but what was there to fight? (Plus I wasn't flying back to Virginia for the privilege.) I wrote out the check to the "Nazis of Virginia", and it was cashed.

Sounds like you tried to do something unethical to keep the check from getting cashed. Fits in with this thread perfectly.

Your clairvoyance is astounding, because that was my thought process: "I bet they will be too scared to cash a check if I insult them." Or perhaps it was anger mixed with some small amount of hope that the police force would get feedback regarding its draconian enforcement of the laws?

[SwordGuy]

If you want to get the small loan for a car and holy there just go shopping it means that you probably don't make much on 1st way to qualify now here is the trick when they ask you for your payslip sandbank statements say you forgot them or you don't have them with you and that you will send them with either fax or email that gives you the opportunity to go home alter the amounts and send them
the paperwork you need. So you can qualify now if you want to avoid paying taxes yeah all of them
in a legal way.

If you alter those documents to get a loan, that would be fraud.  It's illegal as well as being unethical.   

[Dicey]

If you want to get the small loan for a car and holy there just go shopping it means that you probably don't make much on 1st way to qualify now here is the trick when they ask you for your payslip sandbank statements say you forgot them or you don't have them with you and that you will send them with either fax or email that gives you the opportunity to go home alter the amounts and send them
the paperwork you need. So you can qualify now if you want to avoid paying taxes yeah all of them
in a legal way.

If you alter those documents to get a loan, that would be fraud.  It's illegal as well as being unethical.   

Uh, maybe not a good idea to feed the troll, @SwordGuy.

[DadJokes]

Almost this exact example happened to me. I was in Virginia for a business trip, it was late at night, and I was hungry. The fast-food restaurants were to the left from my hotel, but it was a right turn only out of the hotel. I took the right turn and then planned to make a U-turn at the next available opportunity. When I hit the next intersection, I stopped and waited for the light to change. There was one other car facing the other way, but otherwise the six-lane highway and adjacent mall were empty. I proceeded to make the U-turn when I got the green arrow, and then was quickly pulled over by the police cruiser who was that other car. Apparently in my dazed state, I had seen the no U-turn sign but failed to register it.

So this was clearly a bullshit ticket, but what was there to fight? (Plus I wasn't flying back to Virginia for the privilege.) I wrote out the check to the "Nazis of Virginia", and it was cashed.

Sounds like you tried to do something unethical to keep the check from getting cashed. Fits in with this thread perfectly.

Your clairvoyance is astounding, because that was my thought process: "I bet they will be too scared to cash a check if I insult them." Or perhaps it was anger mixed with some small amount of hope that the police force would get feedback regarding its draconian enforcement of the laws?

I bet the departments that process payments for tickets get this kind of stuff all the time.

[Mellabella]

How about shopping at places that you know treat their workers unfairly? Or buying items that were made with sweat shop labour? If you wouldn't work for some place that would do that to you, would you take advantage when it is done to someone else? Is that unethical, strictly speaking, or is that morality?

One of my beefs about this community (really my only beef) is that many of us enjoy a mustachian lifestyle on the backs of others and then pat our own backs for doing the right thing (by being anti-consumerist). I sense a contradiction. 

You might find that controversial. Have at it.

I struggle with this one too. Ethical shopping is sooo expensive I used to do it but I have now given up. I’d rather give to a good charity that educates kids in third world countries than to an Australian made designer brand. It’s a tricky one unless you’re loaded.