• roastpotatothief@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    208
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It is useful to have lots of stupid laws. It makes people feel powerless and frustrated. It means the police can always find excuses to persecute you.

    The technicalities of the individual laws are not important. It’s the psychological effect of the whole body of laws on a people.

      • kool_newt@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This isn’t as bad as it sounds. Water prevented from reaching the ground in watersheds means groundwater doesn’t get replenished. Now maybe a house here and there collecting rainwater isn’t a problem, but what about Nestle? The law should allow reasonable rainwater collection by individuals or family households while preventing theft of water from a region.

        • uis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          means groundwater doesn’t get replenished.

          To then be extracted by greedy corporation.

      • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rainwater collection laws in the US are based on conservation and fair allocation of a scarce resource.

        In places that don’t have scarcity, you actually have the opposite issue, where drainage might be restricted or mandated to prevent issues from harming your neighbors.

        I can’t build a dam on my property because it might flood my neighbor. People in the southwest can’t collect water at will because it might dry out their neighbors.

    • You999@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is useful to have lots of stupid laws. It makes people feel powerless and frustrated. It means the police can always find excuses to persecute you.

      How many laws does the US have again?

  • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Given the context, this seems more evil than is probably intended.

    There are laws about collection and storage of rainwater all over the world unrelated to genocide. Water falling from the sky is the source of aquifers, lakes, and rivers that are important for everyone.

    • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah there are good reasons to limit or prevent rainwater collection in order to preserve necessary river systems or agricultural areas etc.

      However I highly highly doubt anything good faith is going on here.

    • The context is very straightfoward. It is an occupied territory. The occupier claims ownership of natural ressources in the occupied territory. This is typical imperialist behaviour and illegal under international law.

    • Baut [she/her] auf.@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      To add what others said (like Israel making up rules for Palestine), the people of Palestine are being attacked and their infrastructure targeted. It is pretty evil to destroy the water supply and then say: “but you can’t get it elsewhere :)”.
      I don’t think this is necessarily the case here, but laws like this are often an attempt to offer the appearance of legitimacy to acts of violence (i.e. “yes we imprisoned them but they broke the law!”).

    • riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      and who better to claim ownership over the rain falling on palastinian soil than the israeli government

      i dont think you can justify this stuff, at best make it sound slightly less evil

    • Prunebutt@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Water for agricultural and domnestic use usually is fed back to the water cycle, though.

      Watering my veggies is distinct from e.g. building a dam, or something.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You could, though, for example, set up a large collection system for water that would normally be fed into a tributary that other farmers are using downstream for irrigation. A company with enough resources to collect and bottle rainwater for profit across a large area that would otherwise feed into aquifers could bleed a small farming community dry.

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right, it’s just that not all rainwater collection is inherently domestic or agricultural, and that’s why some places (ostensibly, at least) have laws restricting it, with the goal being to keep it feeding into the water cycle and not shipping it elsewhere.

              • Stovetop@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I didn’t miss that part, I’m just saying that usually that’s not why laws like this are created. The stated intent of this one is likely something about protecting fragile aquifers and the real intent is gradual genocide.

    • dukatos@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      AFAIK, there is no such laws in Europe. I know for parts of USA and Israel. Correct me if I am wrong.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        No such laws in Russia. And it seems no such laws in Poland. No for Ukraine, no for Belarus, Kazahstan even has some bonuses if you collect rainwater, Latviya has some bonuses too.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You are definitely wrong. I work in municipal development and a developer retaining water on site beyond what is necessary to offset their increased impervious cover is something that’s highly discouraged and restricted.

        Water need to go to the rivers and aquifers, and damming it up for private use is a real problem.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are laws about collection and storage of rainwater all over the world unrelated to genocide.

      I never seen them before. Too much rainwater is a problem, but not collecting it.

      • Waraugh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s illegal for me to have rain barrels off my gutters. I wanted them to use the water for my garden. I’m not in any area with existing water shortage or drought issues either.

      • ReluctantMuskrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        It can be actually. People upstream of water sources - often wealthy people with land but sometimes a collective of local farmers - build dams or retaining ponds to save the water for themselves and on a significant scale can limit the amount of water that goes downstream.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sometimes.

        I work in municipal development and how rainwater is handled is a huge part of my job. It usually comes down to whatever the developer wants is bad.

        They either want to collect all water and essentially deny it to everyone else so they can sell it, or they want to pave over everything and refuse to detain stormwater and flood the neighbors.

        It’s not at all the same thing as Palestinians wanting water for food and crops, but a lot of the time these laws start out as something sensible before being used as a weapon.

  • callouscomic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    The United States does the same thing all over the Southwest. Rural people will tell you.

    • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s a difference between needing a permit to collect rainwater because the water belongs to everyone, and being forbidden from collecting rainwater because the water belongs to an oppressing party.

    • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      It might be the same as Canada where you only can with a permit just to be sure people aren’t drinking mold water

    • SpunkyMcGoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      isn’t the point there that shit is super dry and if you leech the water in the wrong places the ground can’t handle it?

  • 8000mark@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hamas has banned the digging of wells since 2021. I don’t see how they would permit the harvesting of rainwater, even if there weren’t Israeli legal regulations in place (which seem to be on par with many other countries’ laws). That plus their systematic dismantling of working water infrastructure for rocket parts has had it’s effects.

    • ???@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah, but they banned it as a bad way to deal with a water shortage problem. Israel banned it because they are pricks.

      Many rural areas with Palestinians, including Palestinian citizens of Israel, aren’t even covered by the Iron Dome system because they are registered as an empty area. They also don’t get basic infrastructure that Israel would otherwise provide to any illegal settlement right away.

      That would make Hamas even dumber as bombing Israel would mean a large number of unintercepted missiles will fall into areas where Palestinians live.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Illegal settlement. Wow. Just wow. This says a lot about health of democracy.

    • OtakuAltair@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Basically, both Palestine and Israel hate Palestinians

      What a beautiful world we live in…

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, Putin hates Russians and Sobyanin hates Moscowians. Not a surprise to me.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Water bombs. They launch kegs full of water to bankrupt Israel water companies.

    • Leyla@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Should have added /s at the end. [Differentiating intentions is really hard these days]

    • igorgama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      What is water? H2O. What does the H stand for? Hydrogen. Ever heard of hydrogen bombs?

      Still think Hamas (which is all Palestinians, UN officials, and doctors in hospitals, obviously) just want water do “drink” and “not die of dehydration”?