[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50631#msg50631 date=1299377347]
I think I gave you more credit than I should have a few pages back. You are still rationalizing your initiation of force, I'm thinking you might have given me the wrong impression that you somehow were close to "getting it" when you first showed up after listening to FTL. I know that sounds harsh so I'll apologize for the tone, but it is absolutely true and probably my error for misjudging your intent. I thought you were here to learn. You're not.
As long as you are not willing to accept that you have no legitimate authority to intervene in another peaceful persons life you will continue to nibble on the edges of getting it, but then ultimately resort to your bag of excuses. Good luck with that.
[/quote]
Let's be clear- I DO get it. I know what this movement is all about and it's what made me post here to begin with. I like the idea of not having any outside rules, but in practice this type of society is never going to work. People need to depend on other people for survival, but there are the John Rambo types here that think they can do it all on their own.
YOU rationalize using force also, what makes me any different? Because I do it for the 'state?' Hate to break it to you, but YOU are part of the 'state' as well. I don't care if you don't like that fact, there's no way around it. If you don't like the rules of the state, then have them changed. It appears that some of the rules are put on hiatus for you guys with your weed parties and the like, so what you are doing DOES sometimes work.
My authority comes from not just a book, but the people in the community. I am expected to uphold the rules in the book that the people put there. Some of these rules are 'victimless' to you, but an argument can be made that all the rules have some kind of public safety issue. What part of that don't YOU get? And why exactly am I supposed to feel bad about enforcing rules made by the people for the people?
I'm not advocating "no rules" . Please do not do that straw man thing. I'm advocating that the primary "rule" is abiding by the NAP. I cannot rationalize INITIATING force, you can and do, it's a built in rationalization within your job description, that is where our differences lie.
I don't know anyone named John Rambo here, but if you recall I think the premise of that movie was that Rambo just wanted to be left alone and uh "they drew first blood". So in that sense you could say even Rambo seemed to respect the NAP.
Your authority is backed by force, not a legitimate consensus of "the people". If public safety were the only issue you enforced, there would need to be alot fewer cops and there'd be alot more respect for those cops. Are you aware that the USA incarcerates the highest percent of people in the world? It's about safety? No, it's about control and a "jobs program".
If I'm part of the state, can you provide a source that indicates I'm willingly part of the state? Or is there no escape from the state even if a person is peaceful and agrees to leave others alone? Is that the kind of "freedom" you are protecting?
I agree with you people need to depend on others. My friends can depend on me, helping them, not initiating aggression and generally trying to hold to my word and accepting responsibility when I goofed up. Peaceful people like to be around others they know aren't going to start shit.
Your authority to initiate aggression is morally wrong , even if you can get a bunch of sycophants to bark at the right time. Rules that allow one party to initiate aggression are wrong, legal or not. Slavery was legal wasn't it?
The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?
If you have no money you cant afford legal protection. Is it acceptable to prey on the poor and disadvantaged who have no recourse to protect themselves ?
A "society" that creates a system of predation like this isnt worth having imo.
Dont tell me the legal system is available for everyone because clearly it isnt.
[quote]“Why is marijuana against the law? It grows naturally upon our planet. Doesn't the idea of making nature against the law seem to you a bit . . . unnatural?” Bill Hicks
[/quote]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]
The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?
[/quote]
You guys love using rape and Hitler as your reasoning behind not following rules. At what point have I killed anyone based upon their religious beliefs?
[quote author=Terror Australis link=topic=4846.msg50647#msg50647 date=1299417157]
If you have no money you cant afford legal protection. Is it acceptable to prey on the poor and disadvantaged who have no recourse to protect themselves ?
A "society" that creates a system of predation like this isnt worth having imo.
Dont tell me the legal system is available for everyone because clearly it isnt.
[quote]“Why is marijuana against the law? It grows naturally upon our planet. Doesn't the idea of making nature against the law seem to you a bit . . . unnatural?” Bill Hicks
[/quote]
[/quote]
This is why they have free legal protections in court. It's called a public defender.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50648#msg50648 date=1299420177]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]
The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?
[/quote]
You guys love using rape and Hitler as your reasoning behind not following rules. At what point have I killed anyone based upon their religious beliefs?
[/quote]
The reason I brought up Nuremberg is because something can be done under the guise of legality and be horrible. Like gassing jews or incarcerating people for a plant or stealing a person's home because they didn't pay for extortion. Legality does not automatically impart "goodness" or justice.
I don't know if you've killed anyone, but your willingness to use force against people that have harmed nobody is an indication that you will rationalize your behavior, how far you will go is unknown to me. Your beliefs are different than mine.
Following rules when they initiate harm to another person and you know it's morally wrong might make you a good cop, but they don't make you a good person. Were you born a cop or a person? Is your paycheck so important you will continue to lie to yourself and convince yourself that following a shitty rule is "good", just because it's a "rule" ?
Your methods don't lead to peace and protection. They reinforce the idea that the stronger can prey on the weak and that hurting others is justified if you have a badge because some illegitimate authority told you it's okay. Well you're wrong, correct that somebody told you your behavior is okay, but wrong in your actions. You have no just authority to aggress against any peaceful person, none. I feel bad for you. You cannot justify evil, no matter how many other evil people will agree with you.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50644#msg50644 date=1299409916]Let's be clear- I DO get it. I know what this movement is all about and it's what made me post here to begin with.[/quote]
No, let's actually be clear… you know nothing about what this movement is about. Either that, or you do know, and you're just a bald-faced liar when you make up ridiculous straw men. Which is it?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50644#msg50644 date=1299409916]YOU rationalize using force also, what makes me any different?[/quote]
No, we reason the use of defensive force. You rationalize the use of initiated force. You start fights. We will only, at most, defend ourselves. Even a toddler can grasp the difference between defending himself, and starting the fight.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50644#msg50644 date=1299409916]Because I do it for the 'state?' Hate to break it to you, but YOU are part of the 'state' as well. I don't care if you don't like that fact, there's no way around it.[/quote]
Um, no. The "State" is a god you have invented, which tells you that it is okay for your government to do evil.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50644#msg50644 date=1299409916]My authority comes from not just a book, but the people in the community. I am expected to uphold the rules in the book that the people put there. Some of these rules are 'victimless' to you, but an argument can be made that all the rules have some kind of public safety issue. What part of that don't YOU get? And why exactly am I supposed to feel bad about enforcing rules made by the people for the people?[/quote]
Because that's a bald-faced lie. Some handful of punks make the rules, not "the people."
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50648#msg50648 date=1299420177][quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?[/quote]You guys love using rape and Hitler as your reasoning behind not following rules. At what point have I killed anyone based upon their religious beliefs?[/quote]
How about Rastafarians, whose religious beliefs involve the use of certain plants?
Anyway, the Nazis only killed some of their victims based upon religious beliefs. Anyone with Jewish ancestry was at risk, regardless of his religious beliefs, or lack thereof. And those killed for being Jews were only half of those killed in the camps and the mass graves. The others were killed for being "undesirable" in some way or another.
In the last century, Statism murdered a quarter of a billion men, women, and defenseless children. Billions more were maimed, tortured, raped, abused, imprisoned, starved, and oppressed. Amateur criminals could be allowed to run wild, and never hope to compare to what you professional criminals did.
And, let's reiterate the statistic that was just posted:
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]Are you aware that the USA incarcerates the highest percent of people in the world? It's about safety? No, it's about control and a "jobs program".[/quote]
You jackboots have imprisoned a larger percentage of the US population than the Nazis did theirs. More than Stalin put in the Gulags. More than any third-world dictator. Only Pol Pot had a larger percentage of the population in prison, and the US is rapidly approaching breaking that record, too.
That is what you stand for. You may not understand us, but we certainly understand you.
Joe
Hey look, you're talking to a guy that dresses up like the lead singer of the Village People.
His main tools are an explosive powered hole punch, hand cuffs, a high voltage torture device, and a big, thick, long, black rod.
He drives around looking for the most pathetic of pathetic individuals, and from them, requires absolute submission.
When he finds some poor fool, the first thing he does is call his buddies to brag about it. After he has satiated his immediate desire for submission, applied the restraint and seen if anyone else wants some, hurtles back at high speed to his house of corrections. This is where the real fun begins.
Why else would the guy be rationalizing?
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50652#msg50652 date=1299423607]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50648#msg50648 date=1299420177]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]
The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?
[/quote]
You guys love using rape and Hitler as your reasoning behind not following rules. At what point have I killed anyone based upon their religious beliefs?
[/quote]
The reason I brought up Nuremberg is because something can be done under the guise of legality and be horrible. Like gassing jews or incarcerating people for a plant or stealing a person's home because they didn't pay for extortion. Legality does not automatically impart "goodness" or justice.
I don't know if you've killed anyone, but your willingness to use force against people that have harmed nobody is an indication that you will rationalize your behavior, how far you will go is unknown to me. Your beliefs are different than mine.
Following rules when they initiate harm to another person and you know it's morally wrong might make you a good cop, but they don't make you a good person. Were you born a cop or a person? Is your paycheck so important you will continue to lie to yourself and convince yourself that following a shitty rule is "good", just because it's a "rule" ?
Your methods don't lead to peace and protection. They reinforce the idea that the stronger can prey on the weak and that hurting others is justified if you have a badge because some illegitimate authority told you it's okay. Well you're wrong, correct that somebody told you your behavior is okay, but wrong in your actions. You have no just authority to aggress against any peaceful person, none. I feel bad for you. You cannot justify evil, no matter how many other evil people will agree with you.
[/quote]
Why exaggerate the point? A ticket for a seat belt does not equal death, nor does it even compare with gassing jews or killing people because they don't look right. What I do doesn't require a Nuremberg defense since it is not a life and death matter, is not based upon a look or culture, and is ENTIRELY avoidable by not breaking the law.
I agree legal does not always equal moral. Legal however is based upon the will of the people. The people you elect make these laws, therefore you are directly responsible for these laws. If you don't like the law, elect someone else, protest, or become an activist, and have the law changed.
My methods lead to more peace and protection than your 'let's make a deal' or sign a NAP would since there is no way for you to enforce your deal or treaty without the threat of violence. You become me. I still don't see how you don't understand that point, and then have the gall to call what I do a lie.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50652#msg50652 date=1299423607]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50648#msg50648 date=1299420177]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50645#msg50645 date=1299414622]
The answer to your last question is here — Are you familiar with the Nuremberg defense ?
[/quote]
You guys love using rape and Hitler as your reasoning behind not following rules. At what point have I killed anyone based upon their religious beliefs?
[/quote]
The reason I brought up Nuremberg is because something can be done under the guise of legality and be horrible. Like gassing jews or incarcerating people for a plant or stealing a person's home because they didn't pay for extortion. Legality does not automatically impart "goodness" or justice.
I don't know if you've killed anyone, but your willingness to use force against people that have harmed nobody is an indication that you will rationalize your behavior, how far you will go is unknown to me. Your beliefs are different than mine.
Following rules when they initiate harm to another person and you know it's morally wrong might make you a good cop, but they don't make you a good person. Were you born a cop or a person? Is your paycheck so important you will continue to lie to yourself and convince yourself that following a shitty rule is "good", just because it's a "rule" ?
Your methods don't lead to peace and protection. They reinforce the idea that the stronger can prey on the weak and that hurting others is justified if you have a badge because some illegitimate authority told you it's okay. Well you're wrong, correct that somebody told you your behavior is okay, but wrong in your actions. You have no just authority to aggress against any peaceful person, none. I feel bad for you. You cannot justify evil, no matter how many other evil people will agree with you.
[/quote]
Why exaggerate the point? A ticket for a seat belt does not equal death, nor does it even compare with gassing jews or killing people because they don't look right. What I do doesn't require a Nuremberg defense since it is not a life and death matter, is not based upon a look or culture, and is ENTIRELY avoidable by not breaking the law.
I agree legal does not always equal moral. Legal however is based upon the will of the people. The people you elect make these laws, therefore you are directly responsible for these laws. If you don't like the law, elect someone else, protest, or become an activist, and have the law changed.
My methods lead to more peace and protection than your 'let's make a deal' or sign a NAP would since there is no way for you to enforce your deal or treaty without the threat of violence. You become me. I still don't see how you don't understand that point, and then have the gall to call what I do a lie.
[/quote]
No, a ticket for a seat belt does not equal death. But is that really living? I think I'd rather define that for myself,
The will of the people is to have flying angel fairy nymphs deliver them beers while they're floating above the daily super bowl game.
Where is the line for the hover bleachers?
Your methods inevitably bring mass suffering and death. Thank you, history.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]Why exaggerate the point? A ticket for a seat belt does not equal death…[/quote]
Yes, it does, because unless I submit, one of us is dying there.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]…nor does it even compare with gassing jews or killing people because they don't look right. What I do doesn't require a Nuremberg defense since it is not a life and death matter, is not based upon a look or culture, and is ENTIRELY avoidable by not breaking the law.[/quote]
Yeah, because killing people for not bowing down to you is so much better than killing people because they "don't look right."
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]I agree legal does not always equal moral. Legal however is based upon the will of the people. The people you elect make these laws, therefore you are directly responsible for these laws. If you don't like the law, elect someone else, protest, or become an activist, and have the law changed.[/quote]
I didn't elect the scum who made the laws.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]My methods lead to more peace and protection than your 'let's make a deal' or sign a NAP would since there is no way for you to enforce your deal or treaty without the threat of violence. You become me. I still don't see how you don't understand that point, and then have the gall to call what I do a lie.[/quote]
Your methods lead to hundreds of millions dead, billions abused horrifically, and an imprisonment rate that makes third-world dictators look like paragons of virtue.
And, of course, threatening violence against someone who has used force against you, already, is in no way related to being the one to attack innocent people. Even toddlers understand that.
Joe
Nancy was certainly a major threat to humanity. :roll: Isn't it wonderful that we have cops to abuse folks like her? http://www.longislandlawyerblog.com/mother-of-3-arrested-for-taking-pictures-of-tourist-attraction-at-airport
Joe
Mr. NJ Cop,
You made a comparison in using force, but I think you need to be reminded it is the INITIATION of force that brings the problems. That is a big part of your playbook. That's the part you seem to disregard in your comparisons.
So would you arrest me for aiding a runaway slave or hiding a jew ?
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50666#msg50666 date=1299465319]
Mr. NJ Cop,
You made a comparison in using force, but I think you need to be reminded it is the INITIATION of force that brings the problems. That is a big part of your playbook. That's the part you seem to disregard in your comparisons.
So would you arrest me for aiding a runaway slave or hiding a jew ?
[/quote]
That seriously has to be as dumb as or possibly dumber than Joseph's nonsense. I don't want to have to ignore you as well.
Let's talk about this initiation of force. If someone you don't have a peace treaty or NAP with wrongs your neighbor in your presence, you will just sit there and do nothing? Or will you initiate force to help your neighbor? I don't need scenarios, I just want an answer.
Obviously, NJ cop doesn't understand the meaning of "initiate". If somebody wrongs my neighbor, by harming him or stealing his stuff, that somebody has already initiated force. I will most certainly help my neighbor to defend himself, unless he makes it clear that he wants no help. If my neighbor asks me to join a posse to hunt down the killer of his child, I will most certainly do so.
That means that if YOU, Mr. NJ cop, go to my neighbor's house, break down his door, steal his marijuana and attempt to kidnap him and drag him off to a cage, then it is YOU who have initiated force, and I will gladly shoot you then and there, or join a posse to hunt YOU down and string YOU up.
Of course, as a practical matter, the criminal protection racket for which you, Mr. NJ cop are an enforcer, has me outnumbered, so I may choose as a matter of self preservation to NOT do the right thing, and go after you. But it will hurt me greatly to make that practical decision. While working towards the time when there are enough of us to eradicate you en masse, like an infestation of cockroaches, though I hate to cast such aspersions on innocent insects.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50657#msg50657 date=1299438920]
I agree legal does not always equal moral. Legal however is based upon the will of the people. The people you elect make these laws, therefore you are directly responsible for these laws. If you don't like the law, elect someone else, protest, or become an activist, and have the law changed.
[/quote]
I appreciate your willingness to post in this thread and share your thoughts.
Unfortunately the idea that because the majority elects someone that enacts legislation, this legislation must always be enforced is simply not true. Like you said yourself, "legal does not always equal moral". It is my personal belief that God gave us a mind and a heart that are to be used, and when we die the excuse of "I was just doing my job" will not hold water. Rather, we are responsible for all of our actions as an individual interacting with other individuals. You chose that profession and have 100% control and accountability for everything you do.
If you do not care for the religious argument, I will simply say that it is the police and military that are often the right hand of overreaching governments and leaders, regardless of how those leaders came to be in power. Please use discretion, and encourage other police to do the same.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50669#msg50669 date=1299497962]
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50666#msg50666 date=1299465319]
Mr. NJ Cop,
You made a comparison in using force, but I think you need to be reminded it is the INITIATION of force that brings the problems. That is a big part of your playbook. That's the part you seem to disregard in your comparisons.
So would you arrest me for aiding a runaway slave or hiding a jew ?
[/quote]
That seriously has to be as dumb as or possibly dumber than Joseph's nonsense. I don't want to have to ignore you as well.
Let's talk about this initiation of force. If someone you don't have a peace treaty or NAP with wrongs your neighbor in your presence, you will just sit there and do nothing? Or will you initiate force to help your neighbor? I don't need scenarios, I just want an answer.
[/quote]
Insults indicate a poor reasoning process and loss for words. Please put your thinking cap on and refrain from trying to redirect the converstion into one that includes insults. You can do better I think.
The word initiate seems to be one in need of definition. I don't initiate force nor does my friend in the scenario you describe above.
It is the FIRST person to aggress that "initiates" force. That is something I try very hard not to do.
I'm not sure how I would respond in your scenario above, it's unlikely I would call a cop as that usually doesn't lead to a good resolution. I don't have a problem with people that defend themselves though.
I don't believe when you "just do your job", you follow that principle. By enforcing certain laws you become the first person to aggress. You initiate force against a peaceful person.
In a moral and just world that wouldn't happen. People that harm nobody would be left alone. Your long winded "blood on the plants" story several posts back notwithstanding a good bit of your daily routine involves you being the first person to start shit.
You try to absolve yourself personally of any responsibility, most cops do or they couldn't do their jobs and live with themselves.
Are you familiar with the term cognitive dissonance?
Deep down, you have to feel that something isn't right when YOU initiate force don't you? I mean "right" in a moral sense, since much confusion ensues when we permit "legal" to be our sole guide for our actions.
I attempted to answer your question. How about you answer mine? Do you arrest me for helping a runaway slave or hiding a jew?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50644#msg50644 date=1299409916]
My authority comes from not just a book, but the people in the community.[/quote]
Rules are built into the universe: physical rules like gravity, moral rules like stealing-is-bad, biological rules like eat-or-die.
Getting some of your neighbors to engage in a ritual, on a chosen special day, cannot replace these universal rules with rules inscribed on paper by any human being, no matter how clever the incantation or how well attended the ritual. You are suffering because of your violations of the golden rule; your costumes and superstition cannot save you from the consequences of your failure to obey the rules.