PDA

View Full Version : unconventual ideas




slothman
11-16-2008, 01:33 PM
Does anybody have and opinions on ideas that most people would likely disagree?

Normally when someone enters a store they enter private land.
I am of the opinion that it isn't completely private but a more commercial place.
That means they can't kick you out just because they don't like you.
A few examples are casinos where they can ban you for card counting but not actually cheating and "white only" businesses which can prevent blacks from entering.

I also dislike "proxy" crimes.
Such as Bill Clinton who was impeached for "perjury" officially but it was really sex.

nickcoons
11-16-2008, 04:41 PM
Normally when someone enters a store they enter private land.
I am of the opinion that it isn't completely private but a more commercial place.
That means they can't kick you out just because they don't like you.
A few examples are casinos where they can ban you for card counting but not actually cheating and "white only" businesses which can prevent blacks from entering.

A store is just as much private property as is someone's home. Just because a store owner is allowing people to enter on to his property for a given purpose (to make a purchase) does not mean that he is giving up his rights to use his property as he sees fit. He should have every right to kick someone out for whatever reason he wants.

slothman
11-16-2008, 04:45 PM
That's why it is unconventual.
I don't, though most people here, and other places, would
disagree, that it's'nt completely private.

jeepndesert
11-16-2008, 05:20 PM
That's why it is unconventual.
I don't, though most people here, and other places, would
disagree, that it's'nt completely private.

it isn't completely private. there is usually a 50-foot wide easement that runs in front of it, usually called a road, where people can search for a clear place that hasn't been touched by human labor and plant their flag.

after all, libertarianism is all about anarcho-capitalism. you find the land first, it is yours when you put your labor into it.

however, i wouldn't go that far. people should have private ownership of land that is distributed equally to the people. they should be able to kick out any customer even it is classified as commercial property.

however, we don't even know what libertarianism is, so let's just have complete anarchy and go fuck ourselves.

i do agree with your other point completely. we shouldn't have "crimes by proxy" as you put it. it is as retarded as total anarcho-capitalism. martha stewart is another good example.

heavenlyboy34
11-16-2008, 05:29 PM
it isn't completely private. there is usually a 50-foot wide easement that runs in front of it, usually called a road, where people can search for a clear place that hasn't been touched by human labor and plant their flag.

after all, libertarianism is all about anarcho-capitalism. you find the land first, it is yours when you put your labor into it.

however, i wouldn't go that far. people should have private ownership of land that is distributed equally to the people. they should be able to kick out any customer even it is classified as commercial property.

however, we don't even know what libertarianism is, so let's just have complete anarchy and go fuck ourselves.

i do agree with your other point completely. we shouldn't have "crimes by proxy" as you put it. it is as retarded as total anarcho-capitalism. martha stewart is another good example.

Since you clearly don't understand these philosophies, it doesn't seem very wise for you to be trying to speak about them one way or the other.

Standing Like A Rock
11-16-2008, 05:30 PM
To clear things up, In most states, people on commercial property, like a grocery store are considered invitees because there is an implied invitation from the owner for businesses purposes, however if the owner does not want you there, he can tell you to get out, canceling your invitation, in which you then have the status of a trespasser and depending on the state, you can even be shot legally if you do not leave.

libertea
11-16-2008, 07:40 PM
A store is just as much private property as is someone's home. Just because a store owner is allowing people to enter on to his property for a given purpose (to make a purchase) does not mean that he is giving up his rights to use his property as he sees fit. He should have every right to kick someone out for whatever reason he wants.

A store "should be" private property. The store owner pays taxes on the property. He/she pays for the privilege of being a tax collector for the IRS. They pay for permits and a business license. They pay taxes on income. They pay unemployment insurance tax. The store owner owns their business as much as you own your house. Unfortunately they/you don't.

sevin
11-16-2008, 07:55 PM
I've had this discussion before, and I agree that your store is much your private property (or should be, anyway) as your home.

But this raises some interesting questions, like should store owners be able to discriminate based on race (signs that say: No Coloreds)?

I am in no way racist, but technically, I'd say they should be allowed to prohibit certain people from entering the store. It's their own loss when they start losing more and more customers.

tod evans
11-16-2008, 07:58 PM
i own my own business and if i don`t like you i`ll kick your ass off my property lickity-split and the local sheriff will back me.

Danke
11-16-2008, 08:01 PM
A store "should be" private property. The store owner pays taxes on the property. He/she pays for the privilege of being a tax collector for the IRS. They pay for permits and a business license. They pay taxes on income. They pay unemployment insurance tax. The store owner owns their business as much as you own your house. Unfortunately they/you don't.

Yep. Most business apply for various licenses and therefore have to abide by said contract.

One should be able to be an autonomous business void of State licensing and have sole dominion over their property. But unfortunately that is difficult as both the State will come down on you and other licensed business (and especially banks) may not contract with you.

nickcoons
11-16-2008, 08:04 PM
But this raises some interesting questions, like should store owners be able to discriminate based on race (signs that say: No Coloreds)?

Yes.


I am in no way racist, but technically, I'd say they should be allowed to prohibit certain people from entering the store. It's their own loss when they start losing more and more customers.

And that's exactly why it won't happen. People will bring up instances in the south where this happened, but that's because a small minority intimidated businesses into accepting this policy.

Deborah K
11-16-2008, 08:04 PM
Don't you mean "unconventional" ideas?

TastyWheat
11-16-2008, 08:58 PM
A store is just as much private property as is someone's home. Just because a store owner is allowing people to enter on to his property for a given purpose (to make a purchase) does not mean that he is giving up his rights to use his property as he sees fit. He should have every right to kick someone out for whatever reason he wants.
Very good point. Just because it's a "business" doesn't mean they have to be any more accommodating than if you walked into their home. Their property, their rules.

jeepndesert
11-16-2008, 09:06 PM
Since you clearly don't understand these philosophies, it doesn't seem very wise for you to be trying to speak about them one way or the other.

weird use of sarcasm, but thank you.