Freedom is ...

[FirstAscent]

Cool! Education for the rich.

I think you may be confusing education and schooling.

Schooling for the rich, education for the masses.

You mean a reduced and cheap product for the masses, graduated in such a way as to insure the poor get the least education. How thoughtful.

Once again, you're confusing schooling and education. Everyone gets the same education (as I said, reading, writing, and math, and most importantly how to learn) but not everyone gets the same schooling - classes, curriculum, etc.

So you're saying they really don't get the same thing? Some get the Yugo of education, and others get the Rolls Royce of education.

[myrkul]

Cool! Education for the rich.

I think you may be confusing education and schooling.

Schooling for the rich, education for the masses.

You mean a reduced and cheap product for the masses, graduated in such a way as to insure the poor get the least education. How thoughtful.

Once again, you're confusing schooling and education. Everyone gets the same education (as I said, reading, writing, and math, and most importantly how to learn) but not everyone gets the same schooling - classes, curriculum, etc.

So you're saying they really don't get the same thing? Some get the Yugo of education, and others get the Rolls Royce of education.

Everyone gets basic education. Some get more schooling. Schooling ≠ Education.

[furrycoat]

Freedom is a government with low amounts of power

[DoomDumas]

Freedom will be possible only in a world without the monetary system !

.

[myrkul]

Freedom will be possible only in a world without the monetary system !

Peddle your robocommunism elsewhere.

[luv2drnkbr]

You want to tell me what good a speeding ticket does the person who is harmed as a result of a driver speeding? (Assuming anyone is actually harmed... and if not, who gives a fuck?)

Victimless crimes FTW.

It is not a victimless crime.  I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything.

[luv2drnkbr]

Violence and freedom are inexorably linked.  This is because violence can always overpower nonviolence, unless you have for example a non-violent shield or other defense-- however this only encourages the violent to come up with better violent tactics.  At some point the effort required to maintain defense -- the people killed manufacturing the shield -- becomes so expensive in both property AND human life that the most ethical thing to do is to kill the attackers.

Non-aggression only works until it doesn't.

[hazek]

You want to tell me what good a speeding ticket does the person who is harmed as a result of a driver speeding? (Assuming anyone is actually harmed... and if not, who gives a fuck?)

Victimless crimes FTW.

It is not a victimless crime.  I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything.

You've got it all wrong. It's not a bad idea because you might hurt someone, it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger and they'll hurt you to stop you. Same goes for speeding.

[DoomDumas]

Freedom will be possible only in a world without the monetary system !

Peddle your robocommunism elsewhere.

This prove that you dont know what the Zeitgeist Movement is really about !

[myrkul]

Freedom will be possible only in a world without the monetary system !

Peddle your robocommunism elsewhere.

This prove that you dont know what the Zeitgeist Movement is really about !

Apparently, adding exclamation points to sentences that don't need it. Let's see if any of this sounds familiar:

"a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the population as a whole. "

Does that sound anything like Zeitgeist?

[Dalkore]

You want to tell me what good a speeding ticket does the person who is harmed as a result of a driver speeding? (Assuming anyone is actually harmed... and if not, who gives a fuck?)

Victimless crimes FTW.

It is not a victimless crime.  I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything.

You've got it all wrong. It's not a bad idea because you might hurt someone, it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger and they'll hurt you to stop you. Same goes for speeding.

So let me get this straight, waving a gun in public and randomly discharging it is not a bad idea because you might hurt someone?  But instead it is because someone might hurt me?   That is one of the most selfish statements I have ever heard.  I am sorry but unless you restate this, you discredit yourself on the grounds of your lack of judgement and common sense.  How can we take your opinions on this as reasonable if they is your thoughts on waving and firing a gun in public randomly.   

[myrkul]

You want to tell me what good a speeding ticket does the person who is harmed as a result of a driver speeding? (Assuming anyone is actually harmed... and if not, who gives a fuck?)

Victimless crimes FTW.

It is not a victimless crime.  I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything.

You've got it all wrong. It's not a bad idea because you might hurt someone, it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger and they'll hurt you to stop you. Same goes for speeding.

So let me get this straight, waving a gun in public and randomly discharging it is not a bad idea because you might hurt someone?  But instead it is because someone might hurt me?   That is one of the most selfish statements I have ever heard.  I am sorry but unless you restate this, you discredit yourself on the grounds of your lack of judgement and common sense.  How can we take your opinions on this as reasonable if they is your thoughts on waving and firing a gun in public randomly.   

Apparently you misread that.

it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger

[Dalkore]

You want to tell me what good a speeding ticket does the person who is harmed as a result of a driver speeding? (Assuming anyone is actually harmed... and if not, who gives a fuck?)

Victimless crimes FTW.

It is not a victimless crime.  I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything.

You've got it all wrong. It's not a bad idea because you might hurt someone, it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger and they'll hurt you to stop you. Same goes for speeding.

So let me get this straight, waving a gun in public and randomly discharging it is not a bad idea because you might hurt someone?  But instead it is because someone might hurt me?   That is one of the most selfish statements I have ever heard.  I am sorry but unless you restate this, you discredit yourself on the grounds of your lack of judgement and common sense.  How can we take your opinions on this as reasonable if they is your thoughts on waving and firing a gun in public randomly.  

Apparently you misread that.

it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger

I did not misread anything, trying reading again.  Here is the direct quote.  I know your not stupid so what gives?

Hazek  - "It's not a bad idea because you might hurt someone, it's a bad idea because others might think their lives are in danger and they'll hurt you to stop you. "

Above comment was in response to:  " I could shoot a gun in public, randomly waving it about, and not hit a single person, but it's still a bad idea because the CHANCE of hurting another person was increased due to my actions.  The fact that I didn't actually hit anybody doesn't change anything."

[myrkul]

And you think you're smart enough to live without any government...

I am, but I have my doubts about Dalkore.

I did not misread anything, trying reading again. 

lets try that again:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others might think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

[Dalkore]

And you think you're smart enough to live without any government...

I am, but I have my doubts about Dalkore.

I did not misread anything, trying reading again.  

lets try that again:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others might think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

Ok, your discredited as well.  I am done with this, I feel comfortable that Myrkul and Hazek's lack of common sense on something so basic is proof enough that you do not have the capacity to setup AnCap or any other system in a manner that would be beneficial and safe for the people in it.  I am serious.  I'll just let your comments on this stand and people and judge them all they want.  

Me personally, have enough common sense and compassion to know I would not randomly discharge a firearm in public because I would not want to hurt someone, not because someone might hurt me. 

[Dalkore]

And you think you're smart enough to live without any government...

I am, but I have my doubts about Dalkore.

I did not misread anything, trying reading again. 

lets try that again:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others might think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

He said RANDOMLY waving it about, you mental nut-case. Thus the danger to anyone within range is real, not imagined. If you can't figure such simple things out, you are not fit to live in a society free from government. Yet another reason for governments to exist: to protect others from the dangers posed by people with your dangerous attitude.

Just leave them be, they have shown themselves and discredited their opinions based on a lack of common sense or a sense or right and wrong.  Can't trust what they say at this point.  I would not feel safe around them in person with these attitudes. 

[Dalkore]

Just leave them be, they have shown themselves and discredited their opinions based on a lack of common sense or a sense or right and wrong.  Can't trust what they say at this point.  I would not feel safe around them in person with these attitudes. 

Arrrrr!!!!!.... Fine...

Mind you, I went to a firing range one time, and there were quite a lot of people with really dilated pupils -- it seems handling a gun often gives people an adrenaline rush which they might find addictive. This would explain a lot...

I am sad actually, I was surprised to see this reckless comment.  It is really telling in my opinion on how they see the world. 


Quite scary that the threat of harm against them is what would stop them from randomly firing a gun in public, not that they might hit an innocent.  Scary.

[myrkul]

And you think you're smart enough to live without any government...

I am, but I have my doubts about Dalkore.

I did not misread anything, trying reading again. 

lets try that again:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others might think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

He said RANDOMLY waving it about, you mental nut-case. Thus the danger to anyone within range is real, not imagined. If you can't figure such simple things out, you are not fit to live in a society free from government. Yet another reason for governments to exist: to protect others from the dangers posed by people with your dangerous attitude.

It seems your whole argument hinges on the selection of the word "might" in hazek's post. Let's try again with a different word:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others [will] think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

Is that better?

[Dalkore]

And you think you're smart enough to live without any government...

I am, but I have my doubts about Dalkore.

I did not misread anything, trying reading again. 

lets try that again:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others might think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

He said RANDOMLY waving it about, you mental nut-case. Thus the danger to anyone within range is real, not imagined. If you can't figure such simple things out, you are not fit to live in a society free from government. Yet another reason for governments to exist: to protect others from the dangers posed by people with your dangerous attitude.

It seems your whole argument hinges on the selection of the word "might" in hazek's post. Let's try again with a different word:
This is why it's a bad idea:

because others [will] think their lives are in danger

And this is what happens when you act on that bad idea:

they'll hurt you to stop you.

Is that better?

No its not better at all.  You literally don't get it.   Good luck. 

[FirstAscent]

Dalkore, blablahblah, and others,

These same absolutely absurd things have been discussed over and over, a year and more ago. What these scenarios reveal, is what you guys are coming to realize. And the arguments are circular as well, meaning that they keep following an extraordinarily long and crazy form of logic which ignores key points until you're right back at the beginning, having to go through it all again.

Were any of you here during the discussion about the knife juggler on the inflatable life raft with four other individuals, floating in the ocean, with sharks swimming around? The conversation was actually rather creepy in what it revealed about these people. There was even mention of the first guy in the life raft as having a claim of ownership on the raft, but then it proceeded on to discussion about the knife juggler practicing juggling on board the raft...