[quote author=Ishtar link=topic=4846.msg50800#msg50800 date=1299637022]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50799#msg50799 date=1299636478]
Now let's talk morality…
[/quote]
I never said that my morality is the only right one, but I reserve the right to be upset by, and to do anything in my power to change the fact that other people like you are forceable trying to impose their morality on me, when I am doing no such thing to them.
I will always resist other people imposing their morality on me… I want you, Mr cop to leave me alone and stop charging me for your services, when you don't provide me with your services, and I didn't request them to begin with.
As for your suggestion to talk about morality with you…
No thanks, please go ahead and answer my questions first, and substantiate some of your previous empty claims by actually backing them up with evidence.
Unless you're willing to actually have a debate and be accountable for the things you say, there is no point in debating you on anything, because you will just ignore any point made to you and put your spin on everything else.
[/quote]
And what exactly would you enjoy me answering?
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50803#msg50803 date=1299638133]
And what exactly would you enjoy me answering?
[/quote]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50803#msg50803 date=1299638133]
Let's assume for a moment they try to pass a law that is mala in se, like murdering people based on religion, skin color, or liking the letter 'Q.' There would be the handful of people that would follow their rule simply because it was the rule, but the VAST, VAST, VAST majority of us robots would have them rounded up and prosecuted. There would be a coup quicker than you could imagine.
[/quote]
Provide even ONE case in history when the police force has actually rounded up and prosecuted the ruling class when they implemented laws that are mala in se, without said round ups being proceeded by an uprising of the people through acts of civil disobedience.
In other words… back up your claim that this is what would happen…
One case, against the many many many cases throughout history that have shown that the opposite of your claim is what usually happens.
Also, show me evidence of the fact that American citizens can legally actually pick up and move somewhere else, as you suggest they do, without still being liable to pay taxes in the USA and without having to pay an exit fee if the US government decides that they should.
If you can't, please explain to me how the US government does not enslave it's "citizens" when they demand payment before they allow people to leave.
Further, explain to me how ANYTHING you do during your line of work can be considered moral when your paycheck consist of money that is stolen from people using force and fraud.
If you accept stolen money to do your job, your line of work makes you immoral just by showing up to work in the morning… so explain to me how the morality of the acts you commit at work is even in question.
[quote] You mean the hypothetical shortcomings of a stateless society?[/quote]
No, I mean the obvious ones. Western Sahara is currently 'stateless' and I'd say it's quite far from ideal…much more so than our own 'statist' society.
Where do you get this "suck the tit of government" garbage? The people FUND the government. The roads, the services, YOUR JOB are paid for by the people. So you're damn right you'd better provide us with a service. In point of fact, this entity called "the state" wouldn't even EXIST without the people to create it. So I don't get how you're somehow trying to make it a seperate entity when it is US who give it life in the first place. In addition, I don't know what universe you're from, but in any business I've ever heard of, whoever funds and pays for the daily operations of said business IS THE BOSS. You work for me. Period.
So let's get one thing straight: YOU ARE NOT MY AUTHORITY.
I understand you and your bretheren like to think so, and engage in certain actions to try to convince me and the general populace otherwise… and that is the crux of the arguement. The use of your utility belts to coerce and collect revenues above and beyond what has been already paid. And all in the name of "authority". Notice "Civil Servant" is rarely (if ever) used anymore. Homework assignment: watch the news or read a newspaper and count how many times "authority" is used. What did Goebbels say about repeating a lie often enough??
Even you have said that "a monkey could do our job 99% of the time". Well what I'm saying is get rid of 99% of the laws (and monkeys) and then the rest of the "good cops" can enforce the remaining 1% of actual, common sense laws that actually involve a VICTIM. Not, "You crossed the street diagonally…" Also, it's obvious that laws do not prevent crime. They only provide recourse AFTER THE FACT. So this whole potential victim arguement is a con. Unless there is an actual victim, there can be no cause for redress.
So… Without the burden of the asinine 99% of laws on the books (and the paperwork involved), someone like yourself can actually focus and concentrate on PREVENTING ACTUAL CRIME and actually protect and serve the community and keep it safe. YA HEARD?!?
Government is a religion with a fictional holy tome called laws. The most faithful zealots are given arms to evangelize the non-believers into the flock. The second most faithful fanatics are given robes and lay punishment upon the heretics and serve to make an example of the faithless. The least faithful gather in great conclaves in gilded palaces, it is here that the perversion begins as the palace attracts charlatans and scoundrels.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50789#msg50789 date=1299633272]
@Paul- we know that the idea of marijuana laws are bullshit. I've already admitted as such. The official justification is the idea of blood on the plants. Now some of this IS true to a great extent, and some is hyped. But this debate should not be about weed. Seems like a lot of the justification for the FSP IS the ability to smoke weed. It defeats the purpose of what could be a reasonable idea, and focuses too much on one small aspect of your social life.
[/quote]
Excuse me…The debate isn't about weed as a substance, if it were it's an easy debate for the Cannabis user to win given the benefits they feel they receive. If any person doesn't feel there are benefits, there's an easy solution, don't partake. Simple.
This debate is about the freedom that people SHOULD have, but DON'T because of people like you, to ingest ANY substance. Your blood on the plants analogy can be "official" all it wants…it's a bullshit argument, thank you for owning up to that.
Since you realize it's a bullshit argument, the question becomes… What are YOU going to do? Will you keep defending bullshit arguments and hurting people or will you man up and become a Peace officer? THAT is the real issue. Providing a list of "all the good things" that you do CANNOT justify your fucking with somebodies life over something you admit is bullshit. Rationalizations won't cut it and will get called out hard here friend. Also that whole moving the argument into areas that blur the issues thing…that won't work here either.
If you have arrested ONE person for a victimless crime, you are wrong. All the semantics and word games won't change that.
The way to salvation, is to disavow harming others and then stop that behavior.
In the interest of weaning you of your violent tendencies… I hereby sentence you to 3 months of LEAP outreach, without benefit of your extorted pay and for your final test before graduating to becoming a peaceful person, you must turn in your badge and apologize to your victims.
[quote author=holy_canole link=topic=4846.msg50795#msg50795 date=1299634601]
Western Sahara has no government…I've often wondered why this was not a place chosen (even symbolically) for the Free State Movement, or why the obvious shortcomings of a stateless society are not acknowledged.
[/quote]
Because Western Sahara has several governments fighting to gain control over the territory and has Morocco illegitimately doing most of the ruling in a dictator capacity, despite the fact that it's supposedly has no government.
Hardly what you would call and actually stateless society, when it's basically still occupied 24/7 by a government that's trying to get international recognition for it's "right" to lay claim to the land they're already "illegally" trying to govern…
[quote] Hardly what you would call and actually stateless society, when it's basically still occupied 24/7 by a government that's trying to get international recognition for it's "right" to lay claim to the land they're already "illegally" trying to govern… [/quote]
And you don't see the possibility of that happening if, say, New Hampshire were to become 'stateless'?
[quote author=holy_canole link=topic=4846.msg50825#msg50825 date=1299700733]
[quote] Hardly what you would call and actually stateless society, when it's basically still occupied 24/7 by a government that's trying to get international recognition for it's "right" to lay claim to the land they're already "illegally" trying to govern… [/quote]
And you don't see the possibility of that happening if, say, New Hampshire were to become 'stateless'?
[/quote]
The FSP doesn't have as it's objective to become "stateless".
The FSP has as it's objective to form a voting block that will direct government back to it's original restricted form that this country was founded on.
You did realize what the FSP's goal is why you asked why it didn't pick the Western Sahara as a symbolic starting place, right?
As to whether or not New Hampshire or any other territory would actually survive if it where to become stateless because it's population wanted it that way, that's a whole other question.
My assessment is that the reason why places like Western Sahara and Somalia don't work out without a government is not the fact that the absence of government doesn't work, but that the population itself is still indoctrinated enough to believe that it NEEDS a government.
When a country full of people all think they want and need a government, but all have different opinions on who should be the guy in charge, there is bound to be trouble, which is exactly what you're seeing in the so called "stateless" African countries.
The people on this board who are advocating a stateless society are doing so from the perspective that they want to educate the general population to the point that people realize they don't need the next guy to come in and play dictator while he's promising the next utopia.
The ideal of a stateless society is for people to realize that utopia doesn't exist and is unattainable, and that in the long run, it pays off much better to accept that and take personal responsibility for your own actions than to give your freedoms to somebody else who is promising you their version of utopia but doesn't deliver on even a 10th of his campaign promises…
[quote author=Ishtar link=topic=4846.msg50827#msg50827 date=1299701874]The FSP doesn't have as it's objective to become "stateless".
The FSP has as it's objective to form a voting block that will direct government back to it's original restricted form that this country was founded on.[/quote]
Actually, the FSP doesn't specify tactics…
"… I will exert the fullest practical effort toward the creation of a society in which the maximum role of civil government is the protection of life, liberty, and property."
Voting is one method, and only one. Even if all 20k move, tomorrow, that's not enough to control the outcome of an election in NH. Only by actively recruiting from within the existing population, could enough votes to control the outcome of an election be obtained. The primary goal of those moving to support the FSP should not be to show up and vote, but to show up and convince others to vote and otherwise take action (agorism, education, etc.).
Even within electoral politics, someone who shows up and votes counts less than someone who doesn't vote, but convinces ten others to vote.
Joe
[quote author=free libertarian link=topic=4846.msg50819#msg50819 date=1299681419]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50789#msg50789 date=1299633272]
@Paul- we know that the idea of marijuana laws are bullshit. I've already admitted as such. The official justification is the idea of blood on the plants. Now some of this IS true to a great extent, and some is hyped. But this debate should not be about weed. Seems like a lot of the justification for the FSP IS the ability to smoke weed. It defeats the purpose of what could be a reasonable idea, and focuses too much on one small aspect of your social life.
[/quote]
Excuse me…The debate isn't about weed as a substance, if it were it's an easy debate for the Cannabis user to win given the benefits they feel they receive. If any person doesn't feel there are benefits, there's an easy solution, don't partake. Simple.
This debate is about the freedom that people SHOULD have, but DON'T because of people like you, to ingest ANY substance. Your blood on the plants analogy can be "official" all it wants…it's a bullshit argument, thank you for owning up to that.
Since you realize it's a bullshit argument, the question becomes… What are YOU going to do? Will you keep defending bullshit arguments and hurting people or will you man up and become a Peace officer? THAT is the real issue. Providing a list of "all the good things" that you do CANNOT justify your fucking with somebodies life over something you admit is bullshit. Rationalizations won't cut it and will get called out hard here friend. Also that whole moving the argument into areas that blur the issues thing…that won't work here either.
If you have arrested ONE person for a victimless crime, you are wrong. All the semantics and word games won't change that.
The way to salvation, is to disavow harming others and then stop that behavior.
In the interest of weaning you of your violent tendencies… I hereby sentence you to 3 months of LEAP outreach, without benefit of your extorted pay and for your final test before graduating to becoming a peaceful person, you must turn in your badge and apologize to your victims.
[/quote]
First off, I don't have 'victims.' Secondly, I am a POLICE officer, not a peace officer- whatever the hell that means. Third, PROVE to me that I, myself, have violent tendencies. And last, but most importantly, just ONE life saved can justify a variety of things. I'm proud to say I have more than a few lives saved directly attributable to my actions.
Therefore, friend, I have already been 'saved.'
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50861#msg50861 date=1299808825]
First off, I don't have 'victims.' Secondly, I am a POLICE officer, not a peace officer- whatever the hell that means. Third, PROVE to me that I, myself, have violent tendencies. And last, but most importantly, just ONE life saved can justify a variety of things. I'm proud to say I have more than a few lives saved directly attributable to my actions.
Therefore, friend, I have already been 'saved.'
[/quote]
A couple lives saved hardly seems to count for anything, if measured up against enslaving an entire nation in order to pay for your… generous altruism…
it is not surprising that you can't figure out what a peace officer is.
It's not often you can see a guy sucking his own cock. Your last post has so much self pleasuring statements in it that you must have dropped a big load.
it is violence to collect on your blood money as you do weekly. There are lots of boy scouts that save lives too. I can't remember the last time a boy scout stole my money and then bragged about how he had nothing to do all day but bust people for using drugs and happen upon someone that needed some help.
[quote author=IntegralS link=topic=4846.msg50810#msg50810 date=1299643313]
Where do you get this "suck the tit of government" garbage? The people FUND the government. The roads, the services, YOUR JOB are paid for by the people. So you're damn right you'd better provide us with a service. In point of fact, this entity called "the state" wouldn't even EXIST without the people to create it. So I don't get how you're somehow trying to make it a seperate entity when it is US who give it life in the first place. In addition, I don't know what universe you're from, but in any business I've ever heard of, whoever funds and pays for the daily operations of said business IS THE BOSS. You work for me. Period.[/quote]
Right, but I also work for all the people around you as well. And if those people don't want you smoking weed, and make a law prohibiting it, do I listen to them or you?
[quote author=IntegralS link=topic=4846.msg50810#msg50810 date=1299643313]So let's get one thing straight: YOU ARE NOT MY AUTHORITY.[/quote]
Ok Cartman.
[quote author=IntegralS link=topic=4846.msg50810#msg50810 date=1299643313]I understand you and your bretheren like to think so, and engage in certain actions to try to convince me and the general populace otherwise… and that is the crux of the arguement. The use of your utility belts to coerce and collect revenues above and beyond what has been already paid. And all in the name of "authority". Notice "Civil Servant" is rarely (if ever) used anymore. Homework assignment: watch the news or read a newspaper and count how many times "authority" is used. What did Goebbels say about repeating a lie often enough??
Even you have said that "a monkey could do our job 99% of the time". Well what I'm saying is get rid of 99% of the laws (and monkeys) and then the rest of the "good cops" can enforce the remaining 1% of actual, common sense laws that actually involve a VICTIM. Not, "You crossed the street diagonally…" Also, it's obvious that laws do not prevent crime. They only provide recourse AFTER THE FACT. So this whole potential victim arguement is a con. Unless there is an actual victim, there can be no cause for redress. [/quote]
You are 100% right, the LAWS don't prevent the crimes. But you know what keeps me from getting out of my car and beating the snot out of the person that cut me off? The PUNISHMENT associated with that law. And how am I going to get punished? The government has an authority that enforces rules. Without that enforcement, I will have nothing at all to prevent me from attacking the guy that cut me off, will I? And in a stateless society, please explain how this person who has no idea who I am can somehow find me and prosecute me.
[quote author=IntegralS link=topic=4846.msg50810#msg50810 date=1299643313]
So… Without the burden of the asinine 99% of laws on the books (and the paperwork involved), someone like yourself can actually focus and concentrate on PREVENTING ACTUAL CRIME and actually protect and serve the community and keep it safe. YA HEARD?!?
[/quote]
So exactly how do I PREVENT crime if I can not enforce the rules, or those asinine rules aren't in effect? Most of the time, the bad guy is caught from violating some asinine rule after the major crime had been committed. Check and see how the patsy Tim Mcveigh was caught- YA HEARD THAT?
A POLICE officer does enforcement thuggery for the cretins in the legislature. He wields the clubs and guns of the state. He has special privileges not afforded us peons. He is paid with extorted money (taxes). I avoid him like the plague.
A peace officer makes it his full-time job to help the rest of us preserve the peace. He may not do anything any of the rest of us may not do. He is paid voluntarily by people who contract for his services. I would be happy to call him my friend.
police = cowards hiding behind badges
peace officer = a person who stands up for the natural rights of others and offers a service to help defend those in need, help to protect those that wish for it, and to be morally straight in order to set an example for others.
I don't know many peace officers anymore. I know one thing, I've never met a police officer that was one.
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50861#msg50861 date=1299808825]Third, PROVE to me that I, myself, have violent tendencies.[/quote]
Okay…
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50864#msg50864 date=1299809684]You are 100% right, the LAWS don't prevent the crimes. But you know what keeps me from getting out of my car and beating the snot out of the person that cut me off? The PUNISHMENT associated with that law. And how am I going to get punished? The government has an authority that enforces rules. Without that enforcement, I will have nothing at all to prevent me from attacking the guy that cut me off, will I?[/quote]
Is this guy for real?
"I'm not violent. I'd just assault anyone whom I think slighted me in some way."
See, that's the problem. Cops are nothing but thugs, so they imagine that everyone else is just like them…
Joe
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50864#msg50864 date=1299809684]
you know what keeps me from getting out of my car and beating the snot out of the person that cut me off? The PUNISHMENT associated with that law.
Without that enforcement, I will have nothing at all to prevent me from attacking the guy that cut me off, will I?
[/quote]
Most people out there don't need the threat of punishment to keep them from beating the snot out of random strangers on the street.
Most people have got what one would call a "moral conscious".
But it's interesting that somebody with your chosen line of work would claim that he doesn't have the same sense of moral responsibility without somebody else enforcing it on him.
You're showing your face more and more in this debate.
Tell me…
If you're the type of person that will randomly beat the snot out of strangers just because you can get away with it… why on Earth do I want you on the "police force" supposedly "protecting" me?
Seems to me that somebody like you -a cop- would get an awful lot of opportunities to unpunished beat the snot out of random strangers just because they happened to piss you off a little with their driving style.
Either that, or your almighty cop powers allow you to get "even" with such people in a lot of other ways I imagine…
[quote author=Ishtar link=topic=4846.msg50869#msg50869 date=1299811752]
[quote author=OhCrapItsTheCops link=topic=4846.msg50864#msg50864 date=1299809684]
you know what keeps me from getting out of my car and beating the snot out of the person that cut me off? The PUNISHMENT associated with that law.
Without that enforcement, I will have nothing at all to prevent me from attacking the guy that cut me off, will I?
[/quote]
Most people out there don't need the threat of punishment to keep them from beating the snot out of random strangers on the street.
Most people have got what one would call a "moral conscious".
But it's interesting that somebody with your chosen line of work would claim that he doesn't have the same sense of moral responsibility without somebody else enforcing it on him.
You're showing your face more and more in this debate.
Tell me…
If you're the type of person that will randomly beat the snot out of strangers just because you can get away with it… why on Earth do I want you on the "police force" supposedly "protecting" me?
Seems to me that somebody like you -a cop- would get an awful lot of opportunities to unpunished beat the snot out of random strangers just because they happened to piss you off a little with their driving style.
Either that, or your almighty cop powers allow you to get "even" with such people in a lot of other ways I imagine…
[/quote]
Seriously? I'm poking holes into your idea of the enforcer-less society and this is the best insult you can hurl?
Get your head in the game and debate as to HOW an enforce-less society or a lawless society will operate amicably and together for the GREATER good. It will be anarchy in its truest sense, with no rules of law, moral beliefs that differ for everyone, and hardships had by everyone with no infrastructure. But there will surely be an acre of weed in everyone's back yard.
Welcome back NJ Police Officer. I commend you for helping people if you saved someone's life. That's a good thing.
If a group of people calling themselves legislators had made a law that prevented you from saving those lives, would you have followed the law or still saved the people?