Inside the mind of a "law and order" Republican

phill4paul · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
A little Revolution now and then....

Can't have that with a law and order police state, now can we? To do so would be a declaration that the forced law and order is unlawful and disorderly, now isn't it?

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

phill4paul said:
Can't have that with a law and order police state, now can we? To do so would be a declaration that the forced law and order is unlawful and disorderly, now isn't it?

I have never been in favor of the "law and order police state", all of my comments have favored a reduction of police numbers and activities.
But advocating revolution against tyrannical corruption of the law and law enforcement agencies is not a declaration that the enforced law and order is unlawful and disorderly.

Madison320 · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
Your unfair Neg-Rep and double response will not provoke me into further debate. You Anarchists can't learn, your idiotic theories would only lead to tribal savagery, subjective justice and the strong preying upon the weak. I will not discuss this further.

But what about Somalia?

The only thing worse than police are no police.

Madison320 · Jul 21, 2017

phill4paul said:
I'm not an anarchist. Nice try at painting me into a corner. Yeah, I guess we are done.

Is this the new thing? I see a lot of people lately who claim they are not anarchists but they are against a police force and an army.

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

Madison320 said:
But what about Somalia?

The only thing worse than police are no police.

Sports matches don't need umpires right?

phill4paul · Jul 21, 2017

Madison320 said:
Is this the new thing? I see a lot of people lately who claim they are not anarchists but they are against a police force and an army.

I dunno, is it? I don't get out much. I'm not an anarchist. I'm against governmental policing. I'm against a standing army. I'm pretty sure that I share values with those that fought the American Revolution. So...I don't think it is a very new concept.

TheCount · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
I have never been in favor of the "law and order police state", all of my comments have favored a reduction of police numbers and activities.

I don't even have to leave the front page to find a counter example.

Swordsmyth said:
By that logic you can't catch any criminal, if the illegals leave the sanctuary cities they will be in jurisdictions that cooperate with ICE.

More enforcement will lead to decreased illegal activity.

Madison320 · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
Sports matches don't need umpires right?

Yup. That's a good one. I used to have all sorts of intricate arguments with anarchists but I got tired of it. Now my main argument is just that it's impossible. Government, in one form or another, always exists.

Madison320 · Jul 21, 2017

phill4paul said:
I dunno, is it? I don't get out much. I'm not an anarchist. I'm against governmental policing. I'm against a standing army. I'm pretty sure that I share values with those that fought the American Revolution. So...I don't think it is a very new concept.

What do you think government should do?

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

TheCount said:
I don't even have to leave the front page to find a counter example.

I was referring to my comments on this thread, the fact that I want enforcement of immigration laws that have been deliberately ignored for decades is not "being in favor of 'the law and order police state'".

tod evans · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
I was referring to my comments on this thread, the fact that I want enforcement of immigration laws that have been deliberately ignored for decades is not "being in favor of 'the law and order police state'".

Government caused problems aren't going to be fixed by government...

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

tod evans said:
Government caused problems aren't going to be fixed by government...

That depends on how you think government caused the problem, omission or commission.

tod evans · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
That depends on how you think government caused the problem, omission or commission.

No it doesn't.

More government isn't going to fix government, period.

Arguing semantics is silly.

phill4paul · Jul 21, 2017

Madison320 said:
What do you think government should do?

Depends. Federal, State, County or local? At any length only that for which it can be voluntarily funded and abided.

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

tod evans said:
No it doesn't.

More government isn't going to fix government, period.

Arguing semantics is silly.

If government failed to do a job that it is supposed to do then if it does that job it fixes the problem. QED

TheCount · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
I was referring to my comments on this thread, the fact that I want enforcement of immigration laws that have been deliberately ignored for decades is not "being in favor of 'the law and order police state'".

Immigration enforcement by ICE in cities in the interior of the United States is police enforcement and part of the"law and order police state"

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

TheCount said:
Immigration enforcement by ICE in cities in the interior of the United States is police enforcement and part of the"law and order police state"

The "law and order police state" is whatever you want it to be?
If you mean that the "law and order police state" is having police and the law being enforced then I stand guilty as charged, but that is not what it is taken to mean in ordinary conversation, it is used to describe big brother always watching and pouncing on the smallest infraction, with too many laws to keep track of, and "police presence" omnipresent to keep the population submissive etc.

tod evans · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
If government failed to do a job that it is supposed to do then if it does that job it fixes the problem. QED

"Government' has literally semi loads of rules-n-regulations.

So many that even intelligent people couldn't read and understand a fraction of them over a 20 year career..

Supporting another 20 years cycle of even more government to suck pensions and accomplish little for too much money is a fools game.

Government isn't going to fix government because government works just fine if you're part of it.....

Try to define the 'job' of government...........Just one segment..........Then think about all the other segments of government that exist to support/justify and finance that one segment to do one thing.......If you get through that exercise then try to determine if that segment you looked at does its 'job' well.......Does it do its 'job' cost effectively?

Like I keep saying;

More government isn't going to fix government....

Swordsmyth · Jul 21, 2017

tod evans said:
"Government' has literally semi loads of rules-n-regulations.

So many that even intelligent people couldn't read and understand a fraction of them over a 20 year career..

Supporting another 20 years cycle of even more government to suck pensions and accomplish little for too much money is a fools game.

Government isn't going to fix government because government works just fine if you're part of it.....

Try to define the 'job' of government...........Just one segment..........Then think about all the other segments of government that exist to support/justify and finance that one segment to do one thing.......If you get through that exercise then try to determine if that segment you looked at does its 'job' well.......Does it do its 'job' cost effectively?

Like I keep saying;

More government isn't going to fix government....

Another Anarchist, this conversation is over.

tod evans · Jul 21, 2017

Swordsmyth said:
Another Anarchist, this conversation is over.

Fuck you man.

I didn't start calling names or trying to hang labels on you.

This is the kind of shit that'll get you knocked on your ass in person.

Inside the mind of a "law and order" Republican

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads