- Joined
- Jul 14, 2008
- Messages
- 91,138
- Points
- 113
The phrase "passing the buck" is frequently used to describe a situation where someone passes on the responsibility of a wrongdoing or problem to someone else.
For example, he "passed the buck" to me and went off happily for his holiday.
I think this phrase can and should also be used to make people accountable for other people's actions, and I'm thinking specifically of people who have done something wrong and escaped or absconded.
When the person who has done something wrong runs away, it is very difficult to find him for 2 simple reasons. Firstly, he would have known well in advance that he would be running and he would know where to go to remain undetected. Secondly, especially in cases where there is no outright blatant criminal act or violent crime or where no one important is involved, the authorities tend to go through "due process" to resolve the case, which takes time. By then, the person running away could be thousands of miles away.
In such cases, what do you think of the idea whereby people close to the person are held for questioning, until the person who did the deed returns? If the person ran away with his lover and the person does not have any close family or relatives, then detain the closed family and relatives of the lover?
Some people may think that this is under-handed or mean or unethical, but what the person who ran away did was also under-handed or mean or unethical. Why can't he be treated the same way that he treated others?
For example, he "passed the buck" to me and went off happily for his holiday.
I think this phrase can and should also be used to make people accountable for other people's actions, and I'm thinking specifically of people who have done something wrong and escaped or absconded.
When the person who has done something wrong runs away, it is very difficult to find him for 2 simple reasons. Firstly, he would have known well in advance that he would be running and he would know where to go to remain undetected. Secondly, especially in cases where there is no outright blatant criminal act or violent crime or where no one important is involved, the authorities tend to go through "due process" to resolve the case, which takes time. By then, the person running away could be thousands of miles away.
In such cases, what do you think of the idea whereby people close to the person are held for questioning, until the person who did the deed returns? If the person ran away with his lover and the person does not have any close family or relatives, then detain the closed family and relatives of the lover?
Some people may think that this is under-handed or mean or unethical, but what the person who ran away did was also under-handed or mean or unethical. Why can't he be treated the same way that he treated others?
