Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
PRB trolling again. Intellectual dishonesty.
And save your pleas for me to actually post your contradiction. The contradiction is your own two thread roles in your game of intellectual dishonesty.
The phony PRB role tries to pretend he's just like the RPF member. He claims to want less government. The real PRB (the real you) however, comes along in the same thread and shows the impracticality of less government. He spends multiple posts pointing out the positive and practical results of more government, but without actually advocating more government. The real PRB (the real you) thus instructs the phony PRB (the RPF member) on his stubbornness and foolishness.
The funny thing about your game is that your practical arguments are often flawed because of lack of common sense or real world observation/experience. You said, for example, that you favor government warnings with global warming. You even said that global warming is a factor in determining whether or not you'd locate your house on a river. You say something like this about house buying, but have the nerve to say there are dumber people here and that you find happiness in ridiculing them.
Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 08-05-2014 at 07:04 PM.
Originally Posted by TheCount
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
Holy shikes... chill. Dude posted an article for discussion. I know where you're at but discuss the article not the poster. Medical isolation is an important liberty issue.
'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988
Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation
'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.
...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...
Intellectually dishonesty is when I claim to know something I don't, or don't admit what I don't know, or make $#@! up.
Save my pleas because you can't deliver? Spare you my requests?And save your pleas for me to actually post your contradiction. The contradiction is your own two thread roles in your game of intellectual dishonesty.
Where did I show less government is impractical? I mean, I could've and might've pointed out it's not perfect, but doesn't mean I don't want it.The phony PRB role tries to pretend he's just like the RPF member. He claims to want less government. The real PRB (the real you) however, comes along in the same thread and shows the impracticality of less government.
where is that???He spends multiple posts pointing out the positive and practical results of more government, but without actually advocating more government.
So you'd rather believe that I was intended to advocate for government, rather than ridicule and strawman government advocates, you hate me so much you'll do anything to believe that I am wrong and disagree with you.The real PRB (the real you) thus instructs the phony PRB (the RPF member) on his stubbornness and foolishness.
The funny thing about your game is that your practical arguments are often flawed because of lack of common sense or real world observation/experience.
Correct, as long as they're scientifically sound.You said, for example, that you favor government warnings with global warming.
Yes. What does that have to do with whether I want more government?You even said that global warming is a factor in determining whether or not you'd locate your house on a river.
Correct, there are people dumber than me, even if I am an idiot when it comes to home buying.You say something like this about house buying, but have the nerve to say there are dumber people here and that you find happiness in ridiculing them.
The article vaguely makes it appear that the guy is an illegal vagrant that also abuses heavy narcotics, while opening by labeling him a Californian.
Regardless, my own thoughts, that man should be given one of three options: (1) deportation (and if applicable suspension of any U.S. residency status he has thus far obtained until medically cleared prior to crossing back over the border); (2) if he is a permanent resident and wishes to be represented in court before a jury prior to being medically treated under compulsion, then let it be so; or (3) medically quarantined under lock-and-key until the treatment has been successfully administered.
No individual has any protected rights to run about, freely, while knowingly contaminated by an airborne pathogen.
Proudly, I count myself as part of this imagined demographic of dumbness and idiocy.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius
“They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020
Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber
No. The arrest was not contingent upon treatment. The arrest was made because he violated the law regarding isolation.
If you weren't so busy trying to bait people, then maybe you'd get it right and forego the exclamation points.
Any other articles you'd like to discuss?
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
LOL. The OP just said that his purpose in visiting RPF is entertaining himself by ridiculing people he claims are dumber than he. So knock yourself out with--uh--a discussion with someone who couldn't even bother to get the article facts right in his thread title.
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
why are you getting so stuck on the details! the point is he was arrested for not listening to other people, a violation of his freedom!
Isolation and treatment may differ in practice, but they are both acts against his own desire, so that's the point!!!!!
GOOD! And they should quarantine him lest he infect Americans with the drug-resistant TB that he has. This guy is a frickin' illegal alien carrying this infectious crap into our country. Quarantine him and then kick his ass out..Police state : If you refuse treatment, we'll arrest you! Tuberculosis patient
We used to have common sense in this country. Not anymore.
Rosas Cruz is a transient and comes from an area of Mexico known for a drug-resistant strain of TB, authorities said.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
I don't give a $#@! if he "desires" it. TB is a contagious disease that is FATAL, if untreated. And said illegal alien is from a part of Mexico where they are having problems with a DRUG-RESISTANT version of TB.
Damn straight he needs to be treated, or get his happy ass back to Mexico.
We had eradicated TB from the United States, until the illegal aliens brought it into our country.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to forcibly isolate a person just because he has a CHANCE of infecting and killing other people?
Now, the immediate response goes this way: drunk driving has to be illegal because the probability of causing an accident rises dramatically when you drink. The answer is just as simple: government in a free society should not deal in probabilities. The law should deal in actions and actions alone, and only insofar as they damage person or property. Probabilities are something for insurance companies to assess on a competitive and voluntary basis.
Legalize Drunk Driving, by Lew Rockwell.
http://archive.lewrockwell.com/rockw...nkdriving.html
Unless you can tell me how this person deserves less freedom than drivers, you're a hypocrite. Otherwise you'd be consistently for both forced isolation AND criminalizing drunk driving, which makes you a Fascist. Which one is it?
I don't pray at Lew Rockwell's feet. It's your own problem if you do.
States' rights.
You think I'm a hypocrite? That's fine. I think you are talking like a dumbass.
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
Hell, with your logic, PRB, you'd probably invite all of the African Ebola patients to come to America and send them to go shop at the mall. Heck, why not, right? Peeps have "rights" after all.
ROFLMAO
================
Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.
Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America
The Property Basis of Rights
that would be legally acceptable, but practically stupid.Hell, with your logic, PRB, you'd probably invite all of the African Ebola patients to come to America and send them to go shop at the mall. Heck, why not, right? Peeps have "rights" after all.
ROFLMAO
When you're carrying infectious agents there are sound arguments for isolation in that you are a defacto threat to the life of anyone you encounter; coughing TB in other peoples presence is akin to having unprotected sex when you know you're HIV positive; its criminal imposition onto the life of other people.
Treatment on the other hand is one's option. Nobody can force treatment on you in a free country... that doesn't change the fact that we can expect that you not impose your illness on others. So while one is contagious one should expect to be isolated. In the case of an illegal alien, one should also expect the possibility of deportation.
'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988
Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation
'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.
...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...
Free Typhoid Mary!Hell, with your logic, PRB, you'd probably invite all of the African Ebola patients to come to America and send them to go shop at the mall. Heck, why not, right? Peeps have "rights" after all.
ROFLMAO
Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this site is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.
A police state is a small price to pay for living in the freest country on earth.
Looks like the OP's trolling plan went awry. I don't see anybody here invoking the freedom suggested by the OP.
PRB's second article looks like he is trolling his imaginary friend.
Last edited by NorthCarolinaLiberty; 08-08-2014 at 01:26 AM.
Disrupt, Deny, Deflate. Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3): http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...eptive-members
The point is that he has a highly contagious disease which is fatal.If he wants to die he can go ahead and die in a cell he has no right to put other people at risk.
And then people wonder why today thousands of laws are being enacted daily and bureaucracy continues to get bigger.It is because of people like this and a suing industry.Everything does not have to be written down as a law there is such a thing as common sense.
The situation you are describing is completely different from the situation this man is in.You choose to drink,you choose to drive no one chooses to have tuberculosis,but when you have it you have no control over how you spread it.It is not like HIV where you have to decide to pass it to someone ,tuberculosis is an airborne transferred fatal disease that is mostly associated with poor living conditions .Also kids are especially susceptible to this disease.
Last edited by Demigod; 08-08-2014 at 03:12 AM.
you may choose to drive, but you didn't choose to hurt anybody when you are driving, if you did, it would just be the crime of hurting somebody, the crime of drunk driving comes before and without actually hurting somebody.And then people wonder why today thousands of laws are being enacted daily and bureaucracy continues to get bigger.It is because of people like this and a suing industry.Everything does not have to be written down as a law there is such a thing as common sense.
The situation you are describing is completely different from the situation this man is in.You choose to drink,you choose to drive no one chooses to have tuberculosis,but when you have it you have no control over how you spread it.It is not like HIV where you have to decide to pass it to someone ,tuberculosis is an airborne transferred fatal disease that is mostly associated with poor living conditions .Also kids are especially susceptible to this disease.
but unless and until you've infected somebody, you've harmed nobody. Putting people at risk is still not harming anybody, the price of freedom is you have to live with risk. Why do you have the right to limit a person's freedom just because you don't want the risk?
If you live on the first floor of an apartment building and decide to set fire to it ,because it is yours and you feel like it should the firefighters and cops wait until other apartments start to burn and people are hurt or should they stop you if they can while you are setting your apartment on fire ?
It is COMMON SENSE that it is better to prevent something that to cure it.
Should they wait? Yes, if I had it my way. But I'm pretty sure current laws say I can't burn my own house even if nobody was around.
Your idea of "common sense" is the crap that justifies pre-crime and criminalizing drunk driving, criminalizing stalkers, cyberbullies, and other VICTIMLESS crimes.It is COMMON SENSE that it is better to prevent something that to cure it.
What part of this gospel don't you understand and agree with?
The answer is just as simple: government in a free society should not deal in probabilities. The law should deal in actions and actions alone, and only insofar as they damage person or property. Probabilities are something for insurance companies to assess on a competitive and voluntary basis.
So in your definition if someone is stopped before he has managed to kill someone he can not be charged of attempt of murder because he has not in fact harmed anyone ? Because this is what this individual is doing such as the hypothetical guy starting a fire in his apartment , he is sick and he will put other people in danger but he should be let just because he has rights.
That is not how the world works and a functioning government can be established on your gospel as much the communist managed to make one on their gospels.And that is mostly because it is common sense.
Last edited by Demigod; 08-08-2014 at 12:19 PM.
YES. NO VICTIM = NO CRIME. (assuming his "attempt" has not demonstrably and physically harmed anybody in other ways).
"Just because he has rights" yeah, you $#@!ing fascist, it's just a radical concept to let a person be where he likes "just because he has rights" huh? I guess the CONSTITUTION is "just a piece of paper" to you too?Because this is what this individual is doing such as the hypothetical guy starting a fire in his apartment , he is sick and he will put other people in danger but he should be let just because he has rights.
Except I didn't invent this gospel, it's from a good from of Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, a respected leader and speaker in the libertarian movement.That is not how the world works and a functioning government can be established on your gospel
Common sense says no victim no crime.as much the communist managed to make one on their gospels.And that is mostly because it is common sense.
I agree that the law should deal in actions and not strict liability. However, if someone is carrying some infectious agent that they are aware poses imminent danger to the life of others and they proceed to interact willfully blind while culpable, is that not an assault?
Lets say I spin a six shooter Russian Roulette and point it at you. No harm no foul? I pull the trigger, nothing happens. No harm no foul?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AssaultIn common law, assault is the act of creating apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact with a person.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligenceIn criminal law, criminal negligence is one of the three general classes of mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind") element required to constitute a conventional as opposed to strict liability offense. It is defined as an act that is:
careless, inattentive, neglectful, willfully blind, or in the case of gross negligence what would have been reckless in any other defendant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CulpabilityFrom a legal perspective, culpability describes the degree of one's blameworthiness in the commission of a crime or offense. Except for strict liability crimes, the type and severity of punishment often follow the degree of culpability.
Modern criminal codes in the United States usually make distinct four degrees of culpability.
Legal definitions are:
- A person acts purposely (criminally) with respect to a material element of an offense when:
- if the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and
- if the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist.
- A person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when:
- if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and
- if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.
- A person acts recklessly with respect to a material element of an offense when he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and intent of the actor's conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.
- A person acts negligently with respect to a material element of an offense when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the material element exists or will result from his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor's failure to perceive it, considering the nature and intent of his conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.
'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988
Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation
'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.
...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...
Strict liability is a matter of intent, not whether harm is done.
it is legally defined as assault, but it doesn't mean harm was done.However, if someone is carrying some infectious agent that they are aware poses imminent danger to the life of others and they proceed to interact willfully blind while culpable, is that not an assault?
Yes. Tell me what harm was done. Prove it.Lets say I spin a six shooter Russian Roulette and point it at you. No harm no foul? I pull the trigger, nothing happens. No harm no foul?
Copying all your law school notes where they teach you how to advocate for the government? Gotta get something out of that $100K tuition bill.
All of this ignores the fact that MOST fatal car accidents are caused by sober drivers, MOST infectious deaths are not caused by Ebola or tuberculosis, MOST deaths are not caused by Russian roulette. Statistically these things are minor and should be our freedoms, banning them will not make deaths go away, just like banning guns will not eliminate murder.
And again this is not how the world works nor can it work.
but that's how liberty works and should work, you've been brainwashed too long by the state and decide you can't trust humans to be self governing and responsible, this is what's wrong with the world, people like you advocating for more government and punishing people before any harm is done.
The socialists always said something similar about their system but in the end it never will nor will it ever work. There is philosophy and than there is reality.
Last edited by Demigod; 08-08-2014 at 01:09 PM.
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us