Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#145724 - 02/15/06 11:54 PM Quick question...
Inquisitor Offline


Registered: 11/08/05
Posts: 150
Loc: Dunedin, New Zealand
I have a question I am curious about;
To every specific individual, what are your views on people acting in such a way that contrasts your beliefs, while still staying on acceptable grounds in terms of law and relationships?

For example, if someone you didn't know was beating a dog with a baseball bat, or if a close family member was doing something blatantly illegal, etc.

There are certain occasions where you can walk up and tell them to stop, and "if they do not stop, destroy them!", but in some instances that isn't exactly a feasible option. How do you deal with these issues in a social context?
_________________________
"Hell must be a pretty swell spot, because the guys who invented religion have sure been trying hard to keep everyone else out" - Al Capone

Top
#145725 - 02/16/06 12:41 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
StabAvery Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 11/16/05
Posts: 714
Loc: michigan
People will do what people do. If they cross your path then you have the right to act. the question seems kind of vague but I guess you just address every situation with personal gain and personal interest as your goal. Do what is best for you because no one else will.
_________________________
StabAvery.com
and coming soon... The Devil's Lab

Top
#145726 - 02/16/06 01:04 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
"For example, if someone you didn't know was beating a dog with a baseball bat, or if a close family member was doing something blatantly illegal, etc."

Normally, I don't care what other people do. I did feel obligated once,
when I saw a man was beating his young son on the boardwalk in
Santa Cruz, CA. I went over to him while he was pounding the shit
out of the young boy and in my 6'7", 225 pound imposing loud
voice way, I boomed: "Hey! Why don't you pick on someone
your own size?"

He called me a "fucking hippy" and told me not to tell him how to
raise his kids.

Other than that, I mind my own business.
_________________________




Top
#145727 - 02/16/06 01:17 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
TrojZyr Offline
CoS Witch

Registered: 07/25/01
Posts: 12982
Loc: The Solid State
Depends on the situation.

If some innocent party---like a child or animal---is getting hurt, I'll try to intervene, or find a third party who will intervene.

Or, I may choose to clean up the mess made quietly, without having to involve anyone. I find that a lot of people ignore correction anyway, so if they've caused a problem or made a mess, it's sometimes better to just fix things yourself, without indignantly stomping up and trying to teach a pig to sing.

Otherwise, though, I tend to err on the side of minding my own beeswax. Dragondancer is absolutely right about how vital it is to have a "dog in the fight," and how stepping in at the wrong places can get you into trouble.


Edited by TrojZyr (02/16/06 11:04 AM)
_________________________
"Gentlemen, the verdict is guilty, on all ten counts of first-degree stupidity. The penalty phase will now begin."--Divine, "Pink Flamingos."

"The strong rule the weak, and the cunning rule over all." HS!

Top
#145728 - 02/16/06 08:22 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
dragondancer Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 12/22/04
Posts: 1546
Loc: Virginia
Why should I care what someone else is doing, unless I have a "dog in the fight". I stay the hell out of other people's business. Noone is going to pin a badge on your shirt for getting involved, believe me. Most of the time people resent you, and even the victim of said problem may turn on you. Though I would agree with others, if it is a child or animal being hurt, then do what you can safely.

The more you get involved in other people's business, the more you complicate your own life. Unless, of course, you enjoy that sort of thing.


Hail Satan!
_________________________
"It does take an exceptional mind and a still more exceptional integrity to remain untouched by the brain-destroying influences of the world's doctrines, the accumulated evil of the centuries-to remain human, since the human is the rational." Dr. Akston in Atlas Shrugged

"Not life, but good life, is to be chiefly valued." Socrates

Dragondancer
Temple of Vampire


Top
#145729 - 02/16/06 10:30 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
Bill_M Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 07/28/01
Posts: 11535
Loc: New England, USA
>>For example, if someone you didn't know was beating a dog
>>with a baseball bat, or if a close family member was
>>doing something blatantly illegal, etc.

As the Satanic Bible states, "Each person must decide for himself what his obligations are to his respective friends, family, and community." In most cases I'd just anonymously call the police, as they're the ones who my taxes pay to handle crime. That falls in line with my decided "obligations to my community".

Though of course it depends on the crime too. Renting a VHS movie and dubbing your own copy is outright illegal, as is parking in front of fire hydrant, but I don't see the point in calling the cops on Uncle Joe for doing this.

>>There are certain occasions where you can walk up and
>>tell them to stop, and "if they do not stop, destroy
>>them!",

Re-read the actual first sentence of that particular rule.
_________________________
Reverend Bill M.

http://www.devilsmischief.com: Carnal Comedy Clips, Netherworld Novelty Numbers,
New hour every week. Download the mp3 now!

http://www.aplaceformystuff.org: Tales of Combat Clutter and other Adventures

(Wenn du Google's Übersetzer verwendest, um diese Worte zu lesen, dann bist du ein Arschloch.)

Top
#145730 - 02/16/06 10:38 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
I have principles, however, those principles revolve around my own personal safety.

I don't need to be a martyr. If there's something I can do - safely and legally - then I will do it.

If I'm witness to events of such a nature as you described, then I'm going to call the police - it's their job, not mine.

If any action on your part is going to cause you needless headaches, I'd say it's best to leave well enough alone.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#145731 - 02/16/06 11:58 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
crackergirl Offline


Registered: 11/15/05
Posts: 323
Loc: Kansas
I have several friends that sometimes ask me if I want to "smoke up" with them, and I'm a real partyer, so it makes sense that a lot of them would assume I smoke weed. I don't, though, so I just say, "I'm an advocate, not a user." I think it should be their personal choice to kill their brain cells if they want to. It's not my way, but I couldn't care less if they're screwing themselves over. I've got my shit straight, and that's all that matters to me. I make sure they know I don't want that shit in my car and they can't ride with me if they have it on them. I've seen COPS. As soon as a guy gets busted with anything, the first thing that comes out of his mouth is, "It's not mine." If it's in my car, and the guy denies it's his, then it must be mine. So, in that sense, I'm fucked. The friends I have that smoke, I make sure they don't ride in my car. If they do, I SERIOUSLY, NO FUCKING KIDDING, check their damn pockets like the heat before they get in. I don't fuck around. I had to pat down my buddy the Grasshopper the other day for this. For real.
When it comes to people you actually care about, I'd say you let them know as gently as possible that you don't approve. They'll know what the rules are when they're around you, and you'll know what the deal is when you're in their house (I don't hang out at the Grasshopper's place. I hang at the bar with him because I still enjoy his company even though I don't enjoy his drug habit).
When it comes to witnessing people you don't know and don't care about doing stupid shit, DON'T CONFRONT THEM. Have our boys in blue do it for you. That way, they'll get what they deserve for being assholes, but you won't be treated like a dick for lining them out.

Top
#145732 - 02/16/06 12:25 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: crackergirl]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
Unless you live in California and have a Medical Marijuana Card, a
prescription and a valid medical reason, that stuff is illegal in the
United States. Knowing that someone is breaking a law make
you an accessory to their crime.

Is that really the kind of company you want to keep?
_________________________




Top
#145733 - 02/16/06 12:36 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: crackergirl]
Witch_Scarlet Offline

CoS Witch

Registered: 01/09/06
Posts: 787
Loc: Texas
I have a brother who is a drug addict and a dealer, and I have not spoken to him in 18 years. I warned him a long time ago that I would not tolerate such activities and when he did not stop I cut off all contact with him, and on a quiet note made sure that a police friend of mine knew what he was up to, my brother did two years in the state pen. I do not treat such things lightly, especially for family and I do not allow anyone near me who has this nasty habit. Why would you want anyone around you who are killing their mind and body with such filth? It will only rub off on you sooner or later.

If I see someone beating an animal with a baseball bat I am not likely to stand by and watch, I adore animals and I would never let one suffer needlessly if it is within my power to stop it. People on the other hand… that is a different story.

Top
#145734 - 02/16/06 01:22 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
Tyrson Offline


Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 21
Loc: Canada
I'm sure most know that the only reason that marijuana was made illegal was so that Dupont Oil could sell nylon rope to the U.S. Navy, so they put forth the story of the "evil black man" corrupting their "inoccent" white daughters, buy luring them out to the hemp fields.
Aside from that, I believe that a great number of things are used as excuses for doing or not doing something, whereby a person gives something power over themselves. ie "I can't ______ without smoking,drinking,snorting,watching,listening to.."
Or the the otherside of it "I have to..."
The only things one has to do is breath and deficate everything else is voluntary.
I believe "Everything in moderation and Life to excess"
Hail
_________________________
"When you finally understand the universe, it will not only be stranger than you imagine, it will be stranger than you can imagine." Arthur C. Clarke "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" Aleister Crowley

Top
#145735 - 02/16/06 01:27 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Tyrson]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
Who gives a crap about why?

The fact remains that it is illegal.

End of discussion.
_________________________




Top
#145736 - 02/16/06 01:33 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
Tyrson Offline


Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 21
Loc: Canada
Quote:

Who gives a crap about why?

The fact remains that it is illegal.

End of discussion.



Too true I digressed, point taken

Hail
_________________________
"When you finally understand the universe, it will not only be stranger than you imagine, it will be stranger than you can imagine." Arthur C. Clarke "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" Aleister Crowley

Top
#145737 - 02/16/06 01:46 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
One must give a crap and question why something is illegal. Blindly following orders and regulations without given reason leads to herd mentality.

Here's one: Why is it illegal not to have auto insurance?

Top
#145738 - 02/16/06 01:55 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Quote:

Blindly following orders and regulations without given reason leads to herd mentality.




But there's something you're overlooking.

You can disagree with the law, question the law, complain about the law and petition against the law - but in the end, you still have to follow the law.

There's a distinction to be made. That distinction is between choice. In matters of law, we have no choice.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#145739 - 02/16/06 02:04 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Witch_Scarlet Offline

CoS Witch

Registered: 01/09/06
Posts: 787
Loc: Texas
Why is it illegal not to have auto insurance?

Because I drive a very expensive car and if you hit me I am going to take it out of your hide one way or another! Insurance might save you from me.

Top
#145740 - 02/16/06 02:38 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Witch_Scarlet]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
I am willing to take that risk, as I would pay for my irresponsibility after it happened not before and "in case" it would happen. I trust my driving ability enough to know that I would not hit your car Miss Scarlet. Responsibility to those who deserve it; I and other responsible drivers don't deserve to pay for an accident that has not happened, just because statistically an accident could happen.
Obligation to pay for the irresponsible actions of others is not a virtue I hold dear.
Many choose to take risks in life, without risk the reward is little.
One doesn't have to abide by the law(of the common people, if I may add) it is one's choice to take that risk of not following the law, and suffer the consequences for the failure of their actions.

Paying the church a tithe is also a form of insurance. Think about that for a minute...

Top
#145741 - 02/16/06 02:41 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Poetaster]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
One does have choice to break the law, it just must be done wisely to get away with it.

Top
#145742 - 02/16/06 03:04 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Witch_Scarlet Offline

CoS Witch

Registered: 01/09/06
Posts: 787
Loc: Texas
I will not be drawn into an argument on the subject with you, but… we all know that there are far more irresponsible drivers on the roads then responsible ones, and I have had my favorite car totaled by a drunk driver who had no insurance, my car was my baby and she was priceless, literally! I have insurance for me, not for some bloody jack off who hasn’t the sense not to get behind the wheel of a car. End of argument for me.

Top
#145743 - 02/16/06 03:06 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
If you don't know the difference between having auto insurance and
drugs, I sure hope you aren't driving.

Your arguement is absurd.
_________________________




Top
#145744 - 02/16/06 03:15 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Quote:

One does have choice to break the law, it just must be done wisely to get away with it.




I suppose you have a point.

I've just never tried to rationalize breaking the law.

The law is the law - not getting caught if you break it, still doesn't change the fact that you broke it.

It's about character, I like to think I have some.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#145745 - 02/16/06 03:59 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214
911
"Hail Satan!"
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#145746 - 02/16/06 04:01 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Witch_Scarlet]
crackergirl Offline


Registered: 11/15/05
Posts: 323
Loc: Kansas
Outside of school and outside of the bar, I really don't associate with this dude. He's just a bar friend. Not a real friend. I don't take him to rock concerts (like I do with some of my cop friends who like metal), and I don't let him into my house. Part time friend, man. That's all he is. I don't take him seriously. No one does. The cops around here know I'm a good kid, and I was raised by a good mama, so I'm not worried about that stuff "rubbing off" on me. It won't. I'm too smart to smoke with him. I've told him already that I don't do drugs, and he didn't ask me again.

All the friends I have that are druggies are the same way. They're just some stoners I know. I'm really using the term "friend" loosely with these guys. They're just some dudes that happen to frequent the same night spots. That's all.

If you're worried about Grasshopper man getting away with anything, don't. The police are planning a little spring break bash for him. They're going to bust him after the drug run to Cali he's got planned for next month so they can really fuck him on the charges. I might have let a little info on that slip out during dinner the other night with one of my boys in blue. I'm kind of evil like that.

Top
#145747 - 02/16/06 04:08 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
Discipline Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 08/25/03
Posts: 6796
Loc: Forever West
If it is illegal, I will inform the authorities. If there is risk of injury or death to the innocent, I will take action. There are far too many morons to just let the crap slide.

One time while I was working at an event, a drunk kid ran across the street and started to beat on an elder gentleman for no reason. So I ran over with a few others and we forcefully detained the man while the police arrived. It is blatant disregard for the safety of others that aggravates me the most.

I get paid to tell people what they can and can't do. So, yes. There are a lot of times that I must confront others on their behavior. You actually start to get a gut feeling for when people are going to do something stupid.
_________________________
"I've learned . . . that life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes." ~Andy Rooney

"At last I shall have time to devote myself seriously and freely to the destruction of all my former opinions." ~Descartes

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.” ~Richard Feynman

Top
#145748 - 02/16/06 04:12 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Discipline Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 08/25/03
Posts: 6796
Loc: Forever West
>>One does have choice to break the law, it just must be done wisely to get away with it.

That is moronic. That is the kind of thing I would write a ticket for.

"But sir? There is no traffic and I saw someone else doing it. Can't you cut me a break?"

My answer, NOPE!
_________________________
"I've learned . . . that life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes." ~Andy Rooney

"At last I shall have time to devote myself seriously and freely to the destruction of all my former opinions." ~Descartes

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.” ~Richard Feynman

Top
#145749 - 02/16/06 05:27 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Witch_Scarlet]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
Agreed. Full coverage is essential if one chooses to protect their assets from other's irresponsibility.

Top
#145750 - 02/16/06 06:37 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
Quote:

If you don't know the difference between having auto insurance and
drugs, I sure hope you aren't driving.

Your arguement is absurd.




I never stated that I was without insurance.
But, I have questioned what the reasons for both of these laws.

There is a big difference. Drug enforcement restricts the possession of such, liability laws require the possession such.
Being required by law to pay for liability insurance when one is not proven liable/irresponsible the law is unnecessary. Being forced by law to buy the "product" of a business makes one think of the term "free enterprise". Prepaying the penalties of ones own actions which have not occurred and will not occur is absurd.

One harms nothing but business profits(other’s gains) by not purchasing insurance.

Soon we will be required to purchase psychological damage and racial/discriminative slur liability insurance incase we hurt somebody's feelings.

Top
#145751 - 02/16/06 06:50 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Discipline]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
My mistake, I should have included: When breaking the law harms nobody including yourself,and as long as you are wise enough to get away with it, one has the choice to break the law. In such a case wouldn't one agree that the law is harmful? The choice is even more clear to break the writen law in order to preserve one's self.



Also if one got away with it you would not be writing a ticket.

Top
#145752 - 02/16/06 06:56 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Obolisk Offline


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 30
We require insurance because it puts the expense of the activity on the shoulders of those who engage in said activity. Accidents happen, no matter how good or how careful you are. Without the insurance requirement it would externalize the costs inequitably, increase litigation, increase gov't costs, and increase social burdens. With the insurance requirement the only way anyone gets screwed is if everyone involved was without insurance, which is seldom.

Top
#145753 - 02/16/06 07:27 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Obolisk]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
Quote:

Accidents happen, no matter how good or how careful you are.


I only agree with this if it is nature which causes the accident. The drivers involved in the accident would not be liable then.
Quote:

Without the insurance requirement it would externalize the costs inequitably, increase litigation, increase gov't costs, and increase social burdens. With the insurance requirement the only way anyone gets screwed is if everyone involved was without insurance, which is seldom.




Not if one is required by law to purchase insurance after they are a liability. My point which I have been trying to stress.

Actually I think we would all be better off with the system of "pre-cognition" set up as in the movie Minority Report
Even the mode of transportation in the movie seems like a logical solution to the problem.

Top
#145754 - 02/16/06 07:44 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
JayLucif Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 11/09/02
Posts: 1705
Loc: Helheim
... and there should be death to those who are just too stupid otherwise, but as society spits out protective laws. Charges are usually just a slap on the wrist which 90 percent of drunk drivers are habitual violators of law and will never pay up to begin with, and then on their way the drunkard goes getting behind a wheel drunk again. First convicted violation your legs should be cut off I say, if they survive the accident, and if you kill someone while you are drunk and driving a vehicle you should die on the spot no trial no ruling. A 35 cent bullet compared to thousands in wasted tax money in court fees and other useless bullshit that never corrects these habits this would be fine by me. "Stupidity should be painful."
_________________________
------------------------------------------------------------

Freedom, baby is never having to say you're sorry. Guilt is like a bag of fuckin' bricks. All ya gotta do is set it down. John Milton - The Devil's Advocate!

I'm gonna pull the whole thing down. I'm gonna bring the whole fuckin' diseased, corrupt temple down on your head. It's gonna be biblical. Clyde Shelton - Law Abiding Citizen!


------------------------------------------------------------

Top
#145755 - 02/16/06 07:49 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Obolisk Offline


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 30
Quote:

I only agree with this if it is nature which causes the accident. The drivers involved in the accident would not be liable then.


Even if they aren't liable, there is still the expense of the injured people and damaged property. Mandatory insurance covers that.

Quote:

Not if one is required by law to purchase insurance after they are a liability. My point which I have been trying to stress.


Then we have 200 million accidents to absorb. Everyone gets their into first accident without insurance under that system. Then once a "liability" they have to carry it. That also penalizes them for accidents that aren't their fault b/c fewer insureds means higher premiums to cover the exact same number of accidents and if it wasn't your fault, too bad you are still a liability now.

I agree with the minority report cars. I would love one that drove itself. Oh the extra stuff I could get done!

Top
#145756 - 02/16/06 08:16 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
JayLucif Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 11/09/02
Posts: 1705
Loc: Helheim
I personally avoid dealing with 95% of the people in the outside world on a friend personal level, I would be lucky to name 5 people who I truly trust. Useless it is a very dangerous crime that may endanger many innocent civilians, I avoid most people like the fucking plague. The only three people I truly need is ME, Myself and I. Everyone else can truly fucking die for all I care. May sound like a harsh outlook, but my early teenage life has taught me that one can only truly trust oneself. Everyone else in this world probable has their own agenda and it probable does not include the best outcome for YOU. Under all that superficial goody good guy badge crap, self survival is the highest law and most people will sell someone else out to save their sorry ass excuse as a Human, while pretending to be a law abiding decent Human being. "Long Live Death", and it can not come too soon enough for some of these wasted parasites on this ball of dirt. Do I sit around looking for reasons to call 911 no, but I do not run from that option when a situation warrantes it. Society today is filled with so damn many laws, many that are usually created by self righteous narrowed mind criminal-politicians, when many options can be narrowed down to basic individual decisions. I spend my time focused on my actions and what I am doing, I do not have enough time in this life to deal with other peoples panthetic dramas and their slave mentalities. Why deal with slaves when you can deal with your own liberation from the common society, and truly be free? Truly be free cut off the people and situations that may truly only hold you back, otherwise sit back and slowly watch the shackle and chain snap around your leg. Your choice be free or be a slave, there is no middle road on this opinion.
_________________________
------------------------------------------------------------

Freedom, baby is never having to say you're sorry. Guilt is like a bag of fuckin' bricks. All ya gotta do is set it down. John Milton - The Devil's Advocate!

I'm gonna pull the whole thing down. I'm gonna bring the whole fuckin' diseased, corrupt temple down on your head. It's gonna be biblical. Clyde Shelton - Law Abiding Citizen!


------------------------------------------------------------

Top
#145757 - 02/16/06 08:39 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: JayLucif]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
I like the way this gentalman thinks.


Top
#145758 - 02/16/06 09:14 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: JayLucif]
Lust Offline


Registered: 11/02/05
Posts: 4214


Edited by tier_instinct (02/18/06 08:52 AM)
_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.�
Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Top
#145759 - 02/16/06 09:18 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: JayLucif]
uncleherpe Offline


Registered: 03/22/05
Posts: 499
when I see something bad happen, I usually alert the proper authorities. Ive seen people get assaulted and such, and I called the police- its their job and they would want to know about it. Getting dangerous assholes put in jail is good for everyone, not just the person who got hurt initially.


edit: since drugs were brought up- eh. I dont really care if others want to ruin their lives. I wouldnt call the cops if I saw some stoners smoking a joint, they are pretty damn harmless.


Edited by uncleherpe (02/16/06 09:30 PM)
_________________________
One stupid post too many.

Top
#145760 - 02/16/06 09:34 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: JayLucif]
Leviathan_Rising Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 02/05/06
Posts: 81
Quote:

I personally avoid dealing with 95% of the people in the outside world on a friend personal level, I would be lucky to name 5 people who I truly trust. Useless it is a very dangerous crime that may endanger many innocent civilians, I avoid most people like the fucking plague.



I tend to be the same way. In my mind, friendship is like a very sharp blade; you only offer it to those that you trust implicitly.

Quote:

Your choice be free or be a slave, there is no middle road on this opinion.



There is no one more pitiable than the one who believes he is free while remaining a slave. This seems to be the category into which most of the population falls.

The discussion at hand brings to mind a little Nietzsche, “Freedom is the will to be responsible to ourselves.”
_________________________
From the Deep,
~LR
==============================================================
"Ethical axioms are found and tested not very differently from the axioms of science. Truth is what stands the test of experience." -Einstein

"Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing. " -Emerson

"The freethinking of one age is the common sense of the next." -M. Arnold

Citizen

Top
#145761 - 02/16/06 09:47 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Obolisk]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3

Quote:

Quote:

I only agree with this if it is nature which causes the accident. The drivers involved in the accident would not be liable then.


Even if they aren't liable, there is still the expense of the injured people and damaged property. Mandatory insurance covers that.

Quote:

Not if one is required by law to purchase insurance after they are a liability. My point which I have been trying to stress.


Then we have 200 million accidents to absorb. Everyone gets their into first accident without insurance under that system. Then once a "liability" they have to carry it. That also penalizes them for accidents that aren't their fault b/c fewer insureds means higher premiums to cover the exact same number of accidents and if it wasn't your fault, too bad you are still a liability now.




Isn't it better than being a liability by default? Wouldn't you agree that it's quite ironic and funny that court settlements from auto accidents have since vanished? We have all been made inherently "guilty" by default to pay settlements for an accident we have not been in, or have not yet been involved in if we are even to be involved in an accident in the first place.
Couldn't it be that this law is put into effect due to the government's irresponsibility to its people to accommodate the appropriate amount of judicial facilities and personnel?

Conditioning to injustice is an important tool of suppression.

Top
#145762 - 02/16/06 09:48 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: crackergirl]
Barb Offline

CoS Member

Registered: 04/09/05
Posts: 587
Quote:

The police are planning a little spring break bash for him. They're going to bust him after the drug run to Cali he's got planned for next month so they can really fuck him on the charges. I might have let a little info on that slip out during dinner the other night with one of my boys in blue. I'm kind of evil like that.



Hell yea, that's a GREAT plan!
_________________________
"... it is much more gratifying to change your own world than the whole world." ~Magistra Ygraine

"Life is the great indulgence-death the great abstinence. Therefore, make the most of life-here and now!" ~Anton Szandor LaVey

"The true test of anyone's worth as a living creature is how much he can utilize what he has." ~Anton Szandor LaVey

"Twenty percent of your priorities will give you 80 percent of your production, IF you spend your time, energy, money, and personnel on the top 20 percent of your priorities." ~The Pareto Principle, as stated by John C. Maxwell

Top
#145763 - 02/17/06 01:25 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Obolisk Offline


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 30
Quote:

Isn't it better than being a liability by default?


I don't see it as liability by default. A state system that taxed everyone including non-drivers would be liability by default. I see it as defraying the expense across all participants in an activity.

Quote:

Wouldn't you agree that it's quite ironic and funny that court settlements from auto accidents have since vanished?


Since when? There is still tons of litigation and entire practices devoted to driving and liability insurance. Arbitration and settlement are the biggest tools of that sector.

Quote:

We have all been made inherently "guilty" by default to pay settlements for an accident we have not been in, or have not yet been involved in if we are even to be involved in an accident in the first place.


Not all, only participants in the activity, namely drivers. It is a form of strict liability, just like worker's comp insurance, product manufactuing, or wild animal handlers. To engage in the activity, you must be prepared to cover the expenses of injury. Most states have an opt out to carrying insurance by sufficient showing of alternate expense coverage means, such as a depository account or trust for driver liability.

Quote:

Couldn't it be that this law is put into effect due to the government's irresponsibility to its people to accommodate the appropriate amount of judicial facilities and personnel?


That is just another way of externalizing the cost to people who aren't involved in the activity. We could also take a share of the income tax and make a federal driver liability plan to match worker's comp and have the gov't insure everyone. There are lots of options, this particular one simply assigns it to the participants in the activity.

What isn't going to change are the number of accidents and injuries, the only thing being decided here is how large a pool to spread the expense across and how to determine who is in that pool.

Top
#145764 - 02/17/06 02:50 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Obolisk]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
Quote:

I don't see it as liability by default. A state system that taxed everyone including non-drivers would be liability by default. I see it as defraying the expense across all participants in an activity.




I see what you mean. If only there were better determining factors of how well one participates in the activity, before slapping them with monthly rates.

Quote:

Since when? There is still tons of litigation and entire practices devoted to driving and liability insurance. Arbitration and settlement are the biggest tools of that sector.




I went a little overboard in emphasis. From my observations most "courtroom" battle is done between insurance companies, excluding the individual. It seems to make individuals less acountable for their actions, when handing over the acountability to others to pay out of pocket with rate increases.

Quote:

Not all, only participants in the activity, namely drivers. It is a form of strict liability, just like worker's comp insurance, product manufactuing, or wild animal handlers. To engage in the activity, you must be prepared to cover the expenses of injury. Most states have an opt out to carrying insurance by sufficient showing of alternate expense coverage means, such as a depository account or trust for driver liability.



These coverages are electable aren't they? Giving one the choice...?

Quote:

That is just another way of externalizing the cost to people who aren't involved in the activity. We could also take a share of the income tax and make a federal driver liability plan to match worker's comp and have the gov't insure everyone. There are lots of options, this particular one simply assigns it to the participants in the activity.



The soultion would be to take participants out of the activity. A solution which doesn't appear to be in developement for another century.

*sigh*

Is there a S.I.G. for this project?


How did it get here from the origional topic? *laughs*

Top
#145765 - 02/17/06 04:40 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
Quote:

Quote:

If you don't know the difference between having auto insurance and
drugs, I sure hope you aren't driving.

Your arguement is absurd.




I never stated that I was without insurance.
But, I have questioned what the reasons for both of these laws.

There is a big difference. Drug enforcement restricts the possession of such, liability laws require the possession such.
Being required by law to pay for liability insurance when one is not proven liable/irresponsible the law is unnecessary. Being forced by law to buy the "product" of a business makes one think of the term "free enterprise". Prepaying the penalties of ones own actions which have not occurred and will not occur is absurd.

One harms nothing but business profits(other’s gains) by not purchasing insurance.

Soon we will be required to purchase psychological damage and racial/discriminative slur liability insurance incase we hurt somebody's feelings.




If one follows the laws, the "gray area" is gone.

Again, your arguements are more than teetering on the edge of absurd.
_________________________




Top
#145766 - 02/17/06 04:47 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
Quote:



If one follows the laws, the "gray area" is gone.

Again, your arguements are more than teetering on the edge of absurd.




Thus when one follows the law which comes before the law of self preservation. The gray area becomes permanantly black.

Top
#145767 - 02/17/06 04:50 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
RandomStranger Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 03/09/05
Posts: 2770
Loc: Here.
Quote:

Quote:



If one follows the laws, the "gray area" is gone.

Again, your arguements are more than teetering on the edge of absurd.




Thus when one follows the law which comes before the law of self preservation. The gray area becomes permanantly black.




Line up all of the bottles of your medication. If you see their names mentioned more than once, it is most likely because of contraindication warnings.

Stop taking them. Call your doctor immediately!!!
_________________________




Top
#145768 - 02/17/06 05:03 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Quote:

Thus when one follows the law which comes before the law of self preservation. The gray area becomes permanantly black.




Could you provide me with an example of a law which goes against self-preservation?

I think it's time you reexamine your methods of living if that's the case.

I've personally been able to live comfortably and peacefully without ever entertaining the notion of breaking the law on grounds of violated "self-preservation."
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#145769 - 02/17/06 05:05 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: RandomStranger]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
*snare, kick, cymbal*

Top
#145770 - 02/17/06 05:24 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Poetaster]
Bill_M Offline
CoS Reverend

Registered: 07/28/01
Posts: 11535
Loc: New England, USA
>>Could you provide me with an example of a law
>>which goes against self-preservation?

I'm sure each of us can dream up some silly hypothetical situation where surival would depend on breaking the law. But really, what would be the point of posting such things here?

To quote one moderator's post (which used to be thumbtacked though I'm not sure where it is now), 1) the COS does not condone ANY illegal activity, period, 2) there are lots of stupid people out there who think everything on this one public forum is a direct and official representation of all things COS, therefore 3) posting "yeah, but what if..." stories or "it's morally OK to break the law in this case" is a rather bad idea. I'm not an admin, but I suspect this thread is going in that "law debate" direction.
_________________________
Reverend Bill M.

http://www.devilsmischief.com: Carnal Comedy Clips, Netherworld Novelty Numbers,
New hour every week. Download the mp3 now!

http://www.aplaceformystuff.org: Tales of Combat Clutter and other Adventures

(Wenn du Google's Übersetzer verwendest, um diese Worte zu lesen, dann bist du ein Arschloch.)

Top
#145771 - 02/17/06 05:27 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Bill_M]
Poetaster Offline
CoS Member

Registered: 01/20/06
Posts: 2333
Loc: East Coast, USA.
Oh, I agree, Mr. Bill.

I only posed that question because I don't think there is such a law - without resorting to the hypothetical.
_________________________
"People who harbor strong convictions without evidence belong at the margins of our societies, not in our halls of power. The only thing we should respect in a person’s faith is his desire for a better life in this world; we need never have respected his certainty that one awaits him in the next."

- Sam Harris





Top
#145772 - 02/17/06 07:44 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Obolisk Offline


Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 30
Quote:

The soultion would be to take participants out of the activity. A solution which doesn't appear to be in developement for another century.


Agreed!

I am still waiting for the flying robotic self-driving cars too!

Top
#145773 - 02/17/06 08:26 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
LKRice Offline

CoS Priestess

Registered: 06/28/01
Posts: 6345
Quote:

My mistake, I should have included: When breaking the law harms nobody including yourself,and as long as you are wise enough to get away with it, one has the choice to break the law. In such a case wouldn't one agree that the law is harmful? The choice is even more clear to break the writen law in order to preserve one's self.



Also if one got away with it you would not be writing a ticket.




If you're going to advocate breaking the law, you might as well go elsewhere.
_________________________
Director
Committee for the
Promotion of Vice and
Prevention of Virtue

S Magazine 1 & 2
S Magazine 3

Top
#145774 - 02/17/06 09:58 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: DataLore]
Discipline Offline
CoS Warlock

Registered: 08/25/03
Posts: 6796
Loc: Forever West
If you have a beef with the law you should move, work to change it, or deal with it. Breaking the law simply because of the attitude of, "It ain't gonna hurt no one." is still a cop-out.

I can deal with minor violations, such as speeding, or copying movies. But most things are in place to protect someone, be it you or others.

You have a problem then do something more productive than just being belligerent.

As for your cute statement at the end. Have you ever gone fishing? You can't catch them all. But you can catch a few, even those who think they are sneaky and smart enough not to be caught.
_________________________
"I've learned . . . that life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes." ~Andy Rooney

"At last I shall have time to devote myself seriously and freely to the destruction of all my former opinions." ~Descartes

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.” ~Richard Feynman

Top
#145775 - 02/17/06 11:21 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: Poetaster]
uncleherpe Offline


Registered: 03/22/05
Posts: 499
well, a lot of legal stuff has nothing to do with self preservation. Im thinking about financial laws and file sharing type of stuff- but over all its true. The law makes sense and keeps everyone in check. Im glad its there.
_________________________
One stupid post too many.

Top
#145776 - 02/18/06 07:05 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
Alphines Offline


Registered: 01/13/06
Posts: 44
Loc: China
If I am familiar to him I will dissuade him.If I don't know him,I will try to neglect everything unless I cannot endure it. I will take revenge in every way I can think out.But I can be tolerant of many things.Perhaps it's a bad habit.
But if a person I hate is my leader or has great power so that I must depend on him or I can't hurt him.………Be patient,be patient…………-_-
_________________________
Mourning in the darkness of darkness
My dream chips away while blossom fades

Top
#145777 - 02/18/06 09:17 AM Re: Quick question... [Re: Inquisitor]
d1g1t Offline


Registered: 11/14/05
Posts: 110
Loc: Southwest UK
The consequences of one's actions is the person carrying out the action's responsibility, not yours.
_________________________
Wise men do not share wisdom, they share opinion.

Top
#145778 - 02/18/06 01:00 PM Re: Quick question... [Re: LKRice]
DataLore Offline


Registered: 11/22/05
Posts: 441
Loc: Holodeck 3
I neither support nor deffend any individual breaking the law. I was only stating that people have that choice, and indirectly stating reasons why one would break the law.

I personally dislike criminal activty. Cut-throats and scallywags have no business in our harbors.

But agreed, I will no longer post such misrepresenting statements.
I appologize.


Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >


Forum Stats
12016 Members
73 Forums
43827 Topics
405222 Posts

Max Online: 197 @ 10/04/11 06:49 AM
Advertisements