Tekhead
Elite
Posts: 1110
|
Pho: anyone who takes someone else's belongings without permission should expect a beating, regardless if it's a drug or not. Example - someone takes your hard drive away. I'd predict a rain of blood in the near future for that person.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ConfusedUs
|
I'm gonna move this to CC because I feel it belongs there now.
That being said.
During my 21 years on the planet, I've been around the following in just about equal proportions.
Moderate/social drinkers
Alcoholics
Moderate/social pot smokers
Potheads
Both moderates are fine with me. I don't mind them having a drink or a toke from time to time. I get a high of sorts from splattering people all over a virtual environment. My head swims, I'm happy, and I just feel good. The moderates say pretty much the same thing when describing their 'highs'.
Now onto the extremes.
Alcoholism is worse than any pothead I've ever met in my life. Coming from a family where one parent smoked a ton of pot and the other passed out drunk several nights a week, I can honestly say that alcohol is a much worse drug. There's a reason I refuse to drink.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
shambler
|
>Most of my friends do Tons of pot, and none of them is dumb.
Challenge him to a dual Tabun. I?ll be your second (that?s the bloke who holds the coats etc) Name the server and time. everyone else will spektate Note I live in a country where english is a first language and I still make mistakes and don't smoke anything. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Well here's the other thing Tek: Not all confiscations are thievery. In the US it's illegal. If you possess it, you are breaking the law. Even if someone thinks it's a stupid law, it is still the law. That means people can and WILL take it away. They're called "Police". That's their job - to enforce the law. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
Someone who follows a law believing it to be stupid doesn't deserve to live in a democracy
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dna
|
Someone who follows a law believing it to be stupid doesn't deserve to live in a democracy Social Contract. If I believe laws protecting gay people are stupid, you think it's OK for me to go out and kill them? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
Depends on which Social Contract you mean, I have yet to read any that would allow that
In this particular case I'm refering to a Locke-ian social contract, where if the government goes beyond its respective bounds, at which point you have a responsibility to overthrow it
So If you believe laws protecting gay people are stupid, not much you can do about it, unless those laws involve the taking away of your rights in the process. So if the government made a law that says all straight people will give all their property to gay people you can go out and kill the members of your government, and to not do so would make you a bad citizen. Got that?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dna
|
So If you believe laws protecting gay people are stupid, not much you can do about it, unless those laws involve the taking away of your rights in the process. Ah, now the qualifiers come out. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
The qualifiers were always in there, I may assume a intelligent human being in my examples but I'm not going to state that every time I say anything
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
I suppose it's better than a little "gauntlet sprite" floating above the car.
I can see ups and downs from this. It's good because it can let motorists know who to avoid, but it's also bad because some disgruntled type who might have lost a loved one from a drunk could end up emptying a few rounds into anyone he or she sees with said tags. Of course, that's a good incentive to not drive drunk.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
I find the fact that you think some people are more deserving than others of living under a democracy repulsive, and I'm certainly glad you're not in a position to have power over the lives of others since you think you know what's best for them more than they do. *Doesn't tell Phoenix about the job he got at the Foreign Ministry of a country that supported the War in Iraq*  Are you suggesting they're undeserving to live in a democracy because they'd rather be around to support and protect their family? Yes, pretty much. When you allow the government to overstep its bounds, you are not the only who is hurt, your apathy hurts everyone in your country. The system doesn't exist because people want order, the system exists because certain people want a specific order on everyone else. Half of the Constitutional Founders knew that well There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. --John Adams |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Are you suggesting they're undeserving to live in a democracy because they'd rather be around to support and protect their family? Yes, pretty much. When you allow the government to overstep its bounds, you are not the only who is hurt, your apathy hurts everyone in your country. The system doesn't exist because people want order, the system exists because certain people want a specific order on everyone else. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
No, not at all, dna inserted the shoot at people, I simply agree for shooting at politicians who overstep their bounds and take your property and your freedom.
You want the difference? The fact is my system is laissez-faire, and if you want to start up a crazed Corporate/Jesus Enclave then your free to do so, while in your system the choice for expression no longer exists. That's the difference. I do not impose order, I break down the existing one and give people the choice to create their own order out of it. If they want to use California and make a large Scientology cult out of that disorder, then that's their choice. The second they try to impose their order on me that's when it becomes an issue. Everyone has a right to impose order on themselves not to have order imposed on them by others. Tacit consent is NEVER enough.
That being said, its not about forcing order on others, its about allowing people to choose the order they live in, a choice that if was given to many of us would cause the current system to combust, with good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Admirable ideals, but in practicality this system can never work. There will always be people who want to impose their own order on others. There will also be people who will never be happy living under anyone's order, as well as people who are born to one system who reject it in favor of another, but rather than move to a different geographic localle will try to subvert the current order and reshape it as they see fit. What you propose IS chaos. Unless you force people to comply with this "vision" it will never come to pass, and in doing so you are then violating the very principle of that which you propose. You cannot please everyone all the time, and attempting to do so will merely result in collapse of any structured order. Any such system would be vulnerable to attack by stronger and more organized outside forces whom wish to control and dominate anyone they can. History is written in conquest and bloodshed. The strong control and the weak are enslaved, rebellion ensues, new systems rise and fall like the tides, and lofty ideals are blown about on the wind. You cannot undo human nature in one lifetime, nor one thousand. The dream of unrestricted freedom will always remain just that - a dream.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
And the current system works?? This oligarchy you live in works?? There will also be people who will never be happy living under anyone's order, as well as people who are born to one system who reject it in favor of another, but rather than move to a different geographic localle will try to subvert the current order and reshape it as they see fit. Unfortunately, there is no way to escape the system that exists on this planet. So unless you can tell me where someone can move to escape the system on this planet, and thus not have to subvert the existing system, it makes your example incredibly faulty. The strong control and the weak are enslaved, rebellion ensues, new systems rise and fall like the tides, and lofty ideals are blown about on the wind. You cannot undo human nature in one lifetime, nor one thousand. Oh yes, giving up solved many problems! I'm sure your founding fathers who were told that enslavement under the British was natural and just accepted this fact, and called it a day. Yet within a year were able to change the accepted status of human history. Even if they were eventually sabotaged by their own inner circle. I hope you continue thinking that way, I'm sure most of the capitalistic/imperialistic world wants you to continue thinking this way, since in such a state you are a threat to only yourself and not anyone else or the current status quo. I'm also fairly certain that the people who so graciously give up your liberty to would sell you for a roll of quarters, and I'm sure you would graciously hand yourself over, since really, what can you change, that's the way its always been.... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Nice try with the put downs, but you mistake me for a human American who cares about such things. Insulting the founding fathers of the US does nothing to wound my pride. You see, I don't have to agree with or like any system of government, and I also have absolutely no faith that you humans will ever solve your own problems. You've done a rather poor job of it so far, and I see no end in sight for the destruction you heap upon the earth and one another. All I have to do is wait, and the problem will take care of itself, so you see, I have absolutely nothing to lose whichever way this world turns. To me this is just the same song, only the singer has changed.
As for giving up my liberty, no man owns me. I answer to one authority, and one only. That authority is above mankind, the same authority you reject which I love and cherish and serve in love, not from obligation. I am nobody's puppet, and you have no clue whatsoever about how I think. Oh I'm sure you have me all figured out though. Far be it from me to spoil this illusion for you. Just keep believing what you want about me, it is of no consequence. In fact, it is rather amusing to watch how you attempt to turn aside obvious flaws with your methodology by attacking me outright. I can tell from your acid response I must have struck a nerve somewhere. This is far too predictable for me to take seriously. I'd also be lying if I said that I was sorry that reality and the fact that humans are greedy and self-centered has so spoiled your little ideal dream world.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
Devlar
|
That was insulting the founding fathers? I have more respect for them than for any American alive today (with the exception of that bastard on your 20 dollar bill). They got it right, the people who followed, went and screwed it up Yes, you struck a nerve, there is nothing worse in my book than someone as ridicilous as to make a statement such as this: All I have to do is wait, and the problem will take care of itself, so you see, I have absolutely nothing to lose whichever way this world turns Welcome to the middle ages my friend, you'll be staying there for as long as you live. We'd still be living in caves if humanity thought this way. So yes, that mentality made me more than a little bit angry. As for my methodology, at least I have one, at least I'm making an attempt to make this world more hospitable, I try to offer people something more than delusions of freedom in complacency and apathy. My previous post was not an insult on you, but your mentality, this one on the other hand is and feel free to take it that way |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Woodsman
|
Andrew Jackson (the guy on the 20) was a little late in the running to be a founding father. Hes just on the bill because of his work in the war of 1812.
By the way this was supposed to be about drugs.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2004-03-25, 06:42 by Woodsman »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
