Diablogonzales, A key to understanding lies in your own reflection. Look at it. Look at your posts in this thread and compare them with Sasan's. While you claim to be arguing against aggression (claiming gov regulation is better at reducing it), your posts CONTAIN aggression. Even though the written word can only contain "virtual" aggression, the concept is the same. Your posts deliver insults and name-calling and overt hostility to the person of Sasan, who did absolutely nothing to you to deserve it. That is not only "verbal aggression", it is "INITIATED aggression". Thereby you not only defeat your own claims, you destroy your own credibility.
You demonstrate what you claim to be arguing against. Therefore (according to your own argument), you should be arrested - since a government law making such verbal aggression illegal would only be an extension of your position. -------------------------- --- In [email protected], "Sasan" <sasan.sa...@...> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "diablogonzales" <Spammastergrand@> wrote: > > >No one wants to return to a barbaric culture of half apes. Laws > >protect us, our families and children. > > Actually, they ENSLAVE you, your family, and your children. Laws are nothing more than written threats backed by police violence. Enslave me? By letting me take or quit any job I want? Take any classes, express any opinion? How do you define slavery, the government not letting you commit rape or child molestation? They are enslaving you from denying you that "right?" > > >There would be no private property because the world would be on fire > >with murder and theft. > > The world IS on fire with murder and theft. It's called war and taxes. I have never seen a tank other than television and I'm 45. I do know without laws I would have to arm myself because violent criminals and sex offenders would steal cars, murder people for their homes 1000 times more than they are now. That rape, murder and theft would be commonplace. That toal anarchy and destruction would be nonstop on every street corner in a country without laws, police or government. You have a ridiculously unrealistic philosophy, which is why no one is dumb enough to try it save a few people in loincloths in the forrest. Well we live in a modern civilization, where anarchy is not realistic. Where might doesn't make right and the richest or survivors are the ones with the most guns. The richest are the ones who know the most valuable skills and knowledge. > > >Like post apocalyptic movies. If you had a house, armed people would try to take it constantly. > > You mean like the armed police that would take my house if I stopped paying my protection money on time? So much for private property. Yes, like every other country on the planet. Their government provides services and not for free. > > >[Corporations] have the responsibility not to harm people, like any > >person. The managers making decisions have the personal responbility not to lie cheat, harm the population or they should go to prison. > >They want the same rights as an individulal, perverting the 14th > >amendment, they should have the same responsibility. > > I agree. Unfortunately, corporate law is designed to shield these managers from personal responsibility. > > > > > Then they are in the wrong country. In fact wrong era. They already tried that in Germany. > > Tried what in Germany? Discrimination on a national scale. > > > >You have a mideastern sounding name, how do you feel about people not hiring Arabs and Indians? Or paying you less. You are in favor of the practice? > > Of course not, but government intervention solves nothing. In fact, it would only fan the flames of racial hatred by allowing bigots to claim that they are the victims. It gives people legal recourse if they can prove they were not hired, or were fired on the basis of race, gender, religion, seual orientation. That in a modern society we recognize that those are not valid reasons for not hiring someone. That business that do it do not have the right to operate in a free and honorable society. > > > > You can't let profit and supply and demand dictate laws regulations > > and governance. > > I don't want laws or governance at all, so why would you suggest that I want profit and supply to dictate them? The free market will take care of poison being sold as a memory pill, after a million die, and thats ok? People will eventually stop taking it. That is idiotic. Laws are for prevention. To establish behavior that is unacceptable and arrest, try and imprison those that break those laws. Because some are unfair is no justification for no laws. You really need to buy a tent and go live out in the woods. Or a bunker with spam and rifles to protect your supply. You don't belong in a civilized society if you feel that way. > > > > "If they kidnap children, and sell them as sex slaves, they will get bad publicity." > > > > "People will eventually find out their products are poison, and stop using them." > > > > Actually, people that engage in these practices can expect more than just bad publicity; they can expect violent retaliation. So you are a reactionary, against crime prevention or a proactive stance. You are an anarchist, not Libertarian. Why are you even on a Libertarian site? Why not find a tribe in New Guinea with no official govenment or police? Because you like the safety and prosperity we have attained in a land of laws, property, redress of grievenaces. > > >We live in a civilized society by which we expect people to live by > >the golden rule, and create laws to hold people to them. To punish > >theft, rape and murder. > > Rather than just punish those crimes, I'd rather prevent them from happening in the first place by allowing individuals to arm themselves. So everyone should carry a gun, women, children old people. Maybe grenades. If only America were more like Beruit. Or Mad Max. > > > > You don't wait till people are cheated, you prevent it from > > happening by making it illegal. > > This sort of consumer "protection" law only serve to create a false sense of security among the population which makes them easy targets for fraud. No, it establishes laws coroprations have to abide if they want to do business in the United States of America. Something you don't believe should exist. > > > >Every society has laws, every government some regulations. And for > >good reason. No modern society could exist without them. I could rape > >any woman, steal any car, murder any homeowner without them. > > You could commit those crimes right now, but you run the risk of being caught and punished. What, you mean the fear of being locked up would prevent me from doing something? That being locked up would prevent more crimes? Or should we just live in an eye for an eye land drenched in bloodshed and contiunual class war, rape, violence without laws, only retribution of those well armed? What you are describing is hell. Something that would only happen if we run out of food or water, after a nuclear war. Total chaos and nonstop destruction. >In a free society (well-armed) you can commit those crimes as well but also run the risk of being killed by your victim in the process. > > You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of what a law is, what it's capable of achieving, and what it's unintended consequences are. Laws cannot protect you from crime, but they are very good at facilitating crime. > > ---Sasan Laws are what enable civilization. Large groups of people to live together in relative freedom, prosperity and safety. Governing bodies that address differences, between people, punish dangerous and harmful people. In short, you don't agree with the founding fathers, or really any philosopher except maybe a serial rapist, aborigine or caveman.
