Maine Town to 'Require' gun ownership?

kpmarine said:
It's more a recognition that people are not always prone to thinking beyond the end of their nose. The fact is, there's a reason we moved away from a more individual system.

For the sake of argument though, let's say your ideal system was how the US was ran. Please, describe it to me; perhaps I'm not understanding (or assuming incorrectly) how your system would work. I'd like the idea of a general goodwill dictating society, but I don't honestly see how it would work. Perhaps I'd be more inclined to see your viewpoint if I could better envision the way you see things working.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your interest. Sometimes it is easier to describe things by referring to the work of others. I'll dig up some video for you, but might not be able to post until a bit later, hopefully today...duty calls now. Got a farm to run, critters need feeding, etc. Again, thanks for your sincerity, it's refreshing.
 
Rob Roy said:
Thank you for your interest. Sometimes it is easier to describe things by referring to the work of others. I'll dig up some video for you, but might not be able to post until a bit later, hopefully today...duty calls now. Got a farm to run, critters need feeding, etc. Again, thanks for your sincerity, it's refreshing.
Click to expand...
shit man i wish the farmer i worked for milking 150 head of jerseys and gernsies was as intelligent as you are lol!
 
Rob Roy said:
Thank you for your interest. Sometimes it is easier to describe things by referring to the work of others. I'll dig up some video for you, but might not be able to post until a bit later, hopefully today...duty calls now. Got a farm to run, critters need feeding, etc. Again, thanks for your sincerity, it's refreshing.
Click to expand...

Take your time, I am in no hurry. I can recognize that I hold ideas that others can explain much better; we all have our talents. I can't deny that I am somewhat attached to my current system due to familiarity, so I may give it some preference. Perhaps a different perspective will help me see things in the light you're viewing them, or at least provide me with a better means to discuss this; as we clearly seem to be experiencing some level of disconnect here. If nothing else, learning new things is fun.
 
Dr Kynes said:
Protip: theres been several.

its not commonly announced, but i can think of 4 guys in cali over the last 10 years.

they dont usually get thrown in jail, they get "retired" or get shifted to a different company of jurisdiction, but they rarely go to jail.

like diddling priests or dirty cops, nobody wants to reveal that the guys supposedly porotecting us are in fact compulsive firebugs.

Checkem: http://www.academia.edu/729650/Defining_the_Firefighter_Arson_Problem_A_Research_Note


its a worldwide problem.
Click to expand...

You have to be fucking with me! You're telling me that it doesn't matter whether you're private, volunteer or public firefighter? They all do what Kp said was his objection to the private sector? No way!
 
kpmarine said:
That's an oversimplification. In a situation where you aren't the only person here; taxation isn't as simple as stealing from you to remodel a kitchen. It's more like a guy stealing from you to remodel a kitchen that exists because the guy who is stealing from you made it possible to build your house in the first place. We are more than just the sum of our parts.
Click to expand...

Say what? :confused:
 
Canna Sylvan said:
You have to be fucking with me! You're telling me that it doesn't matter whether you're private, volunteer or public firefighter? They all do what Kp said was his objection to the private sector? No way!
Click to expand...

I think you're missing what I'm discussing, or maybe I'm not making it clear. The end result of Rob's philosophy (Which has been driving this conversation.), as I read it, is essentially a giant group of people doing what they want; with no overriding, beyond what the individual provides for himself. I wasn't aware we were discussing public vs. private sector; I thought this was closer to a "society with no government vs. society with government" discussion, at this point.
 
kpmarine said:
I think you're missing what I'm discussing, or maybe I'm not making it clear. The end result of Rob's philosophy (Which has been driving this conversation.), as I read it, is essentially a giant group of people doing what they want; with no overriding, beyond what the individual provides for himself. I wasn't aware we were discussing public vs. private sector; I thought this was closer to a "society with no government vs. society with government" discussion, at this point.
Click to expand...

I thought, since some sort of a government(like) was required for a private firefighters, that you were arguing we shouldn't go private in the sense of meaning for profit. Somehow profit changes the quality of a government service. If so, I disagree with that thinking.

Unless I misunderstood, in that case carry on.
 
Canna Sylvan said:
I thought, since some sort of a government(like) was required for a private firefighters, that you were arguing we shouldn't go private in the sense of meaning for profit. Somehow profit changes the quality of a government service. If so, I disagree with that thinking.

Unless I misunderstood, in that case carry on.
Click to expand...

Now it's my turn to be confused. Could you break this one down Barney style for me? I'm honestly not understanding what you're conveying with this, for some reason. Maybe it's a phrasing thing, due to how I'm reading it.
 
kpmarine said:
Now it's my turn to be confused. Could you break this one down Barney style for me? I'm honestly not understanding what you're conveying with this, for some reason. Maybe it's a phrasing thing, due to how I'm reading it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I was a bit high at the time.

First off are we talking No Government, as in NONE, shipwrecked alone style?

When I hear most, you have government and private (not government) who provide a community service.

My interpretation was you were talking about when private sectors outside government provide a community service, the quaility of service goes down. Along with humanitarian violations.

Whereas when government provides, the problems only arise, the more private interest only seeks personal gain over "the right thing to do."

Therefore this arguement leads to only "government" can provide an ethical community service, like firefighters.
 
kpmarine said:
I think you're missing what I'm discussing, or maybe I'm not making it clear. The end result of Rob's philosophy (Which has been driving this conversation.), as I read it, is essentially a giant group of people doing what they want; with no overriding, beyond what the individual provides for himself. I wasn't aware we were discussing public vs. private sector; I thought this was closer to a "society with no government vs. society with government" discussion, at this point.
Click to expand...


A society with no person or group having a monopoly on the use of force would be a bit more accurate, guided by morality.

A society based on one fundamental principle-

No man or group of men calling themselves "the government" - is morally entitled to initiate (that is to start) the use of physical force, the threat of force, or any substitute for force (such as fraud) against any other man or group of men.

The definition above came from a book written by Morris and Linda Tannehille called the MARKET FOR LIBERTY. Many questions regarding how a society would function, including mediating disputes is discussed in their book.

Another good book offering ways to get to this kind of society is HEALING OUR WORLD In an Age of Aggression , by Dr. Mary Ruart.

Both books offer possibilities, consider checking them out. Peace.
 
Canna Sylvan said:
Sorry, I was a bit high at the time.

First off are we talking No Government, as in NONE, shipwrecked alone style?

When I hear most, you have government and private (not government) who provide a community service.

My interpretation was you were talking about when private sectors outside government provide a community service, the quaility of service goes down. Along with humanitarian violations.

Whereas when government provides, the problems only arise, the more private interest only seeks personal gain over "the right thing to do."

Therefore this arguement leads to only "government" can provide an ethical community service, like firefighters.
Click to expand...

That's how I saw the inevitable conclusion of Rob's ideology: shipwrecked alone style. However, that may have been a bit of an oversimplification in light of more recent posts, time will tell.

Perhaps I have explained some of my ideas poorly or a little less clearly than I thought. I don't feel that government is the only ethical provider of something. There are many things the government meddles in, that it definitely should not. Government and businesses are both run by people, and accordingly prone to manipulation for personal gain at the expense of others. Unchecked public sector activities can be just as harmful, wasteful monetarily, or beneficial, as a private sector equivalent. If we are talking how much government is actually needed, how much is too much, or at what level of government certain things should be decided or legislated; I see those as topics totally in need of discussion. It seems fairly evident to me that our government needs change, I thought we were taking total removal here though.
 
Rob Roy said:
A society with no person or group having a monopoly on the use of force would be a bit more accurate, guided by morality.

A society based on one fundamental principle-

No man or group of men calling themselves "the government" - is morally entitled to initiate (that is to start) the use of physical force, the threat of force, or any substitute for force (such as fraud) against any other man or group of men.

The definition above came from a book written by Morris and Linda Tannehille called the MARKET FOR LIBERTY. Many questions regarding how a society would function, including mediating disputes is discussed in their book.

Another good book offering ways to get to this kind of society is HEALING OUR WORLD In an Age of Aggression , by Dr. Mary Ruart.

Both books offer possibilities, consider checking them out. Peace.
Click to expand...

I'll have to add those to the reading list, sounds like there should be some interesting subjects covered in those. Do you know of any sources, that don't require me to buy something, that can give me a better idea of how this all is supposed to work?
 
kpmarine said:
I'll have to add those to the reading list, sounds like there should be some interesting subjects covered in those. Do you know of any sources, that don't require me to buy something, that can give me a better idea of how this all is supposed to work?
Click to expand...
Are you Somalian or something?

Thats piracy, son.

Youd steal the private property of others with no regard for their individual property rights?
 
Healing our World.

This is religion. One has to assume there is this "World" and then it is "ill and damaged" and needs to be "Healed." OMG, the giant Hubris!! We also assume we can "heal" it. We assume we broke it. Funny.

A relgion is the same, it makes up hell (ill and damaged) and then it provide fear for motivation and then salvation. (healing)

Same thing, religion makes up a problem to support the solution. Then have easily mis-guided folks as proselyte for your book, while you collect the profits. (and the laughs)
 
Doer said:
Healing our World.

This is religion. One has to assume there is this "World" and then it is "ill and damaged" and needs to be "Healed." OMG, the giant Hubris!! We also assume we can "heal" it. We assume we broke it. Funny.

A relgion is the same, it makes up hell (ill and damaged) and then it provide fear for motivation and then salvation. (healing)

Same thing, religion makes up a problem to support the solution. Then have easily mis-guided folks as proselyte for your book, while you collect the profits. (and the laughs)
Click to expand...
Don't want the book? Don't buy it.

Want it? Buy it.

How can anyone espouse the rights of the individual then with the same mouth suggest taking the efforts of someone else's labour (which is fundamentally THEIR property) ?
 
Harrekin said:
Are you Somalian or something?

Thats piracy, son.

Youd steal the private property of others with no regard for their individual property rights?
Click to expand...

I don't see how exactly asking about sources of information other than books I have to buy is piracy. I didn't ask for free copies of the books, just information.
 
Doer said:
Healing our World.

This is religion. One has to assume there is this "World" and then it is "ill and damaged" and needs to be "Healed." OMG, the giant Hubris!! We also assume we can "heal" it. We assume we broke it. Funny.

A relgion is the same, it makes up hell (ill and damaged) and then it provide fear for motivation and then salvation. (healing)

Same thing, religion makes up a problem to support the solution. Then have easily mis-guided folks as proselyte for your book, while you collect the profits. (and the laughs)
Click to expand...

Have you read the book, or are you just inferring that from the title?
 
Well, exactly....what could I have possibly said against that? I was taking about the free advertising in the forum. It sediments the bs, is all.

But, I'm not against anything but lazy thinking. Seriously, people can kill and eat each other,for all I care, but that would not necessarily suit me in all cases...but in some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lifegoesonbrah
stories about people protecting themselves and others with guns
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
4K
Winter Woman
Winter Woman
mr2shim
Damn good gun control article
Replies
0
Views
661
mr2shim
mr2shim
S
texas town allowed teachers to carry guns!YES!
Replies
5
Views
971
ClaytonBigsby
ClaytonBigsby
squarepush3r
Why there are no "good cops"
Replies
7
Views
2K
canndo
canndo
RC7
Kid Makes 38 Million Selling Marijuana
2
Replies
30
Views
10K
Bombur
B
Back
Top