Shaming doesn’t work. But what DOES?

[Rhea]

The problem with the proposals of making fines higher and offenders clean up, is the problem of seeing them do it. If you don’t know who did it, you can’t decide who to fine/force. Which makes Bilby’s concern very real.

My proposal emphasized utilizing contractors who would actively oversee the cleanup efforts while also offering appropriate training and equipment. Bilby's concerns, though valid due to the unfortunate reality of racism in the world, renders my suggestion less feasible. I notice a tendency to scrutinize my proposal in a context of advocating for slavery, rather than evaluating it on its own merits. This assumption, I must say, is both unfounded and distasteful.

Just to be clear, I did not intend to bring the topic to modern slavery, I meant about netting people who were not sufficiently proven.

For example, when I see anyone pulled over on the side of my road, I take a picture of their plate. Then I go look later to see if they dumped. Granted the police don’t do anything about this in the least, but if they did I could unduly harrass someone with pictures.

That’s all.

The bigger problem is you don’t even get a npicture. There’s just litter and no perp, so there is no one to fine or force to clean up.

 

[Gospel]

Why would anyone notice litter and then actively search for the perpetrator? The essence of the law lies in apprehending individuals caught in the act of littering.

Edit: To clarify explicitly, I am addressing the issue of non-commercial littering in my previous statements. Commercial littering, on the other hand, does necessitate investigation and carries a higher likelihood of being successfully resolved.

 

[Gospel]

Furthermore, I am specifically addressing the level of engagement between law enforcement professionals and littering violators. Not citizens who may want to use it for harassment. It is my assumption that law enforcement often overlooks such violations due to the absence of a robust system in place to effectively address them. There is a likelihood that the prevailing attitude is that the state is already compensating contractors to handle the cleanup, which may mirror the attitude of some litterers who rationalize their actions by thinking, "I'm creating jobs!" Now, with the proposed approach, the police can provide them with an opportunity to do that "job".

It appears that engaging in meaningful discussions on this forum requires individuals to consider even the most absurd and nonsensical arguments. I aint here for that shit.

 

[bilby]

I think some people litter just to be spiteful

Indeed. If you Americans are going to pay lip service to metrication, while continuing to use imperial units for almost every purpose, the least you could do is spell litre correctly.

 

[bilby]

The problem with the proposals of making fines higher and offenders clean up, is the problem of seeing them do it. If you don’t know who did it, you can’t decide who to fine/force. Which makes Bilby’s concern very real.

My proposal emphasized utilizing contractors who would actively oversee the cleanup efforts while also offering appropriate training and equipment. Bilby's concerns, though valid due to the unfortunate reality of racism in the world, renders my suggestion less feasible. I notice a tendency to scrutinize my proposal in a context of advocating for slavery, rather than evaluating it on its own merits. This assumption, I must say, is both unfounded and distasteful.

It's not a reflection on you; But it is what those who actually yearn for a return to widespread slavery will do.

When evaluating any proposed legislation, it's vitally important to look at any possible way in which the evil might attempt to subvert it - because you can be sure that they will.

 

[Gospel]

The problem with the proposals of making fines higher and offenders clean up, is the problem of seeing them do it. If you don’t know who did it, you can’t decide who to fine/force. Which makes Bilby’s concern very real.

My proposal emphasized utilizing contractors who would actively oversee the cleanup efforts while also offering appropriate training and equipment. Bilby's concerns, though valid due to the unfortunate reality of racism in the world, renders my suggestion less feasible. I notice a tendency to scrutinize my proposal in a context of advocating for slavery, rather than evaluating it on its own merits. This assumption, I must say, is both unfounded and distasteful.

It's not a reflection on you; But it is what those who actually yearn for a return to widespread slavery will do.

When evaluating any proposed legislation, it's vitally important to look at any possible way in which the evil might attempt to subvert it - because you can be sure that they will.

I have already demonstrated my attentiveness to those concerns, and I have acknowledged that I share them as well, not once, but twice. It is true that any law, idea, or statement can potentially be exploited. However, does that imply that we should refrain from creating laws, generating ideas, and expressing our thoughts?

As I've later mentioned, in Florida, the judicial system already provides judges with the option to mandate community service as a means of holding individuals accountable for their actions. You seemed to miss the detail that what I'm proposing is for the state to use already engaged contractors to lower the burden of enforcement on the state and also allow violators to receive compensation along with the valuable lesson they've learned.

I was frankly astonished to see you, of all people, suggest such a dangerous solution.

I find it truly remarkable that the notion of offering individuals professional guidance, resources, and fair compensation in order to impart a valuable lesson is perceived as perilous. I want to emphasize that even though I conceded and acknowledged sharing your concerns, it does not imply that I necessarily agree with your interpretation of my proposal.

 

[Gospel]

To be honest, during my time of homelessness in New York, if I had discovered that the state would offer me a job simply by purposefully littering in front of an officer, I would have considered tossing a paper plane that said hire me in their direction.

 

[Rhea]

Why would anyone notice litter and then actively search for the perpetrator? The essence of the law lies in apprehending individuals caught in the act of littering.

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!


So, for example, whoever throws the fast food bags on my road - I am pretty sure it is ONE GUY. One person who eats fast food twice a week and throws out the bag on the way home. I want to find out who that is.

Although, he hasn’t thrown anything in the last half year or so. So maybe my problem with fast food bags is over…

 

[Tigers!]

Why would anyone notice litter and then actively search for the perpetrator? The essence of the law lies in apprehending individuals caught in the act of littering.

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!


So, for example, whoever throws the fast food bags on my road - I am pretty sure it is ONE GUY. One person who eats fast food twice a week and throws out the bag on the way home. I want to find out who that is.

Although, he hasn’t thrown anything in the last half year or so. So maybe my problem with fast food bags is over…

Perhaps the fast food killed him?

 

[Rhea]

So, to give some context on what made me, personally, create this thread, I’ll list the littering I am concerned with below.

I recognize that people in other areas; suburban, exurban, urban, or cul-de-sac vs thruway, will have VERY different motivations and remedies.

To recap: this is my road:


And there are 2 major problems, derived from 4 major categories of waste.

Problem 1: Litterers. They throw out small amounts of trash (category 1 waste) that they could easily take home, but for some reason choose to chuck out the window instead.
- My conclusions from this discussion is that there is no real policy solution here, because you can’t identify the perps. So probably social pressure campaigns are the only possibility.

Problem 2: Dumpers. They throw out bags of trash, sofas and mattresses (category 2 waste)
- My conclusion from this discussion is that it would probably help a lot if they just made dumping these large items free at the transfer station. Because appliances are free and we don’t see many appliances.

Category 3 waste does not create a “problem” because that is dead animals, and if the coyotes don’t get them, the town will pick them up in a few days.

Category 4 waste is a different sort of problem, because this is live animals. Like kittens and raccons that people are trying to “put out in the wild.” But we have a fairly robust Hawk and Eagle solution for those, so if I don’t try to save them, they become a not-problem.



Of course, as I said above, none if this may make any sense at all in a suburban setting. So carry on with that discussion - it’s interesting - but I think we should state which kind of environment we’re talking about for our solutions, so that we don’t waste time dismissing something as improbable just because we’re talking about different environs.

 

[ZiprHead]

Why would anyone notice litter and then actively search for the perpetrator? The essence of the law lies in apprehending individuals caught in the act of littering.

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!


So, for example, whoever throws the fast food bags on my road - I am pretty sure it is ONE GUY. One person who eats fast food twice a week and throws out the bag on the way home. I want to find out who that is.

Although, he hasn’t thrown anything in the last half year or so. So maybe my problem with fast food bags is over…

Littering drives me absolutely crazy. Driving through a KFC. On the way out I see someone left their chicken bucket and other trash on the sidewalk right by the exit. Assholes.

 

[TV and credit cards]

It should be very easy to dispose of large items, tires, hazmat, etc. It is here. Not all is free but things improved when they went from those twice a year hazmat collection events (I mean if you forget one, you're absolutely grief stricken) to being able to drop off three days of the week. Everything else can be dropped off any day of the week. Recycle does not have to be separated, paper, glass, metal is all in one. Regular curb trash will take anything, appliances, mattress, sofa, except refrigerators have to have the refrigerant removed which is local too.

Now that I think about it, I don't see much trash along the roads here. I guess when everything is in order, it tends to go unnoticed. There is small trash along the road but that will always be. And I know exactly who is doing it. They are the people with all manner of junk/trash in their yards, homes, and vehicles. If they don't care enough about their own property why would they ever care about public spaces?

We'll just have to wait for modern medicine to find a cure for the common dirtbag.

 

[Gospel]

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!

In my area that would still require catching them in the act. I have repeatedly observed occasions where garbage trucks travel down the road with paper twisting off into the air behind it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Deposit fees do work for beverage bottles and cans, car batteries and tires, so I see no reason why they would not work for mattresses as well. When you buy a mattress, there'd be a charge attached to the purchase that is refunded at any mattress store upon return.

Yup. I would like to see deposits required on a lot of things. Make the deposit high enough that even if you don't want to return it (the average person isn't in a position to return something like a mattress without renting a truck) that there will be businesses whose model it is to collect them for the deposit.

I've also proposed it for pollutants. You pay the government the deposit when you create or mine (which includes drilling) the material, redeem it when you render it not a pollutant. This automatically makes recycling interesting as reclaiming the material doesn't incur the deposit.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Anyone caught littering should not only be fined but also made to clean up a half mile radius in an area designated by the state. Not only will this encourage individuals to stop & discourage others from littering it will help clean up some trash.

What if the area isn't legal for them to enter? Or isn't safe to enter? I've seen plenty of bits of terrain I would not be comfortable entering--in some cases with trees that could anchor a rope but some in the desert where there were no anchors nor would belaying even be a good idea as they would have nothing to anchor against.

And, yes, I have seen trash in such areas. Spent some minutes trying to fish out one such bit less than 10' from the trail. (Important as from a distance it appeared consistent with attire worn by a missing hiker.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Part of my hesitation about the original shaming sign is indeed that it would provoke people to “I’ll show them!” Behavior. But keeping it positive should reduce that a bit.

Yup, these days I would not like to see any shaming based approach for this very reason.

I read an article a long time ago about someone training crows to pick up the trash and dump it where the car parks (local litterers). It would be a hoot to have your Chik-fila bag show up in your own driveway. haha!

Except the crows quickly learned to steal trash rather than pick it up.

 

[Gospel]

Anyone caught littering should not only be fined but also made to clean up a half mile radius in an area designated by the state. Not only will this encourage individuals to stop & discourage others from littering it will help clean up some trash.

What if the area isn't legal for them to enter? Or isn't safe to enter? I've seen plenty of bits of terrain I would not be comfortable entering--in some cases with trees that could anchor a rope but some in the desert where there were no anchors nor would belaying even be a good idea as they would have nothing to anchor against.

And, yes, I have seen trash in such areas. Spent some minutes trying to fish out one such bit less than 10' from the trail. (Important as from a distance it appeared consistent with attire worn by a missing hiker.)

Isn't it clear from the reading? My proposal emphasizes the use of professional contractors. I implore you to understand that these seasoned professionals wouldn't compromise safety by assigning an inexperienced individual, sent by the state as part of some rehabilitation process, to a hazardous environment. It almost feels futile to reiterate this if you're not interested in actually reading my posts.

 

[thebeave]

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!

In my area that would still require catching them in the act. I have repeatedly observed occasions where garbage trucks travel down the road with paper twisting off into the air behind it.

I confess to having done that myself a couple of years ago.

I had purchased a large roll of a new type of drywall tape (Fibafuse) that was super lightweight and thin with no adhesive backing to use on a small drywall job (maybe 10' of taping?). Tossed the (mostly full) 250' roll in the back of my truck and took off down the highway. After a mile or so, some "fluttering" in my rearview mirror caught my eye, and when I turned around to look, I saw the whole roll of drywall tape rapidly and methodically unwinding itself in the wind, leaving a long streamer flapping from the back of my truck. I was horrified. Not wanting to risk stopping on a busy highway due to personal safety, I just kept going and did my best to ignore it and hope no cop was in sight. I got away with it, but not without a lot of guilt and shame. I still love my Fibafuse, but now I keep it in the truck cab with me at all times.

But yeah, I think a lot of the trash we see out there on the roads comes off garbage trucks, debris trailers and is not intentionally thrown out. I also see trucks carrying an open load of tomatoes and inevitably a few pop out when the truck hits a pothole. There was a sharp turn on a rural highway near my college that always had a pile of rotted tomatoes on the side, where drivers took the turn too fast or piled up the tomatoes too high in back.

 

[Gospel]

During the time I owned my 1978 Saturn (that thing was still running well when I gave it away in the early 2000's), I had a habit of smoking inside the car, a practice I would never consider in my Tesla. On multiple instances, I'd lower the window to light up, and a forgotten receipt from a past purchase would whirl around the interior before escaping through the window. While such littering was unintentional, had an officer pulled me over to issue a ticket for the infraction, I wouldn't have taken exception to it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Because they sometimes throw out identifying information, like mail with their address on it. That’s how they caught Arlo Guthrie, you know!

In my area that would still require catching them in the act. I have repeatedly observed occasions where garbage trucks travel down the road with paper twisting off into the air behind it.

In hiking once I'm a mile from the trailhead most trash appears to be things that were inadvertently dropped rather than discards. There are also the occasional items set down and then forgotten to pick up.