Here's a fundamental point : Nobody has a right to call you. Nobody has a right to text you. If someone is doing it and you don't want them to, you should be able to tell them so and they should stop. It's not their right to carry on doing so and you have inconvenience yourself to deal with it.

You may do so, and it's a valid solution, but it's the 'wrong' solution.

Jon

Here's another fundamental point: Nobody has a right to a mobile phone - they're a luxury that most of mankind (especially the woman in the story) can easily manage without.


In which case he's part of a tiny minority of the population that does need to keep their phones on.

However, the vast majority can turn their phone off with absolutely no consequence whatsoever. That people choose to keep it turned on is their choice. They could easily break the chain of causation, which makes being disturbed at night at least partly their fault.

Indeed - these turds need to be stopped. I haven't said anything to the contrary.

However, the fact still remains that if you choose to have your phone on at night, you're choosing to be available to be disturbed.

True, but irrelevant. Something not being right doesn't give other people the right to abuse it. Having a mobile phone does not mean you've consented to any old idiot trying to contact you at any time of the day or night.


You know, that's about the same logic that says 'if a woman gets raped while wearing revealing clothes, it's partly their fault'. An emotive comparison I'd admit, but see my point above. Having a house doesn't mean you consent to have it burgled or vandalised. Walking down the street doesn't mean you consent to be mugged. Having an online presence doesn't mean you consent to having your identity stolen, or your private data given away by any company you might deal with. Having a mobile phone is indeed a privilege, but there is absolutely no implied consent in having one for anyone at random to contact you anytime at random.

Jon

Indeed, but choosing to have your mobile turned on means you choose to be contactable by anyone that knows your number.

If you know that someone nefarious has your number and is likely to use it late at night, then by keeping your phone on at night you are choosing to make it easy for the antagonist to inconvenience you. It seems especially stupid if you have no important reason for keeping that phone on.

It's nothing like the same logic. Rape is a mostly unpredictable, unforeseeable event that the victim is usually powerless to prevent.

In this case, it's much more like a woman who leaves the house dressed as a green & orange stripey rabbit, gets raped at the bottom of the street by a rapist who only rapes women dressed as green & orange stripey rabbits, gets told this by the Police and then the next night chooses to go out again dressed as a green & orange stripey rabbit.

Yes the rapist should be stopped and should bear the full penalty of the law. However, she doesn't need to go out dressed as a green & orange stripey rabbit and can take a very step action to prevent the problem.

Neither time is her fault. However the second time round, she is choosing to make it easy for the antagonist to inconvenience her.

No it doesn't. Correct.

However, part of any home insurance is the duty to take reasonable steps to prevent burglary i.e. locking the doors and shutting the windows. Deliberately not locking the door means you choose to make it easy for the burglar to commit the crime; you are choosing to make it easy for the antagonist to inconvenience you.

Again correct.

However, choosing to walk through Hulme or Mosside whilst carrying a laptop, an iPhone and noise reduction headphones means you are choosing to not be able to hear the mugger coming. You are choosing to make it easy for the antagonist to inconvenience you.

Again correct.

However unless you take reasonable precautions e.g. updating your browser, installing anti-virus, not including your credit card details in forum posts and e-mails etc., you are choosing to make it easy for the antagonist to inconvenience you.

However there are quite simple steps almost anyone can take to reduce the risk of disturbance or inconvenience.

Have you recently taken a job at a call centre, Jim?

That whole thing reads like you're reaching, to justify a weak position.

Until a couple of years ago I was on 24hr call-out and my mobile HAD to be switched on. I didn't work in a particularly high powered/specialised job, nor was I part of the emergency services. Under your reasoning, if was still in that job, I'd just have to grin and bear it when receiving spam texts at 2am.

For many people, their mobile is their only form of contact. Texting someone at stupid o'clock is exactly the same as banging on their front door. Would you not be upset if I banged on your front door uninvited 4 times every day at various hours?

Of course it's your own fault for having a front door. A front door is a privilege many people can't afford - and that's seriously true. Millions of people are homeless or living in accommodation with no kind of privacy.

+1

I don't do anything urgent via text message. However, my degree was in Trading Standards (who enforce this sort of thing), so I know only too well exactly what sort of affect this kind of badgering can have on someone, especially a vulnerable person. What starts off as an annoyance can quickly become distressing for the recipient and it's a highly unethical way to be carrying on business.

I don't have a phone plugged into my landline as 12 months after I move in I'll be moving out.

My mobile is for all sorts of contact, and although turned to silent, still vibrates and flashes at me during the night.

Work could also call me 24/7 if the other guy on call can't make the call out (illness, etc.).

The few spam texts I've had have been annoying, but I'd rather suffer them than find something awful had happened to a family member over voicemail.

No.

Under my reasoning, you now don't have to.


For the vast majority, that's just not true.

I am talking about the majority.


It's nothing like the same.

One cannot turn a front door to silent or leave it downstairs on the kitchen counter..

Indeed - I've been on the receiving end.

And until I could sort it out, I either turned my phone off at night or, if I needed to contactable, turned the SMS volume down. Either way I wasn't disturbed at night, slept soundly and could better deal with things in the morning.

RB, you are the only person who has posted anything in this thread that suggest these kind of unsolicited communications are the receiver's problem to deal with, rather than something the sender should be prohibited from doing. Has it occurred to you that, you know, everyone else might just be right on this one?

For the majority of wealthy people, what you say is true. It's incredibly unchristian to deny the existence of the majority of the world population who are not so fortunate.



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8355504.stm

Outside of Europe, the figures are very much higher. They've also increased since that article. I'm sure you could find the facts if you cared.

I have not suggested anything of the sort.

I have merely suggested that the woman in the report is not nearly as helpless as is being made out. She has things she can do while she waits for the authorities to catch up.


Ah! Argumentum ad populum. I was wondering when that would turn up.

And to my recollection, it has never been valid.

It very much sounded like you were suggesting it was her problem, or simply dismissing it as not being a problem at all.

We're not talking about email spam or bumf through the letter box, it's far more intrusive and I maintain that it's equivalent to banging on someone's door. Not that bad once or twice, but 28 times per week, 120 times a month, over 1000 times a year it can really grind you down.

I've had to change my land line number in the past for a similar reason - I was getting texts and calls several times a day, to the point where my phone was literally full of this crap if I was away for a couple of days. You simply can't change your number frequently, and for many people as they have testified here unplugging is just not an option and wouldn't make the problem go away anyway.