Philosophy Now Forum

HQ wrote:I own a gun, it's mine. On the day I deprive another of his life, liberty, or property without justification, folks can gimme grief. Till then: my gun ain't anybody's business.

To sacrifice your own life for the sake of a murderer's depraved idiocy is indeed irresponsible.
To sacrifice your own peace of mind in defense of the innocent is not irresponsible.

Calling the aborted other than human is self-justification via self-deception.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:22 pm You have shown a complete disregard for law, that is why you don't count for a person worthy of argumentation.
And it also means you don't get to hide behind the 2nd amendment too.

Your fallacy is: appeal to authority. The law is a false authority.

You have shown a complete disregard for law-making, and how all law-making exists under the umbrella of a constitution, and how constitutions exist under the umbrella of violence.

You don't get to hide behind laws as being a given. Laws are socially constructed. Constitutions are socially constructed.

The colonialists lost the war. The winners of the war wrote new laws. The sword is mightier than the pen.

Q.E.D

Part of the reason we have constitutions is precisely so that assholes like you can't decide that "I don't count as a person".
I am a person.
I am a human.
I have constitutionally agreed freedoms and rights, including the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

There is no argument you can present that will convince me to give up my guns, so all that you can do is to take them from me by force and that's illegal and unconstitutional. So who exactly is the asshole who has "complete disregard for the law" ? It seems to be you...

So let it be said as clearly as it can be said. I prefer to do this the democratic way. If you try to do this any other way - I will kill you.
If via democratic means you successfully scrap the 2A, and the you pretend to have authority over me while depriving me of property - I will kill you and then reinstate the 2A. Are we clear? Good

I am not hiding behind the 2A. I am hiding in plain sight behind the promise of violence.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:40 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:22 pm You have shown a complete disregard for law, that is why you don't count for a person worthy of argumentation.
And it also means you don't get to hide behind the 2nd amendment too.

Your fallacy is: appeal to authority. The law is a false authority.

There is no appeal here.
I just won't waste my time with a person who has no respect for law and society.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:25 pm There is no appeal here.

Observe the language you are using. Appeal. To whom? You?

Seems you have mistakenly self-appointed yourself as my juror. Need I remind you that you have no authority over me? If you are looking for a way to clear your mind on this matter - a bullet to the face is a proven technique.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 4:25 pm I just won't waste my time with a person who has no respect for law and society.

You are one such a person, dickhead.

You are literally demonstrating disregard for my constitutional rights and you have dehumanised me for exercising them. If that's the kind of respect I get from you while I am armed, I can only imagine the kind of asshole you will turn into after you legally disarm me.

The level of hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness it takes to accuse me of disrespecting law and society is staggering.

And Skep ought not waste time fartin' 'round with a person who has no respect for the individual.

Skepdick wrote:... How does the contents of your household affect your neighbours in any way? ...

Er!? I'm making mustard gas, bombs or explosives, sarin, etc, etc...

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:16 pm

Skepdick wrote:... How does the contents of your household affect your neighbours in any way? ...

Er!? I'm making mustard gas, bombs or explosives, sarin, etc, etc...

I think these people have trouble understanding what the benefits of civilisation are.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:16 pm

Skepdick wrote:... How does the contents of your household affect your neighbours in any way? ...

Er!? I'm making mustard gas, bombs or explosives, sarin, etc, etc...

You mean you broke the law already?

OK. What happens next?

Do the enforcers of the law know you are breaking the law to come and stop you from breaking the law? How?

If you aren't deprivin' your neighbors of life, liberty, or property, what business is it of theirs what you got?

Seems to me: what you got (guns, watermelons, butter knives, piss-filed balloons, stacks of old Time magazines, etc.) only becomes the other guy's business when you make it his business.

I think some people have trouble understanding what civilization is.

A clue: it ain't 'law & society'.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:03 am This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

Militias worked well enough in England in the late 18th early 19th century. As any reader of Pride and Prejudice knows these were nominally for keeping the peace and guarding against invasion by the French but were deteriorating into officers' social clubs. I am sure militias worked well in the US for a time too , for the adequate reason that central law and order machinery was impossible.

The Mafia seems to exemplify a modern militia.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 3:03 am This is your 2nd amendment yes?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."4

I know the Swiss are but how many gun owners in America are in well regulated militias?

Militias worked well enough in England in the late 18th early 19th century. As any reader of Pride and Prejudice knows these were nominally for keeping the peace and guarding against invasion by the French but were deteriorating into officers' social clubs. I am sure militias worked well in the US for a time too , for the adequate reason that central law and order machinery was impossible.

The Mafia seems to exemplify a modern militia.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:13 pm I think some people have trouble understanding what civilization is.

A clue: it ain't 'law & society'.

I'd have thought a civilisation was a society or group of societies that have become complex enough to need laws?

Skepdick wrote: You mean you broke the law already? ...

Sorry did I miss the bit where you said 'lawful contents'?

OK. What happens next? ...

Well looking at youtube in America it'd depend upon what colour you are and/or how rich you are as to whether you'll survive but by an' large your door will be kicked in and you'll be arrested.

Do the enforcers of the law know you are breaking the law to come and stop you from breaking the law? How?

Well presumably some good neighbour or acquaintance has informed the police about what you are up to.

Still, am I correct in assuming that if guns were made illegal you would stop having one? Being a law-abiding citizen and all that.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 4:15 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:13 pm I think some people have trouble understanding what civilization is.

A clue: it ain't 'law & society'.

I'd have thought a civilisation was a society or group of societies that have become complex enough to need laws?

I think civilization is the condition wherein each individual can pursue his own goals rather than serve the ambitions of the Crown or the State or the guy down the street.