I believe in Liberty
- Thread starter ♪alt13
- Start date
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I agreed that it is disgusting, not that it should be illegal.
I wouldn't smoke marijuana if it were legal(I don't like it)but just because I don't like something doesn't mean others should not be free to do it.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
What about much dangerous drugs like meth, coke, acid, etc?
Depends on the "thing" we are talking about. Not everything is equal.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
*country's
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Right I was simply stating that ones' personal feelings are irrelevant when it comes to what is a crime. I believe that if you are not violating the rights(victimizing) of other people you have not committed a crime.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I believe in enhancements for crimes committed while under the influence of any mind altering drug(including alchohol) but I am not for banning them.
So basically you don't want to argue against it, since you prolly can't? I never made a point about motorcycles. I don't find them useful too, so I would mind if they get banned. But it's not my decision to ban them. But I would guess a belt that attaches the rider to its motorcycle would only increase the danger to die in a case of an accident. Being loose on it causes you to continue the direction your body is going(same as the motorcycle was going before the impact) Being attached to the motorcycle would force me to do the same uncontrolled movement with it together(Like multiple rollovers resulting my head to injure while dropping on the surface repeatedly)
Btw viewing its people as an investment is a usual calculation method in national economics (per capita GNP for example). I think interaction with your government is a give and take. They do decisions to provide you with aid in situations while you finance these solutions in your productive years. Streets and hospitals aren't for free in the real world. None in your country will agree with all the decisions made, but I'm sure if you use your head(in case you've got one) you'll find many opportunities your local administration provides you with that you didn't cherish properly before.
Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
heyhey, are you a anarchist?
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Anarchist is a loaded word so even if I were I wouldn't title myself one. I do believe that while governments are necessary they will always degrade and the powerful in society will always gain ever more control over them. For this reason and others I believe it is necessary to limit the power of any government to that which is absolutely necessary.
Before I go to bed(it's 2.30 in Germany) I'll add one thing to my previous statement:
An example: Your brother wants to start a business, but doesn't have the necessary funds. You have them, and give him a credit of $50k. You agree that it's paid back in the next 5 years with 5% interest.
But instead of getting his business going, your bother uses your money to start gambling with it and using drugs. These drugs damage him severely that he's unable to get his **** together and pay his debt back.
Now if you watch such a situation you'd prolly intervene and revoke his credit. The government can't do such a thing. It gives out credit for each and every citizen to develop skills and start his own business(as an employee, investor or whatever). Now the government can't revoke their made investments, as it can't supervise every step you make. But it has to provide each and everyone the same opportunities. That's the principle called fairness and got instituted way back then. So what does the government make to secure their investment? They put the parents name on the loan and can hold them responsible for major breach of regulations and they try to prevent each and every individual to fail and prevent such a disappointing situation(for both sides) by not allowing certain "liberties".
This may come down to seat belts in cars, declaring possession and consume of drugs as illegal(I think alcohol should be illegal too, but it has a strong lobby, same as the tobacco industry unfortunately). You can continue this list to a certain extent. In Germany for example guns are not allowed other than for purpose of hunting and sports and you actually have to be trained to use the weapons appropriately and what kind of responsibility it gives each individual.
That's a move to prevent unresponsible usage of these items and increase the security and comfort of each and every one in public.
Just think about it...
I can give you another example of your behavior of denial.
When I went to school I was a tutor for younger kids. I gave one kid living down the street lessons, who had an IQ that was way too high but lacked social skills. So the point was this kid was so bored in school, and that clever to realize the others weren't that bright. He showed everyone, including his teacher. So his mother was raising that kid alone and he didn't respond well to female authority. So that woman had the idea I assist him with his homework and teach him work attitude from a male POV a couple times a week. It wasn't that he couldn't do his homework. He simply didn't think it was worth a while. So he ran into major trouble at school with his teacher who was acting a lot like you here. She started cherry picking for mistakes, taking a narrow selected POV on everything. Best example was a math exam:
It as something like: There's a table, which has one bench attached on each side. Every bench provides space for 8 kids. How many kids can sit at the table?
The kid calculated: 8*2 = 16
The teacher marked this as a mistake. The proper train of thought was allgedly 2*8 (Two benches with 8 kids each, not 8 kids a bench times two...)
That's what I feel you're doing here. Let me tell you this. Making a valid and transparent argument on a topic is a way to show others how smart you are.
But none is always right and it really takes social intelligence to admit mistakes. That shows your bright mind even more than just creating arguments. Because you give up power in order to become more likeable and by saying: Damn I didn't think this far you give others the chance to do the same thing without it affecting the dynamic between 2 persons. That's how strangers become friends.
So I suggest you either start making good arguments for your statements or you admit you reached with your train of thought. It's not about agreeing on statements. It's about offering explanation and an argument on it in the first place.
Good night and happy discussing!
An example: Your brother wants to start a business, but doesn't have the necessary funds. You have them, and give him a credit of $50k. You agree that it's paid back in the next 5 years with 5% interest.
But instead of getting his business going, your bother uses your money to start gambling with it and using drugs. These drugs damage him severely that he's unable to get his **** together and pay his debt back.
Now if you watch such a situation you'd prolly intervene and revoke his credit. The government can't do such a thing. It gives out credit for each and every citizen to develop skills and start his own business(as an employee, investor or whatever). Now the government can't revoke their made investments, as it can't supervise every step you make. But it has to provide each and everyone the same opportunities. That's the principle called fairness and got instituted way back then. So what does the government make to secure their investment? They put the parents name on the loan and can hold them responsible for major breach of regulations and they try to prevent each and every individual to fail and prevent such a disappointing situation(for both sides) by not allowing certain "liberties".
This may come down to seat belts in cars, declaring possession and consume of drugs as illegal(I think alcohol should be illegal too, but it has a strong lobby, same as the tobacco industry unfortunately). You can continue this list to a certain extent. In Germany for example guns are not allowed other than for purpose of hunting and sports and you actually have to be trained to use the weapons appropriately and what kind of responsibility it gives each individual.
That's a move to prevent unresponsible usage of these items and increase the security and comfort of each and every one in public.
Just think about it...
I can give you another example of your behavior of denial.
When I went to school I was a tutor for younger kids. I gave one kid living down the street lessons, who had an IQ that was way too high but lacked social skills. So the point was this kid was so bored in school, and that clever to realize the others weren't that bright. He showed everyone, including his teacher. So his mother was raising that kid alone and he didn't respond well to female authority. So that woman had the idea I assist him with his homework and teach him work attitude from a male POV a couple times a week. It wasn't that he couldn't do his homework. He simply didn't think it was worth a while. So he ran into major trouble at school with his teacher who was acting a lot like you here. She started cherry picking for mistakes, taking a narrow selected POV on everything. Best example was a math exam:
It as something like: There's a table, which has one bench attached on each side. Every bench provides space for 8 kids. How many kids can sit at the table?
The kid calculated: 8*2 = 16
The teacher marked this as a mistake. The proper train of thought was allgedly 2*8 (Two benches with 8 kids each, not 8 kids a bench times two...)
That's what I feel you're doing here. Let me tell you this. Making a valid and transparent argument on a topic is a way to show others how smart you are.
But none is always right and it really takes social intelligence to admit mistakes. That shows your bright mind even more than just creating arguments. Because you give up power in order to become more likeable and by saying: Damn I didn't think this far you give others the chance to do the same thing without it affecting the dynamic between 2 persons. That's how strangers become friends.
So I suggest you either start making good arguments for your statements or you admit you reached with your train of thought. It's not about agreeing on statements. It's about offering explanation and an argument on it in the first place.
Good night and happy discussing!
![[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]](/data/avatars/m/2/2497.jpg?1511131091){kind=avatar}
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]
Well-Known Member
I'll happily label myself an anarchist, but insist on an asterisk: I do have a positive/creative political project; and I reject any definition of anarchy that labels it as necessarily meaningless and negative.
I haven't read this thread, but it's in the name of individual perspective (call it "liberty" if you want) that I celebrate anarchy. Much is lost when people start spouting about universals, virtues in-themselves, and true morality as if they were real things.
I haven't read this thread, but it's in the name of individual perspective (call it "liberty" if you want) that I celebrate anarchy. Much is lost when people start spouting about universals, virtues in-themselves, and true morality as if they were real things.
I'm with you on marijuana but not things like meth, coke and acid. Those are a whole different ballgame.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I think most people feel that way. I have watched many people close to me suffer the ravages of addiction, but I never saw any of them do anything that would justify a prison sentence.
Then you didn't pay close attention.
You bet your *** that it leads to arrestable offenses.
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
I never said they were great people when they were chasing the dragon, just that they did nothing that would justify prison.
I am sure that some people will commit serious crimes because of their drug use(less if it were legal) but that doesn't justify locking someone up before they have committed a violent crime. Cars lead to car crashes. Hamburgers lead to heart attacks. Lots of things that people enjoy have negative consequences.
I am sure that some people will commit serious crimes because of their drug use(less if it were legal) but that doesn't justify locking someone up before they have committed a violent crime. Cars lead to car crashes. Hamburgers lead to heart attacks. Lots of things that people enjoy have negative consequences.
I honestly do not know how I am fascist or communist, when all I do is put economical impact, importance and statistics up as measures to estimate the VALUE of a person, that's the society's job to PROTECT. Communists don't have such calculations, as it doesn't have a market as such. Fascism is described on wikipedia as
I don't know how my statements qualify me as either. What I describe is a social market economy's way to put their citizens in a position to succeed the way they look at the world. That doesn't have to be correct and it's an ongoing process to describe and understand the human individual better. But at a give time that's what the think is best, since having a strong group of young people growing up is fundamental for a nations continuity and success.
PS: You should look up the influence of a "Gaussian distribution" on the real world and everyday's life. It's a statistics measure that describes nearly every process happening in the nature and the way human beings behave. Such measures help administrations to predict how human beings act if you merge them as a group in certain points.
PPS: The way to evaluate human beings as assets while analyzing your business is exactly what NBA franchises do with their players. That's what statistics and advanced stats are doing. Fans are even stronger at judging in such a way over players and the persons they are outside of work hours. But the way I look at it viewing your players as numbers on the court doesn't preclude to look at each and every one as an individual off the court.
I don't think the Bulls view Jay Williams as a bad person, just because a decision of his that ruined his body resulted in the Bulls suffering a huge loss in their business.
Same way for Andrew Bynum. The flak he's taking is from fans, not from the guys who invested in him. While from a business standpoint they weren't happy when Bynum hurt himself while bowling, this doesn't mean the Sixers GM wouldn't go bowling with him at this point. They just moved on as business partners as they take their business in different directions and couldn't find common ground to prolong it.
Theft, home invasion, assault...all justifiable reasons to lock someone up. I know what you are saying and I am telling you that you are wrong.
If making those things illegal solved the problems associated with them then what world am I living in?
There are a few countries that have legalized ALL drugs and things haven't gotten worse. In many ways things are better. Not that there is no drug abuse, there was before it was legal and there is now, but this notion that if legalized it would suddenly be socially acceptable to do meth and the floodgates would open up and use would skyrocket is unfounded.
Making drugs illegal hasn't fixed anything. I don't think we should make things illegal as a way of saying we don't approve when we know full well enforcement and prevention are impossible.