Silk Road forums

Discussion => Philosophy, Economics and Justice => Topic started by: BarryBarron on January 16, 2013, 11:53 pm

Title: In a 'free' society...
Post by: BarryBarron on January 16, 2013, 11:53 pm
Hypothetically.
In a free society, if someone is engaging in behaviour you find repulsive, but is not infringing the perceived freedoms of you or anyone else, do you think you have the right to intervene and stop the behaviour?
Please discuss.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: kmfkewm on January 17, 2013, 04:39 am
Of course your neighbor has the right to kill his own puppies. Of course that also means he is extremely fucked up by western cultural standards, and you should probably refuse to trade with him or offer him any assistance at all if you wish to discourage his behavior. You have some cultural conditioning that has made you put dogs on a higher level than animals such as cows, however in many Asian countries dogs are routinely raised for slaughter, just as in your country it is quite likely that cows and chickens are raised for slaughter. If your neighbor is a farmer and raises cows because he enjoys killing them and eating them, do you think you have any right to stop him? How about pigs? Pigs are actually quite intelligent as far as non-human animals go, I have heard them compared to dogs in this regard although I am by no means an expert on animal cognition. In India they find it extremely offensive (and I believe it may even be illegal) to raise a cow for slaughter, in much of the western world we place dogs and cats on such a level, however in much of the oriental world they raise dogs and cats for slaughter just as westerners do pigs and cows. In a free society you can kill your cows, chickens, dogs and cats.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: davebowman on January 17, 2013, 11:12 pm
Animals will cease to be property and gain rights of their own when they evolve to be capable of asserting their own rights. Some already have done this, like man-eating mountain lions. You are not morally responsible for your neighbor's behavior and if you condemn what he is doing to the puppies, you can try to convince him to stop, or simply excommunicate him from your life.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: BarryBarron on January 18, 2013, 08:53 pm
Of course your neighbor has the right to kill his own puppies. Of course that also means he is extremely fucked up by western cultural standards, and you should probably refuse to trade with him or offer him any assistance at all if you wish to discourage his behavior. You have some cultural conditioning that has made you put dogs on a higher level than animals such as cows, however in many Asian countries dogs are routinely raised for slaughter, just as in your country it is quite likely that cows and chickens are raised for slaughter. If your neighbor is a farmer and raises cows because he enjoys killing them and eating them, do you think you have any right to stop him? How about pigs? Pigs are actually quite intelligent as far as non-human animals go, I have heard them compared to dogs in this regard although I am by no means an expert on animal cognition. In India they find it extremely offensive (and I believe it may even be illegal) to raise a cow for slaughter, in much of the western world we place dogs and cats on such a level, however in much of the oriental world they raise dogs and cats for slaughter just as westerners do pigs and cows. In a free society you can kill your cows, chickens, dogs and cats.

I'm not convinced.
Are you saying that in a free society there would be a mechanism whereby I am prevented from interfering in the actions of my neighbour? If so how would this be enforced?
Or are you arguing from a moral perspective i.e. that it would just be immoral for me to interfere in the actions of my neighbour, but there would be no enforcement mechanism?
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: kmfkewm on January 18, 2013, 11:40 pm
Of course your neighbor has the right to kill his own puppies. Of course that also means he is extremely fucked up by western cultural standards, and you should probably refuse to trade with him or offer him any assistance at all if you wish to discourage his behavior. You have some cultural conditioning that has made you put dogs on a higher level than animals such as cows, however in many Asian countries dogs are routinely raised for slaughter, just as in your country it is quite likely that cows and chickens are raised for slaughter. If your neighbor is a farmer and raises cows because he enjoys killing them and eating them, do you think you have any right to stop him? How about pigs? Pigs are actually quite intelligent as far as non-human animals go, I have heard them compared to dogs in this regard although I am by no means an expert on animal cognition. In India they find it extremely offensive (and I believe it may even be illegal) to raise a cow for slaughter, in much of the western world we place dogs and cats on such a level, however in much of the oriental world they raise dogs and cats for slaughter just as westerners do pigs and cows. In a free society you can kill your cows, chickens, dogs and cats.

I'm not convinced.
Are you saying that in a free society there would be a mechanism whereby I am prevented from interfering in the actions of my neighbour? If so how would this be enforced?
Or are you arguing from a moral perspective i.e. that it would just be immoral for me to interfere in the actions of my neighbour, but there would be no enforcement mechanism?

In addition to it being immoral for you to interfere, it will be enforced by your neighbors private defense agency.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: ElBastardo on January 23, 2013, 11:49 pm
Of course your neighbor has the right to kill his own puppies. Of course that also means he is extremely fucked up by western cultural standards, and you should probably refuse to trade with him or offer him any assistance at all if you wish to discourage his behavior....

I subscribe that. In a free world (I assume you mean a World without any written "binding" code of behavior, namely the Law) it depends on one part on the community where you are living and what they think it's an accurate behavior, (you will have to live in a community otherwise it' will be hard providing you with all material and skills to survive on you own, if you can I guess no discussion needed). So, if you community decides you are a lunatic puppy killer and deserve to encounter the same fate, as the puppies you are definitely going down because there is now paper or somebody to enforce that non existent paper to protect you ass.

Now to the second part; I think it depends also on the resources and skills you can provide to the community. So if puppy meat is the only or an easily available nutrition you have a certain amount of POWER over the rest of the community and even if some think it's bad,  those are still dependable on you providing puppy meat, it means a fuck what those think cause they would starve over there own moral and ethnic thoughts.
To refer to the thought about the private security agency; For that those agents secure his property, he needs to provide them with something (puppy meat, security, butt fuck, weapons...) for that those people are going against the commune sense of their community not killing puppies (assuming it's in a western country where the majority is against dead puppies) and maybe slaughtering there own relatives, rising against the puppy breeder.

So resuming all those thoughts, in my opinion it's all about who has the Power to control the resources and decides who get them.

To the Barron: I think you approach on what a free society is, is a bit naive. Cause a "society" that goes after the motto "I just care about my individual believes and freedom and won't interfering with those of others" is just a loose bunch of individuals who are all gone die sooner or later; I want call it even a society, cause a society needs some common rules, values or believes for that individuals can interact in a civilized form with each other. It's has nothing to do with moral, just survival, cause there is no mechanism like Law or enforcement on that to protect you just a community you are stuck with.
This is just my opinion and how I like to say: "Opinions are like assholes; every one has one and mostly there are no flowers coming out"

-Peace over-
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: CiscoYankerStuck on January 24, 2013, 03:34 am
Call your local police or the SPCA to report animal abuse. That is if they exist in your area.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Roky Erickson on January 25, 2013, 07:53 am
Seems a lot of newbies on this site want to turn this place into China lately, too many newbies from a certain country that loves to be controlled methinks
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: ElBastardo on January 25, 2013, 02:33 pm
I remember you from the puppy section Mr. Erickson, struggling to get the 50 post and being thrown back by some Mods deleting you "Hate threads", which in fact gave me much to laugh ^^
I don't see any posts in this thread that suggest that anybody likes to get controlled in a Chinese way. If you referring to my post there's just the conclusion that there is always some kind of "control" of those who have Power where this comes from, who controls it, how far it goes and how you like it is by far an other question.

In fact I support your right to say whatever the fuck you want but please use some argumentation, otherwise I guess there would be nobody taking you serious.

-Peace over-
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: FartBomber on January 25, 2013, 03:36 pm
I chose "No, they are his property, therefore he can do what he wants with them". Everyone who chose "Yes you can stop him, his property rights do not extend to include abhorrent behaviour" should instantly become a vegetarian who will try to stop pigs, cows etc from getting slaughtered or live with the fact that they have double standards.

And yes, eating meat is for your own enjoyment. You choose to eat it because you enjoy it more then those nasty tofu veggyburgers. Also, I like kittens more then puppies.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: müslix on January 25, 2013, 05:57 pm
Everyone who chose "Yes you can stop him, his property rights do not extend to include abhorrent behaviour" should instantly become a vegetarian who will try to stop pigs, cows etc from getting slaughtered or live with the fact that they have double standards.

And yes, eating meat is for your own enjoyment. You choose to eat it because you enjoy it more then those nasty tofu veggyburgers. Also, I like kittens more then puppies.

While true of course, it should also be mentioned that everyone's a hypocrite. Not everyone has the power not to be, eg a smoker will often tell friends not to start smoking. A airplane-crash survivor who's a vegan will eat his captain if it means staying alive. I cut my finger real bad and I tell everyone to not use a keyboard as it opens up the cut again, yet I am typing these lines ;D 

I am on the same page as you are (also prefer kittens :P) but breading dogs just to kill them is plain animal cruelty. Claiming he "shouldn't" be stopped, because other animals suffer abuse as well is a bit like turning your back on the issue. Of course I can't safe all, but to me that wouldn't be a reason not to try/start somewhere.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Roky Erickson on January 25, 2013, 06:00 pm
Seems a lot of newbies on this site want to turn this place into China lately, too many newbies from a certain country that loves to be controlled methinks

Surely you're not implying the Land Of The FREE?

 :-X

I remember you from the puppy section Mr. Erickson, struggling to get the 50 post and being thrown back by some Mods deleting you "Hate threads", which in fact gave me much to laugh ^^
I don't see any posts in this thread that suggest that anybody likes to get controlled in a Chinese way. If you referring to my post there's just the conclusion that there is always some kind of "control" of those who have Power where this comes from, who controls it, how far it goes and how you like it is by far an other question.

In fact I support your right to say whatever the fuck you want but please use some argumentation, otherwise I guess there would be nobody taking you serious.

-Peace over-

Glad I could make you laugh, I know the mods sure did a great job making me laugh! :)  I wasn't referring to you I was speaking of a thread in the SR discussion forum where I basically asked anyone who does not believe in free speech to accept the fact that these forums do, almost 50 posts later and not one person has spoken against censorship of the forums, it's just newbies telling me about property rights and 'forum standards' (i.e. if you don't agree with the mod you are a troll and your post should be deleted). As I said in that thread, these forums ain't what they used to be and they don't look like reverting back anytime soon :(

*shakes fist at jews*
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 26, 2013, 10:00 am
In a free society, your neighbor has the right to abuse and molest his own children, kick and shoot his puppies, beat his wife...

Nah, I'm just kidding.

But seriously, if a neighbor is doing something you seriously disapprove of, you have the full right to refuse to do business with him, to discredit him among his peers, to publish exceedingly scathing reviews about his objectionable behavior and what that indicates about his responsibility, wisdom, business sense, and manhood. (Or lack thereof.)
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 26, 2013, 11:21 am
Also, I like kittens more then puppies.

Cute adorable little psychopaths.

I kid, I own a cat, and I swear, she is the most affectionate cat in existence.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Scampony on January 26, 2013, 10:32 pm
Seems a lot of newbies on this site want to turn this place into China lately, too many newbies from a certain country that loves to be controlled methinks

Surely you're not implying the Land Of The FREE?

 :-X

I remember you from the puppy section Mr. Erickson, struggling to get the 50 post and being thrown back by some Mods deleting you "Hate threads", which in fact gave me much to laugh ^^
I don't see any posts in this thread that suggest that anybody likes to get controlled in a Chinese way. If you referring to my post there's just the conclusion that there is always some kind of "control" of those who have Power where this comes from, who controls it, how far it goes and how you like it is by far an other question.

In fact I support your right to say whatever the fuck you want but please use some argumentation, otherwise I guess there would be nobody taking you serious.

-Peace over-

Glad I could make you laugh, I know the mods sure did a great job making me laugh! :)  I wasn't referring to you I was speaking of a thread in the SR discussion forum where I basically asked anyone who does not believe in free speech to accept the fact that these forums do, almost 50 posts later and not one person has spoken against censorship of the forums, it's just newbies telling me about property rights and 'forum standards' (i.e. if you don't agree with the mod you are a troll and your post should be deleted). As I said in that thread, these forums ain't what they used to be and they don't look like reverting back anytime soon :(

*shakes fist at jews*

Ha Mr. Erickson be honest with yourself you had an agenda using yourself trolling to get it excepted and the trolling was very much based in spam distribution.
Yet you dropped your second troll in search of further trolling power.

The first one was genius, why did you stop so close to level 2?
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 27, 2013, 01:03 am
In a free society, no one would be FORCED to go to a "school" where they condition you like a Pavlovian dog into a procedural drone who hates discovery and real free thinking.

In a free society, there would be no taboos.

In a free society, there would be no such thing as crime.

In a free society, all of the lawyers, judges, politicians and government drones would have been thrown in a ditch and shot to death long ago.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: hoobydoobydoo on January 27, 2013, 05:50 am
Of course your neighbor has the right to kill his own puppies.

I think that a dog IS someone else.  People who think they should be tortured and killed are scum and should be put to death in the same manner.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Roky Erickson on January 27, 2013, 06:07 am
Glad I could make you laugh, I know the mods sure did a great job making me laugh! :)  I wasn't referring to you I was speaking of a thread in the SR discussion forum where I basically asked anyone who does not believe in free speech to accept the fact that these forums do, almost 50 posts later and not one person has spoken against censorship of the forums, it's just newbies telling me about property rights and 'forum standards' (i.e. if you don't agree with the mod you are a troll and your post should be deleted). As I said in that thread, these forums ain't what they used to be and they don't look like reverting back anytime soon :(

*shakes fist at jews*

Ha Mr. Erickson be honest with yourself you had an agenda using yourself trolling to get it excepted and the trolling was very much based in spam distribution.
Yet you dropped your second troll in search of further trolling power.

The first one was genius, why did you stop so close to level 2?

I'm not sure where you are coming from here, other than 'first one was genius' I don't understand what you are asking.
I am intrigued by the idea of further trolling power, alas, as a lone soldier I can really only annoy, quite well I might add, but to no real effect.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Davey Jones on January 27, 2013, 06:26 pm
First, are the puppies owned property like a car, a house, etc. or do the puppies have rights similar to people?  If they are just owned property, then owners of property should be able to do what they want with their stuff.  If the puppies have rights like people but live at the property where the owner likes to kill puppies, then the puppies will have to figure out their environment isn't the best place to be and try to leave. What if they can't leave?  Then they need to get together, come up with a battle plan, and attack and kill or be killed.  There it is.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 27, 2013, 07:51 pm
What if they can't leave?  Then they need to get together, come up with a battle plan, and attack and kill or be killed.  There it is.

Puppy Power!
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Davey Jones on January 28, 2013, 02:02 am
We know this isn't about puppies.  Nice example though.  Now if the puppy killer uses his freedom to kill the 'puppies' but the puppies don't want to be killed, then the puppies freedom is being violated.  The 'puppies' have their choice too. Now in total anarchy the ones with the biggest guns, the most manpower, the most resources, will try to dominate those who have less and are not as powerful.  Then they make rules they call laws, and mete out punishment if you don't listen to them, because they're in charge  Even if their rules are unfair, they have the muscle to make things happen. So a type of government is formed.  It would be nice for a truly free society to exist, but there aren't any.  Then, once the anarchy turns into another government, there will be those who don't agree with the policies and form alliances and eventually overthrow what they don't like, then they're in charge.  On and on it goes. 
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 28, 2013, 05:22 am
It would be nice for a truly free society to exist, but there aren't any.  Then, once the anarchy turns into another government, there will be those who don't agree with the policies and form alliances and eventually overthrow what they don't like, then they're in charge.

So you argue that government is necessary merely because foreign powers exist, or that individuals are naturally unequal, and the powerful would overpower the weak?

Then why not have a monarchy? Why not be honest and enshrine our masters, the plutocrats?

Why hide them away in abstractions and deceit?

I find the lie far more disgusting and abhorrent, that we are equally valued human beings, when the truth is much simpler, that those of us not born to plutocratic families are worth less than the minerals and materials of which are bodies are composed.

We should at least be honest with ourselves and admit that the laws are all written by plutocrats, and lobbyists and politicians are all working for multinational corporations owned and controlled by plutocratic families.

Socialism is a lie. Democracy is a lie.

Republicanism is an even worse lie.

Everything is a lie.

The schools indoctrinate you, the government indoctrinate you, and the truth is that all of that infrastructure was funded and controlled by a tiny, tiny group of plutocratic elites.

This is not exclusive to one country, or even NATO, but all countries on this dirtball we call Earth.

The only way by which we can live free men and women, is if we build an entire independent alternative society, with our own culture, our own economy, our own books and movies and music.

A world free of the plutocrat's machinations.

A world untouched by mega-corps, and the multi-billionaire families that control them.

We should build a nation from scratch, the way society ought to operate, and construct it, operate it, and test it experimentally.

A free society.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: PathSeeker on January 29, 2013, 09:01 am
I eat meat.  But I don't kill animals for fun.  In this case I'd say you can do whatever you want.  The question mentions that he breeds them because he likes to kill them.  It says nothing about eating them.  It also says nothing about torturing them which is where my line would come into focus.  If he was torturing puppies 15' from my back door, I'd probably fuck a bitch up y'know.  Although he has the right to his beliefs and he may believe that puppies are his property and have no right to not be tortured.  I believe that all living beings have the right to be free from unnecessary pain and suffering.  If he was killing them instantly, and painlessly somehow...I don't know, I think I'd have to let him.
I agree that in a libertarian nation, he would end up living amongst people who had the same beliefs and if they tortured puppies, there'd be wars with the PETA tribes.

And to the guy that said "if the puppies don't defend themselves it's ok," would you feel the same way about babies?  I'm new in this neighborhood, but I've noticed a few posts which could be paraphrased to say that silence equals consent, which is pretty disconcerting in a community based around a drug market.  Fuck, guys!
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: livestr0ng on January 29, 2013, 09:51 am
I'm a vegetarian. The Non-Aggression Principle states that one may not initiate coercion. That's what killing puppies is. To anybody who says "oh thats different," is it? "Oh that guy can put me in a cage because he has a badge; its different." Shouldn't it be applied everywhere? Puppy killer has his individual freedom which is fine. However, by killing the puppies, he is interfering with a living being (the puppy)'s freedom. For that reason, I think it would warrant contacting a  Dispute Resolution Organization (Freedomain radio's solution to "crime" in an anarchist society) or other similar organization/ idea. DaveyJones, do you agree with rape? "Well, she couldn't get away from me so I figured it was okay." Additionally, I like what PathSeeker said about silence not meaning consent.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 29, 2013, 03:34 pm
I eat meat.  But I don't kill animals for fun.  In this case I'd say you can do whatever you want.  The question mentions that he breeds them because he likes to kill them.  It says nothing about eating them.  It also says nothing about torturing them which is where my line would come into focus.  If he was torturing puppies 15' from my back door, I'd probably fuck a bitch up y'know.

Take out my blunderbus and blunder his bus.

Although he has the right to his beliefs and he may believe that puppies are his property and have no right to not be tortured.  I believe that all living beings have the right to be free from unnecessary pain and suffering.  If he was killing them instantly, and painlessly somehow...I don't know, I think I'd have to let him.

If he was killing and eating puppies, I'd still shoot the fucker. I just wouldn't hide behind daddy government, I'd get my own hands dirty with the fucker's blood.

I agree that in a libertarian nation, he would end up living amongst people who had the same beliefs and if they tortured puppies, there'd be wars with the PETA tribes.

Perish the thought.

And to the guy that said "if the puppies don't defend themselves it's ok," would you feel the same way about babies?  I'm new in this neighborhood, but I've noticed a few posts which could be paraphrased to say that silence equals consent, which is pretty disconcerting in a community based around a drug market.  Fuck, guys!

Silence does not equal consent. Puppies cannot sign contracts, as they do not have the mental capacity for responsibility for their own actions.

Even if most Internet people think this does not concern them, since the guy isn't killing kittens, I do think that enough people love puppies that a puppy-killer would not last very long.

Eventually, his ass would be pushing daisies.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: PathSeeker on January 29, 2013, 10:44 pm
Although he has the right to his beliefs and he may believe that puppies are his property and have no right to not be tortured.  I believe that all living beings have the right to be free from unnecessary pain and suffering.  If he was killing them instantly, and painlessly somehow...I don't know, I think I'd have to let him.

If he was killing and eating puppies, I'd still shoot the fucker. I just wouldn't hide behind daddy government, I'd get my own hands dirty with the fucker's blood.
Yeah...on second thought, I would still have a pretty big issue with it whether he was causing them pain or not.  I would try slightly less violent means of persuasion before I pulled out the crossbow though.  Maybe slip him a heroic dose of acid so he could have a better look into what he was doing and maybe he'd see what it was doing for him and find a better way to fill that need...who knows.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 29, 2013, 11:58 pm
If he was killing and eating puppies, I'd still shoot the fucker. I just wouldn't hide behind daddy government, I'd get my own hands dirty with the fucker's blood.

Maybe slip him a heroic dose of acid so he could have a better look into what he was doing and maybe he'd see what it was doing for him and find a better way to fill that need...who knows.

Weaponized Acid? That might actually work. I'd say weaponized jediflipping might be a better approach.

Jediflipping is LSD + MDMA + Psilocybin combined.

In this case, we'd load a tranquilizer dart with the stuff, then shoot people who really should know better with the dart.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Davey Jones on January 30, 2013, 03:26 am
lsd as a weapon,  You know, the whole lsd thing started as government experimentation anyway(I wonder why?).  I wonder what type of delivery system would truly work.  Thats alot of liquid, what if you spilled some on yourself?lol    Really though, people can and do know how things are, but the a holes in charge don't give a crap because they have the power.  We are nothing to them.  We are just numbers to them, numbers they want to delete.  But just think, what if the elites used their power to make laws making certain things illegal and then using their power to fund the illegal activities as well, thus profiting from the prison industry and the black market, and those caught in the middle are just pawns.  Time to wake up. 
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 30, 2013, 05:02 am
But just think, what if the elites used their power to make laws making certain things illegal and then using their power to fund the illegal activities as well, thus profiting from the prison industry and the black market, and those caught in the middle are just pawns.  Time to wake up.

This is reality.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Davey Jones on January 30, 2013, 01:30 pm
Thats why its called 'the game'.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: BarryBarron on January 30, 2013, 03:11 pm
I eat meat.  But I don't kill animals for fun.  In this case I'd say you can do whatever you want.  The question mentions that he breeds them because he likes to kill them.  It says nothing about eating them.  It also says nothing about torturing them which is where my line would come into focus.  If he was torturing puppies 15' from my back door, I'd probably fuck a bitch up y'know.  Although he has the right to his beliefs and he may believe that puppies are his property and have no right to not be tortured.  I believe that all living beings have the right to be free from unnecessary pain and suffering.  If he was killing them instantly, and painlessly somehow...I don't know, I think I'd have to let him.
I agree that in a libertarian nation, he would end up living amongst people who had the same beliefs and if they tortured puppies, there'd be wars with the PETA tribes.

And to the guy that said "if the puppies don't defend themselves it's ok," would you feel the same way about babies?  I'm new in this neighborhood, but I've noticed a few posts which could be paraphrased to say that silence equals consent, which is pretty disconcerting in a community based around a drug market.  Fuck, guys!

Exactly what my point is. He's not eating them or using their carcass for any purpose. I tried to use an analogy that would affect most (reasonable) people emotionally.
If he was impaling live newborn puppies 2m into the air you would intervene, and so would most people. But this is in contradiction to my principle that you should not initiate force against peaceful people. And dogs are not people. So I am at a loss.

I can't find a reasonable argument for why a person couldn't/shouldn't or wouldn't intervene against this person. Kmf tried with his private security force, but like you say that would lead to competing factions trying to implement their view of morality.

I'm a vegetarian. The Non-Aggression Principle states that one may not initiate coercion. That's what killing puppies is. To anybody who says "oh thats different," is it? "Oh that guy can put me in a cage because he has a badge; its different." Shouldn't it be applied everywhere? Puppy killer has his individual freedom which is fine. However, by killing the puppies, he is interfering with a living being (the puppy)'s freedom. For that reason, I think it would warrant contacting a  Dispute Resolution Organization (Freedomain radio's solution to "crime" in an anarchist society) or other similar organization/ idea. DaveyJones, do you agree with rape? "Well, she couldn't get away from me so I figured it was okay." Additionally, I like what PathSeeker said about silence not meaning consent.

Are you a Jainist? Are you a militant animal rights activist? ALF?
You think that what is considered rights should be extended to all animals?



My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: livestr0ng on January 31, 2013, 02:43 am

I'm a vegetarian. The Non-Aggression Principle states that one may not initiate coercion. That's what killing puppies is. To anybody who says "oh thats different," is it? "Oh that guy can put me in a cage because he has a badge; its different." Shouldn't it be applied everywhere? Puppy killer has his individual freedom which is fine. However, by killing the puppies, he is interfering with a living being (the puppy)'s freedom. For that reason, I think it would warrant contacting a  Dispute Resolution Organization (Freedomain radio's solution to "crime" in an anarchist society) or other similar organization/ idea. DaveyJones, do you agree with rape? "Well, she couldn't get away from me so I figured it was okay." Additionally, I like what PathSeeker said about silence not meaning consent.

Are you a Jainist? Are you a militant animal rights activist? ALF?
You think that what is considered rights should be extended to all animals?



My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
I'm not a jainist. I'm not a militant animal rights activist. Not an ALF member. lol. Because of my stance, you assume I'm a member of one of these? I ask that because I just don't understand why all the questions haha. I thought since a lot of people on SR forums see through the society and the government's lies and bullshit and believe in peace that they would be more for animal rights? I'm not here to preach but I thought there were more people like me at least. Although, I can't fairly say whether or not there are. Also, what exactly do you mean by
Quote
My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
? Just wondering.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on January 31, 2013, 05:18 am
And dogs are not people. So I am at a loss.

You obviously do not sleep with a pile of dogs in your bed, like my family all do.

To my family, dogs are people, government employees are not.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: BarryBarron on February 01, 2013, 04:34 pm

I'm a vegetarian. The Non-Aggression Principle states that one may not initiate coercion. That's what killing puppies is. To anybody who says "oh thats different," is it? "Oh that guy can put me in a cage because he has a badge; its different." Shouldn't it be applied everywhere? Puppy killer has his individual freedom which is fine. However, by killing the puppies, he is interfering with a living being (the puppy)'s freedom. For that reason, I think it would warrant contacting a  Dispute Resolution Organization (Freedomain radio's solution to "crime" in an anarchist society) or other similar organization/ idea. DaveyJones, do you agree with rape? "Well, she couldn't get away from me so I figured it was okay." Additionally, I like what PathSeeker said about silence not meaning consent.

Are you a Jainist? Are you a militant animal rights activist? ALF?
You think that what is considered rights should be extended to all animals?



My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
I'm not a jainist. I'm not a militant animal rights activist. Not an ALF member. lol. Because of my stance, you assume I'm a member of one of these? I ask that because I just don't understand why all the questions haha. I thought since a lot of people on SR forums see through the society and the government's lies and bullshit and believe in peace that they would be more for animal rights? I'm not here to preach but I thought there were more people like me at least. Although, I can't fairly say whether or not there are.

I ask if practice Jainism because you apply the non-aggression principle to all animals. Jainism has a very similar principle.
The ALF membership was in reference to the militant libertarianism thread. sorry.
Do you think we should all stop eating meat, and stop killing vermin that ruin crops?
The dispute resolution service is a good idea

Also, what exactly do you mean by
Quote
My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
? Just wondering.

I mean that this make believe scenario is preferable to governments/police and their various crimes.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: BarryBarron on February 01, 2013, 04:46 pm
And dogs are not people. So I am at a loss.

You obviously do not sleep with a pile of dogs in your bed, like my family all do.

To my family, dogs are people, government employees are not.

All humans are people.
Some people are government employees.
Some dogs are government employees.

Are dogs people?
Nooooo!  :o

To be fair, you do not know what I think about dogs. I could be the fucking dog whisperer!
But if you assign rights to dogs, then you must assign rights to all animals. Which is problematic because people like to eat them.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on February 01, 2013, 09:34 pm
All humans are people.
Some people are government employees.
Some dogs are government employees.

Dogs cannot sign contracts because it cannot be proven that they are sapient and responsible for their behaviors.

Dogs cannot become employees. They are merely used.

To be fair, you do not know what I think about dogs. I could be the fucking dog whisperer!
But if you assign rights to dogs, then you must assign rights to all animals. Which is problematic because people like to eat them.

Rights are obviously fiction, unnatural fiction at that, but I've never said I believe nature is correct. The faster we kill Mother Nature, the better.

That said, the biggest difference between dogs and humans is that humans have absolutely no excuse.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: livestr0ng on February 02, 2013, 07:04 am

I'm a vegetarian. The Non-Aggression Principle states that one may not initiate coercion. That's what killing puppies is. To anybody who says "oh thats different," is it? "Oh that guy can put me in a cage because he has a badge; its different." Shouldn't it be applied everywhere? Puppy killer has his individual freedom which is fine. However, by killing the puppies, he is interfering with a living being (the puppy)'s freedom. For that reason, I think it would warrant contacting a  Dispute Resolution Organization (Freedomain radio's solution to "crime" in an anarchist society) or other similar organization/ idea. DaveyJones, do you agree with rape? "Well, she couldn't get away from me so I figured it was okay." Additionally, I like what PathSeeker said about silence not meaning consent.

Are you a Jainist? Are you a militant animal rights activist? ALF?
You think that what is considered rights should be extended to all animals?



My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
I'm not a jainist. I'm not a militant animal rights activist. Not an ALF member. lol. Because of my stance, you assume I'm a member of one of these? I ask that because I just don't understand why all the questions haha. I thought since a lot of people on SR forums see through the society and the government's lies and bullshit and believe in peace that they would be more for animal rights? I'm not here to preach but I thought there were more people like me at least. Although, I can't fairly say whether or not there are.

I ask if practice Jainism because you apply the non-aggression principle to all animals. Jainism has a very similar principle.
The ALF membership was in reference to the militant libertarianism thread. sorry.
Do you think we should all stop eating meat, and stop killing vermin that ruin crops?
The dispute resolution service is a good idea

Also, what exactly do you mean by
Quote
My position is, quite firmly, that this hypothetical of the crazy puppy killer is preferable to the status quo.
? Just wondering.

I mean that this make believe scenario is preferable to governments/police and their various crimes.
From the tad bit of research I did to answer your question, Jainism does sound interesting. However, I'm against all organized religion. I am conflicted on whether or not I think we should stop eating meat. I certainly think we should stop how we do right now though.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: raynardine on February 03, 2013, 11:48 pm
Basically no, unless he is infringing on the freedoms and safety of others against their will, or if he is basically acting like a savage toward animals and children in which case yourself and others have the right to remove the animals or children from their (lack of) care.

Regardless of the law, I doubt I'd stand idly by and watch some dude savage dogs, cats or children.
Title: Re: In a 'free' society...
Post by: Davey Jones on February 11, 2013, 08:33 pm
In a truly free society, people could put into their own bodies what they choose, and buy and sell what they choose.  In a free society the government wouldn't try to indoctrinate the masses to their agenda, but truly educate so people can make informed decisions.  Personal property would belong to the owners, not the government lending it out to use until people don't pay to use it anymore.(taxes)Its easy to see who's property it is when people don't pay their property taxes, even if everything else is paid off.  The government is run by low life pontificating pea brain politicians.