On personal liberties

Well, if addressing to me you used as an example of violation of personal liberties a case that is related to the issue of child molestation you did it to upset me.

When I first read it, I didn't reply, I let it go but when I saw the butter crap the day after, I realized that what you posted you posted it on purpose to provoke people pretending that you were joking...

:bs:

Well, better luck next time.
 
Hey Cleo, are you going to account for your hypocrisy, or are you going to dodge?
 
Tony said:
Hey Cleo, are you going to account for your hypocrisy, or are you going to dodge?
Click to expand...

If you rephrase your sentence to a more civilized one dear peasant, I might consider replying you.
 
Cleopatra said:


If you rephrase your sentence to a more civilized one dear peasant, I might consider replying you.
Click to expand...


So you're going to dodge. I thought so.
 
Cleopatra said:


So you will remain a rude peasant....
Click to expand...


Thats funny coming from someone who wants the nanny state to protect her from the big bad guns.
 
Tony said:



Thats funny coming from someone who wants the nanny state to protect her from the big bad guns.
Click to expand...

Tony please, go flame Faux who shares your sense of humor and probably your IQ rates...
 
And yet another potentially great thread about liberty is derailed by those who are uncomfortable with the subject but don't want to specifically address it. Typical, unfortunately...
 
Cleopatra said:


Tony please, go flame Faux who shares your sense of humor and probably your IQ rates...
Click to expand...


I’m not flaming, you just can’t handle it when someone challenges your hypocrisy. Your disdain for personal liberties and your hypocritical nature is noted.
 
shanek said:
And yet another potentially great thread about liberty is derailed by those who are uncomfortable with the subject but don't want to specifically address it. Typical, unfortunately...
Click to expand...

I thought it was about guns and air pressure? Did I miss something? :confused:


Also, what's the deal with the peasantry?
 
Cleopatra said:
Well, if addressing to me you used as an example of violation of personal liberties a case that is related to the issue of child molestation you did it to upset me.

When I first read it, I didn't reply, I let it go but when I saw the butter crap the day after, I realized that what you posted you posted it on purpose to provoke people pretending that you were joking...

Well, better luck next time.
Click to expand...

All right, I'll play along.
The topic heading is "On personal liberties", under "Politics, current events, and history". The link you are refering to is this, about a man who was sent to jail for WRITING FICTIONAL STORIES.
I did not post this link to intentionally upset you; I don't know you and therefore it would be ridiculous for me to target you. If child molestation has hit you close to home, I'm sorry. But, child molestation is not what my link was about. It was about free speech, and our right to it. The issue of free speech runs right along with the initial post I set up, which was about right to privacy. I posted this link to provoke thoughts on freedom. I am still on track.
You, however, have derailed this thread considerably, and have been nothing but hostile towards me, with your comments meant to annoy and disrupt the discussion. Thusly, this makes YOU the troll setting up flame bait.
If you would like to attack my personal beliefs, you may do so at your leisure in the flame war thread. You may also PM me if you like; I'll bare my breast for you to stab that dagger in as much as you like.
However, this isn't the place for it. If you'd like to continue to post on this thread and give us your anti-gun arguements, I'm sure we'd all be happy to hear them. If not, take the comments somewhere else.
Contribute, don't tear down.
 
MoeFaux said:


All right, I'll play along.
The topic heading is "On personal liberties", under "Politics, current events, and history". The link you are refering to is this, about a man who was sent to jail for WRITING FICTIONAL STORIES.
I did not post this link to intentionally upset you; I don't know you and therefore it would be ridiculous for me to target you. If child molestation has hit you close to home, I'm sorry. But, child molestation is not what my link was about. It was about free speech, and our right to it. The issue of free speech runs right along with the initial post I set up, which was about right to privacy. I posted this link to provoke thoughts on freedom. I am still on track.
You, however, have derailed this thread considerably, and have been nothing but hostile towards me, with your comments meant to annoy and disrupt the discussion. Thusly, this makes YOU the troll setting up flame bait.
If you would like to attack my personal beliefs, you may do so at your leisure in the flame war thread. You may also PM me if you like; I'll bare my breast for you to stab that dagger in as much as you like.
However, this isn't the place for it. If you'd like to continue to post on this thread and give us your anti-gun arguements, I'm sure we'd all be happy to hear them. If not, take the comments somewhere else.
Contribute, don't tear down.
Click to expand...

Cleopatra, if all this man did was write fictional stories, and from the article it appears that to be the case, I don't see why you are so upset with MoeFaux? I didn't see her advocate child molestation; all she is trying to show is how people are willing to curb free speech if it they don't agree with it. Using the same twisted logic, one could argue that a person writing a novel where a man gets killed should be held for attempted murder.
 
shanek said:
And yet another potentially great thread about liberty is derailed by those who are uncomfortable with the subject but don't want to specifically address it. Typical, unfortunately...
Click to expand...

In her opening post Faux, mentioned the case of Khader Hamide and Michel Shehadeh that although it dates back in 1987,both of them face the risk to be deported because of a provision of the Mac Carran Act that whilst it was repealed in 1990, Congress's action didn't affect pending disputes.

When I said that American people must resist, young, skeptical Tony suggested that I cannot ask people to resist without being pro-gun ownership and this is where the dispute started.

So, since you are against the gun control and you quoted verbatim Thomas Jefferson's "Declaration of Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms" can you or somebody else explain to me why don't you use your guns to resist to the abuse of personal freedoms under the Patriot Act?
 
Cleopatra said:
So, since you are against the gun control and you quoted verbatim Thomas Jefferson's "Declaration of Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms" can you or somebody else explain to me why don't you use your guns to resist to the abuse of personal freedoms under the Patriot Act?
Click to expand...

I have told you this before. The cartridge box is the last resort when the ballto box and the jury box fail. Although government in many ways is rigging elections and constraining what juries can do, I don't think it's hopeless enough to abandon those measures.

What am I doing to combat the Patriot Act? I drafted a resolution and presented it to our County Commissioners. I also made a supporting page to provide evidence and convince people about the evils of the act.

All over America, over 300 municipalities and five states have passed resolutions refusing to cooperate with the Patriot Act's violation of our liberties. So this is a method that works.

I'm also running for County Commissioner in the hopes of having a greater effect on all of this. In the process, I am battling the ballot access and campaign finance laws.

The use of force must always be the last resort.
 
Cleopatra said:


In her opening post Faux, mentioned the case of Khader Hamide and Michel Shehadeh that although it dates back in 1987,both of them face the risk to be deported because of a provision of the Mac Carran Act that whilst it was repealed in 1990, Congress's action didn't affect pending disputes.

When I said that American people must resist, young, skeptical Tony suggested that I cannot ask people to resist without being pro-gun ownership and this is where the dispute started.

So, since you are against the gun control and you quoted verbatim Thomas Jefferson's "Declaration of Causes and Necessity of Taking up Arms" can you or somebody else explain to me why don't you use your guns to resist to the abuse of personal freedoms under the Patriot Act?
Click to expand...

Not wanting to harm others. That's it.

I guess the point I'm trying to get accross about gun rights can be explained by this:
The Eiffel Tower.
I've never been to the Eiffel Tower, and I don't think I'll ever go visit it. But, it's there. And I like knowing it's there, just in case I decide to go.
Boy, when the WTC collapsed, I was bummed (not just for the obvious reasons) because now I'll never get to see it.
Like the Eiffel Tower, personal freedoms are great to have around. Maybe not everyone appreciates them, but, they're there, and it would be a sad thing if they were to go away.

But...you can't just whip out a gun and shoot someone if they're going against you.
The best defense is the one Shanek has already suggested. Vote, speak up, run for office.
 
shanek said:


Whaddya mean, what things? The very things you were talking about in your post! The things you said were bound to happen if people were allowed to carry guns!
Click to expand...

groan...I should have known better than to ask for a simple explanation.

Shane... I was making the point that if, as was suggested, all women carry handguns to ward off rapists then a lot of other consequences would occur due to the mass of guns being carried around. Mothers and their families would start shooting themselves and each other with these "anti-rape" guns. They would simply raise the usual levels of domestic violence to far more fatal levels. Thats what I was talking about. If more people carry more guns more people get shot. Everywhere in the world where people have a lot of guns, a lot of people get shot.

Now....WTF is this "gun ban" you talk about?? and I'll (with hopeful anticipation) ask yet again what on earth you were going on about when you posted..

Why weren't these kinds of things happening before the gun bans?

"before the gun bans"....what gun bans?? Is there a shortage of guns somewhere?
 
shanek said:



What am I doing to combat the Patriot Act? I drafted a resolution and presented it to our County Commissioners. I also made a supporting page to provide evidence and convince people about the evils of the act.

All over America, over 300 municipalities and five states have passed resolutions refusing to cooperate with the Patriot Act's violation of our liberties. So this is a method that works.

I'm also running for County Commissioner in the hopes of having a greater effect on all of this. In the process, I am battling the ballot access and campaign finance laws.
Click to expand...

Shanek

The text of Jefferson you quoted dates back in 1775.

From 1775 until today I am sure that they were occasions that would justify the use of guns...

Guns is Greece are outlawed and in USA are not. Let's say that both of us, in both countries belong to groups that believe that our personal freedoms are infrindged upon a government's act and we think that guns are our last resort, if we decided to use them, the law wouldn't stop my group in Greece from using them.

If both of us decide to resort to armed violence to defend our rights, tell me how will we differ from the terrorist groups that are engaged in urban partisan warfares?

Don't reply that is enough for you to have the option to use guns because you always have the option to use guns whether they are legal or not.

Moe Faux, my ideas about Liberty were influenced by the writings of Isaiah Berlin. Therefore I prefer to be raped or murdered rather that getting a gun and start playing by the rules of the criminals. If what distinghuishes a criminal is the use of a gun ( as you implied in a previous post of yours) then I have nothing in common with criminals.

I do not wish to deprive you of your right to own guns I want to persuade you that you don't need them.

I am against prohibitary laws, I am pro-persuasion.

edited to correct the usual grammatical and spelling mistakes...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom