PDA

View Full Version : No bacon for you!




Brian4Liberty
06-07-2013, 11:55 PM
Bacon.


Bacon Restaurant Shuttered Due to Smell, Adds Mission Location

The bacon smell is coming to the Mission -- where, perhaps thankfully, it's already a part of the social fabric.

Bacon Bacon, the Frederick Street pig eatery whose battle with neighbors in the Upper Haight made national news, is opening a second location in the Mission District, according to the San Francisco Examiner.

Bacon Bacon will begin offering breakfast sandwiches and other offerings that include cured pork products at Brick and Mortar, a Mission Street music venue, the newspaper reported.

The old Frederick Street location is closed for now, thanks to dispute with neighbors over the smell of fried bacon. But it may reopen, depending on how a July hearing at the city's Planning Commission goes -- and depending on how a standoff between restaurant owner Jim Angelus and smell-tired neighbors go.

...
http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Bacon-Restaurant-Shuttered-Due-to-Smell-Adds-Mission-Location-210465491.html



http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32150886.jpg

Department of Health...


Long story short: A neighbor’s complaints — mainly about the bacon odor — have led to the Department of Health saying that Bacon Bacon must shut down today.

http://insidescoopsf.sfgate.com/blog/2013/05/17/bacon-bacon-forced-to-shutter-its-cafe/



Bacon restaurant shut down for smelling like bacon

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2013/05/20/bacon-restaurant-shut-down-for-smelling-like-bacon/#ixzz2VeTj1YN8



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3C4jO7pmRw

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 12:03 AM
It's not government though. It's people who live around it who don't want the smell of bacon wafting all over their property day in and day out.

What's wrong with them expressing themselves?

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 12:06 AM
LOL - Will only be a matter of time before cooking in your home will be monitored, regulated and some foodstuffs banned because of the smell.

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 12:11 AM
Would you apply that same reasoning, AF, if a hog farm was about to move in upwind of your property?

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 12:16 AM
Would you apply that same reasoning, AF, if a hog farm was about to move in upwind of your property?

Depends.

Is the area zoned for it and who was there first?

I live in an area that is "rural residential/Agricultural" and have a farm that stinks to high heaven on a northwest wind, right down the road.

I'm the relative newcomer and will never say a word about it.

Are you in favor of smoking bans in condos and apartments because somebody may smell smoke from under your door in in the air ducts?

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 12:20 AM
Depends.

Is the area zoned for it and who was there first?

I live in an area that is "rural residential/Agricultural" and have a farm that stinks to high heaven on a northwest wind, right down the road.

I'm the relative newcomer and will never say a word about it.

Are you in favor of smoking bans in condos and apartments because somebody may smell smoke from under your door in in the air ducts?

No, but that would be a different thing. That would be government dictating what is done on private property. In the case at hand, we are talking about property owners.

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 12:24 AM
No, but that would be a different thing. That would be government dictating what is done on private property. In the case at hand, we are talking about property owners.

Isn't shutting down your restaurant, that I am assuming is located in an area where such establishments are "permitted", dictating what is done on private property?

TER
06-08-2013, 12:25 AM
The neighbors have every right to protest to the local board and request a re-ordinance in zoning.
The people who like to smell bacon everyday or like the fact that this business is in town, can make their voice known.
Then the local government will make a decision.
And pork will fry or not.
Whatever the case, I'm going to the refrigerator to make a sandwich.

oyarde
06-08-2013, 12:32 AM
I own the world's greatest bacon.

TER
06-08-2013, 12:41 AM
I own the world's greatest bacon.

You selling?

Weston White
06-08-2013, 01:18 AM
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/32150886.jpg

DamianTV
06-08-2013, 02:06 AM
Govt can only tell you what to do when it affects no one else but yourself when Govt can claim nothing short of flat out OWNERSHIP of your Person.

The Busybodies, Nanny Staters, and Do-Gooders fail to understand that the doors they are opening are the key to Govt telling you what you can and can not do in every second of every day. From Cradle to Grave. The sad thing here is that Govt only really does what is being demanded of it. Lobbyists make certain demands, and Govt responds in kind. People also make demands of the Govt without the Power of Lobbyists and being able to "buy" corrupt politicians. And likewise, Govt responds in kind to those people as well. This is the true failure of Democracy. The demands of the 51% being able to take away the Rights of the 49%. And this is EXACTLY why this country was founded as a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy.

In a Republic, the Representatives know that there are also very specific times that they need to flat out IGNORE the demands of the People. I am quite certain that the statement I just made will get a ton of flack, and I excpect it. But what would be an "appropriate" time to ignore the demands of the Public? Take a pick. Would you rather have a truly Representative Govt that ignored the demands of the majority of the people to take away the Right of the Citizens of another country that has performed NO aggressive actions towards the People or Govt of the US to have their Rights infringed upon by means of Military Invasion? IE WAR. Or would you prefer a Represtative Govt that ignored the cries of Non Christians to be able to follow their own Religious beliefs an a manner that caused no one else harm of any way shape or form? Or would you prefer a Representative Govt that ignored the demands of the Majority to take away the prosperity of the minority to the benefit of the Majority?

I am a firm believer that a Man has nearly Unlimited Rights, not just the ones enumerated by the Bill of Rights. I say NEARLY because the only restriction on those Rights are when a Man claims to have jurisdiction over another Man's Rights.


Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within limits drawn around us
by the equal rights of others. I do not add "within the limits of the law", because law is
often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

-Thomas Jefferson

You have the Right to cook and eat Bacon. ANY Man who tells you otherwise is not only ENEMY of Liberty, but an ENEMY of the very principals upon which the very concept of Liberty is founded. This also means that if a Man believes that another Mans consumption of Bacon should not be tolerated, that is one of many doors that need to be opened for one Man to be able to claim ownership of another Man. IE SLAVERY. You are now BLACK because you ate Bacon.

THere are lines that a Man does not cross if they truly respect the Rights of others. That includes standing up not only for that which you believe in, but especially that in which you do NOT believe. Protect your Neighbors beliefs not because they are the same, but because they are DIFFERENT. In some way shape or form, we are all different from one another. We must fight to protect the Rights of others to be different from ourselves for the sole purpose that they are different from ourselves. Christians should defend with their lives the Right of Atheists to be Atheists. Whites should defend with their very lives the right of Non Whites to be Non White. Non Smokers should defend with their very lives the Right of Smokers to be Smokers. And in every case, the likewise should also apply. IE Smokers should defend with their very lives the right of Non Smokers to be Non Smokers.

Divided We Fall. And our Govt and its owners are very good at Long Division.

The Line in the Sand must be drawn somewhere. You might even be suprised to find out that the line is quite a ways back from what has already been crossed. Congratulate yourself once you draw that line, because you now have a Goal. Strive to achieve your goal and you strive to defend your Line in the Sand.

Liberty can not exist without Lines drawn in the Sand.

DamianTV
06-08-2013, 02:09 AM
Would you apply that same reasoning, AF, if a hog farm was about to move in upwind of your property?

He might, he might not, but he should.

EVERY Oath Keeper should. With their lives if need be.

Schifference
06-08-2013, 04:46 AM
The neighbors have every right to protest to the local board and request a re-ordinance in zoning.
The people who like to smell bacon everyday or like the fact that this business is in town, can make their voice known.
Then the local government will make a decision.
And pork will fry or not.
Whatever the case, I'm going to the refrigerator to make a sandwich.

Move the guy 20 miles from town. Put him on a reservation like we did the Indians. Wow, Novel idea towns will soon be mandated to have a food court. No cooking outside of the food zone.

Origanalist
06-08-2013, 04:56 AM
Govt can only tell you what to do when it affects no one else but yourself when Govt can claim nothing short of flat out OWNERSHIP of your Person.

The Busybodies, Nanny Staters, and Do-Gooders fail to understand that the doors they are opening are the key to Govt telling you what you can and can not do in every second of every day. From Cradle to Grave. The sad thing here is that Govt only really does what is being demanded of it. Lobbyists make certain demands, and Govt responds in kind. People also make demands of the Govt without the Power of Lobbyists and being able to "buy" corrupt politicians. And likewise, Govt responds in kind to those people as well. This is the true failure of Democracy. The demands of the 51% being able to take away the Rights of the 49%. And this is EXACTLY why this country was founded as a Constitutional Republic, NOT a Democracy.

In a Republic, the Representatives know that there are also very specific times that they need to flat out IGNORE the demands of the People. I am quite certain that the statement I just made will get a ton of flack, and I excpect it. But what would be an "appropriate" time to ignore the demands of the Public? Take a pick. Would you rather have a truly Representative Govt that ignored the demands of the majority of the people to take away the Right of the Citizens of another country that has performed NO aggressive actions towards the People or Govt of the US to have their Rights infringed upon by means of Military Invasion? IE WAR. Or would you prefer a Represtative Govt that ignored the cries of Non Christians to be able to follow their own Religious beliefs an a manner that caused no one else harm of any way shape or form? Or would you prefer a Representative Govt that ignored the demands of the Majority to take away the prosperity of the minority to the benefit of the Majority?

I am a firm believer that a Man has nearly Unlimited Rights, not just the ones enumerated by the Bill of Rights. I say NEARLY because the only restriction on those Rights are when a Man claims to have jurisdiction over another Man's Rights.



You have the Right to cook and eat Bacon. ANY Man who tells you otherwise is not only ENEMY of Liberty, but an ENEMY of the very principals upon which the very concept of Liberty is founded. This also means that if a Man believes that another Mans consumption of Bacon should not be tolerated, that is one of many doors that need to be opened for one Man to be able to claim ownership of another Man. IE SLAVERY. You are now BLACK because you ate Bacon.

THere are lines that a Man does not cross if they truly respect the Rights of others. That includes standing up not only for that which you believe in, but especially that in which you do NOT believe. Protect your Neighbors beliefs not because they are the same, but because they are DIFFERENT. In some way shape or form, we are all different from one another. We must fight to protect the Rights of others to be different from ourselves for the sole purpose that they are different from ourselves. Christians should defend with their lives the Right of Atheists to be Atheists. Whites should defend with their very lives the right of Non Whites to be Non White. Non Smokers should defend with their very lives the Right of Smokers to be Smokers. And in every case, the likewise should also apply. IE Smokers should defend with their very lives the right of Non Smokers to be Non Smokers.

Divided We Fall. And our Govt and its owners are very good at Long Division.

The Line in the Sand must be drawn somewhere. You might even be suprised to find out that the line is quite a ways back from what has already been crossed. Congratulate yourself once you draw that line, because you now have a Goal. Strive to achieve your goal and you strive to defend your Line in the Sand.

Liberty can not exist without Lines drawn in the Sand.

You know, for a post about bacon, that's pretty damn good.

oyarde
06-08-2013, 09:16 AM
You selling?

Used to , I just keep it all now. I do sell lots of other things .

donnay
06-08-2013, 09:43 AM
No, but that would be a different thing. That would be government dictating what is done on private property. In the case at hand, we are talking about property owners.


No they are not different. There have been plenty of Hatfield and McCoy battles throughout history--however, now-a-days government always intervenes and all parties ultimately lose. In democracy it is 51% against 49%--remember? You call for zoning ordnances and eventually someone will call for it on you, because your personal habits bother them.

I, personally, do not like pork, but I will defend the right of others to enjoy it-- smell and all.

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 09:49 AM
No they are not different. There have been plenty of Hatfield and McCoy battles throughout history--however, now-a-days government always intervenes and all parties ultimately lose. In democracy it is 51% against 49%--remember? You call for zoning ordnances and eventually someone will call for it on you, because your personal habits bother them.

I, personally, do not like pork, but I will defend the right of others to enjoy it-- smell and all.

I believe a person's liberties extend to the point they start infringing on someone else's. To that end, if the neighbors are sick of the smell of bacon in the airspace on their property, day in and day out, I do believe they have a justification for speaking up. Note that I didn't say I agree with them on doing so, only that they have the right to do it.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 09:52 AM
Smells are not an infringement of rights.

It's exactly this type of belief that has got us the wonderful government and court system we're enjoying.

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 09:52 AM
He might, he might not, but he should.

EVERY Oath Keeper should. With their lives if need be.

Sorry, but a hog farm moving upwinds of him would destroy the value of his property. In that light, the hog farm's stink coming onto his property would be infringing on his liberty.

Would I argue against a hog farm going in upwinds of my property? Hell yes, I would.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 09:55 AM
I wouldn't mind a friendly hog farmer moving on to the next parcel..

And I'd never whine or petition government about it if one did.

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 09:55 AM
Smells are not an infringement of rights.

It's exactly this type of belief that has got us the wonderful government and court system we're enjoying.

It would destroy the value of his property.

Sorry guys, I'm not against in-town zoning laws. There are some places who have not incorporated and don't have them. Or, move outside the city limits if you hate them.

This country used to be all about options. One size does not fit all.

oyarde
06-08-2013, 09:55 AM
My little piggies smell like roses .

tod evans
06-08-2013, 09:56 AM
I'm way outside city limits.

City folks piss me off:mad:

LibertyEagle
06-08-2013, 09:57 AM
I wouldn't mind a friendly hog farmer moving on to the next parcel..

And I'd never whine or petition government about it if one did.

I wonder if you'd sing that same tune if it was a huge corporate hog farm.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 10:00 AM
I wonder if you'd sing that same tune if it was a huge corporate hog farm.

I have family who keeps 2500 head under roof...

Farrowing 10k twice a year....Some of the nicest people you'll ever meet and well respected in their community.

Like my uncle says; "Smells like money to me."

donnay
06-08-2013, 10:11 AM
I believe a person's liberties extend to the point they start infringing on someone else's. To that end, if the neighbors are sick of the smell of bacon in the airspace on their property, day in and day out, I do believe they have a justification for speaking up. Note that I didn't say I agree with them on doing so, only that they have the right to do it.

Being "sick of the smell?" People are using that for just about everything--smoking, perfume and now cooking. When you continue down this slippery slope, at the bottom, there is no liberty for anyone.

I have no problem with people 'speaking their mind.' The problem I see is, when they speak their mind and change other's minds to infringe upon another's right, then I have a problem.

talkingpointes
06-08-2013, 10:15 AM
It's not government though. It's people who live around it who don't want the smell of bacon wafting all over their property day in and day out.

What's wrong with them expressing themselves?

"But it may reopen, depending on how a July hearing at the city's Planning Commission goes -- and depending on how a standoff between restaurant owner Jim Angelus and smell-tired neighbors go."

Occam's Banana
06-08-2013, 10:16 AM
You know, for a post about bacon, that's pretty damn good.

Are you suggesting that posts about bacon possess some quality that makes it likely that they won't be pretty damn good?

:eek: Say it ain't so!

oyarde
06-08-2013, 10:18 AM
I imagine I was really lowering property value once I had the fire in the smokehouse and the wood stove, lol

Brian4Liberty
06-08-2013, 12:42 PM
It's not government though. It's people who live around it who don't want the smell of bacon wafting all over their property day in and day out.

What's wrong with them expressing themselves?

These are pre-existing restaurants. And the city is mostly zoned for both restaurants and residential. Can I complain to my neighbor about their cooking odors? Can I force them to not cook things I don't like?

This particular controversy is about vegetarians. No meat to be cooked within smelling distance of vegetarians?


Depends.

Is the area zoned for it and who was there first?

I live in an area that is "rural residential/Agricultural" and have a farm that stinks to high heaven on a northwest wind, right down the road.

I'm the relative newcomer and will never say a word about it.

Are you in favor of smoking bans in condos and apartments because somebody may smell smoke from under your door in in the air ducts?

Yes, that is a good analogy. Being able to "smell" smoke is much different than it being a high enough concentration to have ill health effects. Likewise, in every dense living situation, you will sometimes be able to smell things from neighbors. Usually cooking. And sometimes it is an awful smell. And some people cook the same thing everyday.

Brian4Liberty
06-08-2013, 12:44 PM
Department of Health...


Long story short: A neighbor’s complaints — mainly about the bacon odor — have led to the Department of Health saying that Bacon Bacon must shut down today.

http://insidescoopsf.sfgate.com/blog/2013/05/17/bacon-bacon-forced-to-shutter-its-cafe/

Apparently the shutdown was bureaucratic in nature.

As AF might say, you are always in violation. Enforcement comes at the whim of the state, and sometimes your neighbors.

Brian4Liberty
06-08-2013, 12:56 PM
105-Year-Old Woman Says Bacon Keeps Her Alive


What’s the secret to an extra-long life? For one centenarian, it just might be bacon.

A 105-year-old Texas woman, who became a widow at age 38 and worked as everything from a cotton picker to a hay baler while raising 7 kids on her own, says bacon is the secret to her longevity, the Huffington Post reports.

“I love bacon. I eat it everyday,” Pearl Cantrell told NBC affiliate KRBC when asked her secret to living so long. “I don’t feel as old as I am. That’s all I can say,” Cantrell added.
...
Despite its popularity, or perhaps because of it, bacon’s gotten a bad rap lately. A University of Zurich study published by the journal BMC Medicine in March found that processed meat was linked to a premature death. The study, which analyzed the diets of more than 440,000 people between the ages of 35 and 69, found that eating processed meats in moderation–less than 20g per day–could prevent an estimated 3% of premature deaths each year. As The Atlantic pointed out, however, that’s equivalent to a matchbook-sized portion. An earlier study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine last March found that even a single serving of processed red meat (yes, that includes bacon) increased the risk of participants dying by 20%. That study tracked over 121,000 doctors and nurses over the course of 22 years.

Cantrell was not among either study’s participants.

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/05/09/105-year-old-woman-says-bacon-keeps-her-alive/

DamianTV
06-08-2013, 01:19 PM
...

Yes, that is a good analogy. Being able to "smell" smoke is much different than it being a high enough concentration to have ill health effects. Likewise, in every dense living situation, you will sometimes be able to smell things from neighbors. Usually cooking. And sometimes it is an awful smell. And some people cook the same thing everyday.

Next to be outlawed: Farting.

Schifference
06-08-2013, 02:16 PM
I lived in a residential neighborhood. The neighbor was a scrap scavenger. That did not bother me but he would be outside at all hours every day of the week banging on metal and cutting it. Very noisy! 6:30am on Saturday and Sunday and then all day! Sound is just another sense. Had I purchased a house next door to a commercial property or commercial scrap yard that was in existence I would live with it. I would not even care so much about the noise from the neighbor except he had absolutely no awareness how the nonstop racket from early hours was disruptive. I actually admired him for trying to live somewhat under the radar but my tranquility at my own home was being compromised for his personal gain.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 03:01 PM
Note that I didn't say I agree with them on doing so, only that they have the right to do it.

It depends who was there first. Smells could indeed be an agression, conceivably. As could light, vibration, pollen, sound, etc. It all just depends on who was there first.

So AF is totally right, if he'd just leave out the additional part about zoning, since zoning is completely tyrannical and fascist.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 03:04 PM
Being "sick of the smell?" People are using that for just about everything--smoking, perfume and now cooking. When you continue down this slippery slope, at the bottom, there is no liberty for anyone.

I have no problem with people 'speaking their mind.' The problem I see is, when they speak their mind and change other's minds to infringe upon another's right, then I have a problem.
Until you decide you no longer want to infringe on people's right to eat GMOs, you have exactly ZIP credibility on this.

donnay
06-08-2013, 03:25 PM
Until you decide you no longer want to infringe on people's right to eat GMOs, you have exactly ZIP credibility on this.


LOL!! Simply warning people of the dangers of GMOs is not infringing upon anyone's rights. It is the GMO seeds and Monsanto's lobbying that infringe on all of us with our food supply, but you're not willing to educate yourself about that.

Carson
06-08-2013, 03:25 PM
I wouldn't mind a friendly hog farmer moving on to the next parcel..

And I'd never whine or petition government about it if one did.


Those sound like famous last words.

I'm thinking they might take some getting used too.

I guess you have to experience them up close and personal.

Are You Experienced Jimi Hendrix HD

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg2segLZoeA

Thread music!


P.S. It just occurred to me having few hogs around could keep away a lot of undesirables off and away from your place. Adding a guard goose and we are talking Fort Knox.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 03:39 PM
Those sound like famous last words.

I'm thinking they might take some getting used too.

I guess you have to experience them up close and personal.



I am a farm boy...

And I'd rather smell critter shit than exhaust fumes any day.

But that's me, I live in the country and I don't whine about my neighbors...In fact none of the neighbors whine about eachother..

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 03:45 PM
This particular controversy is about vegetarians. No meat to be cooked within smelling distance of vegetarians?
Whoa whoa whoa...hold the phone...you got a source for that?

If so, I am vindicated yet again.

I have been saying for years now that it would only be a matter of time before some vegetarian or devout Muslim or Jew starts the ball rolling on banning what you can cook, because the smell offends them or violates their religious beliefs.

There are rights and there is right.

Frankly, these whining busybodies and butt-in-skies ought to mind their own damn business more, and mind other people's business less. If you are going to live around other people then you are going to just have to understand that you will need to shine a lot of things on, and not go complaining to the cops every time someone plays loud music, cooks food, or their dog barks.

Maybe these people ought to be angry at government crawling up their asshole with a microscope instead.

But I know that won't happen.

This system has built the snitch society, and the snitches are waiting by the millions and millions to See Something Say Something.

Which only goes to prove me right once again:

Fed, Entertained and exercise Petty Power over their fellow man.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 03:47 PM
LOL!! Simply warning people of the dangers of GMOs is not infringing upon anyone's rights. It is the GMO seeds and Monsanto's lobbying that infringe on all of us with our food supply, but you're not willing to educate yourself about that.

I am all for you warning people of the dangers. I myself warn people of GMO dangers. You said you wanted to ban GMOs. If you misspoke, feel free to say so. If not, let me explain: warning is different than banning. Talking to people is voluntary. Shooting them in the head is not. Banning GMOs means shooting people in the head for growing a food you don't like. Possibly, if the ban follows other product bans in the US, such as drugs, shooting the consumers in the head as well for buying and eating the wrong things. I oppose this. Is that clear enough yet?

tod evans
06-08-2013, 03:51 PM
Since I haven't stated it yet I stand firmly in the bacon-cookers camp.


Now if the bacon cookers were to whine about the gastric odors emitted from the vegetarians I'd back the plant-eaters..

donnay
06-08-2013, 04:16 PM
I am all for you warning people of the dangers. I myself warn people of GMO dangers. You said you wanted to ban GMOs. If you misspoke, feel free to say so. If not, let me explain: warning is different than banning. Talking to people is voluntary. Shooting them in the head is not. Banning GMOs means shooting people in the head for growing a food you don't like. Possibly, if the ban follows other product bans in the US, such as drugs, shooting the consumers in the head as well for buying and eating the wrong things. I oppose this. Is that clear enough yet?

Again, if you took a moment to educate yourself you would see that your analogy just doesn't cut it. The BIG Agra company lobbying and using government for enforcement is what Monsanto is doing to the people, here and around the globe. These frankenseeds will ultimately ruin our heirloom seeds and our food supply. When animals eat these frankenseeds, the animals have organ failure and cancer. That in turn is passed on to us in our food supply. Not to mention Monsanto has patented their seeds so farmers will be beholden to them year after year. Doesn't sound like a free market company to me.

kcchiefs6465
06-08-2013, 04:35 PM
Frankly, these whining busybodies and butt-in-skies ought to mind their own damn business more, and mind other people's business less. If you are going to live around other people then you are going to just have to understand that you will need to shine a lot of things on, and not go complaining to the cops every time someone plays loud music, cooks food, or their dog barks.

Maybe these people ought to be angry at government crawling up their asshole with a microscope instead.

But I know that won't happen.

This system has built the snitch society, and the snitches are waiting by the millions and millions to See Something Say Something.

Which only goes to prove me right once again:

Fed, Entertained and exercise Petty Power over their fellow man.
I've been saying this for years. I really don't get it. People are so quick and eager to be in someone else's business. To spread gossip and listen to petty rumors. It's sickening. "So and so is doing this" to the gasps or laughs of their friends. Like goddamn teenagers. And the news feeds into this as well. Why I need to know every time 'Kimye' takes a shit I'll never understand.

I must be a different breed. I really can't relate. I prefer to be left alone and do not care about what someone else is doing in the least.

And another thing, I don't care what happens, I never have called the police and never will. Somewhere along the lines of them threatening me with death, chaining me to shit, beating on me, stealing my money, trying to run me over, (etc. etc. etc.) I've come to terms with the fact that I'd rather die than have one of their greasy hooves touch me. I've told them this, when they spouted off the old hypothetical of "one day you'll need us and then you'll be singing a different tune." I told them in no uncertain terms to leave me where they find me. (they used the hypothetical of if I was ejected from a car) Only then did they realize my true disdain for them, my true feelings, and left my eleven or twelve year old self alone. They still kept me ankle cuffed for another hour or so though. They probably went home and jerked off to that scene.

People wishing to call the police from my phone have to go elsewhere. I've literally told people this. Idgaf. That number will not be called from my phone. It is a principle I have in keeping true to my words I told the now police chief. He was about a rookie when I knew him.

Czolgosz
06-08-2013, 05:40 PM
Quantifiable damages, or not?


That's the test for an un-corrupted judicial system.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 05:55 PM
Again, if you took a moment to educate yourself you would see that your analogy just doesn't cut it. The BIG Agra company lobbying and using government for enforcement is what Monsanto is doing to the people, here and around the globe. These frankenseeds will ultimately ruin our heirloom seeds and our food supply. When animals eat these frankenseeds, the animals have organ failure and cancer. That in turn is passed on to us in our food supply. Not to mention Monsanto has patented their seeds so farmers will be beholden to them year after year. Doesn't sound like a free market company to me.
Why would you dream you need to explain this all to me? You assume you are my teacher because why? You assume you know more about this issue than me because why? I already wrote in my last post that I believe "GMOs" have dangers. I share your world-view on them to an extent. I in fact talk to people about this stuff from time to time. Just like you maybe do.

But yet we seem to differ somehow.

How is that possible?

It's because you want to shoot people in the head. Bad things XYZ are happening. And so you want to shoot people in the head. Shooting people in the head is A) nor going to solve your problem, and B) something I oppose on moral grounds.

In the case of the topic of this post, it is like thinking that bacon smell is a big problem or danger and so deciding to get the State to shoot the smell-maker in the head for you. That's what these bums did. You say you oppose it. Why? Because you can't go shoot people in the head just because you don't like the smell (unless you were there first). Similarly, you can't go shooting people in the head because you don't like their seeds. "Liberty"Eagle wants to shoot people in the head for not following stupid and arbitrary dictats called "zoning".

The central question of political philosophy is, "When is it OK to shoot people in the head?". That is, when can one use force? Libertarianism answers: only in response to aggression.

This is very simple stuff to understand. You should have understood from my last post and posts in a previous thread that I accept the problems and dangers of genetically engineered seeds. Yet somehow your reply was to ramble at me about heirloom seeds for the umpteenth time. You are going to have to get a higher IQ or else stop writing to me. Seriously.

oyarde
06-08-2013, 06:12 PM
Tomorrow afternoon I am grilling a bunch of Brats and huge slabs of pork shoulder steaks :)

oyarde
06-08-2013, 06:18 PM
Of course , I am not in San Francisco , or I would go ahead and put a notice in the paper that none of them are invited, lol, for real.

familydog
06-08-2013, 06:27 PM
Putting up with neighborly smells, sights and noise is part of living in a city/suburb. It's an implied agreement. If you don't like it, don't live next to other people or businesses.

Natural Citizen
06-08-2013, 07:16 PM
LOL!! Simply warning people of the dangers of GMOs is not infringing upon anyone's rights. It is the GMO seeds and Monsanto's lobbying that infringe on all of us with our food supply, but you're not willing to educate yourself about that.

Not only that but it's a glorified science experiment on a species. Natural citizens, in particular, and most likely strategic on the part of these non-natural fellers who seem to be getting all of the representation and now obviously even writing legislation that will most likely end up having our grand children paying the tyrants royalties because of some gene patent. So much for the old of, by and for gag. Right? That'll be repatriated if our representatives continue to receive the luxury of not having to explain their position on these sciences themselves to the people...the real ones...the natural ones...rather than some market paradigm where we know full well it's a government contolled monopoly.

Until the terms of controversy are placed into the correct perspective we'll continue seeing "libertarians" acting as the welcome wagon for tyranny as has historically been the case.

Unfortunately, people are limited/indoctrinated to speak solely in context with gmo food as a product. We have Monsanto into big pharma with gene patents and all kinds of things.

They say "food product", I say science experiment. Apples and oranges. Completely different terms of controversy. The difference between political science and the real stuff.

I'm beginning to really loath the rationality of the contemporary "libertarian". Seems like just because they choose to be anti-science because of some half wit conformity to political narrative/paradigm that they think they get to get a free pass to place everything into some free market squabble and ignore the really, really....really important elements of the skullduggery. And then on top of that what they are actually defending is a government controlled market. They're defending it. Fuggin scwewy.

Victor Grey
06-08-2013, 07:19 PM
I hope that in the future as technology advances, these problems such as smells and sounds become less of an issue.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 07:42 PM
Until the terms of controversy are placed into the correct perspective we'll continue seeing "libertarians" acting as the welcome wagon for tyranny as has historically been the case.

There were no libertarians until about 1950, or virtually none, and very few after that until the 1970s. In that 70 years or so, we have been very decidedly *not* acting as a welcome wagon for tyranny. So I sincerely have no idea whatsoever what "historical cases" you're referring to. Help me out here.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 07:46 PM
Tomorrow afternoon I am grilling a bunch of Brats and huge slabs of pork shoulder steaks :)

Is it still illegal to grill vegetarians?

Origanalist
06-08-2013, 07:50 PM
Is it still illegal to grill vegetarians?

Only the human ones.

tod evans
06-08-2013, 07:53 PM
Only the human ones.

Well damn it!

Sure would put an end to lotsa whining..

oyarde
06-08-2013, 07:57 PM
Is it still illegal to grill vegetarians?

Due to poor brain development, lack of reproduction etc they should eventually become an endangered species :)

tod evans
06-08-2013, 07:59 PM
Due to poor brain development, lack of reproduction etc they should eventually become an endangered species :)

Translation;

Delicacy...:cool:

oyarde
06-08-2013, 08:01 PM
Translation;

Delicacy...:cool:

Marinate over night in some Wishbone Italian dressing , LOL

donnay
06-08-2013, 08:32 PM
Not only that but it's a glorified science experiment on a species. Natural citizens, in particular, and most likely strategic on the part of these non-natural fellers who seem to be getting all of the representation and now obviously even writing legislation that will most likely end up having our grand children paying the tyrants royalties because of some gene patent. So much for the old of, by and for gag. Right? That'll be repatriated if our representatives continue to receive the luxury of not having to explain their position on these sciences themselves to the people...the real ones...the natural ones...rather than some market paradigm where we know full well it's a government contolled monopoly.

Until the terms of controversy are placed into the correct perspective we'll continue seeing "libertarians" acting as the welcome wagon for tyranny as has historically been the case.

Unfortunately, people are limited/indoctrinated to speak solely in context with gmo food as a product. We have Monsanto into big pharma with gene patents and all kinds of things.

They say "food product", I say science experiment. Apples and oranges. Completely different terms of controversy. The difference between political science and the real stuff.

I'm beginning to really loath the rationality of the contemporary "libertarian". Seems like just because they choose to be anti-science because of some half wit conformity to political narrative/paradigm that they think they get to get a free pass to place everything into some free market squabble and ignore the really, really....really important elements of the skullduggery. And then on top of that what they are actually defending is a government controlled market. They're defending it. Fuggin scwewy.

Well said. +rep

The sad thing is Big Agra and Big pHARMa uses governments to put a gun to our heads. But let's support an illusion of a free market. :rolleyes:

LibForestPaul
06-08-2013, 08:55 PM
Would you apply that same reasoning, AF, if a hog farm was about to move in upwind of your property?

Is that not a reason we have courts with jurors of our peers?

If damages have been wrought, then a suit should be brought.

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 09:05 PM
There were no libertarians until about 1950, or virtually none, and very few after that until the 1970s. In that 70 years or so, we have been very decidedly *not* acting as a welcome wagon for tyranny. So I sincerely have no idea whatsoever what "historical cases" you're referring to. Help me out here.

Lolwut?

Who was this guy?

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/spoonersepia.jpg

Or this guy?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Bastiat.jpg/220px-Bastiat.jpg

Or this gal?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/RoseWilderLane01.jpg/175px-RoseWilderLane01.jpg

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 09:38 PM
The best example would probably be Gustave de Molinari. But libertarianism had not been fully fleshed out as a philosophy until the mid 20th century and so all these people would probably be classical liberals or proto-libertarians. Not to downgrade anything these great men did. It's just that they couldn't be adherents of something that hadn't been invented yet.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 09:46 PM
Besides, there were very few of them and so the "virtually none" would still be true even if you wanted to count Bastiat and Jefferson and Acton et. al. as libertarians.

Anti Federalist
06-08-2013, 10:50 PM
The best example would probably be Gustave de Molinari. But libertarianism had not been fully fleshed out as a philosophy until the mid 20th century and so all these people would probably be classical liberals or proto-libertarians. Not to downgrade anything these great men did. It's just that they couldn't be adherents of something that hadn't been invented yet.

Libertarianism, as a philosophy, was well fleshed out and understood in the 18th century, and built upon in the 19th century by those I posted and many many more.

To say that libertarianism, as a philosophy and governing principle only came into being in the middle of the 20th century is historically and factually incorrect.

helmuth_hubener
06-08-2013, 11:17 PM
I disagree. In my view, Rothbard essentially invented modern libertarianism, which pulls together many different elements and traditions into a whole that has a surprising -- i would say electrifying -- consistency and rigor. It's a new thing. It's never been tried fully and consciously. Elements were there, but not the whole. And certainly there was no mass Libertarian Movement prior to the 1970s.

Thoreau, Cobden and Bright, Paine, Sam Adams,... these men are my heroes. They had the libertarian *spirit*, for sure. Many others throughout history. William Wallace, perhaps. Men everywhere who stood up to tyrants or tyranny in one way or another. But it was not until Rothbard that Classical Liberalism was systematized and rigorized and radicalized into what we know as Libertarianism.

Danan
06-09-2013, 07:35 AM
Sorry, but a hog farm moving upwinds of him would destroy the value of his property. In that light, the hog farm's stink coming onto his property would be infringing on his liberty.

Would I argue against a hog farm going in upwinds of my property? Hell yes, I would.

To me it depends on who was there first. Or to put it differently, on who homesteaded the odor in the area.

If there is a hog farm in an area where no other property owner can smell the stench (or in an area where this is already common and thus the additional stench isn't really recognizable or doesn't bother anyone), then no "latecomer" who buys neighbouring property has a right to complain to the government about it. Even if the majority of the people in this area agree with the complaint. A majority can't make right what is wrong, not locally, not federally and not internationally.

If, however, the hog farmer wants to start a business in a new area, where there are already property owners having homesteaded the right to clean air on their property, than the hog farmer has no right to emit a stench to their property. Unless he offers them compensation and they agree to give up those rights by selling or leasing them.

Of course it also depends on the severity. In order to enforce any right (the right to emit stench or the right to clean air on your property) you'd have to go in front of a court. And any sane judge, who judges on the basis of natural law, would have to find out whether the claim is reasonable (i.e. not every fart of your neighbor is a violation of your property).

helmuth_hubener
06-09-2013, 07:41 AM
Danan! Exactly! Exactly! Exactly!!!

Brian4Liberty
06-09-2013, 01:30 PM
Whoa whoa whoa...hold the phone...you got a source for that?


It was a TV news segment, but I can't remember which channel.

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2013, 02:02 PM
A number of folks in my neighborhood burn mesquite wood in their fireplaces in the winter-which bothers my allergies a LOT. However, I have no right to take their fireplaces and this Planning Commission has no right to shut down Bacon Bacon. This is the arrogance, thuggery, and violence of Central Planning on display. I'm quite surprised to see "liberty" supporters claiming the Planning Commission was in the right. :eek:

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2013, 02:06 PM
The best example would probably be Gustave de Molinari. But libertarianism had not been fully fleshed out as a philosophy until the mid 20th century and so all these people would probably be classical liberals or proto-libertarians. Not to downgrade anything these great men did. It's just that they couldn't be adherents of something that hadn't been invented yet.
Truth.

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2013, 02:11 PM
I disagree. In my view, Rothbard essentially invented modern libertarianism, which pulls together many different elements and traditions into a whole that has a surprising -- i would say electrifying -- consistency and rigor. It's a new thing. It's never been tried fully and consciously. Elements were there, but not the whole. And certainly there was no mass Libertarian Movement prior to the 1970s.

Thoreau, Cobden and Bright, Paine, Sam Adams,... these men are my heroes. They had the libertarian *spirit*, for sure. Many others throughout history. William Wallace, perhaps. Men everywhere who stood up to tyrants or tyranny in one way or another. But it was not until Rothbard that Classical Liberalism was systematized and rigorized and radicalized into what we know as Libertarianism.
This^^ qft. :cool:

Brian4Liberty
06-09-2013, 05:16 PM
A number of folks in my neighborhood burn mesquite wood in their fireplaces in the winter-which bothers my allergies a LOT. However, I have no right to take their fireplaces and this Planning Commission has no right to shut down Bacon Bacon. This is the arrogance, thuggery, and violence of Central Planning on display. I'm quite surprised to see "liberty" supporters claiming the Planning Commission was in the right. :eek:

Wood burning is banned in many places in California to prevent air pollution, especially during certain times of year when the air doesn't move a whole lot. The big difference is that it reaches concentrations that go beyond a "smell", and actually reach levels that effect people's health, especially people with lung problems.

heavenlyboy34
06-09-2013, 05:20 PM
Whoa whoa whoa...hold the phone...you got a source for that?

If so, I am vindicated yet again.

I have been saying for years now that it would only be a matter of time before some vegetarian or devout Muslim or Jew starts the ball rolling on banning what you can cook, because the smell offends them or violates their religious beliefs.

There are rights and there is right.

Frankly, these whining busybodies and butt-in-skies ought to mind their own damn business more, and mind other people's business less. If you are going to live around other people then you are going to just have to understand that you will need to shine a lot of things on, and not go complaining to the cops every time someone plays loud music, cooks food, or their dog barks.

Maybe these people ought to be angry at government crawling up their asshole with a microscope instead.

But I know that won't happen.

This system has built the snitch society, and the snitches are waiting by the millions and millions to See Something Say Something.

Which only goes to prove me right once again:

Fed, Entertained and exercise Petty Power over their fellow man.
WTF, mundane? Don't you know you owe a Debt To Society(TM)? If you loved your country, you'd do as you're fucking told.

(/sarc, but a lot of people think that nowadays :( 'murica fail.)

Xhin
06-09-2013, 08:32 PM
I guess technically if your bacon smell is getting on other peoples' property then you're infringing on their property rights (assuming they don't want their property to smell like bacon). It's kind of like whether it's ethical under libertarianism to dump garbage in your neighbor's yard or not.