This is gonna get interesting! Militia takes over Ore. federal building after protest.

Rob Roy said:
When Stan and Bob got in a fight who initiated the fight? Was it mutual?


Can a person intervene ? Good question. Is the intervention to cease the fight, aid the defending person (if there is one) or to aid the initial aggressor?
Click to expand...

What if you dont know who is the aggressor and who is the defender? What if both of them are calling out for your offensive help... You cannot act defensively if you are not being attacked so that is the case right?
 
NLXSK1 said:
What if you dont know who is the aggressor and who is the defender? What if both of them are calling out for your offensive help... You cannot act defensively if you are not being attacked so that is the case right?
Click to expand...
Rob Roy has stated that if you intervene to help stop an adult from fucking a child you are a molester.
 
NLXSK1 said:
What if you dont know who is the aggressor and who is the defender? What if both of them are calling out for your offensive help... You cannot act defensively if you are not being attacked so that is the case right?
Click to expand...


By my personal code, I am not morally authorized to initiate aggression.

However WHERE the fight is taking place can be an element of how to resolve it. If it is on MY property, I have a right to intervene and remove either or both fighters.

While there is no moral obligation to become involved in other peoples disputes, if both are seeking help, it might be a sign neither wants to fight anymore. If you do intervene with the purpose of separating them, you might be performing an act of neutrality and "saving" both of them or you could be "aggressing against" both of them.

Your question is a good one and highlights why property rights can be used to solve problems.


What do you suggest happen? What would you do?




Rrog said:
Again, that's why he's on ignore. Nothing worthwhile ever came outta that mouth.
Click to expand...

Actually in a fit of temporary sanity you responded favorably to a statement awhile back that I made about gay people seeking permission from the state to marry was really them asking the state for equal oppression, since they would now like straight people "need state permission".

Also, you're not ignoring me, you are maligning me, because I call out your contradictions and don't fit into one of your little boxes.
 
ChesusRice said:
Rob Roy has stated that if you intervene to help stop an adult from fucking a child you are a molester.
Click to expand...


Nice perverted twist you used there... For a minute please take your hand out of your pants and I'll ask you a generic question or two...

If you intervene in the lives of people that are capable of consenting to having an interaction which only involves them would you say that you are acting in a defensive way or an offensive way when you intervene?

In other words do you approve of third parties interjecting themselves into other peoples business wherein the other people are capable of forming consent and do consent?


Also, the questions I pose above are rhetorical, so there's no need for you to reply with a distracting answer. By virtue of your history of advocating prohibitionist laws, I think your position is already clear. Have a nice day.
 
Rob Roy said:
By my personal code, I am not morally authorized to initiate aggression.

However WHERE the fight is taking place can be an element of how to resolve it. If it is on MY property, I have a right to intervene and remove either or both fighters.

While there is no moral obligation to become involved in other peoples disputes, if both are seeking help, it might be a sign neither wants to fight anymore. If you do intervene with the purpose of separating them, you might be performing an act of neutrality and "saving" both of them or you could be "aggressing against" both of them.

Your question is a good one and highlights why property rights can be used to solve problems.


What do you suggest happen? What would you do?.
Click to expand...

Ok, lets use property rights to solve the problem. Stan went over to Bob's house and took Bob's Toaster. Bob wasnt home so he could not stop him. When Bob got home he noticed his missing toaster and trespassed upon Stan's land to go get it. Stan decided to stop him so now both bob and stan are on Stan's land fighting it out.

Stan is yelling for you to get bob off his land because he is trespassing and bob is yelling for you to attack stan because stan stole his toaster.

Why are you asking me what I would do? This is a discussion of your philosophy of how life should work.

So, would you trespass on Stan's land? Would you if Stan injured Bob and Bob needed medical attention? When can you violate Stan's property rights if ever?
 
NLXSK1 said:
Ok, lets use property rights to solve the problem. Stan went over to Bob's house and took Bob's Toaster. Bob wasnt home so he could not stop him. When Bob got home he noticed his missing toaster and trespassed upon Stan's land to go get it. Stan decided to stop him so now both bob and stan are on Stan's land fighting it out.

Stan is yelling for you to get bob off his land because he is trespassing and bob is yelling for you to attack stan because stan stole his toaster.

Why are you asking me what I would do? This is a discussion of your philosophy of how life should work.

So, would you trespass on Stan's land? Would you if Stan injured Bob and Bob needed medical attention? When can you violate Stan's property rights if ever?
Click to expand...


If there is clear evidence of a toaster theft, I think the owner of the toaster has the right to recover it. The toaster thief is liable for the level of harm he created to the person(s) he harmed. It comes to down to who initiated the harm...who broke the peaceful neutrality first.


How the toaster gets recovered could happen in a number of ways. This reminds me of a story many years ago. Some neighborhood kids and I built a kids fort in the woods and an adult came and took a piece of plywood from it to use for something or other around his house.

Being kids, most of the gang figured "the authority" , the adult, had spoken and our plywood roof was gone forever. The rest of the story includes me, knocking on the adults door, getting him to confess to the theft. and me recovering the property and then lumping the plywood back to our fort.


I was asking you what you would do in your toaster scenario, because I'm curious.
 
I see you now have both hands in your pants and you are breathing heavy. I had hoped to use generic examples...Very well let's expose your hypocrisy....

Your hypothetical scenario is a little perverted, first if only ONE person consents to an interaction, BUT the other doesn't, the interaction should not happen should it?

On the one hand you purport to be a protector... but if you intervene when BOTH people consent to something and its none of your business....aren't you then an unwanted third party AGGRESSOR? Who are you protecting in that instance?
 
Rob Roy said:
I see you now have both hands in your pants and you are breathing heavy. I had hoped to use generic examples...Very well let's expose your hypocrisy....

Your hypothetical scenario is a little perverted, first if only ONE person consents to an interaction, BUT the other doesn't, the interaction should not happen should it?

On the one hand you purport to be a protector... but if you intervene when BOTH people consent to something and its none of your business....aren't you then an unwanted third party AGGRESSOR? Who are you protecting in that instance?
Click to expand...
You would die. And if you lived what's left of you would go to prison
 
ChesusRice said:
You would die. And if you lived what's left of you would go to prison
Click to expand...


I'm not saying you have a guilty conscience, but you seem unusually focused on shifting a generic conversation about consent to one that has elements of child molestation in it.

I guess maybe your having a pet robot could be a good thing if it keeps you from hanging around the school yard and at home indulging your perversions there.

I'm not sure why you're doing the internet badass thing either, but I suppose it's because you have masculinity issues and skinny arms. Have a great day playing with your robot.
 
Rob Roy said:
I'm not saying you have a guilty conscience, but you seem unusually focused on shifting a generic conversation about consent to one that has elements of child molestation in it.

I guess maybe your having a pet robot could be a good thing if it keeps you from hanging around the school yard and at home indulging your perversions there.

I'm not sure why you're doing the internet badass thing either, but I suppose it's because you have masculinity issues and skinny arms. Have a great day playing with your robot.
Click to expand...
You are the one advocating that sex with a child is ok as long as the child Consents
 
ChesusRice said:
You are the one advocating that sex with a child is ok as long as the child Consents
Click to expand...


I'm not an advocate for that. I have an aversion to it.

However, I have an aversion to intervening in the lives of people who are capable of consenting to something if their interaction is none of my business. You CLEARLY think you have a right to run others lives for them. I do not.


Thanks for not sending internet death rays to assassinate me, you had me worried for a minute there, you robot fucking stud you.
 
Rob Roy said:
I'm not an advocate for that. I have an aversion to it.

However, I have an aversion to intervening in the lives of people who are capable of consenting to something if their interaction is none of my business. You CLEARLY think you have a right to run others lives for them. I do not.


Thanks for not sending internet death rays to assassinate me, you had me worried for a minute there, you robot fucking stud you.
Click to expand...
Can a child of 13 consent to having sex with Rob Roy? Yes or No?

Answer the question or get the fuck out of here
 
ChesusRice said:
Can a child of 13 consent to having sex with Rob Roy? Yes or No?

Answer the question or get the fuck out of here
Click to expand...


While I appreciate you think you are making me an offer, I thought I told you already I was put off by your efforts to pimp out the babysitter.

Can't you just find a young looking robot and satisfy your urges that way, Prohibitionist?
 
Rob Roy said:
You are equivocating, you either agree or not...also the "just doing my job excuse" is lame

View attachment 3599875



It looked like the "dangerous people" shot a man trying to avoid a confrontation.

Badges don't grant extra rights.
Click to expand...

You're insane if you think he was trying to avoid a confrontation. He actively sought one, in every sense of his actions. And lol Robert Higgs. Ugh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

vostok
Oregon: Armed protest at US wildlife building
Replies
5
Views
359
Harrekin
Harrekin
Finshaggy
Occupy
2 3
Replies
43
Views
3K
Finshaggy
Finshaggy
Back
Top