Would you rather live without the law?

You don't need laws, if you have guns.

If you have the laws, and I have the guns, I win.

a reply to: Annee

NO!

I do not support anarchy.

Well most of us don't, but would you rather live without law?
And by our past encounters, I surmise that you would.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Annee

NO!

I do not support anarchy.

Well most of us don't, but would you rather live without law?
And by our past encounters, I surmise that you would.

Religious law?

No.

No victim. ...No crime. ..
Common sense laws are really all that we need to survive.

a reply to: Annee


How bout Gods law? Surly you don't count them as one
in the same?

originally posted by: JHumm
No victim. ...No crime. ..
Common sense laws are really all that we need to survive.

I agree one hundred percent.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Annee


How bout Gods law? Surly you don't count them as one
in the same?

No!

a reply to: Annee

A very honest answer indeed.

One law is all that is needed.

The Silver Rule

Do not do unto other that which you would not have done unto you.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Annee

A very honest answer indeed.

That is NO! to God's law, in case there was any confusion.

No to religion. No to any God law.

originally posted by: TheArrow
One law is all that is needed.

The Silver Rule

Do not do unto other that which you would not have done unto you.

Requires others to do or not do the same.

I can't even get that in a Family of 5.

Idealism is a nice word.

a reply to: randyvs

So if you follow me, what good does it do us to have any government at all? When
in an anarchy you know who you can and can not trust. And by the
rule of law many a wolf hides, cloaked in sheeps clothing.

Absolutely. The bureaucratic aspects of law and order we can dispense with. Thats the sheep's clothing. The "hide", if you will.

People know how to behave if you let them. If you pressure them to conform, stripping their good will then they may became the problem the law fears. Hey, I think they plan it that way.

Sort of self-fulfilling.

Lack of centralized control isn't anarchy. Anarchy results from too much law and order.

a reply to: Annee

No confusion at all my good member.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: randyvs

So if you follow me, what good does it do us to have any government at all? When
in an anarchy you know who you can and can not trust. And by the
rule of law many a wolf hides, cloaked in sheeps clothing.

Absolutely. The bureaucratic aspects of law and order we can dispense with. Thats the sheep's clothing. The "hide", if you will.

People know how to behave if you let them. If you pressure them to conform, stripping their good will then they may became the problem the law fears. Hey, I think they plan it that way.

Sort of self-fulfilling.

Lack of centralized control isn't anarchy. Anarchy results from too much law and order.

I read every one of your posts I come across. And tend to believe we think
alike on wide range.

originally posted by: randyvs

originally posted by: JHumm
No victim. ...No crime. ..
Common sense laws are really all that we need to survive.

I agree one hundred percent.

Thank you. We would be a more productive nation if our laws were from common sense, and if more people used common sense we would need far less laws on the books . But unfortunately our lawmakers seem to have lost a great deal of common sense when they took office, if they would actually listen to what the people who put them in office want we could really get something done but money changes who they represent, sadly.

The real laws are customs that humans naturally follow.

Laws of custom are the default settings of human groups.

Most people are smart enough to understand that if murder is disregarded, then their own murder is more likely.

Law is a way to keep life reasonably safe and predictable.

The problem with law is the authority. Mission creep gives the lawful authority more and more power.

Anarchy means "No State or No Ruler".

Law is from socializing over millennia, not from government in particular.


Found this quote page, which seems to me inline with the general area of discussion.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke

"Tyranny is always better organized than freedom." -- Charles Peguy.

"There is no substitute for a militant freedom. The only alternative is submission and slavery." -- Calvin Coolidge

www.freedomkeys.com...

Here are some law ones, way down the page

"The more prohibitions there are, the poorer the people will be. The more laws are promulgated, the more thieves and bandits there will be." -- Lao-tzu, The Tao Te Ching (believed written in China, 6th century BC).

"An oppressive government is much worse than a man-eating tiger." -- Kong Fu-Dzuh ("Confucious")

"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws." -- Tacitus, Roman senator and historian (A.D. c.56-c.115)

a reply to: randyvs

You're making it sound black or white.

There needs to be rules. But only the essential rules that would make us good people.

Don't hurt or kill
Don't steal
Don't damage others property.
etc etc

I don't expect to see parents arrested for taking their kids on holiday during term time.

Or people arrested for growing their own food or collecting their own water.

Land owners refusing to give up their land are forced out.

People selling loose cigarettes are murdered by police

Protesters are criminilised and assaulted.

Today an owner of a 9mm pistol is a normal contributing member of society. Tomorrow he may be a criminal because of a change in the law.

Should he refuse to give that gun up as he believes in his right to self defense he will be placed in prison.

These are laws I do not agree with.

And along with these laws comes terrible excuses and explanations which the public buy hook, line and sinker!

And I find myself on here infuriated by the morons who defend these laws and defend the government because they believe the sh!t that they are told.

I will teach my kids not to hurt people or steal from people. Not to be rude or blatantly offensive. But to speak their mind and stick up for themselves.

If they get in trouble at school for defending themselves against a bully. They will not be in trouble with me.

If they get in trouble for growing their own vegetables and giving some to their neighbour I will be behind them all the way.

At the moment too many people think we live in a completely free democratic society. In reality we are only free to do as we are told.

Failing to do as you're told lands you in prison. But hey, if it's the law its ok right?

originally posted by: randyvs

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: randyvs

So if you follow me, what good does it do us to have any government at all? When
in an anarchy you know who you can and can not trust. And by the
rule of law many a wolf hides, cloaked in sheeps clothing.

Absolutely. The bureaucratic aspects of law and order we can dispense with. Thats the sheep's clothing. The "hide", if you will.

People know how to behave if you let them. If you pressure them to conform, stripping their good will then they may became the problem the law fears. Hey, I think they plan it that way.

Sort of self-fulfilling.

Lack of centralized control isn't anarchy. Anarchy results from too much law and order.

I read every one of your posts I come across. And tend to believe we think
alike on wide range.

I know. I was glad when I saw your thread. I knew it would be a good subject.

a reply to: Silicis n Volvo

Failing to do as you're told lands you in prison. But hey, if it's the law its ok right?

Oh contrare!

originally posted by: Semicollegiate

Law is a way to keep life reasonably safe and predictable.

Every new law is an attempt to overturn an already existing law.

The reason why we introduce laws is because we want the change the environment.

We want to remove the rights from those that have them now, and give those rights to
others who do not have them.

We introduce laws, to shift the rights around.

We refer to the laws as evidence that we are "civilized".

So, how did it all get started?

We started with "the laws of the jungle." There "the strong" rule.

The smart defeat the strong, by changing the rules of the game.
The wise defeat the smart, by changing the meaning of the rules.
The fools defeat the wise, by lacking understanding.
And the strong defeat the fools, by shear strength.
So, who is the winner in the end?

If you're a strong man, you have by your shear strength the right to take
whatever you want. So, for example, the skinny kid on the beach, licking
his ice cream cone, has to give up his ice cream to the muscle bound bully
that accosts him and takes it away.

So, what does the skinny guy do? He's not strong, but he's smart. So, he
gets together with his other skinny buddies, and they develop a plan.
They design a system called "civilization" and write down some "laws" that
people must follow if they want to be part of this civilization. One of the
laws says, that big muscular bullies can't just take the skinny guys ice cream
away. It's illegal. i.e. "against their law". Then they hire a bunch of muscle
bound bullies, put them in a nice "uniform" and tell them to "uphold the law".

Now, when a muscle bound bully tries to take the skinny guy's ice cream
on the beach, he just blows a whistle, and the hired strong man comes and
stops the other strong man from "taking" the ice cream. The law is upheld.

The law has transfered the right to eat ice cream, from the strong man who
could have previously just taken it before, to the skinny guy who didn't have the strength
to protect his own ice cream.

So, that's what the law does. It transfers rights from those that have them, to those that need them or want them.

Obviously, this is a great scheme. Because, once we get into the lawmaking business, we can change the
society to benefit ourselves, our friends, our relatives, or anybody we please. We can even be "noble" about it,
and design laws "for the good of all" etc..But, never forget, that we're just "transferring rights", in the same way
we "transfer stocks" today in the stock-market.

Now, of course, only a few people get the power to make laws. What do the rest of the people do?
Well, if you're not in the lawmaking business, the next best thing is to "interpret the law" according
to some way that favors you. This is where the wise dominate. They take the laws created by the smart guys,
and "twist and bend" them to work in their favor. More often than not, when the "smart" guys wrote
down the law, they never considered all the different ways that law could be interpreted and used by
wise people. So, often they see their law being applied in ways they never intended. The "smart" guys
are defeated by the "wise" guys, in their plans.

But, not everybody is educated, smart or wise, so what do the other people do, who can't figure out
how to "twist and bend" the law to their advantage. Well, these are "the fools", who simply "ignore the law",
because they don't quite see why they should obey them. They recognize that they can do things physically,
because of abilities granted them by God or Nature, and they don't understand why a man made law should
override their natural rights. So, they defeat even the wise, in their scheme, by not following anybody else's
sophisticated plan.

So, next we come back to the strong man. Because the fools won't follow the law, we have to send in
the strong men to "make them follow the law".

And so it goes. Round and round the bend.

The great circle of law. From the jungle to the civilized world and back.