What do you call it?

[Tambora]

Let's play a game!

What do you call it from a legal standpoint?


What do you call a person that takes possession of your lawnmower (that you bought and paid for yourself for your own needs) without your permission simply because that person saw a need for something you had --- a lawnmower to mow his yard?
In other words, he saw something that you owned as something he needed, so he took it.

 

[glorydaz]

A dirty thief.

 

[steko]

Let's play a game!

What do you call it from a legal standpoint?


What do you call a person that takes possession of your lawnmower (that you bought and paid for yourself for your own needs) without your permission simply because that person saw a need for something you had --- a lawnmower to mow his yard?
In other words, he saw something that you owned as something he needed, so he took it.

A Democrat.

 

[Tambora]

A dirty thief.

Yeppers.

Now, what do you call it from a moral standpoint?
Still a thief, right?

 

[glorydaz]

Yeppers.

Now, what do you call it from a moral standpoint?
Still a thief, right?

Yep

 

[Tambora]

A Democrat.

hehe!
They do seem to favor that position of taking from one to give to another.

A book (Atlas Shrugged) that Clete had mentioned in another thread reminded me of the argument given at a trial that was about pro-capitalism and anti-socialism that flabbergasted the court and he won his case.

Netflix did a 3 episode drama series of the same title.

It had a whole lot of philosophical questions about objectivity and perspective that were very good arguments and showed just how oppressive and immoral socialism was.
And it had a lot to do with governments infringing upon the rights of some by taking away (ie. stealing) their property in the name of "the collective good".
He made a great case for why it was both legally abhorrent and morally unjust as well.

 

[Tambora]

Ahhh, here we go ....
Couldn't find the whole Netflix show online for free viewing, but here is a clip (11 mins).
The show didn't go into as much detail as the book, but you get the gist of the argument.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2RSGHCPoM

 

[glorydaz]

Ahhh, here we go ....
Couldn't find the whole Netflix show online for free viewing, but here is a clip (11 mins).
The show didn't go into as much detail as the book, but you get the gist of the argument.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2RSGHCPoM

That was awesome. I've read the book, but I'll have to find this on Netflix. Thanks Tam.

 

[Tambora]

That was awesome. I've read the book, but I'll have to find this on Netflix. Thanks Tam.

You're welcome.

For me, the book was a slow read.
It had a whole whole whole whole lot of just the thoughts of a character (how they viewed objects, people, ideas, etc.)
But the book also had so many one-liners that I actually REMEMBER as I read their perspective of things in an objective manner.
Here's a couple ....... (don't know if word for word, but will paraphrase) .....

"Remember, every law made can only be enforced by force."


Concerning speeches by politicians ...... "They meticulously construct sentences packed with a stream of eloquent words that end up saying nothing at all".​

 

[rexlunae]

Ahhh, here we go ....
Couldn't find the whole Netflix show online for free viewing, but here is a clip (11 mins).
The show didn't go into as much detail as the book, but you get the gist of the argument.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2RSGHCPoM

1. Are you an anarchist? Because you seem to have ruled out any means by which the government could fund itself.

2. If you're an anarchist, what meaning does the word "theft" have? You expect people to decide individually who owns what, and just behave accordingly without anyone to enforce it?

3. There's something a bit ironic about folks who are supposedly hardline believers in a sort of absolute right to ownership of property, enforced by some sort of personal honor, who are willing none-the-less to post a link to a bootlegged copy of a movie posted to YouTube. You realize that that is theft, too, right?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

1. Are you an anarchist? Because you seem to have ruled out any means by which the government could fund itself.

2. If you're an anarchist, what meaning does the word "theft" have? You expect people to decide individually who owns what, and just behave accordingly without anyone to enforce it?

3. There's something a bit ironic about folks who are supposedly hardline believers in a sort of absolute right to ownership of property, enforced by some sort of personal honor, who are willing none-the-less to post a link to a bootlegged copy of a movie posted to YouTube. You realize that that is theft, too, right?

Old GM has a REAL problem with you, pal.

 

[Jonahdog]

Let's play a game!

What do you call it from a legal standpoint?


What do you call a person that takes possession of your lawnmower (that you bought and paid for yourself for your own needs) without your permission simply because that person saw a need for something you had --- a lawnmower to mow his yard?
In other words, he saw something that you owned as something he needed, so he took it.

What is your point?

 

[Tambora]

1. Are you an anarchist?

Who gets to decide the answer?

2. If you're an anarchist, what meaning does the word "theft" have?

Just the plain ol' simplistic meaning that any child would know.

You expect people to decide individually who owns what, and just behave accordingly without anyone to enforce it?

Go ahead and give your opinion of who you expect to decide those things.
:idunno:

3. There's something a bit ironic about folks who are supposedly hardline believers in a sort of absolute right to ownership of property, enforced by some sort of personal honor,

Tell us how you decide what you own.
:idunno:

who are willing none-the-less to post a link to a bootlegged copy of a movie posted to YouTube. You realize that that is theft, too, right?

It was a 10 min clip, moron, not the movie.

 

[Tambora]

What is your point?

Maybe you shouldn't be playing this game.
You suck at it.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Who gets to decide the answer?


Just the plain ol' simplistic meaning that any child would know.


Go ahead and give your opinion of who you expect to decide those things.
:idunno:


Tell us how you decide what you own.
:idunno:


It was a 10 min clip, moron, not the movie.

Since Rex seems to think no one has 'true ownership' of anything, perhaps we can come to his home, eat all the food in his refrigerator, pack all his worldly items in HIS car (that he really cannot own) and just drive away?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Maybe you shouldn't be playing this game.
You suck at it.

J-dog has difficulty understanding simple conclusions.

 

[The Horn]

Wrong !!!! It's actually the REPUBLICANS who are thieves , because they are the ones who actually "redistribute wealth " in America .
But they do this as reverse Robin Hoods, stealing from the poor and middle class to make the rich even richer . And this is exactly what Trump is trying to do now . His whole "tax cut " promise is nothing but another GOP scam . Only the richest 1 % of Americans will benefit from it . Beware !

 

[Tambora]

Wrong !!!! It's actually the REPUBLICANS who are thieves , because they are the ones who actually "redistribute wealth " in America .
But they do this as reverse Robin Hoods, stealing from the poor and middle class to make the rich even richer . And this is exactly what Trump is trying to do now . His whole "tax cut " promise is nothing but another GOP scam . Only the richest 1 % of Americans will benefit from it . Beware !

You are getting warmer.
At least you have come to the realization that it is indeed THEFT.

 

[Zeke]

Its just discovery legalized theft for European Christians to do their dirty deeds and still discovering under that antichrist rational to this day. Lawful and legal are not the same.
So traditional Christian would be my choice, who are soiled by association.

 

[Tambora]

Its just discovery legalized theft for European Christians to do their dirty deeds and still discovering under that antichrist rational to this day. Lawful and legal are not the same.
So traditional Christian would be my choice, who are soiled by association.

They made laws that could only be enforced by force, which is how all laws are enforced.

But on what grounds is one mere man supposed to accept a law made by another mere man at any point in history?