Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 32 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft (Read 3502 times)
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36063
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #200 - Sep 27th, 2018 at 4:15pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Sep 27th, 2018 at 3:04pm:
Raising taxes are inevitable once the idea of forced taxation is accepted.  By nature, government seeks to grow and if the people have no realistic means to stop it disaster is inevitable.


Yes. Realistic means short of armed revolution are available in our law.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8059
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #201 - Sep 27th, 2018 at 10:43pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Sep 26th, 2018 at 12:16pm:
So, Opposition was completely right about you. Any disagreement you have with taxes has nothing to do with any right to own property.


I'm completely right about most libertarians: They're spoiled, selfish, mental two-year-olds who can't share. You can test this by applying a right they discover in a way that causes them a detriment: Invariably, they won't share that right. They'll find a way to weasel out of having to. And along comes another pro interpretation of the NAP.

Not wanting to share is understandable. Not being able to share - never having learnt to - is a huge problem.

So they solve this problem by concocting a philosophy where you're never forced to share. So far, so good.

But when other people aren't forced to share, that affects them negatively and they revert to the same temper-tantrum-throwing "MINE MINE MINE!" screech that got them into libertarianism in the first place.

All this can be dismissed as an ad hominem argument, which it very well is. But it's also very, very true, and to the heart of why it's like pulling teeth to get libertarians to agree on anything.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36063
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #202 - Sep 28th, 2018 at 7:45am
Print Post  
An interesting article about using force to prevent theft-

https://fee.org/articles/how-to-spot-misleading-statistics-in-the-gun-control-de...
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TYCapitalism
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 55
Location: Mt. Vernon, IL
Joined: Feb 20th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #203 - Oct 3rd, 2018 at 8:40am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 27th, 2018 at 10:43pm:
I'm completely right about most libertarians: They're spoiled, selfish, mental two-year-olds who can't share. You can test this by applying a right they discover in a way that causes them a detriment: Invariably, they won't share that right. They'll find a way to weasel out of having to. And along comes another pro interpretation of the NAP.

Not wanting to share is understandable. Not being able to share - never having learnt to - is a huge problem.

So they solve this problem by concocting a philosophy where you're never forced to share. So far, so good.

But when other people aren't forced to share, that affects them negatively and they revert to the same temper-tantrum-throwing "MINE MINE MINE!" screech that got them into libertarianism in the first place.

All this can be dismissed as an ad hominem argument, which it very well is. But it's also very, very true, and to the heart of why it's like pulling teeth to get libertarians to agree on anything.



lol at "share".

Being stolen from is not sharing.
  

Help me buy shotguns for women.
https://www.help50.org/donate
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
TYCapitalism
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 55
Location: Mt. Vernon, IL
Joined: Feb 20th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #204 - Oct 3rd, 2018 at 8:42am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Sep 25th, 2018 at 9:17pm:
Here's the problem with self-defence: It's unworkable.

Either you can defend whatever is yours by whatever means necessary, or you can't.

If you can, then you can shoot a child for stealing bubble gum from your store, and that's obviously false. Even Rothbard said you can't do this.

If you cannot defend yourself and your stuff by any means necessary, people can just take your stuff whenever they find cases where the force necessary to prevent their act would be excessive.

Not only that, but the big dogs will decide (and to benefit themselves) that when you defend against Johnny, the force was excessive and you're the aggressor, but when you try to pull the same shit against Johnny, his self-defence was necessary.

Once you say, "Some defensive force is excessive," the big dogs will get to shoot the kids stealing bubble gum and the little guy is stripped of the right to use any defensive force. It will always be excessive. Lawyers will decide, and the little guy doesn't have the good ones. And does the NAP protect against this? Nope. Not if how you're interpreting it is, "Sometimes, defensive force is excessive."

If this is your intention, then you win, and my hat off to you.


Self-defense is unworkable, despite it working for millions of years across a wide variety of species.

Are you...are you sure you're the opposition?
  

Help me buy shotguns for women.
https://www.help50.org/donate
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36063
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #205 - Oct 3rd, 2018 at 9:30am
Print Post  
TYCapitalism wrote on Oct 3rd, 2018 at 8:42am:
Self-defense is unworkable, despite it working for millions of years across a wide variety of species.

Are you...are you sure you're the opposition?
It opposes individual liberty, that makes it the opposition.

Unfortunately, the lizard is a an amoral creature, and it's feeble/non-existent grasp of the concept of human morality makes it a moral absolutist.

Self defense is a right. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but, you have a right to use it when you see it is necessary, and civilized people have placed what they believe to be reasonable restrictions on its use- You can't kill someone if they don't have a reasonable chance of actually causing you great bodily harm or killing you.

Defense of your property is a right too, but civilized people have placed what they believe to be reasonable restrictions on your right to defend your property- you can't kill shoplifters.

To maintain a civilization, people grant police powers to some of their governments. These powers generally include a monopoly on the use of force except when force is used in self defense. Long experience has shown that justice is best served if you call the police when someone steals from rather than shooting whoever it was you think did the stealing.

That doesn't satisfy moral absolutists like the lizard, but it does serve the cause of justice in a civilized society.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8059
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #206 - Oct 3rd, 2018 at 10:34pm
Print Post  
TYCapitalism wrote on Oct 3rd, 2018 at 8:40am:
lol at "share".

Being stolen from is not sharing.


And you'll always think that, because you're a libertarian.

Like Jeff, you'll invent any rights necessary so you don't have to share, but because you can't share, you won't be able to share the rights.

Jeff wrote on Feb 24th, 2018 at 7:49am:
You have no more rights than an animal, because your understanding of rights is at the level of a predatory animal.


Sharing, the skill, is more fundamental to a successful society than rights. You can't have equal rights if you can't share, because sharing is required in order to recognise that others have rights.

Libertarians, on the whole, became libertarians because they can't share, not because they just don't want to.

I follow the NAP. Yes, to the letter. I don't call the police because that's technically redistribution, and theft. It's also force. When my neighbour went insane this put me and my beloved at serious risk when he started waving a gun around.

I have never taken a dime of government money, because I think it's wrong. If I get jury duty, the law requires my employer to pay me for that day. So instead of using force on my employer, I lie by omission and say I just want the day off.

I also pay my taxes, and I don't hold a grudge against anyone "stealing" my money. I happily go to the jury duty.

This is because I can share.

You cannot.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36063
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #207 - Oct 4th, 2018 at 9:59am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 3rd, 2018 at 10:34pm:
And you'll always think that, because you're a libertarian.

Like Jeff, you'll invent any rights necessary so you don't have to share, but because you can't share, you won't be able to share the rights.


No right needs to be invented. If you don't want to share, you don't have to.

I've not invented any rights lizard, I just operate on the presumption of general liberty for everyone, on the theory that everyone is born with the same rights.

The thing about sharing is that it is voluntary, you can choose who you want to share with. You can tell Billy "No, I'm not sharing my cookies with you because you are a mean bully."

Ask Red about how such voluntary sharing/withholding can modify behavior to reduce bullying.


« Last Edit: Oct 5th, 2018 at 7:29am by Jeff »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8059
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #208 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:39am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 4th, 2018 at 9:59am:
No right needs to be invented. If you don't want to share, you don't have to.


And because you never learned to share, you can't share the rights you discover with others. You'll always have another pro interpretation of the NAP at the ready so you don't have to respect another person's rights.
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36063
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #209 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 7:32am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:39am:
And because you never learned to share, you can't share the rights you discover with others.
I firmly believe that everyone is endowed at birth with the same rights as everyone else.

What makes you think you can keep making the statement that I "never learned to share"?

Because I refuse to grant that animals have human rights?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 19 20 [21] 22 23 ... 32
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy