Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Attitudes have changed over the years (Score 1) 448

During the era of IRA bombings, you kept a close eye on red-haired folks with Irish accents doing suspicious things like leaving luggage sitting about. Profiling of that type these days is not Politically Correct. We've legislated against common sense, hence we find it more palatable to frisk 85-year-old nuns and paraplegic veterans than actually single out members of groups that have committed 99.9% of the attacks against us.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

The example in question could have been remedied easily. What should have happened in this case? FD could have said to homeowner, "You didn't pay your fee (insurance) this year. We will put out the fire, but you will be liable for full costs associated with this. Do you want us to proceed?" I think the FD was stupid for not handling it this way, but that's beside the point I was arguing.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

Dude, if you are so petty as to ridicule me for not updating my signature (which has been the same for, oh, maybe six years now) then you need to get a life. And clean up your mouth while you're at it. You've reminded me why I started coming to Slashdot less and less several years ago. This isn't worth my time.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

It's not about me "feeling better". Perfectly logical and rational on this end, thank you very much. Please don't project your stereotypes on me. There's simply nothing about my argument that requires that you have any additional information about me or my situation. Get it yet? That's the point. Liberty. I leave you free to deal responsibly with your own affairs, and you do the same for me. That's it, end of story. Nobody needs the details of the other's business. Hopefully you begin to understand soon.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

I don't personally object to taxation to provide a fire department. (Though I also don't personally think privatization of the FD--which this case, an optional subscription/enrollment based service, is similar to--is a bad idea, either.) Narrowly, I was objecting to the OP's comment "Taxes are good, because they protect idiots like this one from themselves", which implied the purpose of taxation is to protect idiots from themselves. If that is the case, I want my money back, because I'm not an idiot.

More generally, I object to the larger premise as well. The purpose of government is not to protect anybody from themselves; the purpose of government is to protect the people's rights. I am vehemently against the notion that somebody else, somewhere else, who doesn't know me or my situation, can better determine my choices for me than I can for myself. Don't limit my freedom "for my own good". I don't need laws to tell me to buckle up, to wear a helmet, to buy health insurance, to buy fire insurance, not to smoke, etc etc ad nauseum! I can do the smart things on my own, and if I don't and get bitten by the consequences, I'll take responsibility for it!

The real problem, as I see it, is that nobody takes responsibility any more. Anybody with a decent moral compass can look at what they've bungled and say, "Yup, that's my fault," then, "How do I make it right?" or, "I guess I won't do that again." Morality is on the decline, and we've traded it for legality. We'll only admit culpability if it's legally required, after all the machinations and contortions and extensions fail to win a more favorable outcome. We want someone else to take the blame, someone else to pick up the tab. To do that, for every possible situation that might arise, requires an insanely complex set of rules. We call this the "legal system". To help us navigate it, we have more lawyers per capita than any society in history. We have waiting times to get into court that mock the right to a "speedy trial", bordering on unjust. Frivolous lawsuits clog the system, because people throw everything at the wall just to see what will stick. Nearly every law that's passed to limit some unjust action has overreach that will snag inoffensive actions as well. And then there are the laws that are passed because "it's a good idea". If it's so good, you shouldn't need a law to make people do it! That's how freedom is eroded.

William Penn said, "Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants." That's exactly what we're seeing. We've traded morality for legality, but legal doesn't make it right. "The system" is the tyrant, and it's of our own making.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

That you are so sure you know what's best for me, even when you don't know a thing about me, indicates that you are a patronizing elitist. Go find a socialist country to reside in, where that kind of thing is appreciated.

Further, why should I answer questions if I don't want to? You don't need to understand me. You only need to leave me alone unless we mutually enter into a relationship or transaction. Don't force your will upon me, and I won't force mine on you. It's called liberty. That's what you need to understand. Since we'll all have differing ideas on what functions of gov't are beneficial to the general welfare, those functions should be limited to the smallest set we all agree on.

I'm not saying I should be exempted from a mound of regulations because of a "unique plight" of mine. I don't meekly submit an application asking if I may be allowed to use my rights. I'm saying the mound of regulations shouldn't exist at all, for anybody! That's why I don't feel obligated to open up any details to anybody.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

Clarifying, I wasn't saying that taxes are only good for that. It was the GP that implied it, and I responded to that.

I do realize that there are tax-funded services that are necessary, but I would like the "nanny state" to be dismantled, and to keep that money in my own pocket so I can take care of myself. People need to be more self-reliant, and take their lumps when they screw up. No need to coddle adults, unless you want a society of perpetual children.

Comment Re:Counterpoint (Score 1) 2058

I didn't say they were only good for that. There are, in fact, some legitimate gov't functions that are funded by taxation, and I do not object to those. But since "idiot protection" taxes are paid for by everyone and not only by the idiots who need that protection, I still want my money (and freedom) back. I do not need the gov't as my nanny.

Comment Re:That was not whacky at all. (Score 1) 450

Most gun violence is perpetrated by governments, not "society", not individual criminals. Your society may well be civilized. Germany certainly was. That doesn't obviate the need for self-defense against those with power.

Individual criminals will disregard the laws, and come at you with greater force than you have. Is that right?

Governments will make laws to disarm you, and then use the power you've entrusted them with against you. Is that right?

In either case, it is wise to have the means of self-defense. The quotes I posted only go to show that a wide variety of other people, from all places and walks of life, seem to agree.

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...