What "rights" does nature give us?

[LibertyLemming]

Somalia is just as statist as we are, they just have pirates and Al-Qaeda instead of the NYPD and the IRS.

 

[Koios]

Somalia is just as statist as we are, they just have pirates and Al-Qaeda instead of the NYPD and the IRS.

Hardly. Here we have rights, even when ignored by individuals. You can come to my home, and do with me what you wish and take what you wish. But we have penalties, because OUR SOCIETY has made it clear that my right to you not killing me or stealing my stuff is vastly more important than your right to kill and steal from me. And vice versa.

But let's say some law-breaker does that to you or me. (ignores BUT DOES NOT REMOVE your/my rights, because we have fucking LAWS and mechanisms to support and protect them.) Our police will hunt them down, and if found our criminal justice system will make an example of them. (we penalize and do not reform) So it's a very remote risk in America, that may never happen to you, me or anyone we know.

In Somalia they kill you, and take your stuff. Or you can do it to them if you have the upper hand. And the only penalty is being on the losing end. So there, the risk of dying or having your shit taken is VERY HIGH. In fact, you'd almost assuredly have it happen to you, or me, and everyone we know, should we spend much time there.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Somalia is just as statist as we are, they just have pirates and Al-Qaeda instead of the NYPD and the IRS.

Hardly. Here we have rights, even when ignored by individuals. You can come to my home, and do with me what you wish and take what you wish. But we have penalties, because OUR SOCIETY has made it clear that my right to you not killing me or stealing my stuff is vastly more important than your right to kill and steal from me. And vice versa.

But let's say some law-breaker does that to you or me. (ignores BUT DOES NOT REMOVE your/my rights, because we have fucking LAWS and mechanisms to support and prtect them.) Our police will hunt them down, and if found our criminal justice system will make an example of them. (we penalize and do not reform) So it's a very remote risk in America, that that will ever happen to you, me or anyone we know.

In Somalia they kill you, and take your stuff. Or you can do it to them if you have the upper hand. And the only penalty is being on the losing end. So there, the risk of dying or having your shit taken is VERY HIGH. In fact, you'd almost assuredly have it happen to you, or me, and everyone we know, should we spend much time there.

You do realize our intentional homicide rate is almost 4 times as high as Somalia's right?

 

[Koios]

Somalia is just as statist as we are, they just have pirates and Al-Qaeda instead of the NYPD and the IRS.

Hardly. Here we have rights, even when ignored by individuals. You can come to my home, and do with me what you wish and take what you wish. But we have penalties, because OUR SOCIETY has made it clear that my right to you not killing me or stealing my stuff is vastly more important than your right to kill and steal from me. And vice versa.

But let's say some law-breaker does that to you or me. (ignores BUT DOES NOT REMOVE your/my rights, because we have fucking LAWS and mechanisms to support and prtect them.) Our police will hunt them down, and if found our criminal justice system will make an example of them. (we penalize and do not reform) So it's a very remote risk in America, that that will ever happen to you, me or anyone we know.

In Somalia they kill you, and take your stuff. Or you can do it to them if you have the upper hand. And the only penalty is being on the losing end. So there, the risk of dying or having your shit taken is VERY HIGH. In fact, you'd almost assuredly have it happen to you, or me, and everyone we know, should we spend much time there.

You do realize our intentional homicide rate is almost 4 times as high as Somalia's right?

No. And neither do you. It's a fucking anarchy at present, and their Somalia CDC-equivalent is not operational. But undoubtedly, some retarded fucking Libertarian blog, feeding horseshit to you abject morons, is all giddy as shit about some place with no effective government and just dying to come up with reasons it's a peach of society.

How stupid can you people get? I am in utter fucking astonishment, no shit.

Whew.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Hardly. Here we have rights, even when ignored by individuals. You can come to my home, and do with me what you wish and take what you wish. But we have penalties, because OUR SOCIETY has made it clear that my right to you not killing me or stealing my stuff is vastly more important than your right to kill and steal from me. And vice versa.

But let's say some law-breaker does that to you or me. (ignores BUT DOES NOT REMOVE your/my rights, because we have fucking LAWS and mechanisms to support and prtect them.) Our police will hunt them down, and if found our criminal justice system will make an example of them. (we penalize and do not reform) So it's a very remote risk in America, that that will ever happen to you, me or anyone we know.

In Somalia they kill you, and take your stuff. Or you can do it to them if you have the upper hand. And the only penalty is being on the losing end. So there, the risk of dying or having your shit taken is VERY HIGH. In fact, you'd almost assuredly have it happen to you, or me, and everyone we know, should we spend much time there.

You do realize our intentional homicide rate is almost 4 times as high as Somalia's right?

No. And neither do you. It's a fucking anarchy at present, and their Somalia CDC-equivalent is not operational. But undoubtedly, some retarded fucking Libertarian blog, feeding horseshit to you abject morons, is all giddy as shit about some place with no effective government and just dying to come up with reasons it's a peach of society.

How stupid can you people get? I am in utter fucking astonishment, no shit.

Whew.

Actually I took the figure from the 2012 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime report.

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls

Somalia: 1.5
USA: 4.8

I will say that I am highly skeptical of anything the UN or any government publishes.

 

[Koios]

You do realize our intentional homicide rate is almost 4 times as high as Somalia's right?

No. And neither do you. It's a fucking anarchy at present, and their Somalia CDC-equivalent is not operational. But undoubtedly, some retarded fucking Libertarian blog, feeding horseshit to you abject morons, is all giddy as shit about some place with no effective government and just dying to come up with reasons it's a peach of society.

How stupid can you people get? I am in utter fucking astonishment, no shit.

Whew.

Actually I took the figure from the 2012 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime report.

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls

Somalia: 1.5
USA: 4.8

I will say that I am highly skeptical of anything the UN or any government publishes.

It's ridiculous. No one knows. They have no reporting now that the government is defunct, and leading up to being irrelevant, we can assume reporting was spotty in the "good" times.

Meanwhile, tell a Righty Retard about US vs. UK gun death rates, and the first thing they'll point out is UK reporting of crime is different and insufficient. Yet, bet me they don't think Somalia reporting is spot on, since criminals are so good about keeping track of that shit, and seeing it's reported. Yeah; that's the ticket!!!

Un

Fucking

Believable

How do you people dress yourselves?

 

[LibertyLemming]

okay well you stand by your argument with no evidence and ill stand by mine. good day

 

[Koios]

okay well you stand by your argument with no evidence and ill stand by mine. good day

What "evidence" would you like? Myriad published reports of death tolls there, from the civil war, range from 300,000 to 350,000 to 400,00 to 500,000 and more, even. Pick a number, because NO ONE KNOWS!!!! It's round numbers and all over the fucking map. (no shit; Google it, and have a ball looking at the wide-ranging, round-number-GUESSES)

Now back in America, with a fucntioning government and reporting and shit, since criminal justice keeps tabs on everything and BATF, CDC, Census and myriad others have solid fucking data, that's neither a round number (guess) nor all over the map. Just slight variations in how the data is parsed (categorized). Ergo, example from CDC ...

"Violence-related firearm deaths remain an important public health concern in the United States. During 2006–2007, a total of 25,423 firearm homicides and 34,235 firearm suicides occurred among U.S. residents (1). These national totals include 4,166 firearm homicides and 1,446 firearm suicides among youths aged 10–19 years; the rate of firearm homicides among youths slightly exceeded the rate among persons of all ages. This report presents statistics on firearm homicides and firearm suicides for major metropolitan areas and cities, with an emphasis on youths aged 10–19 years in recognition of the ..."

Anything like that on Somalia? Anything even close to that?

 

[LibertyLemming]

okay well you stand by your argument with no evidence and ill stand by mine. good day

What "evidence" would you like? Myriad published reports of death tolls there, from the civil war, from 300,000 to 350,000 to 400,00 to 500,000? Pick a number, because NO ONE KNOWS!!!! It's round numbers all over the fucking map. (no shit; Google it, and have a ball looking at the wide-ranging, round-number-GUESSES)

Now back in America, with a fucntioning government and reporting and shit, since criminal justice keeps tabs on everything and BATF, CDC, Census and myriad others have solid fucking data, that's neither a round number (guess) nor all over the map. Just slight variations in how the data is parsed (categorized). Ergo, example from CDC ...

"Violence-related firearm deaths remain an important public health concern in the United States. During 2006–2007, a total of 25,423 firearm homicides and 34,235 firearm suicides occurred among U.S. residents (1). These national totals include 4,166 firearm homicides and 1,446 firearm suicides among youths aged 10–19 years; the rate of firearm homicides among youths slightly exceeded the rate among persons of all ages. This report presents statistics on firearm homicides and firearm suicides for major metropolitan areas and cities, with an emphasis on youths aged 10–19 years in recognition of the ..."

Anything like that on Somalia? Anything even close to that?

we had a civil war once. more were killed. more people die here more people are imprisoned here. we have enslaved, we kill innocents overseas. quit acting like we are so superior.

 

[Koios]

okay well you stand by your argument with no evidence and ill stand by mine. good day

What "evidence" would you like? Myriad published reports of death tolls there, from the civil war, from 300,000 to 350,000 to 400,00 to 500,000? Pick a number, because NO ONE KNOWS!!!! It's round numbers all over the fucking map. (no shit; Google it, and have a ball looking at the wide-ranging, round-number-GUESSES)

Now back in America, with a fucntioning government and reporting and shit, since criminal justice keeps tabs on everything and BATF, CDC, Census and myriad others have solid fucking data, that's neither a round number (guess) nor all over the map. Just slight variations in how the data is parsed (categorized). Ergo, example from CDC ...

"Violence-related firearm deaths remain an important public health concern in the United States. During 2006–2007, a total of 25,423 firearm homicides and 34,235 firearm suicides occurred among U.S. residents (1). These national totals include 4,166 firearm homicides and 1,446 firearm suicides among youths aged 10–19 years; the rate of firearm homicides among youths slightly exceeded the rate among persons of all ages. This report presents statistics on firearm homicides and firearm suicides for major metropolitan areas and cities, with an emphasis on youths aged 10–19 years in recognition of the ..."

Anything like that on Somalia? Anything even close to that?

we had a civil war once. more were killed. more people die here more people are imprisoned here. we have enslaved, we kill innocents overseas. quit acting like we are so superior.

Good to know. Thanks.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Keep voting for thieves and killers and then getting on your high horse and criticizing other countries.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is there a reason no one has challenged my premise that society always limits rights?

Because doing it the 85th time is no more likely to bear fruit than the 84 times previous.

Now then. If we guarantee your right to privacy (bring me to trial and sue my ass should I divulge a secret about you and disseminate it against your specific instructions that it remain private, for example) or you have the freedom to say what you wish, and associate with whom you wish, print what you wish, etc .. THAT LIMITS YOUR RIGHTS???

You keep pointing out who society stops people from doing things you think they shouldn't do, which is why you argue that rights come from those limits.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

For example, it's easy to address QM's assertions, which I'll do now and bet you each and every point I make is utterly ignored, by her, and you ... here goes:

This is going to be really stupid.

QM: If we accept the premise that rights are a construct of organization and politics then every slave revolt in history was wrong because organized rule/policies creates slavery, not freedom. The more organized a society becomes, the less freedom an individual has, and the fewer rights are accorded to people.

Me: No. They did not have rights, which is why the revolts were both illegal and put down. In fact, they didn't have those rights, even in Africa, since despite misconceptions, slavers did not run through the jungle snagging natives; they dealt with chiefs, who sold undesireables within their tribes as well as those captured from other tribes. The rights of slaves to be free came when societies that had slavery abolished it and granted rights to them.

You did not even address the issue, what a surprise.

Was slavery right or was it wrong?

QM: The only way authority can protect me from random violence is by taking away my rights. They need to be able to check into everything everyone is doing, thus they ignore my right to privacy. They need to make sure people are not plotting to kill me, so they ignore my right not to be subject to unreasonable search. There is no way for an authoritarian society to protect society unless they violate personal rights. This can easily be demonstrated by looking around the world and seeing that the societies with most oppressive governments also happen to have the lowest crime rates.

Me: That's simply wrong. While nothing can guarantee you will be free of random violence, without our criminal justice system and government making it illegal and punishing law-breakers, violence would run amock, putting you at far greater risk of random and even deliberate violence.

You have argued that police exist to protect me and that the threat of retaliation protects people's rights. Yet you now admit that it doesn't actually work that way, then you argue that crime runs amok in societies without laws. The really interesting thing is that none of that even addresses the part of my post you quoted.

Let me try to make it simple for you, the only way the state can protect me is by ignoring my rights.

QM: Free societies realize this, and use the threat of punishment to deter crime. The deterence you refer to does not protect my rights, it protects society from individuals that ignore the rules. Authority cannot protect rights, all it can do is punish those who violate the rules about not violating others rights.

Me: Our and other modern nations do know this; and we each have varying degrees of freedom to do as we wish. I can smoke pot in the Netherlands, but not here. We have freedom from religion and of religion, which the UK lacks, and so on and so on. But the key is the system of authority within the polities (governments), without which we'd be more like Somalia, where no functioning government is in place, currently; and thus the notion of rights to person and property is a joke, in and around Somalia.

I have as much freedom as I desire to take. Society doesn't like some of my choices, and even makes them illegal at times. Strangely enough, no law that criminalizes personal choice has ever stopped people from making those choices.

 

[Koios]

Is there a reason no one has challenged my premise that society always limits rights?

Because doing it the 85th time is no more likely to bear fruit than the 84 times previous.

Now then. If we guarantee your right to privacy (bring me to trial and sue my ass should I divulge a secret about you and disseminate it against your specific instructions that it remain private, for example) or you have the freedom to say what you wish, and associate with whom you wish, print what you wish, etc .. THAT LIMITS YOUR RIGHTS???

You keep pointing out who society stops people from doing things you think they shouldn't do, which is why you argue that rights come from those limits.

I'll ask again: does what I described, limit your rights? You said government only limits rights, and I argue many are protected by government, without which the rights would non existent.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Leeson is a fucking loon. Also an economist, with nothing to say about rights. So even if some possible silver lining exists, economically, (absurd) try telling a Somali Pirate about your fucking rights, natural or otherwise, and then get ready to meet your maker.

Astonishing.

Either way you compare a country to what it came from not to other countries while it is transitioning.

Most who advocate anarchy acknowledge that without a moral society almost not form of society is going to function perfectly.

No. Back to rights. What rights do you have in Somalia that we lack? Got anything?

My rights exist whether you, or the government, like it or not. That makes the real question what natural rights do we have in the US that do not exist in Somalia?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Somalia is just as statist as we are, they just have pirates and Al-Qaeda instead of the NYPD and the IRS.

Hardly. Here we have rights, even when ignored by individuals. You can come to my home, and do with me what you wish and take what you wish. But we have penalties, because OUR SOCIETY has made it clear that my right to you not killing me or stealing my stuff is vastly more important than your right to kill and steal from me. And vice versa.

But let's say some law-breaker does that to you or me. (ignores BUT DOES NOT REMOVE your/my rights, because we have fucking LAWS and mechanisms to support and prtect them.) Our police will hunt them down, and if found our criminal justice system will make an example of them. (we penalize and do not reform) So it's a very remote risk in America, that that will ever happen to you, me or anyone we know.

In Somalia they kill you, and take your stuff. Or you can do it to them if you have the upper hand. And the only penalty is being on the losing end. So there, the risk of dying or having your shit taken is VERY HIGH. In fact, you'd almost assuredly have it happen to you, or me, and everyone we know, should we spend much time there.

You do realize our intentional homicide rate is almost 4 times as high as Somalia's right?

That can't be, laws are the only thing that keep people from killing each other.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Because doing it the 85th time is no more likely to bear fruit than the 84 times previous.

Now then. If we guarantee your right to privacy (bring me to trial and sue my ass should I divulge a secret about you and disseminate it against your specific instructions that it remain private, for example) or you have the freedom to say what you wish, and associate with whom you wish, print what you wish, etc .. THAT LIMITS YOUR RIGHTS???

You keep pointing out who society stops people from doing things you think they shouldn't do, which is why you argue that rights come from those limits.

I'll ask again: does what I described, limit your rights? You said government only limits rights, and I argue many are protected by government, without which the rights would non existent.

Yes.

 

[Koios]

For example, it's easy to address QM's assertions, which I'll do now and bet you each and every point I make is utterly ignored, by her, and you ... here goes:

This is going to be really stupid.

QM: If we accept the premise that rights are a construct of organization and politics then every slave revolt in history was wrong because organized rule/policies creates slavery, not freedom. The more organized a society becomes, the less freedom an individual has, and the fewer rights are accorded to people.

Me: No. They did not have rights, which is why the revolts were both illegal and put down. In fact, they didn't have those rights, even in Africa, since despite misconceptions, slavers did not run through the jungle snagging natives; they dealt with chiefs, who sold undesireables within their tribes as well as those captured from other tribes. The rights of slaves to be free came when societies that had slavery abolished it and granted rights to them.

1. You did not even address the issue, what a surprise.

2. Was slavery right or was it wrong?

QM: The only way authority can protect me from random violence is by taking away my rights. They need to be able to check into everything everyone is doing, thus they ignore my right to privacy. They need to make sure people are not plotting to kill me, so they ignore my right not to be subject to unreasonable search. There is no way for an authoritarian society to protect society unless they violate personal rights. This can easily be demonstrated by looking around the world and seeing that the societies with most oppressive governments also happen to have the lowest crime rates.

Me: That's simply wrong. While nothing can guarantee you will be free of random violence, without our criminal justice system and government making it illegal and punishing law-breakers, violence would run amock, putting you at far greater risk of random and even deliberate violence.

3. You have argued that police exist to protect me and that the threat of retaliation protects people's rights. Yet you now admit that it doesn't actually work that way, then you argue that crime runs amok in societies without laws. The really interesting thing is that none of that even addresses the part of my post you quoted.

4. Let me try to make it simple for you, the only way the state can protect me is by ignoring my rights.

QM: Free societies realize this, and use the threat of punishment to deter crime. The deterence you refer to does not protect my rights, it protects society from individuals that ignore the rules. Authority cannot protect rights, all it can do is punish those who violate the rules about not violating others rights.

Me: Our and other modern nations do know this; and we each have varying degrees of freedom to do as we wish. I can smoke pot in the Netherlands, but not here. We have freedom from religion and of religion, which the UK lacks, and so on and so on. But the key is the system of authority within the polities (governments), without which we'd be more like Somalia, where no functioning government is in place, currently; and thus the notion of rights to person and property is a joke, in and around Somalia.

5. I have as much freedom as I desire to take. Society doesn't like some of my choices, and even makes them illegal at times. Strangely enough, no law that criminalizes personal choice has ever stopped people from making those choices.

1. I did, but obviously you have no response.

2. It's niether, as far as nature is concerned. But in some societies it was right for a time. Now in nearly every society it is wrong. In my opinion it is very, very wrong, despite the fact that nature has no qualms about me enslaving any person or animal I can control.

3. What the fuck?

4. All you made simple is your unsustantiated claim, which I would have known was simple and unsubstantiated, even had you not prefaced it as such.

5. Pray what you think are your rights do not violate those not granted to you in America, which in fact are the only rights you have, while here. You might have fewer still in Mexico.

 

[Koios]

You keep pointing out who society stops people from doing things you think they shouldn't do, which is why you argue that rights come from those limits.

I'll ask again: does what I described, limit your rights? You said government only limits rights, and I argue many are protected by government, without which the rights would non existent.

Yes.

How so?

 

[Koios]

Either way you compare a country to what it came from not to other countries while it is transitioning.

Most who advocate anarchy acknowledge that without a moral society almost not form of society is going to function perfectly.

No. Back to rights. What rights do you have in Somalia that we lack? Got anything?

My rights exist whether you, or the government, like it or not. That makes the real question what natural rights do we have in the US that do not exist in Somalia?

No they don't. Take away our laws, and pray you do not have something I want, which I can take from you, killing you if I have to, with impunity. (Note that last word. Punative measures and mechanisms supporting them are the only thing protecting your rights.)