Detroit citizens no longer rely on police, justifiable homicide in the city shot up 79% and the local rate of self-defense killings now stands 2,200% above the national average.

vampiricrogu3 · 2012-02-08T20:59:58.325945+00:00

but I'm curious what's to ensure the success of individual citizens if criminals begin to organize their forces.

Historically, criminals only organized for the purpose of engaging in black market activities. You need networks that can move things across borders, bribe/blackmail officials, etc. If you're just robbing homes, no need for that.

While it's not impossible we'd see a rise in organized crime in such a situation, I can't think of any serious precedent for it.

The criminal element is a market force as well;

Those supplying black market products are certainly a market force. No argument there... but ignoring that particular segment, it's not clear at all that the remainder is a market force. The types of criminals you imagine after excepting drug dealers and pimps and all the rest leaves you with maniacs and rapists and coked-out-of-their-gourd muggers and the like. These aren't aspiring businessmen meeting the challenges of the marketplace head-on.

zombeye · 2012-02-08T20:54:55.710830+00:00

Or do A and B remain married? How is joint property divided?

Are these kinds of questions so tough as to preclude it? Proportionally, I'd imagine. Fuck, sounds like something to let courts decide.

Or if A, B, and C are married, and A (a woman) gets pregnant by C (a man) and bears a child, does B's name also go on the birth certificate?

The father and mother go on the birth certificate. If Daddy is married to someone else now, does his cheated-on wife also put her name on it?

Besides, all of your arguments are only an issue for polygamy anyway. If we wanted to argue that people should be allowed to marry door knobs or slabs of marble or living room furniture or horses... it becomes even simpler. No one worries about health insurance for furniture or immigration status for inflatable sex dolls.

Such marriages would generate revenue for the state in marriage license fees and economic activity as freaks everywhere threw receptions for lifeless pieces of plastic and metal and lord knows what else.

Why don't we go for those?

zombeye · 2012-02-08T20:47:58.567930+00:00

Do you have some evidence supporting your assertions, like a link or something I might read to reinforce what you are saying?

So you want me to show you evidence of zero overlap in the statutes dealing with the two? In a reddit comment? Perhaps the 900 page essay can be serialized, and I can submit it 10,000 words at a time for the next 3 years for you?

Go fucking google.

Or a college of law:

August 19, 2010, 5:19 pm

Gee, that's ancient.

Hell, if you pull any other quote from that, it starts to get absurd. English Common Law goes back what, 7 or 8 centuries? Does anyone believe that it was a private agreement between the husband and wife? Until feminism came to the fore in the past century, this was not the case at all, daughters were considered to be chattel of the father even after the age of majority... not that many marriages waited quite so long as that. It's all drivel.

vampiricrogu3 · 2012-02-08T20:41:54.921531+00:00

Both. The government would interfere with a private group acting as if they were traditional police in the city of Detroit. They'd spin PR about how they were evil corrupt vigilantes and need to go to prison forever. Dramatic televised raids resulting in the death of people who'd surrender peacefully, all of it.

And everyone knows this. So who would ever take over for the failing government knowing that?

Additionally, the market is still quite clever, if I can stretch the meaning of that word. It sells cheap guns to private citizens enabling them to protect themselves without the help of traditional (private or public) police at all.

And yet, you still mock libertarianism.

In essence, my question is really do you feel that the problem has been fixed, or not?

Partially. More people need to own more firearms, and better ones.

anthonyjohn24 · 2012-02-08T20:37:57.381936+00:00

In all seriousness, I'm more trustworthy with nukes than the US government. These are the people who decided to nuke civilians twice and then did atmospheric testing for decades.

Hell, most crackwhores are more trustworthy, truth be told.

anthonyjohn24 · 2012-02-08T20:35:35.554949+00:00

If the government was administering healthcare, there wouldn't be insurance companies you nitwit.

No, it'd be some big agency or bureau or whatever. And guess who they'd hire to staff it?

All those out-of-work health insurance workers. Who else has the right experience on their resume?

anthonyjohn24 · 2012-02-08T20:34:20.604121+00:00

Net Neutrality is the other team buying a referee and having him call fouls on you when you were playing fair, and being impossibly blind when that other team stomps on your face.

It is as bad as SOPA and all the rest. You can't be arguing that big powerful corporations own the government out of one side of your mouth while simultaneously begging that very same government to protect you from the corporations and still sound sane.

anthonyjohn24 · 2012-02-08T20:29:59.018780+00:00

It does no good. Though I know what you're saying and you're right, these jackasses crawl out of the woodwork feeling a duty to make up pleasant lies about any such thing.

"Oh, you hate the DMV? Well they're just the nicest folks, and I was out of there in a jiffy with my license renewed, yesiree! It was like a dream come true!"

anthonyjohn24 · 2012-02-08T20:27:23.434632+00:00

Who says I trust them with nukes? This is the same military that nuked two civilian cities within human memory.

zombeye · 2012-02-08T20:21:14.488775+00:00

You and everyone that spreads the "marriage is a contract" meme are setting up a false premise. It can only lead to absurdities. I've explained why it is wrong. It's obvious to anyone who will listen.

But perhaps it's just not convenient for you to listen. Perhaps you get something out of pretending that it is a contract.

it falls on you to explain why your view is correct and the majority's is in error.

I will repeat myself just this once.

The laws that deal with contracts do not deal with marriage. The laws that deal with marriage do not deal with contracts. Almost zero overlap.
Culturally and sociologically, marriage has never been a contract nor contracts a marriage. The idea that somehow the two were really just minor variations on the same concept has only developed in the last 10 years. It doesn't exist prior to that. The closest you come to that is some bad historical poetry.

Considering these two things, it's obvious you are wrong. And once you've recognized how wrong it is, you have to wonder why people are persisting.

approximatic · 2012-02-08T20:16:49.823728+00:00

Yeh, but sometimes I wonder if my degree program is teaching for the world that has ended. Some of it's good, but I'm having to wade through alot of crap to get to it. It's so bad that if I had to actually pay for it, I don't think I would.

namegoeshere · 2012-02-08T20:13:19.450634+00:00

You got them to get it out of ban hell? I had been trying to get /r/rootbeer for years.

Hmmph. Looks like it opened back up to. Guess I'll go subscribe.

Havokeachday · 2012-02-08T20:12:33.141677+00:00

If you grill out, use only hardwood charcoal. I'm not convinced this is a good idea... my soil is already pretty close to 7, and that's probably enough to tip it over into alkaline.

Though, remember the ash is just the remainder of what carbon doesn't float away as CO and CO2. So, anything the ash has the charcoal has as well. Maybe grinding it to powder and adding it directly would be better.

approximatic · 2012-02-08T20:07:19.483584+00:00

In my limited reading on permaculture principles, I don't find that the profit motive figures into most permaculture promoters' reasons for adopting this lifestyle.

It's why I am interested in it. I will measure my profits in bushels of wheat and pounds of meat and so forth. But if you decide to do all that work for someone else, they take those profits, dole out a few tokens to go redeem for ever less of those same things you helped to grow. Agriculture may not make sense working for someone else, but it sure as hell makes sense working for yourself.

zombeye · 2012-02-08T20:03:27.840192+00:00

Also, the Wikipedia article on marriage uses the word "contract" 15 times, with many references going back thousands of years.

First, that was written what, 6 months ago by the same sorts of dweebs who spread this stupid meme.

Second, "marriage contracts" doesn't mean that the marriage was the contract. It means that a marriage was a product offered in that contract. If someone offers their daughter to you in a "marriage contract", the contract is between you and the father. Not you and the daughter.

This is so plainly obvious, I have to wonder where you come up with this shit.

zombeye · 2012-02-08T19:41:11.090508+00:00

Currently, none of our legal institutions are set up to handle polygamous marriages. For instance, we don't have precedents for how divorce, inheritance, or child custody would work.

So your argument against is that it's too inconvenient for the government to handle?

"Sorry, you may have a point about your 5th amendment rights, but they were too inconvenient so we decided to ignore them"... that's the world you want to live in?

zombeye · 2012-02-08T19:39:56.470026+00:00

The reason is marriage is a legal contract between two people.

This claim is presented with zero evidence.

Look at the facts. The laws regarding contracts do not overlap at all with the laws regarding marriages. Culturally, they are very different practices as well. Nowhere in human history were marriages ever considered contracts until just a few years ago when this stupid, baseless meme started spreading.

Marriages are not contracts.

vampiricrogu3 · 2012-02-08T19:30:02.008548+00:00

Both. On the first it's "the market isn't allowed to step in and fix it in the manner described" and on the second it's "the market fixed this with a superior method".

Take your pick.

scrubadub · 2012-02-08T19:28:56.303210+00:00

No chance of getting FOPA repealed, is there?

libertarianism · 2012-02-08T18:51:33.383493+00:00

So it is ok if starbucks does it, but the government doing it crosses a moral boundary for you?

I've never paid anything to Starbucks. Not even once. All these corporations that the leftists and socialists rant against... they've never once forced me to pay.

You still can't see the difference?

ThePieOfSauron · 2012-02-08T18:42:34.514320+00:00

All of christianity is fiction, but the Book of Mormon was authored by a L. Ron Hubbard wannabe.

ThePieOfSauron · 2012-02-08T18:34:40.119721+00:00

Haha. In Minnesota, Romney is third place following Ron Paul in second. How bad is that?

ThePieOfSauron · 2012-02-08T18:28:15.235076+00:00

It basically gives a surefire Obama victory, and no one talks about that, at all. Not the news, not the people, not on conservative websites.

A victory for Obama is a victory for neocons everywhere. Why would they need Gingrich or Romney in the White House? They've already got a guy there.

approximatic · 2012-02-08T18:12:06.602838+00:00

I'm a horticulture major thinking about doubling in animal science. Haha.

They're right though. It's the 21st century. We can all eat pills, no more of this messy plant and animal stuff. Have you tasted the new Blue Glop^TM? It now comes in a microwavable plastic tray for more convenience! Get yours today.

snarkypants · 2012-02-08T18:00:51.722687+00:00

that if a library wants to lend ebooks, they must repurchase the ebook every 180th time it is lent

So, we finally improve books so that they never wear out, and they're trying to force such horseshit on us? Nice.

Five-Year Club	reddit mold
reddit gold Since February 2011	Verified Email

NoMoreNicksLeft

TROPHY CASE

NoMoreNicksLeft

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login