Tab Content
  • osan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 09:09 AM
    And you also wrote: The statement is clear. You believe it is acceptable to falsely imprison some people for the sake of getting the guilty. You subscribe to the typical weak-tea, feel-good supplementation "so long as false convictions are minimized", as if that makes things acceptable. I bet those who today rot in prison cells on false convictions, however few they may be, do not share your view. I'd love to see you face those people at less than arm's length and tell them to their faces how it's sad, but that's how the cookie crumbles sometimes. You might be lucky to walk away with all your teeth. :) Either what you wrote was an intentional lie, or you need to work on your sentence structure for semantics because the statement is quite clear in its meaning. I will assume you did not intend to lie. Then I wroted:
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-13-2018, 10:27 PM
    So you are of the school of thought that feels there is some number of false convictions that is acceptable... the greater good and all that nonsense. Sad.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-13-2018, 10:22 PM
    I certainly hope this surprises nobody. My use of FB has been primarily to keep in touch with people. Otherwise, it is a pretty useless platform, IMO. That said, they recently put me in FB jail for 30 days because they didn't like my use of "überfag". Naturally, those sissies assumed I was making a pejorative reference to homosekshools, when in fact I was using the "f a g" portion in its original and proper way, which denotes that which is "weak". But these people are so horny to be offended, so feverishly seeking to be "insulted", that they have no use for anything even remotely resembling a good communication habit that would direct them to first ask the question, "what sense of 'f a g' are you employing in your statement" prior to taking action. Never waste a good opportunity to go red in the face with outrage. For those here that would like to be able to communicate with others without being monitored by those such as the Facebook NAZIs, I can recommend spreely.com. Thus far they appear to be good for their claims that you will not be censored. Come find me - search for "Demon Buddha". Have fun, and to hell with FB. Run by a raft of pussies. :)
    16 replies | 446 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-13-2018, 07:06 AM
    Justice or Freedom and the sovereign rights it conveys?
    5 replies | 185 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-13-2018, 06:50 AM
    Once again I see the false dichotomy trap - if you're not falsely imprisoning innocents for the sake of making sure you get the guilty, then criminals will roam freely on the streets and there will be chaos. I do not believe this would be the case in a world that had readjusted itself to proper responsibilities for one's own wellbeing. In such a world, those committing crimes are more likely to get their just deserts at the hands of "civilians" who choose to defend themselves against predation and other violations. Bear this in mind: the vast majority of crimes are committed by those who count on the ready cooperation of their victims. This directly leads one to correctly infer that most of these rubes are not of a stomach for a real fight. The net is rife with video examples of the "oh shit" moments of low-rent criminals when their chosen targets give even mild fight. Being so threatened themselves, the crooks flee. That is the vast and overwhelming proportion of such events and the people who perpetrate the crimes in question. If the good people cease their corrupted reliance on cops and other groups to bail them out when the poo hits the fan and start learning how to care for themselves, the rates of crime would plummet from those petty, up to and including murder. What would be left are those who would be criminals in any event because they are the hardcores who are willing to assume the risks, perhaps due to brain lesions or whatever other hardware or software stupidity that managed to take root. If we are to be serious about freedom, and I find that most whom I encounter are not, then the sanctity of innocence must stand as a highest virtue for all men. The very thought of imprisoning a man who has committed no crime should fill one with the same revulsion as does the thought of a woman aborting her pregnancy in the eighth month or a child being brutally raped. I say tis better that every criminal escape the courts than so much as one innocent be caged without just cause. The criminal will get his eventually - that is a statistical certainty. The more crimes you commit, the greater the likelihood your wick is going to get snuffed.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-11-2018, 10:35 AM
    It appears you have no argument against me, save your blindly unsupported assertions and differing assumptions. We will have to agree to disagree on this one.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 10:38 PM
    Perhaps I failed to make myself clear - the right to resist directly implies the crime of the "state". The "state" is far larger in terms of men with guns more than happy to kill you if you resist. Therefore, the right to resist becomes meaningless in the face of an organization of mobsters who will gleefully murder you for having the temerity not to go quietly into the maw of hell upon their whim. THAT is why the state should be eliminated. The nearly universal corruption of people is the primary reason the "state" will likely never be dismantled, barring a reset event. I don't know to which societies you refer, but I assure you that the vast majority of human societies over the course of the last umpteen thousands of years were very much in fact and indeed anarchic. Let us be clear that such societies had leaders, but no rulers. Chiefs were not kings or rulers of any other sort, but rather trusted individuals who, the moment they violated that trust for any reason, were no longer chiefs. Anyone was free to act contrary to a chief's recommendations, and let us be clear that recommendation was all to which he was entitled. There were no edicts, no commands, imperatives, fiats, or any other brand of tyrannical acts tolerated because the people knew who they were, what they were, and were more than willing to banish or in extreme cases kill anyone showing the least disrespect for the rights of his fellows. You assert with no demonstration. My philosophy is not quite as you characterize it. I am a full believer in autodiathism - the right of all men to self-determination. This does not equate to might making right. Nor does the fact that I believe in the propriety of consequences where unwise choices are acted upon. I believe in the free nature of men and of the responsibility of each man to himself and possibly those around him not to behave as if he were stupid.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 05:04 PM
    We ARE of the first type. Were it otherwise, the "state" would be unable to contain us. We are too large and far too well armed. Our problem is that we are corrupted with some very ill-considered assumptions about life and human relations. They are appealing because they speak to our weaknesses, including our vanity. I maintain that if people were freed with no recourse to a corrupt and wildly evil/misguided "state", they would shape up in short order. Those who didn't would be consumed, most likely unto death and thereby cleansing what is now a deeply polluted gene pool. The weak, of course, will hate such a turn of events, but even they will have the opportunity to become strong enough, given today's technologies. Those choosing otherwise become fair game for Darwin. So be it. I would also point out that those who take the "weak" without just cause would eventually run out of luck by picking the wrong target and being themselves reduced to ash at the hands of strong and righteous freemen. The balance would be established in accord with the mean nature of the population. At that point it is all a matter of choice. We choose, even when we don't.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 04:54 PM
    This is either disingenuous, very evil, or impossibly mistaken. No man holds such authority. I defy you to name a single man and by what virtue he may wield such power over another as a master over a chattel slave. Just one. History demonstrates that you are absolutely dead-wrong on this issue. Anarchic societies represent the majority of human societies in terms of numbers of them and years. They had been studied extensively in the nineteenth century and the literature is clear: they were generally FAR more orderly and mutually cooperative than have been the "higher" civilizations of centralized governance. If you do not believe me, I suggest you visit the library. It's all there. There were anarchic tribes that were warlike and who preyed upon the more peaceful, that is certainly true. They were, however, a distinct minority. That said, circumstances of technology are now such that now even the weak can take the strong. Firearms alone have done more to physically equalize individual humanity than any other technological development in the history of the race.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 04:36 PM
    Another false dichotomy. The absence of a "state" does not perforce result in abandoning accountability, which is in part what punishment is all about. Disallow the corruption that has lead to the world in which we now live, the presence of "government" notwithstanding, forcing the choice upon people to cowboy up or be consumed, and I believe you would surprised to see how many people would suddenly find religion. The average man behaves as an idiot not because he is one, but because the environment supports his idiotic choices, usually through the absence of commensurate consequences. Our lives are rotten with examples of how this is true. Eliminate those loopholes such that stupidity most likely earns its commensurate reward, and people would mostly stop acting as if they had brain lesions. Consider sk8ers, snowboarders, and other "extreme sports" types. I was once one of them, being founder and president of the "Ski To Die" club. I was admittedly and idiot, skiiing 60+ mph straight down double black diamond slopes as fast as gravity and friction would allow. Note how I left out "my skill", because when shit happens at those speeds and under those conditions, no amount of skill is likely to save your stupid ass from serious catastrophe. But today these young kids do what they do, it all being very impressive and very dangerous, precisely in part because they know that if they wreck themselves, the miracles of modern ER medicine will patch them back together. Back in a day where any opening of the skin was potentially lethal, not to mention more serious injuries such as broken bones, people moved with far greater caution. Our medical environment allows us to do things we were unlikely to risk just a short age ago. Back in a day where any show of disrespect to another could lead to a severe beating or even a duel, people behaved with far greater caution and formal manners around each other. Our demented, debased, and castrated interpersonal culture - the product of progressive muck-raking via... wait for it... GOVERNMENT - allows us to behave with beastly casualness and familiarity toward one another, which is why so many people regard their fellows with such deep contempt. The saddest part there is how few people recognize it as such, thinking it's all OK, which it really is not, judging by the overall result.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 03:46 PM
    Whatever odds are created by doing everything humanly possible to avoid punishing the innocent without giving up all attempts to punish the guilty, I am willing to suffer those odds because they are better than the odds of me being seriously damaged in a society that makes no attempt to punish the guilty. And what if someone such as myself is not willing to suffer those odds? Are my rights to be forcibly suborned to your desire for "justice"? You seem to be arguing based on competing harms, your contention being that getting bad guys is more important than the evil perpetrated against the sovereign rights of all men. And make no mistake about it, you are clearly in support of the violation of all the rights of all the people for the sake of false senses of safety and justice. This is madness of the first order, pal. People, on the average, and for perhaps as many as two full sigmas to either side of the mean are corrupt. They are corrupted by FAIL - Fear, Avarice, Ignorance, and Lassitude. There are very few people not corrupted along one or more of these lines of human weakness. They want what they want and most often give no care the cost, so long as their sense of comfort is satisfied, whatever that may be. We have been fed a grand lie about "justice". Sure, it's a nice-to-have item, but one does not trade freedom and the attendant rights that derive therefrom for the sake of a "nice to have". Furthermore, to suggest as you have, however tacitly, that the land would fall into chaos without a "justice system", is utter falderal. When "the state" is not busying itself with "justice" wherein innocent men are putt o the hazards of lazy men, the rest of the population is faced with a choice to either remain corrupt and allow said chaos to descend upon their lives, or they step up and take seriously their rights in all ways and under all circumstances. Those lesser corrupted people take responsibility of their own safety, their own rights and so forth, and in the absence of "the state", take care of the business of justice. In the absence of "the state" and the false authority represented there, individual people are faced with the choice of being masters of their own lives or being victims of the vicissitudes of life. This is the central problem: people want all the benefits of freedom without having to bear the fatigues of maintaining it. Pure corruption that justifies itself with such foolish notions as "efficiencies gained through specialization in the division of labor." There is nothing wrong with the notion in pure theory and even in much practice, but where the conflicting interests of human rights versus political power are concerned, the notion is absurd on its face, that assessment justified by no less than six thousands of years of recorded human history.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 03:01 AM
    My normative response is to abandon such systems precisely because they cannot guarantee justice. Positively speaking, abandonment is not going to happen because people are corrupt, wanting things that cannot be delivered. Therefore, the likely practical path is to reform what is a deeply flawed system of so-called "justice".
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 02:11 AM
    You have thus far failed to answer the question I posed twice and now for the third time: what integer number expressing the quantity of individuals for which it is acceptable to sacrifice as losses for the sake of making sure the bad guys buy the pony of justice? Let us put it as a standard rate figure: how many per 100K known crimes may be sacrificed in terms of life, limb, and liberty for the sake of serving up justice to actual criminals?
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 02:09 AM
    Nothing you have written here is objectively demonstrative of your claims. That is already done. Your assertions fail prima facie when viewed through the corrective lens of "freedom" and the "inherent, fundamental rights" of the individual. To apprehend, try, and convict an innocent man is by definition felonious. Innocent men hold every right to kill anyone and everyone attempting to bring him to injustice, of which false justice is the ultimate case. If you actually believe in the rights of men, then you cannot accept that ANY man is obliged to go quietly into the pitch black night of injustice, just because men with fancy titles and hats say so.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 02:02 AM
    If we are to retain courts, the propriety of which is questionable on its best day, we can begin by eliminating the "reasonable man" standard. Why? Because there is no objective definition of the term. It is legal bullshittery of the first order, concocted by the very same courts too lazy, inept, and thereby corrupted to do their jobs competently and honestly. The fact is that "reasonable man" is a meaningless term, but it plays well in the minds of lesser intellects, such as those who coined it. It has been employed to absolve the courts of a prosecutor's responsibility to PROVE their cases. If "reasonable doubt" is to be used as a term, and I have no problem with the words in themselves, it must perforce be given a rigorous definition to which prosecutors are to be sternly held in pursuit of their vocational duties. There can be no fucking around where such matters are concerned; not if we are to take seriously the sovereignty of the individual. Otherwise, one's talk of "freedom" and "rights" is naught but hot air, devoid of any substance. Men are either free or they are something else.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:53 AM
    Who says? Seriously? Who says that this is so? Upon what objectively provable basis do you make the assertion? The precise number is irrelevant to the underlying point that we NOT punish the innocent.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:49 AM
    And I asked where, exactly, is that point? What's the precise integer that tells us it is acceptable that we imprison, fine, execute, or otherwise damage that many innocent men? Second question: how does the notion of "acceptable losses" accord with that of freedom, and which is more important? Finally, will you be first to step up and fall upon your sword for the sake of "balance", that another innocent not be called upon to pay for a crime which he had not committed?
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:46 AM
    It would appear you have missed the point, which would be precisely the same even had he said "one million" or "ten googolplexes". If you are not familiar with "googol", see wikipedia for the skinny.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:41 AM
    False dichotomy. Other possibilities exist.
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:40 AM
    You negleted step 3a: '?' Perhaps this will help:
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-10-2018, 01:38 AM
    "Balance"? What does that mean? Is it OK to send a single innocent man to a cell or the gallows for the sake of "getting" the bad guys? Where is that line to be drawn? How many innocents, proportionally speaking, constitute "acceptable losses" for the sake of "balance"? That's some right dangerous speak you've written there. Please elaborate, because as things stand I see nothing good coming of this notion of "balance".
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-09-2018, 03:41 AM
    Well?
    51 replies | 1137 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    10-07-2018, 11:25 AM
    Going by what is written here, the Interior Sec. said "option". That is not a direct threat. Sounds like the yappy mouth of someone with no real say in US foreign policy. That aside, blockading Russian trade seems an idiotic notion on its face, all else equal. The era of Klown Diplomacy is steaming along at flank speed with no peak in sight.
    1 replies | 225 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 06:44 PM
    Oh what a tangled web we weave...
    60 replies | 1244 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 06:39 PM
    And once again the salient point wafts right past you.
    60 replies | 1244 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 04:18 PM
    Imagine it... Sotomayor can no longer cut it, or simply drops dead after an arm falls off during lesbosex or whatever. Ginsburg bursts and artery and flies first-class into the thirteenth circle of hell, constructed by Satan just for her. Breyer calls it quits and Thomas sees his chance to best ensure that at least his spot is filled with an actual human being. I'd love to see Trump place five justices, if for no other reason than to watch the lefties in full-retard apoplexy überSpazzOut mode.
    211 replies | 4373 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 04:11 PM
    EEeeewwww... You ijit. Especially for posting the gross, stomach-turning truth.
    124 replies | 3570 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 04:10 PM
    You kidding? It would be abfab. Imagine they find nothing on Kavanaugh, which is precisely was I think will be the case, but learn that she was a trash whore who'd do it with damned nearly anyone. I've read she had some 64 sex partners between HS and college. Good for her if it made her happy, but this "I'm so pure" act doesn't cut muster.
    60 replies | 1244 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 04:02 PM
    Let us hope that proves the case. I REALLY don't like it that he was involved in authoring PATRIOT. But perhaps it was a ladder climbing maneuver. Besides, when he made it he perhaps had no thought that he'd ever end up on the short list to become a SCOTUS-head. This is a REALLY big deal, career-wise and it could very conceivably alter his behavior on the bench. Only time will tell.
    60 replies | 1244 view(s)
  • osan's Avatar
    09-30-2018, 04:11 AM
    osan started a thread Machine tools... in Open Discussion
    Please pardon this mostly inappropriate post, but I thought I'd offer this here before going elsewhere. I have two lathes and a milling machine I wish to unload. They are at a friend's place and he needs the space. I have no place to put them, save the barn and that would be a death sentence for them. The fare: 1. Schaublin SV102 instrument maker's lathe. W20 spindle with about 50 collets, 4-jaw, milling attachment, back-gear, drilling tailstock, bed turret, FIMS tool post (absolute best there is), high-speed grinding attachment, 240V variable drive, separate motor with belting apparatus for milling and grinding attachments, and more. 2. Scgaublin 12 milling machine. Vertical and horizontal mill with bedway identical to SV102, allowing one to turn on the lathe and move the headstock to the mill without disturbing the work. All manner of tooling. 3 phase, variable speed, power feeds. Not been run in a long time and may need some attention to electrical, but a sound machine.
    0 replies | 82 view(s)
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
14,426
Posts Per Day
4.49
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
10
Most Recent Message
08-04-2016 07:33 AM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 09:45 AM
Join Date
12-26-2009
Referrals
1
View osan's Blog

Recent Entries

Global War On Terrorism: Are We Winning?

by osan on 03-25-2017 at 07:19 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
Short answer: If you are still fighting it you are losing it.
After 26 years, I'd have to agree.
Categories
Uncategorized

Global War On Terrorism: Are We Winning?

by osan on 03-25-2017 at 07:19 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
Short answer: If you are still fighting it you are losing it.
After 26 years, I'd have to agree.
Categories
Uncategorized

Guns and Marijuana in Missouri

by osan on 01-02-2017 at 08:51 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
"castle doctrine," which permits homeowners to use deadly force against intruders. The revised law will allow invited guests, such as babysitters, to use lethal force.
I find it amazing to consider just how hopelessly corrupt a land we are, and have been for so very long a time when I read things like this. To think not only that some people would dare usurp the authority to remove those which are the most obvious prerogatives of free men, but also that we as a people would

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

RP: Who Brought the World to the Brink of World War III?

by osan on 10-17-2016 at 11:14 PM
Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
We did.
and

Quote Originally Posted by PierzStyx View Post
Uhm, no. Not all of us. Only most of the countries involved. We few radicals and rebels do what we can to prevent it. Whether that works or not still doesn't change whether it is our fault or not.
To which I responded thusly:


The number of people out there who are putting their asses on the line is vanishingly small. My statistical assessment therefore stands. To wit...

The fact is this: we failed from the earliest days.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

How to defend liberty and property in a stateless social construct?

by osan on 04-15-2016 at 07:22 AM
Quote Originally Posted by Bryan View Post
How would you defend liberty and property in a stateless social construct? The use of private security firms is a stock answer, but let’s consider some more detail. Consider the following situations…
And it has its problems. It is a partial answer at best.


1) A band of thugs is going around robbing people, how do you defend your home from invasion?
By killing them to eliminate them from the book of immediate and potential future threats to others, including

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

10-10-2018


05-16-2018


04-06-2018


03-17-2018


03-14-2018


03-13-2018


03-07-2018


02-25-2018

  • 01:28 AM - Hidden

06-13-2017


05-08-2017


05-03-2017


04-13-2017


03-27-2017


03-04-2017


02-19-2017


01-11-2017


09-29-2016


08-01-2016



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 88 1231151 ... LastLast

10-14-2018


10-13-2018


10-12-2018


10-11-2018


10-10-2018


09-30-2018



Page 1 of 88 1231151 ... LastLast