Do you always obey the law?

[fd15k]

fd15k...the 2nd amendment is a right. Right? Like the 1st amendment? What if we needed a permit to engage in free speach? That would just as wrong as needing a permit for the 2nd.
That's my view, anyway.

Certain activities secured by 1st Amendment do require permission from the government. Besides, under current legal doctrine 1st and 2nd are not treated equally. Finally, the scope of 2nd is not yet fully established.

 

[bikejunkie]

rapeing the bank or whatever...

I believe it's typically the banks that do the raping...

 

[hariph creek]

fd15k...''shall not be infringed'' what's to be established?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not holding my breath.

 

[fd15k]

fd15k...''shall not be infringed'' what's to be established?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not holding my breath.

I'm in a good mood today, so I will be patient with you Text of the Constitution delegates authority to interpret the meaning of the Constitution to the federal court system with the Supreme Court on top of it. At this time we have not had federal courts to take the same stance on what constitutes "infringed". Also, we had the Supreme Court to say what in fact does not trigger infringement. So basically text of the Constitution matters as applied, as opposed as written.

 

[hariph creek]

What if a teller at a bank gave you one to many $100 bills when you cashed your check? We'll call it say, First National Bilk and Swindle or FNBS for short.
Would you keep it?
It is stealing. Not intentional, at first, until you're aware of it.
What if some FNBS manager never finds out it was you? Who's hurt right? After all, the banks are largely responsible for the most recent recession. They made money coming and going. Since the government is in their pocket, they even got bailed out.

 

[hariph creek]

fd15k...I appreciate your restraint and patience. The validity or status of the 2nd vs permits was just an example of an issue some people feel worthy of defiance. I'm not trying to make it the focus of debate.


I was hoping to have an intelligent discussion. With minimal insult and offense. It seems if we (not you specifically) can't agree we could refrain from bizarre proclimations of...''well if you this (view), than you must advocate that (extreme view).''

 

[bikejunkie]

fd15k...I appreciate your restraint and patience. The validity or status of the 2nd vs permits was just an example of an issue some people feel worthy of defiance. I'm not trying to make it the focus of debate.


I was hoping to have an intelligent discussion. With minimal insult and offense. It seems if we (not you specifically) can't agree we could refrain from bizarre proclimations of...''well if you this (view), than you must advocate that (extreme view).''

You can't really expect reasonable, intelligent debate on the internet dude...That's rediculous

 

[hariph creek]

Oh come on! Really?
I pay my taxes, drive the speed limit, don't curse, wash my hands, open doors for ladies, believe in a handshake, look people in the eye, say both please and thank you, etc...
Surely, I'm delusional enough to expect civilty and honorable conduct? Especially from gun people, right?

 

[BadMotel]

What if a teller at a bank gave you one to many $100 bills when you cashed your check? We'll call it say, First National Bilk and Swindle or FNBS for short.
Would you keep it?
It is stealing. Not intentional, at first, until you're aware of it.
What if some FNBS manager never finds out it was you? Who's hurt right? After all, the banks are largely responsible for the most recent recession. They made money coming and going. Since the government is in their pocket, they even got bailed out.

It is stealing. Especially if you belong to a credit union which is member owned, you're in fact stealing some other members money, not the banks.

Plus, you cannot justify committing a crime because you feel like someone else did it first. If a grocery store charges too much and you think it's robbery, does that make it ok to steal from the store?

 

[Burt Gummer]

I thought this thread was more about breaking stupid laws that hurt no one else like running a stop sign in the boonies, cutting down a tree in your own backyard without a permit, trying out .22 subsonics with the lawn mower running lol.

We are a society of drones. Authority worshippers. Non-thinkers. Subservients. Slaves. How else could the war on drugs or war on terror even exist? You are #6.

For Christ's sake - run a red light or two. Be bold and park in a spot where someone else overpaid the parking meter. Throw some of your garbage into a recycle can. Toss a wrapper out your window. Post an ad on Craigslist for a date with a tranny and put your best friend's mobile number on it.

Just do it, feel's great. Being an obedient social drone your whole life just sucks.

 

[BadMotel]

For Christ's sake - run a red light or two. Be bold and park in a spot where someone else overpaid the parking meter. Throw some of your garbage into a recycle can. Toss a wrapper out your window. Post an ad on Craigslist for a date with a tranny and put your best friend's mobile number on it.

Done it, done it, unfortunately done it, probably done it while drunk, will do it because that sounds hilarious.

I think what it comes down to is whether you want to knowingly break the law or not. Someone said they judge based on personal morals, consequences, and likelyhood of getting caught, which I think is fair. I think some laws are dumber than others, and I break some of them because I ave no fear not too. I also think some laws are dumb but don't break them because I doubt I would get away with it / fear the consequences.

You can break any law you want, just know it's the law and be prepared to accept the po-po coming after your *** if you get caught. Don't wanna wear a seat-belt? Fine, but don't bubblegum if you get a ticket though because you brought it on yourself.

 

[hariph creek]

Noisycow...too funny! Especially the Craigslist thing.
My life does not suck, though, sorry.
I don't worship (secular authority). I'm not blind to the corruption of the ''leaders'' of ALL governments.
I don't subscribe to the media, either side. I don't participate in the political process. It's all a sham.
I say fight it or live with it. I've done enough fighting in my life. I'll live with it.

I was raised by stinky hippies. They bucked the system. (Actually they complained and refused to do for themselves.) My father was a drug dealer, among other things. He didn't enjoy prison, either time. Most my siblings are in and out of jail, on welfare and miserable. One OD'd.
It's all someone else's fault though.

I make my choices, I stand by them. I'm a ''by your boot straps'' believer.
I'm happier now. Big brother is NOT my friend.

 

[fd15k]

fd15k...I appreciate your restraint and patience. The validity or status of the 2nd vs permits was just an example of an issue some people feel worthy of defiance. I'm not trying to make it the focus of debate.


I was hoping to have an intelligent discussion. With minimal insult and offense. It seems if we (not you specifically) can't agree we could refrain from bizarre proclimations of...''well if you this (view), than you must advocate that (extreme view).''

Sure, and that's a great example to use, because a lot of people here will justify their actions with "shall not be infringed" regardless of what the law says. Here is another good expansion of that topic. Assuming one is serving on a jury, will he/she convict a person of :

- carrying concealed weapon without a license
- possessing an unregistered machinegun (suppressor, SBR, etc)
- concealed carry on Post Office property

things of that nature

 

[hariph creek]

fd15k...point taken, and it's a good one.

 

[hariph creek]

The following statement is not intended as a personal attack on anyone here. These are my views. They don't invalidate yours.


Juvenile rebelliousness, is just that, juvenile. Doing petty things to spite injustice, accomplishes nothing. The most that will happen is trouble for the transgressor. If a person feels that strong about something, do something meaningful, change it. Don't decry it all corrupt and write off any responsibility to society. Because we do live in a society. We all have to give at least a little towards the much maligned ''common denominator.'' A standardized code of conduct does this. Unfortunately those who institute and enforce such rules are corrupt.
Things like honor, decency, civility, compassion, honesty, etc...(all principals, not laws), trump law.
Hence my previous reference to crimes of convenience vs crimes of conscience. A crime of convenience serves only the one committing the act. A crime of conscience serves the greater good. So if you feel compelled to break societies laws, isn't it important enough work towards changing those laws?

Revolt or reform changes things.

One, revolt, often not for the better. Look at the political and labor revolts 100 years ago. All over the world, the people, the workers, protested, rioted, revolted. Are they better off now? Russia, for instance. It went from a Monarch based repression, to a state regime based repression, to chaos.
Only now, in our neck of the woods. The ''people'' are not destitute enough to rise up. We are distracted by just enough convenience, entertainment and propaganda. So as to be pacified.

The other, reform, is too little too slow. Plus reform requires operating whithin a givin system. The instances of being corrupted by that very system, are myriad. At what point does compromise become selling out your ideals?

Civil disobedience, is admirable. It lets people express their dissatisfaction.
Hopefully it accomplishes something. As opposed to sneaking around breaking laws, hoping not to get caught. Stand up for what you believe in.
Protest is often not as effective as one could wish, though. The attention span of the media and general public, is short. By the time a point is made, the public can feel inconvenienced, and thus irritated.
Rioting and looting, on the other hand, is horrific. It more often than not hurts our neighbors. The ''have nots'' are usually devestated, as opposed to the "haves.''

I stand apart, as much as possible, from the corrupt system.
I'm not a revolutionary nor a political activist. I believe in neither.
I refuse to engage in petty, childish fits of tantrum like rebellion. Which accomplish nothing but grief (for me and those I should be helping).
I also am not so hypocritical so as to say 'F' the man, ''no one's going to tell me what to do!'' Then later expect things like roads and firetrucks and legal protection (dubios though that may be) and an education for my children and an endless list of things.
So yes, I'll do my part, I'll obey. So long as it doesn't conflict with the things I hold to be more important.
I'm not a drone. I know the score.
This is a choice I make. I don't require it of you.
I was raised the ''do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt others'' way. It usually includes the subtext of ''you don't have to be responsible for yourself, blame somebody else.''
I prefer ''do what is right, as long as you don't hurt anybody else.'' With the subtext of ''be accountable for your actions.''
The ''right'' thing isn't the same for everyone. The ''right'' thing isn't always ''whatever you want.''

I am only looking for conversation. Not insults and glib remarks. I'm sorry I've responded in kind. I don't have to be right, neither do you.
Why does civility go out the window, when we sit behind a keyboard?

 

[Misterbill]

Misterbill...I fail (Misterbill's) ethics 101. We all have to live by our own ethics.

Why can we not have a rational discussion, without regressing to outlandish accusations.
I have not, here or anywhere, anytime, advocated for slavery.

If you've read what I've tried to say. I understand anyone who is in defiance of rules or laws...based on conscience issues. We all have to decide for ourselves, where the line is.

I agree with you, most laws are not just.

I live by PRINCIPALS. Among those is to obey the laws of the appointed authorities. As long as those laws don't contradict the principals I believe in.

I can assure you I need no legaslation to keep me from robbing my neighbor or rapeing the bank or whatever...

If you have issues you feel are worth defiance of the law. Than by all means, follow your conscience.
Who am I to say you can't, get high and sodomize your marital aid. Have at it.

My question pertains more to ''crimes of convenience'' not conscience.

No, you fail ANY ethics study whatever.

You make a statement (to summarize):

"We should follow the law because we should be upstanding people as gun owners. (I GUESS you are referring to some arbitrary clinging to a social contract, which is fine. You then contradicyt yourself by saying that people should NOT follow laws that are in their subjective view, immoral or offend their conscience.

That is an inherently illogical position. If you wrote that in any freshman ethics class, you'd get an F on the paper.

At this point you're just repeating yourself and taking issues with people's particulars as it suits you. Sorry, but I'm a little old for a Freshman college bull session where one participant can't defend his position logically, in which his own position is contradictory and in which he gets butthurt when someone points out his logical fallacies.

Go take an ethics course at your local community college. It will open your eyes and it's an interesting topic. But you aren't taking an ethical position and defending it. You're trolling.

 

[hariph creek]

Misterbill...ummm...ok?
Just because we disagree or my view isn't popular, doesn't make me a troll.
I've restated myself in an effort to, hopefully, be understood. The post I made before your most recent one, is I think, about the best I can do.

There is no ONE standard of ethics.
Ethics vary from; time, era, region, culture, religion, etc.. Whithin these different subsets there can be different ideas of what is ''ethical.''
How else could abhorent things like genocide and slavery happen?
We from our vantage point may see it as unethical. The perpetrators, I'm sure, saw it differently.
So yes, to defy what is seen as an immoral or unethical law. State mandated genocide for example. Is, to me, laudable.
On the other hand, running stop signs because one feels it shouldn't apply to them, is selfish.

Mankind's ''wisdom'' is flawed and fickle. If you think a college professor doesn't color ethics with his own slant? Well...I'd have to disagree. I don't say thus from blind suppisition. I may drive truck, but I am college educated, I do hold a degree. Despite my dismal spelling.
I'm sure many Nazi's in the death camp's held college degrees, too.

So, I'm sorry if I'm not ''up to snuff,'' enough to, debate ethics with you. I didn't start the the thread to trade insults, either. It just seemed like an interesting topic. You win, I give up, it's not worth the aggrevation.

I am truly sorry if I've offended anyone here. I wish you all the best.

If you see me slogging along, in the right lane. Wave.
Later, when I see you on the shoulder, getting a ticket. I'll wave back, I'll use ALL my fingers, though.
(that's a joke)

Take care.

 

[dmancornell]

So after pages of arguing, I found a slam dunk answer on why I should just ignore all traffic laws:

<broken link removed>

 

[jbett98]

There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which I have also imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.


Civil Disobedience
By Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)

 

[Nigel_Vertigo]

I thought this thread was more about breaking stupid laws that hurt no one else like running a stop sign in the boonies, cutting down a tree in your own backyard without a permit, trying out .22 subsonics with the lawn mower running lol.

We are a society of drones. Authority worshippers. Non-thinkers. Subservients. Slaves. How else could the war on drugs or war on terror even exist? You are #6.

For Christ's sake - run a red light or two. Be bold and park in a spot where someone else overpaid the parking meter. Throw some of your garbage into a recycle can. Toss a wrapper out your window. Post an ad on Craigslist for a date with a tranny and put your best friend's mobile number on it.

Just do it, feel's great. Being an obedient social drone your whole life just sucks.

I went about 85mph all the way home from work on the freeway tonight and it felt great.