Will Congress act now?

[Rob Roy]

In the scenario I provided, that doctor was the only doctor within 100 miles. He either treats the black patient, or the patient dies.

I’m just trying to figure out how far you go with your no-forced-associations society. Would you be willing to let someone die over the rights of the doctor to refuse his services for any reason? No exceptions? If so, can you not see the problems that would create, and can you not see how that would lead to the breakdown of a functioning society?

Before an action is under taken, isn't it fair to consider whether it is rightful or not ? I don't think I have a right to rip your liver out if I really really need one.

Nor do I think in less exigent circumstances I have the right to force you to rescue me from something or serve me. If you do not rescue me, and weren't involved in creating my dire emergency how could you be the one "causing" my death ?

Race is irrelevant in my example by the way.

You are advocating for the use of offensive force against a neutral person, as a solution ,but it isn't, it is the REASON why things are not functioning as they should. Would I want the doctor to treat the injured person? Yes, of course.

 

[Rob Roy]

You are using the word force a bit out of context, no?

If someone pays the asking price for a product or service, agrees to any contractual obligations related to that good or service, and abides by the businesses code of conduct while in the place of business, how does “force” come in to play? It’s a consensual transaction that has nothing to do with skin color, sex, etc is it not?

If you promise to buy your wife a nice dinner if she'll do X for you, and you both agree your deal is consensual.

If I ask your wife to do X for me, but she says "ewww Rob Roy get away you hairy beast" doesn't she have the right to deny me her service based on HER rights? Even if I agree to pay the same price you would, that's not relevant.

 

[UncleBuck]

Before an action is under taken, isn't it fair to consider whether it is rightful or not ? I don't think I have a right to rip your liver out if I really really need one.

Nor do I think in less exigent circumstances I have the right to force you to rescue me from something or serve me. If you do not rescue me, and weren't involved in creating my dire emergency how could you be the one "causing" my death ?

Race is irrelevant in my example by the way.

You are advocating for the use of offensive force against a neutral person, as a solution ,but it isn't, it is the REASON why things are not functioning as they should. Would I want the doctor to treat the injured person? Yes, of course.

rob roy would rather let a black person die than say a white should provide CPR.

 

[Rob Roy]

What does felon mean to you? Dumbfuck.

It all depends. Some felons coincidentally are people who have used offensive force in some way. Whether the law called them a criminal or not, they would be.

Other felons are merely statutory criminals and haven't used any kind of offensive force or in reality committed any real crimes.

Thanks for making my argument for me. Too easy. (Rob Roy scratches his ass and lights up another one)

 

[Rob Roy]

rob roy would rather let a black person die than say a white should provide CPR.

Would you force a black person to serve somebody if they simply wanted to self determine and not be involved in another persons life ?

 

[st0wandgrow]

Before an action is under taken, isn't it fair to consider whether it is rightful or not ? I don't think I have a right to rip your liver out if I really really need one.

Nor do I think in less exigent circumstances I have the right to force you to rescue me from something or serve me. If you do not rescue me, and weren't involved in creating my dire emergency how could you be the one "causing" my death ?

Race is irrelevant in my example by the way.

You are advocating for the use of offensive force against a neutral person, as a solution ,but it isn't, it is the REASON why things are not functioning as they should. Would I want the doctor to treat the injured person? Yes, of course.

Yeah, we could go around and around for days on this. I think it’s fair to say that there is a reason why no countries on the planet conduct themselves in the way that you favor. You seem to want to go back to a time where there were no social constructs. Society has progressed and left that mentality behind for good reason. It does not work.

 

[whitebb2727]

Colt was founded in 1845, which is after 1776.

But Alt facts to the rescue!

The morons come out of the woodwork, drawn by violence.

And? You really think the founding fathers thought there would be no advancements in weaponry? That has always been the goal. A better gun.

The Girandoni air rifle was invented 12 years before the bill of rights. It held 20 rounds and was gravity fed and was effective out to 125 yards.

Soldiers that used muskets eventually premeasured powder and made their shots up before a fight. The whole goal was more rounds per minute.

I won't go to the extreme of saying that citizens should be able to own the same as the government.

I believe a competent person should be able to own ar's and the like. They are just a variant of a hunting rifle.

For the bump stock, I see no need in them. Ban them or at least make them NFA item. Same with a suppressor. Keep it an NFA item.

Full automatics have remained legal with the right license. I'm fine with that. Thouse guns are so expensive that they stay in collections.

This is a horrible incident. In the big picture pistols kill way more people.

You want those banned too?

 

[Rob Roy]

rob roy would rather let a black person die than say a white should provide CPR.

There is a difference between the words "should" and "must" isn't there ?


Must is not for me or you to say for another neutral person though, Rapey Mc Slave Master .

If you use offensive force to decide what a neutral person must do, then you are advocating for a form of slavery. You can't possibly refute that by the way, deflect yes, refute, no.

 

[whitebb2727]

Colt invented the repeating firearm. Benjamin Henry did the same for rifles in 1860.

It's called history. Maybe you should learn some.

There were breach loading rifles in the 1700's. Not a true repeater but still quicker than a flint lock.

The bullets were stored in the stock and loaded in the breach as fast as a person could load it.

 

[Rob Roy]

Yeah, we could go around and around for days on this. I think it’s fair to say that there is a reason why no countries on the planet conduct themselves in the way that you favor. You seem to want to go back to a time where there were no social constructs. Society has progressed and left that mentality behind for good reason. It does not work.

Nope. I want to proceed FORWARD in time, where every person has the equal right of self determination and no person or group of persons has the right to deny others that.

I don't have a right (nobody does) to force another person to serve me. It is impossible to use a system which approves of the use of offensive force against neutral people to also be the thing which rids us of societal offensive force. It HAS NOT worked.

Social constructs based on two opposing points of view may be "normal" in the sense they occur on a regular and frequent basis, but it was normal to burn witches once too.

 

[whitebb2727]

I feel that people should have a right to go out in public without being surrounded by armed people.

Then the very next breath bitch about cops killing people.

Why accept cops carrying a gun but not a competent citizen?

 

[SneekyNinja]

It's been a while since we've engaged sir. Dammit man, how about a little bit of foreplay first?

Is that what you say or is that what they say to you?

 

[PCXV]

I'm old and won't be around that long.


So, you believe some people have a right to force others to serve them ? Is that correct ?

I believe if you act within a society you have accepted the laws of, you should rightfully expect to follow those laws, and if you break those laws face consequences proportional to your actions.

You act like the government uses capital punishment for every crime. Disingenuous.

 

[PCXV]

I think a slave has every right to flee or to use defensive force against his captor. I think no slave or any person has any right to force another person to serve them though...what about you? Do you think it is okay for someone to force you to associate with them?

You seem painfully unaware of your own duplicity by the way.

But the government has no right to punish a slaveholder when slavery was democratically decided to be a crime?

 

[PCXV]

No, IF, I had the right to tell others how to use their property or their body, I'd instruct them to behave as I would.

However I DO NOT have the right to tell others what they must do with their things, neither do you.

I do have a right to repel somebody from forcing me into a human relation I prefer not to be in though, everybody does.

You never address or refute what I said above, since you can't.

You forfeit absolute freedom when you agree to live in a society of law. But you already knew that. Disingenuous.

 

[Rob Roy]

Is that what you say or is that what they say to you?

Ask your mother, son.

 

[PCXV]

It all depends. Some felons coincidentally are people who have used offensive force in some way. Whether the law called them a criminal or not, they would be.

Other felons are merely statutory criminals and haven't used any kind of offensive force or in reality committed any real crimes.

Thanks for making my argument for me. Too easy. (Rob Roy scratches his ass and lights up another one)

That is a more fair and nuanced stance.

 

[Rob Roy]

You forfeit absolute freedom when you agree to live in a society of law. But you already knew that. Disingenuous.

Oh my, a barrage of platitudes. Should I take a shower and pound the old lady all afternoon or should I stay and dismantle your flawed assumptions?

Decisions , decisions.

 

[UncleBuck]

Oh my, a barrage of platitudes. Should I take a shower and pound the old lady all afternoon or should I stay and dismantle your flawed assumptions?

Decisions , decisions.

in case anyone is wondering, rob roy refers to 14 year old children as "old lady".

he prefers 11 year olds.

 

[Rob Roy]

you should respond to the same post for a third time.

nothing will change, you will still be the guy who would rather watch a black man die than see a white perform CPR on him, but at least it will amuse me.

now ask how you could possibly be racist now, ya pedophile fuck.

Excellent. I find you amusing too. That thing that you do where you believe in two opposing things at once is so funny!