She could've possibly made nearly 200 pigs unsalable, I think more than rock salt wouldve been fully justified.Originally Posted by SewrRatt
I am the spoon.
Awesome. Hopefully somebody unloads all 10 on her next time.
I am the spoon.
"Someone asked if our wines were vegan, to my horror I realized they were in fact vegan, so I fixed them" Maynard J. Keenan of Tool
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
Except she didn't, presumably because the buyers had a shred of common sense, which is more than I can say for many in this thread. Do you think Ron Paul would've shot this woman with anything if he were driving the truck?
Ron Paul would have shot liberty all over that bitch.
"The Patriarch"
If the truck driver had been allowed to just clock her I'd agree.
But swarming a livestock truck stopped at traffic light is TOTALLY responsible.
So you would not allow any one to stop her. And then you would not punish her for repeatedly ignoring the property owner's instructions NOT to give the pigs water.
If this was a woman who was just passing by, I might be inclined to agree that the punishment was overblown. If there were 2 libertarians involved, I"d be against the government involvement. But she is the one clamoring for government intervention on behalf of the pigs, so it is perfectly reasonable for the farmer to also ask for government intervention.
Me,on certain days I'd run her over so I could feed her to the pigs.
Instead, both parties pointed their phones at each other like millennials and threatened to sic the state on each other.
Yep, I totally said that.
The driver couldn't have known what was in the bottle, and it doesn't matter what Ron Paul would've done...dont $#@! with other people's $#@!.
I am the spoon.
I think I happen to like this solution best because its the best and perhaps only way to get a heavy handed liberal to turn into a hands off libertarian... Give them a dose of the medicine they seek to dole out on others.
If it doesn't matter to you what Ron Paul would do, you must not value his opinion. I agree that people shouldn't mess with people's stuff, (not sure why you censored the words mess and stuff, though) but that doesn't mean you should react to every minor interference with violence.
If you read the whole comment, in the next sentence he states that his wines are vegan.
"Someone asked if our wines were vegan, to my horror I realized they were in fact vegan, so I fixed them" Maynard J. Keenan of Tool
It's kinda interesting that he would make vegan wine, as a meat-eater, especially if vegans only make up 2 percent of the population... maybe he's trying to appeal to everyone? Whatever.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
wouldnt all wine be considered vegan?
Thank you for being sane.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
No, actually, if I'm not mistaken most wines contain a few animal products. I'm no expert, but here's an article on this: http://www.thekitchn.com/as-it-is-vegan-week-136676
Last edited by lilymc; 09-09-2016 at 11:23 AM.
“I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”
― Henry David Thoreau
Yeah I just looked it up on Frey's website... Had no idea.. well I like Frey anyway.. theyre organic and have no sulfites... though with the little amount of alcohol i drink its probably no big deal
Exactly. Once you start $#@!ing with other people's stuff, you do not get to whine about the severity of the penalty. According to libertarianism, one of the proper functions of government is the protection of private property. That's pretty much a useless function if we do not believe that we have to wait until that property is damaged before the state can take action.
That is why the statues covering battery also include assault.
According to your logic, since you reject proportionality, if a kid sits on the fender of your car it's 100% okay to blow them away with an RPG. After all, someone is doing something to your stuff, and they don't get to whine. They could've dented that fender. They might be carrying anthrax spores.
This isn't violence - it's opposing forces. What should they do - ask her to please stop? Because they already did that.
Damn straight.
I am the spoon.
And using your logic, the driver has zero right to defend his freight against the persistent enemy. You won't let him use force, you won't let him appeal to authority. He asked her to stop. She refused.
She wants the court trial - she said so. So what exactly is the issue again?
Isn't Canada a Monarchy? With all of this "libertarian" speak, it should be noted that there are no inalienable rights in Canada. The Parliament, Provincial Legislatures, and judges are not limited. They have the unchecked power to limit or take away any rights or freedoms from Canadians much like Australia and other countries. It's a false dichotomy to make comparisons based on our form of government where inalienable actually do exist. The only legit argument (at least in this circumstance) would be one benchmarked on natural rights.
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 09-09-2016 at 12:24 PM.
Just like if someone pulls a knife on you. You don't wait to get stabbed before you react. Their life was forfeit the moment they made clear their intention to take yours.
I am the spoon.
Here's the real world definition of assault:
Assault
At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact.
An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/AssaultHow classy of you.Sadly for you, nobody cares enough about your opinion to even bother asking you what you think the punishment should be .
Liberty folks in the U.S. only care about liberty in the U.S.?
Oh I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that my disapproval for killing or maiming people just for doing something dumb that didn't actually harm anyone was tyrannical. Were your feelings hurt? Because I don't remember preventing anyone from doing anything. Your suggestion of him clocking her was actually one of the closest to sane responses in the thread, although other viable responses would've been simply ignoring the hippies or brandishing. Far be it from anyone around here to consider any response other than "CALL IN THE SWAT TEAM!" or "WATERBOARD HER WITH ACID!"
They do this all the time because the caged pigs are thirsty.
What the hell is the matter with you?
You're really reaching.
I'm going to start a thread on this at some point. I just haven't thought on it. It doesn't pertain to you or your thread here. You just kind of reminded me that I want to do that.
Last edited by Natural Citizen; 09-09-2016 at 12:38 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us