Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-16-2015, 01:04 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
Yes, I know you believe deep down the thief initiated other peoples use of force. I guess he has some kind of mind-control of other peoples actions. I wonder what initiated the thief's actions, my guess that is, ironically, irrelevant.
His desire to steal. You seem to have this odd idea that a position statement means the one who wrote it believes everyone will live by it. They don't, which is why they are not agaisnt all government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-16-2015, 01:26 AM
 
1,160 posts, read 711,552 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
His desire to steal. You seem to have this odd idea that a position statement means the one who wrote it believes everyone will live by it. They don't, which is why they are not agaisnt all government.
Would you say the police actions would be based upon their own desire to arrest a thief? Basically, thief/police violate the NAP based on x reasons. One is valid, the other isn't. Liberty can be violated with force under certain circumstances.

The NAP position is nonsensical and logically incoherent. This is a guy who has some strong libertarian ideals telling you this.

Last edited by billydaman; 09-16-2015 at 01:38 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:00 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
Would you say the police actions would be based upon their own desire to arrest a thief?
No, it would be the desire to do their job.

Quote:
Basically, thief/police violate the NAP based on x reasons. One is valid, the other isn't. Liberty can be violated with force under certain circumstances.

The NAP position is nonsensical and logically incoherent. This is a guy who has some strong libertarian ideals telling you this.
No one anywhere ever has or ever will deny that force is sometimes used. To say otherwise is you simply making things up to argue against.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:19 AM
 
1,160 posts, read 711,552 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
No, it would be the desire to do their job.
I agree! They initiate force based on a desire to do their job which violates the NAP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:28 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
I agree! They initiate force based on a desire to do their job which violates the NAP.
No it doesn't. That's like saying that throwing someone in jail for threatening someone violates the first amendment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:31 AM
 
1,160 posts, read 711,552 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
No it doesn't. That's like saying that throwing someone in jail for threatening someone violates the first amendment.
What?

The only reason you think it does not break the NAP is because you agree with the action they took, having nothing to do with the fact the police initiated force to arrest the thief.

It's really really simple:

Did the police initiate force in order to arrest the thief?

The answer is clearly, yes, they did, out of the desire to do their job.

Do you arrest the police for thievery once they recoup the stolen property? They do not have a right to that property, as they do not own it. They took property they did not own, by force, from the thief.


All kinds of absurdity with the NAP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:34 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
What?

The only reason you think it does not break the NAP is because you agree with the action they took, having nothing to do with the fact the police initiated force to arrest the thief.

Its really really simple.

Did the police initiate force to arrest the thief.

The answer is clearly yes.
Nope, they reacted to the theft. A perfectly legitimate reaction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:38 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199
Seattle officer fired for actions in controversial arrest over golf club | Local & Regional | Seattle News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOMO News

An unreasonable initiation of force.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:42 AM
 
1,160 posts, read 711,552 times
Reputation: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Nope, they reacted to the theft. A perfectly legitimate reaction.

Did blaming your sibling, after they started it, ever work for you?

BTW: you are discussing the reasonableness of the arrest, not whether or not they initiated force (hint: its irrelevant the reason they initiated force, as quite simply, initiating force is against the NAP). Its indisputable to any one with a basic comprehension of logic and reasonableness that's human beings initiate every action they take. The NAP does not have any caveat that states you can use force, if its reasonable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2015, 02:49 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,040,844 times
Reputation: 17199
Quote:
Originally Posted by billydaman View Post
Did blaming your sibling, after they started it, ever work for you?
Um, yeah, if they started it.

Quote:
BTW: you are discussing the reasonableness of the arrest, not whether or not they initiated force (hint: its irrelevant the reason they initiated force, as quite simply, initiating force is against the NAP). Its indisputable to any one with a basic comprehension of logic and reasonableness thats human beings initiate every action they take.
Nowhere does your making up of positions ever come into play. No one has ever argued there should not be repercussions for violating the rights of others.

That is a position you have simply made up to argue against.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top