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 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 32 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft (Read 3715 times)
Snarky Sack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4379
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #210 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 11:05am
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.

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.




Yes, I always advocate voluntarism.  It works, theft doesn't.

But the people have spoken and said loud and clear that they want to be taxed for purposes of welfare and food stamps, so sharing cookies is no longer optional.

  

"I think I'll backtrack." - Jeff
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36176
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #211 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:29pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Oct 5th, 2018 at 11:05am:
But the people have spoken and said loud and clear that they want to be taxed for purposes of welfare and food stamps, so sharing cookies is no longer optional.

But, by prior agreement, the people decided that they would not grant the government any power to transfer wealth, so no matter that people all want free stuff, the government is not empowered to give it to them without the people first amending the Constitution.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Snarky Sack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4379
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #212 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:38pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:29pm:
But, by prior agreement, the people decided that they would not grant the government any power to transfer wealth, so no matter that people all want free stuff, the government is not empowered to give it to them without the people first amending the Constitution.


The white male slaveholders who signed that prior agreement are all dead.  No one is morally bound by an agreement just because people they never met signed it.  The people’s representatives are empowered to tax for the purpose of transferring wealth in the form of education, housing, food stamps, farm subsidies, midnight basketball or whatever else they dream up.  It all theft, but it’s completely legal.

The people overwhelmingly vote for representatives who promise to either give them free stuff or fund programs that they think are important. 

When was the last time taxpayer-funded judges sent a taxer to jail for theft?
  

"I think I'll backtrack." - Jeff
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36176
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #213 - Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:45pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Oct 5th, 2018 at 1:38pm:
The white male slaveholders who signed that prior agreement are all dead.  No one is morally bound by an agreement just because people they never met signed it.  The people’s representatives are empowered to tax for the purpose of transferring wealth in the form of education, housing, food stamps, farm subsidies, midnight basketball or whatever else they dream up.  It all theft, but it’s completely legal.

The people overwhelmingly vote for representatives who promise to either give them free stuff or fund programs that they think are important. 

When was the last time taxpayer-funded judges sent a taxer to jail for theft? 
All your arguments lead to anarchy.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8093
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #214 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 12:24am
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 5th, 2018 at 7:32am:
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?


Because you conveniently never have to actually respect the rights of anyone else. You'll come up with another pro interpretation of the NAP, or if you're backed into a corner, you'll just strip the other person of rights altogether. (I'm sorry, you'll discover that they actually never had any rights.) Demonstrated below.

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.


If you want a gun, you get it because rights, no matter how dangerous your gun is to me. If I want a chicken, I do not get it, because rights. A chicken is dangerous to you!

Jeff wrote on Jul 4th, 2014 at 8:37am:
I raise chickens. If you want to buy one, I'll sell it to you. If you steal one, I'll file a complaint and have you arrested.
I don't raise my chickens in a residential neighborhood. If I did, they would constitute a nuisance and possibly a health hazard, and my neighbors would file complaints against me.


Only bullies like the idea of rights.

People invested in equality under the law would naturally prefer the idea that no one has any rights.

It happens to be false, and people do have rights. They work in exactly the way libertarians suggest. I have to respect those rights. I cannot bring myself to be happy they exist.
  

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: 36176
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #215 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 7:59am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 6th, 2018 at 12:24am:
If I want a chicken, I do not get it, because rights. A chicken is dangerous to you!


Get a chicken for heavens sake.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36176
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #216 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 8:02am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 6th, 2018 at 12:24am:
People invested in equality under the law would naturally prefer the idea that no one has any rights.

It happens to be false, and people do have rights. They work in exactly the way libertarians suggest. I have to respect those rights. I cannot bring myself to be happy they exist.
Can you explain that first statement? Thanks.

Rights don't "work" or not work. People have them, and they can either be respected or denied.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8093
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #217 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 1:35pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 6th, 2018 at 8:02am:
Rights don't "work" or not work. People have them, and they can either be respected or denied.


Correct, and they work to give some people disproportionate freedom to endanger others.

Note that rights do not entitle me to have a chicken if it endangers others, but rights entitle you to have a gun, even if that endangers others.

You and others have agreed that rights do not entitle me to have a chicken in a residential neighbourhood.

Unfortunately, I do not believe the danger a gun poses to me is enough to stick my nose in your business and try to deny you a gun.
  

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: 36176
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #218 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 1:58pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Oct 6th, 2018 at 1:35pm:
Correct, and they work to give some people disproportionate freedom to endanger others.

No they don't. Everyone has exactly the same freedom to endanger others under a system that equally protects rights.

Under such a system, everyone's right to be armed is equally protected as long as they don't abuse the right by shooting people at random or some such thing.

Everyone's right to own chickens is also equally protected, but you can't start a poultry farm in a residential area, or build a bomb factory there either...

But everyone still has an equal right to build a bomb factory.

The fact that your right to go 180mph on a racetrack is equal to everyone else's doesn't give you or anyone else the right to go 180mph through a residential neighborhood.

BTW, simply having a gun doesn't endanger others, no more than owning a car endangers others. Either can be made use of in ways that endanger others, but that doesn't mean just owning one is a danger.

Maybe you could convince me by citing statistics that show that almost 100% of vehicular homicides are perpetrated by car owners... Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8093
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Using Deadly Force to Prevent Theft
Reply #219 - Oct 6th, 2018 at 3:07pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Oct 6th, 2018 at 1:58pm:
No they don't. Everyone has exactly the same freedom to endanger others under a system that equally protects rights.

Under such a system, everyone's right to be armed is equally protected as long as they don't abuse the right by shooting people at random or some such thing.

Everyone's right to own chickens is also equally protected, but you can't start a poultry farm in a residential area, or build a bomb factory there either...


If you want equality, how about no owning guns in a residential area? Or no brothels in a residential area?

This is my point: Rights work absolutely in your case, and they have lots and lots of caveats in my case. This is simply how they work and I support your interpretation because it is right.

I won't pretend rights make people equal under the law, though.

Not while you get your gun in a residential neighbourhood and I don't get my chicken in a residential neighbourhood.

Imagine this: Some residential neighbourhoods allow chickens! (Usually hens only.) I have more rights* under Statism.

(Note: These are not real rights, because owning a chicken in a residential neighbourhood is obviously a positive and illegitimate "right" that actually violates the rights of others, but still... I have more freedom now than I would under libertarianism. Considerably so.)
  

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
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 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