Google PlusTwitter

Traffic Police Vs. Moral Police

By on Feb 18, 2009 | 6 comments

Share On GoogleShare On FacebookShare On Twitter

[Note for low IQ people: I am not supporting moral police.]

Think about this:

1. Traffic police spank you when you break the traffic rules.

2. Moral police spank you when you break the moral rules.

I mean, come on! We live in a free country and I want my personal freedom. I don’t want anyone to tell me when & where to stop when I’m traveling to some place!

Who are the traffic police to stop me and tell me which lane to follow? I’m free, come on.

The Big K


  1. kaustubh

    February 20, 2009

    Post a Reply

    Only those people can teach the lessons of morality who themselves are living at the peak of morality. And nobody in the world is staying on this peak.
    So no one gets the right to teach moral lessons to others.
    Indian culture teach us not to beat women. We are taught to treat them with grace and respect.
    So if a woman going to pub is a moral crime then beating woman also is a moral sin.
    Why not closing all the pubs and bars be considered as a solution?
    This way we may remove the root cause of this problem!!
    Its should be quite easy when you have your own government in the state?
    Easily possible, right!!!!
    But no such measures will be taken otherwise from where will they get their remunerations?
    Lets compare this to traffic rules and police:
    If there is a road, you need rules and a traffic police.
    But if no road exist, then there is no traffic and no need of police!!!!
    (of course pubs and bars are not the only thing effecting the culture)

  2. The Big K

    February 20, 2009

    Post a Reply

    First of all, I am no way supporting actions taken by Ram Sena and nor do I support beating women [or anyone!].

    What I don’t get is the ‘extreme’ stand taken by both Ram Sena and Pink Chaddi supporting women.

    Just like people say Ram Sena’s stand of being the moral police is not right; I’m saying the stand taken by the pink chaddi supporting women who think being free to do whatever they want is ‘Indian Culture’.

    Am I wrong?

  3. Amit

    February 22, 2009

    Post a Reply

    Traffic police catches you in a no entry, gives you a warning according to clearly laid down traffic rules, charges you a fine and asks you to be careful the next time. And what is considered a “no entry” is well-defined, there are clear boards, maps and you can go to the traffic/municipality department to see which areas are no entry, which are one way etc so that you can be on the right side of the traffic law next time.

    Moral police catches you in an “immoral” condition, immoral according to their arbitrary sensibilities, grabs you by your hair and start beating you up and abusing you. You can’t go anywhere to see what this “morality” standard is. You can’t be absolutely sure to not offend their “morality” sensibilities without going back to medieval times – they can pick a girl up and beat her up if she’re sitting in a pub alone, if she’s sitting in a cafe with a boy, if she’s travelling in a rickshaw with a boy, if she’s just talking on a cellphone… who knows what might offend them in the name of “Indian Culture”?

    Secondly, the traffic police are appointed by administration – on merit basis, by a government elected democratically. You won’t listen to me if I catch you going into a no entry and demand a fine, will you? Worse still, if I slap you for breaking a traffic rule, I’m sure you’ll beat me up in turn.

    Moral police are entirely self-appointed.

    Get the difference?

    Good. Now what is the problem with personal freedom? What the PCC women want is freedom to do whatever they want as long as the laws of the land are not violated. Is that not fair enough for you? You think laws of the land are inadequate and there should be rules for personal conduct additionally?

  4. The Big K

    February 22, 2009

    Post a Reply

    @Amit: Giving me the flashes of the obvious? 😉

    So, I look at it like this. Couple of guys sat together, decided what the traffic laws should be and put traffic signals in roads and expect me to follow. Come on!

    Let me put it this way – We don’t like someone else decide what should we do.

    Regarding your last paragraph, I don’t have much to say. I’m thinking, is it okay to do anything that does not break the laws of the land? Umm, why’d we need something called ‘Sanskar’ then?

  5. Amit

    February 22, 2009

    Post a Reply

    Sanskar, ie culture is something that develops… with the way people think, speak, act. It’s a mixture of influences. You can’t force another person with your version of ‘sanskar’. That’s fascism.

    About the traffic rules. It’s not a couple of guys sitting together and deciding. A. The guys who decided are not arbitrarily decided. B. Traffic rules are to facilitate better traffic, and work all over the world similarly. A traffic rule that creates more nuisance than it solves problems would be out of the scene eventually, because things would get worse, and it’d make the job of the people deciding those rules and managing the actual traffic tougher than they would want.

    All I wanted to tell you is that the comparison you’ve made is not done.

    And as far as your last paragraph goes – all I’m bound with is the laws of the land. I’m all for ‘sanskar’ and ‘good conduct’, but I don’t think any of us have the right to tell anyone else how they should conduct themselves. For example, I think people spending hours in temples is a useless activity. But you won’t see me telling anyone sitting in a temple what he should do – leave alone beating him up over it.

    Simple message to the “moral police” – mind your own business. I think it’s too hard for them to grasp. 🙂

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *