The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Fun with statists  (Read 4547 times)

2ndmouse

  • Guest
Fun with statists
« Reply #15 on: November 25, 2004, 11:32:31 am »

Quote
And you nice (self admitted) socialists will send cops to my home and kill me.


you say that as if you really really believe it. I'm not sure if thats funny or sad.  :(  
Logged

Occupant No-name

  • Guest
Fun with statists
« Reply #16 on: November 25, 2004, 12:03:17 pm »

Mr Mouse,
You do have a avatar of Trotsky though. Perhap that leads people to the wrong conclusion but you can see why though right? :)  
Logged

RagnarDanneskjold

  • Four-Leaf Order of PSM
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6944
Fun with statists
« Reply #17 on: November 26, 2004, 12:25:45 am »

Quote
Quote
And you nice (self admitted) socialists will send cops to my home and kill me.


you say that as if you really really believe it. I'm not sure if thats funny or sad.  :(
You just really don't get it, do you?

Laws, and taxes implemented by laws, are enforced. Any law that is not in correspondence with natural law is whim. Whim backed by force can only end in the death of anyone who does not comply with the whim. You can repeat the mantra over and over until your face turns blue from lack of oxygen for not inhaling, "but look, no one has died because of x or y or z." But why has no one died (physically, anyway)? Because in the cost benefit analysis, x or y or z is not worth dying over. Are these whims, imposed by force or threat of force, therefore necessarily right simply because no one has died because of them? (none of the following are exact quotes) You say all one need do is comply. You say the majority wills it so tough noogies, the minority just couldn't muster enough support for their side, life is not fair, work harder, expend your precious time here on earth fighting the whims of others rather than simply investing your time in taking care of yourself and your family and friends.

Government compulsory skule-ing - one does not agree that it is the proper function of government to "educate" ones children. (the hell with grammatical correctness and this "one" shit) So, he does not send his kids to school, does not pay to send them to private school, does not beg the government's permission to educate his kid at home or in those states where permission is not explicitly required does not recognize government's authority by submitting his kid's name to the skule district and providing a lesson plan or testing results. Some busybody who has no life of his own to be concerned with notices a kid who is not in school and takes it upon his busybody self to alert the "authorities." As you say, now, along the following path the guy has plenty of opportunity to realize that his life is in danger if he refuses to comply so it should not come as a surprise when they come with guns. So, let's skip all that b.s. He does know this. He thinks "fuck them with a capital F. They have no right to take my child." So, here comes a rep. from the skule bored.
sb. - Please submit Johnny's name, we don't really wanna make a big deal out of this. Just put his name on this piece of paper.
parent - I am sorry, I don't recognize any authority of you over my or my son's life, please be so kind as to leave my property, for you are not welcome here and are now a trespasser.
truant officer. - Sir, we insist you comply. Your son is a truant and we will need you to either enroll him in our skule, a private school or sign this paper which we have filled out to make it so much easier for you. All you have to do is sign it and fill in a curriculum you will be following for the year. When you have him tested in the spring, just send us the results. We mean you no harm. I am a family man myself. I know how important your son is to you. I don't want a confrontation. I am a nice guy. Just doing my job.
parent - I am sorry, I don't recognize any authority of you over my or my son's life, please be so kind as to leave my property, for you are not welcome here and are now a trespasser.
Child protective services "officer" - Sir, we have reason to believe you are abusing your child by not providing him with a proper (ie."authorized" "state approved") education. You must comply. I need to come in to your house to check up on the condition of your son - for his safety.
parent - I am sorry, I don't recognize any authority of you over my or my son's life, please be so kind as to leave my property, for you are not welcome here and are now a trespasser.
Peace "officer" accompanying Child protective services "officer"  - Sir, we have come along with Mr CPSO to ensure there is no problem. You must allow him to enter your house.
parent - I am sorry, I don't recognize any authority of you over my or my son's life, please be so kind as to leave my property, for you are not welcome here and are now a trespasser.
Peace "officer" accompanying Child protective services "officer"  - Now look here, sir, I have a warrant to check on the condition of your son and on your living conditions. You do understand this is only for his safety. We are sure you are doing nothing wrong and do not mean you any harm, but you know, I'm sure, that many children who are home schooled are victims of abuse, there was this study,see, and we are only concerned for your son. Besides, we don't want him to grow up and become a burden on society because of a lack of a proper education.
parent - I am sorry, I don't recognize any authority of you over my or my son's life, please be so kind as to leave my property, for you are not welcome here and are a trespasser.
Peace "officer" accompanying Child protective services "officer"  - Sir, we have we are going to enter your house with or without your approval. We have this warrant signed by a judge and that gives us the authority whether you recognize that authority or not. Now, stand aside (pulls tazer)
parent - raises his weapon which he has been holding at his side in case this got ugly and puts one between the eyes of both malcontents who are attempting to break and enter his house and kidnap his child.

Of course, this will not be seen as a case of self defense, so whatever level of force is eventually required to "take out" this ne'er-do-well will be utilized. More people will die.

Of course, anywhere along this path, the violence part could have been avoided by compliance. I won't argue that fact. But, unless someone is violating the rights of others, he should not have to fear for his life.
If someone wants to take my property by force or threat of force, it is theft or attempted theft. No matter what a majority says.
If someone wants to take my physical body or that of any members of my family and lock them in a place not of their choosing, that is kidnapping. No matter what a majority says.
Submitting one's knowledge to the will of a majority can be termed social metaphysics. That means, more or less, that what is is dependent on majority opinion, not on evidence and facts.
I submit to the will of the majority on a cost benefit basis. There are some things which are not worth the redirection of time and effort to fight.
I can go through a similar scenario for smoking bans. Or for anti-firearms legislation. Or building codes or any other statist mala prohibita law or regulation you can come up with.

The "majority" and its laws and taxes are force.
There is nothing wrong with voluntary socialism. If people can agree to share, voluntarily, with other like minded people, no one's rights are violated. But to enforce your sharing mind set upon those who are not like minded is a violation of very fundamental rights.
Logged
The Mayor is the Problem
The flagpole is the answer
We hung the first one
We can hang another one

The Firesign Theatre - from the album Boom Dot Bust

Dear Government
You are a ass shit.

A note from my younger son when he was 3.

When rights are outlawed, only outlaws will have rights. - Me


Round up everybody who can ride a horse or pull a trigger. Let's break out some Winchesters.  - John Wayne (Chisum)

Mos2

  • Guest
Fun with statists
« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2004, 08:48:27 pm »

So then, if you leave your property, you are using other people's property, taken from them by force by this same government. Both in terms of real estate and taxes used to build and maintain infrastructure... seems like that makes you as guilty as anyone else. .  

Devil's advocate mode off....
 
Logged

Occupant No-name

  • Guest
Fun with statists
« Reply #19 on: November 27, 2004, 09:23:26 pm »

People have a right to their own lives period. And parents or guardians have a "right" to direct and control the lives of minor children when they small.
That being said Mos, you can go back through what is called "infinite regress" about who owns the roads and all other tangible things: gov > private owners > Indians > other Indians > Neanderthals...
Your life is yours first and always. People can only do that to you if you allow it. So if you think its wrong don't allow it. Adapt and endure.
 
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up