what u talkin bout rights?

DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
I think this is where I and many of you disagree. I don't think the best plan is to discard the entire system, rather focus on what is broken and fix it. And just because there is no demonstrable affect you can observe does not mean there is none. If that were the case, we'd all be smoking cigarettes in our offices and local Wal-Marts. But what we need to be careful of is government using that as an excuse to create laws that constrict. And I agree the government can and has done that.
Click to expand...
imo there is much could be scrapped and much to keep...but we wont know which is which because we are not willing to do and have not done the hard work in court it takes to achieve both at the same time...
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
How are you going to make individuals responsible for the harm they cause...?
Click to expand...
when people are allowed to truly be responsible for themselves and other humans, that is when they will start acting like such...
slowly erode their personal responsibilities for themselves and the world around them and u will see what we are seeing these days and as it continues it will only get worse...
we can start with:
where do your essentials come from?
what part of that responsibility do u bare?
 
Jack Harer

Jack Harer

Well-Known Member
The constitution cannot convey or assign rights, but it doesn't try to either, it merely outlines what the drafters considered our rights. In the preamble of the constitution we see that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights.....Which tells me that the drafters of the constitution had in mind that our civil rights were really basic human rights, and applied to all men regardless of Flag.
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
when people are allowed to truly be responsible for themselves and other humans, that is when they will start acting like such...
slowly erode their personal responsibilities for themselves and the world around them and u will see what we are seeing these days and as it continues it will only get worse...
we can start with:
where do your essentials come from?
what part of that responsibility do u bare?
Click to expand...
Except humans have never behaved that way. We got laws and regulations precisely because people refused to be responsible for themselves.
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
Except humans have never behaved that way. We got laws and regulations precisely because people refused to be responsible for themselves.
Click to expand...
actually there was a model here on this continent from about 500 to 800+ years ago who acted in such responsible ways to themselves and to each other, and at the root of those cultures was a knowledge that all else that exists was their relative and should be respected as such etc and round and round...of course such cultures were rubbed out into extinction by those who had their own ideas of what humans were and weren't and how to force compliance etc...
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
Jack Harer said:
The constitution cannot convey or assign rights, but it doesn't try to either, it merely outlines what the drafters considered our rights. In the preamble of the constitution we see that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights.....Which tells me that the drafters of the constitution had in mind that our civil rights were really basic human rights, and applied to all men regardless of Flag.
Click to expand...
Jack the prob is that none of that works unless the court room is regularly exercised in efforts to check and balance...
when u were still walkin round in your ol bag'o bones u and i would go round and round on this and you always instead chose the path of legislation...now that your in the gr8 beyond can u see finally that if an issue is based in fact and rooted in human rights that it belongs in the court rooms, not opinion forums like elections etc...
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
DNAprotection said:
when people are allowed to truly be responsible for themselves and other humans, that is when they will start acting like such...
slowly erode their personal responsibilities for themselves and the world around them and u will see what we are seeing these days and as it continues it will only get worse...
we can start with:
where do your essentials come from?
what part of that responsibility do u bare?
Click to expand...
The bolded is a common feature of utopian thought, and I disagree with it.
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
actually there was a model here on this continent from about 500 to 800+ years ago who acted in such responsible ways to themselves and to each other, and at the root of those cultures was a knowledge that all else that exists was their relative and should be respected as such etc and round and round...of course such cultures were rubbed out into extinction by those who had their own ideas of what humans were and weren't and how to force compliance etc...
Click to expand...
The model you're speaking of has existed all over the world (to an extent--some cultures have been more responsible and less selfish than others, but irresponsibility and selfishness have certainly existed in all cultures everywhere to some extent). The move from subsistence agriculture, vast increases in human population, and the concentration of that population onto fixed land areas permanently eroded and destroyed that model.

There wasn't much of a pollution problem when people were busy hunting animals and gathering fruit, we can agree on that! People aren't content with that today. They want houses, they want cars, they want technology, and they don't know or care about where any of those things come from or the negative impacts they might cause on the environment or other people. You don't like my car spewing pollution? Fuck you, I need to get around! I assure you people in the past would have been just as selfish and irresponsible if they had access to the same lifestyle. That they didn't makes the comparison totally unfair.
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
The model you're speaking of has existed all over the world (to an extent--some cultures have been more responsible and less selfish than others, but irresponsibility and selfishness have certainly existed in all cultures everywhere to some extent). The move from subsistence agriculture, vast increases in human population, and the concentration of that population onto fixed land areas permanently eroded and destroyed that model.

There wasn't much of a pollution problem when people were busy hunting animals and gathering fruit, we can agree on that! People aren't content with that today. They want houses, they want cars, they want technology, and they don't know or care about where any of those things come from or the negative impacts they might cause on the environment or other people. You don't like my car spewing pollution? Fuck you, I need to get around! I assure you people in the past would have been just as selfish and irresponsible if they had access to the same lifestyle. That they didn't makes the comparison totally unfair.
Click to expand...
i think it might truly b helpful at this point to reread your statement above against the dialog here...

[video=youtube;LJRs2TnP9H8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJRs2TnP9H8[/video]
 
T

tokeprep

Well-Known Member
DNAprotection said:
i think it might truly b helpful at this point to reread your statement above against the dialog here...

[video=youtube;LJRs2TnP9H8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJRs2TnP9H8[/video]
Click to expand...
First of all, it's problematic to try to combine the distinct beliefs of myriad cultures into one belief. I guarantee we can identify Native American cultures that did not share the views espoused in your video. Second, how many people have chosen to live within this culture in the modern day versus embracing something else? Doesn't the answer to that make my point?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
see4 said:
I think this is where I and many of you disagree. I don't think the best plan is to discard the entire system, rather focus on what is broken and fix it. And just because there is no demonstrable affect you can observe does not mean there is none. If that were the case, we'd all be smoking cigarettes in our offices and local Wal-Marts. But what we need to be careful of is government using that as an excuse to create laws that constrict. And I agree the government can and has done that.
Click to expand...

The owner of the business should decide if smoking is allowed. The consumer that doesn't like smoking should speak with their feet. It's called choice. I'm glad you agree that there are things wrong with the system. I consider the problem to be systemic, as the system relies upon violating the non-aggression principle. So tinkering with any system that doesn't get to the root cause is like wishing mites will go away rather than exterminating them.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
Except humans have never behaved that way. We got laws and regulations precisely because people refused to be responsible for themselves.
Click to expand...
It is important to distinguish between "good" laws that restitute a real victim and laws that protect privileged dick wads. Mala prohibitum etc.

Your point about human behavior could also be taken that some people that love and seek control use bad laws to their advantage and to the disadvantage of harmless people. That's why a crime must have an actual victim or it is a bullshit law and should be ignored.

Good people should ignore bad laws and fight to get on juries to acquit people charged with victim less crimes.

It could just as easily be said we got laws so some people can control others or legally steal from them.
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
It is important to distinguish between "good" laws that restitute a real victim and laws that protect privileged dick wads. Mala prohibitum etc.

Your point about human behavior could also be taken that some people that love and seek control use bad laws to their advantage and to the disadvantage of harmless people. That's why a crime must have an actual victim or it is a bullshit law and should be ignored.

Good people should ignore bad laws and fight to get on juries to acquit people charged with victim less crimes.

It could just as easily be said we got laws so some people can control others or legally steal from them.
Click to expand...
definitely is something we should all be doing, but it must go hand in hand with stepping up 2b plaintiffs in human rights actions...law by litigating will serve us all, jury nullification without civil action will only end in more opinionated legislation that will 4sure serve a few but may not serve us all...
example:
alcohol prohibition in relation to jury nullification and the resulting legislation etc...
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
tokeprep said:
First of all, it's problematic to try to combine the distinct beliefs of myriad cultures into one belief. I guarantee we can identify Native American cultures that did not share the views espoused in your video. Second, how many people have chosen to live within this culture in the modern day versus embracing something else? Doesn't the answer to that make my point?
Click to expand...
how many people realistically have that choice? i'm not saying that people wouldn't choose your way, but many might choose otherwise if they realistically had a choice...
our style of democracy is to limit choices through the illusion that you have every choice possible lol...been in a market lately?
also i would like to see some evidence of your 'grantee' because i think the basic animistic view was held across the board in the cultures i referenced...
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
This is a negligible niche within a much larger society/economy. It does nothing to impede my point.
Click to expand...
everything is relative bro and that which u state as fact is really just a matter of opinion imo lol...but it did give u pinwom :o
i hear aloe or better yet concentrated oil from the cannabis flower will clear that right up ;)
happy new year, u can thank me latter :)
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
who asks the most relevant question pertaining to this thread and imo the most relevant question we should all be asking ourselves in this 'happy new year'...

[video=youtube;5modnIBpqTQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5modnIBpqTQ[/video]
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
answer that question honestly and youll know what time it is...who knows...

[video=youtube;a4xjr9v5ehk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4xjr9v5ehk[/video]
 
DNAprotection

DNAprotection

Well-Known Member
question...is anyone here interested in being involved (in whatever capacity) in helping to file a civil suit in fed court going to the effort to reestablishing our human rights in the area of possessing seeds and growing plants for your own use/needs outside of commerce etc?
a small window of opportunity still exists with regards to 'standing' but that window will be effectively closed when feds pass a law granting access through regulation etc...
the time to file is now...
theres some good folks here imo (not all lol) that i think could truly help to make a big difference...
a shot heard round the world is the idea, no mater the outcome of the litigation...
thanks, gooday' :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top