Words of Wisdom from this Retired Marine Colonel

[Tgace]

Has the judicial determined the executive and\or legislative have violated the Constitution?

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Makalakumu]

Has the judicial determined the executive and\or legislative have violated the Constitution?

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

What if the Judicial Branch is compromised? This was a major worry for the FF?

 

[ballen0351]

I disagree. This contract is forced on an individual at birth. It was spread through North America and beyond through the use of force. It isn't a "contract" in any sense of the word. It's a fiat that states that a certain group of individuals the exclusive right to initiate force in a given geographic area.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fiat

An individual can flee the fiat or they can stay for many different reasons, including simply not having the resources to flee. This is not the same as consenting to the fiat.

So don't follow it I don't care. In not sure what you want here. Why don't you file a complaint with the courts saying the constitution is not valid because you didn't sign it. You don't like the rules I got it you wanna smoke pot and you can't I'm sorry move to Washington or change the laws in your state. But its more fun to make up LA LA land and say well laws don't apply to me. I just had a similar case in court a few weeks ago a "Moorish national". Spouting that sane junk saying he didn't need a driver license to travel upon the lands. Said I was a pawn of the Govt and they don't care about me. Told the judge she had no authority to hold a trail against him. Guess who got a 60 day sentence and went to jail. So fight the Govt protest the govt sue the govt ignore the govt. I DONT CARE. Just face the fact when you do there will be repercussions. I know I know you don't like the repercussions you didn't agree to them. TOUGH

 

[Makalakumu]

So don't follow it I don't care. In not sure what you want here. Why don't you file a complaint with the courts saying the constitution is not valid because you didn't sign it. You don't like the rules I got it you wanna smoke pot and you can't I'm sorry move to Washington or change the laws in your state. But its more fun to make up LA LA land and say well laws don't apply to me. I just had a similar case in court a few weeks ago a "Moorish national". Spouting that sane junk saying he didn't need a driver license to travel upon the lands. Said I was a pawn of the Govt and they don't care about me. Told the judge she had no authority to hold a trail against him. Guess who got a 60 day sentence and went to jail. So fight the Govt protest the govt sue the govt ignore the govt. I DONT CARE. Just face the fact when you do there will be repercussions. I know I know you don't like the repercussions you didn't agree to them. TOUGH

I understand all of this. I follow all the rules, even those I don't like, because people like you have guns and are willing to use them. The point here is that there is a potential contradiction between words and actions that I'm pointing out. I don't have to deal with it because I'm not holding the government's guns. I don't want that job because it would place me in a position where I would have to force myself to do something against my conscience.

You do have to deal with it, though. I'm curious how it will play out. Most people in your position simply outsource their moral reasoning to some "higher" authority. Some people find creative ways of rationalizing what they do. Some realize that they can't do it anymore and quit.

Ever hear of the Milgram Experiment?

 

[Tgace]

I love my job.

Moorish nationals...meet a few of them myself ballen...good analogy.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Sukerkin]

I know that in some ways the basis of law in America is different to that over here but something to add into the conceptual mix is that the body of Common Law is meant to protect individuals from the predation of other, more powerful individuals and groups. Law and law enforcement can be seen as an evil imposition on the individual but it is also a very real 'shield' for individuals too. You have to look at it with both sets of eyes to see fully whether you think the legal system is something to be scorned or welcomed.

 

[oftheherd1]

I don't have the right to enforce my opinion on anyone. I wouldn't want that power. In my dojo, if someone doesn't like what I'm doing, they can leave. It's a voluntary association that many call the free market.

Perhaps that would give you more peace of mind in the long run.

This is very different from how Tgace and other police officers choose to operate. They agree when they take their jobs that they will enforce the rules of the State good or bad. They may disagree with a rule, but they are still required to enforce it. My point is to only illustrate that there is a potential contradiction between thought and action here. To put it simply, "words are wind." The words and thoughts of a person do not actually demonstrate commitment to principles or opinions. Only actions demonstrate commitment. So, the real opinion of every cop of rips out someones blackberry and okra bushes while pointing guns at non-violent farmers is demonstrated by their actions. Their actions show that they are committed to an opinion that someone else has and are willing to enforce that opinion at gun point.

That might be true. I didn't look that up further than your post, but I did the mention of Manassas as I am familiar with that city. It is something rather old (2008 as I recall) and clouded depending on whose side you are on. The amount of police used in both seems not likely in either incident.

But are you suggesting that defines all those on MT who have indicated they are cops?

And I must admit I am having trouble with your intimation that all cops threaten all people they deal with by using guns. Is that truly how it is done where you live?

Ultimately, it's a matter of integrity to principles.

Isn't a cop who enforces legitimately enacted laws displaying integrity to principles?

 

[oftheherd1]

I know that in some ways the basis of law in America is different to that over here but something to add into the conceptual mix is that the body of Common Law is meant to protect individuals from the predation of other, more powerful individuals and groups. Law and law enforcement can be seen as an evil imposition on the individual but it is also a very real 'shield' for individuals too. You have to look at it with both sets of eyes to see fully whether you think the legal system is something to be scorned or welcomed.

Truth.

Just as an aside, were you aware that four states and two territories refer to themselves ad commonwealths? And more or less (probably less) adhere to the idea of common law?

 

[ballen0351]

Truth.

Just as an aside, were you aware that four states and two territories refer to themselves ad commonwealths? And more or less (probably less) adhere to the idea of common law?

We still have some common laws on the books here. I like using them because there is no set penalty. When you tell the person what they are charged with you get to say "Any punishment the judge rules not to be cruel or unusual" they look at you all crazy and ask what the heck that means

 

[Makalakumu]

So don't follow it I don't care. In not sure what you want here. Why don't you file a complaint with the courts saying the constitution is not valid because you didn't sign it. You don't like the rules I got it you wanna smoke pot and you can't I'm sorry move to Washington or change the laws in your state. But its more fun to make up LA LA land and say well laws don't apply to me. I just had a similar case in court a few weeks ago a "Moorish national". Spouting that sane junk saying he didn't need a driver license to travel upon the lands. Said I was a pawn of the Govt and they don't care about me. Told the judge she had no authority to hold a trail against him. Guess who got a 60 day sentence and went to jail. So fight the Govt protest the govt sue the govt ignore the govt. I DONT CARE. Just face the fact when you do there will be repercussions. I know I know you don't like the repercussions you didn't agree to them. TOUGH

If I went to another country, I would follow there laws and expect to be punished if I broke them. It's no different for the country where I was born. I tend to look at America from a foreign perspective. By random chance I was born here, but I don't feel any kinship or loyalty to the government. It's just another government with features that make it distinct and similar to other governments in the past and present.

That said, what interests me more are people. It's really important to see what principles they hold and understand them for what they really stand for and how they are applied in actuality. I see this as part of the intellectual self defense that a person can do to understand better the people in the community, the people who enforce the rules, and people who make the rules. If you understand the principle by which people operate, you can predict future actions.

 

[Makalakumu]

And I must admit I am having trouble with your intimation that all cops threaten all people they deal with by using guns. Is that truly how it is done where you live?



Isn't a cop who enforces legitimately enacted laws displaying integrity to principles?

In the US and just about every country I can think of, laws are enforced through direct or indirect force. Indirect force is the threat of force. So, in a metaphorical way of speaking, laws are opinions with a gun...where the "gun" represents force and/or the threat of force.

That said, the second question strikes to the mark of what I want to talk about. A government official who is enforcing legitimately enacted laws is displaying integrity...but to what principle? If a government official initiates force against peaceful non-violent members of the community, what principles are they displaying with their actions?

 

[ballen0351]

If I went to another country, I would follow there laws and expect to be punished if I broke them. It's no different for the country where I was born. I tend to look at America from a foreign perspective. By random chance I was born here, but I don't feel any kinship or loyalty to the government. It's just another government with features that make it distinct and similar to other governments in the past and present.

Im sorry bro its life. Buy your own island and start your own land where respect and a stern talking too is all you need to stop a criminal from stealing you stuff. Let me know how that works. Im sorry that you were forced to live in society and you just dont like it.

That said, what interests me more are people. It's really important to see what principles they hold and understand them for what they really stand for and how they are applied in actuality. I see this as part of the intellectual self defense that a person can do to understand better the people in the community, the people who enforce the rules, and people who make the rules. If you understand the principle by which people operate, you can predict future actions.

Um ok

 

[ballen0351]

In the US and just about every country I can think of, laws are enforced through direct or indirect force. Indirect force is the threat of force. So, in a metaphorical way of speaking, laws are opinions with a gun...where the "gun" represents force and/or the threat of force.

So in your world how would you enforce laws and rules?

That said, the second question strikes to the mark of what I want to talk about. A government official who is enforcing legitimately enacted laws is displaying integrity...but to what principle? If a government official initiates force against peaceful non-violent members of the community, what principles are they displaying with their actions?

Whos using force against peaceful non-violent members of the community?

 

[Makalakumu]

So in your world how would you enforce laws and rules?

Whos using force against peaceful non-violent members of the community?

As to how I would run society, I don't know and I have no desire to even attempt that.

People like you initiate force against nonviolent and peaceful community members all of the time. So, what principle is being displayed by people like you? I know the reason why you are doing it. The actions of said community members is against the law. What principle drives you to take the action you are taking?

 

[oftheherd1]

In the US and just about every country I can think of, laws are enforced through direct or indirect force. Indirect force is the threat of force. So, in a metaphorical way of speaking, laws are opinions with a gun...where the "gun" represents force and/or the threat of force.

I am sure you know that isn't a usual way of thinking in the USA. Most people in the USA know when they are breaking laws, especially traffic laws. If they are caught, most accept their ticket without consideration of violent reaction. Even more serious infractions of law may not draw a violent response. A policeman must always remain vigilant for people they deal with who may turn violent. But I think you are much mistaken. Police in general don't walk around looking for people to lord it over, using their guns as a threat of violence. I'm sorry if that isn't the norm for police where you are. It is sad to think of your police acting in any other manner.

That said, the second question strikes to the mark of what I want to talk about. A government official who is enforcing legitimately enacted laws is displaying integrity...but to what principle? If a government official initiates force against peaceful non-violent members of the community, what principles are they displaying with their actions?

You have a funny way of getting where you want to go. Why didn't you just ask that to begin with?

A government official who is enforcing legitimately enacted laws is displaying integrity...but to what principle? If a government official initiates force against peaceful non-violent members of the community, what principles are they displaying with their actions?

Those two sentences don't automatically go together with most people, including police. To enforce legitimately enacted laws is displaying integrity to the law and more importantly, to society who has requested or acquiesced to them. If you consider that act unprincipled use of force, then I would have to assume you don't want any laws enforced. That would be chaotic anarchy, with only the unprincipled strong getting what they want from more peaceful people. Not a society where I would like to live. If you would, I think there are places in the world where that is how it is done. Perhaps you should seek out a place like that.

If you were to move to such a place, which do you want to be, those who enforce their selfish desires on all others, or those who must submit or be inconvenienced, hurt or die? Mind you, you must be stronger than anyone else, and enforce your desires on them by force or fear. Do you see no value to a society where rules are made that most people wish to live by, and are enforced by government through law and a body (police) to enforce that law? And if there are people who prefer to go against those laws, what do you propose be done with them?

If I went to another country, I would follow there laws and expect to be punished if I broke them. It's no different for the country where I was born. I tend to look at America from a foreign perspective. By random chance I was born here, but I don't feel any kinship or loyalty to the government. It's just another government with features that make it distinct and similar to other governments in the past and present.

As to the bolded part, then what is your problem with obeying law? And I am sorry you don't feel any kinship or loyalty to the government of the USA. Isn't it ironic that you feel that way but seem to prefer to live where others others who do feel kinship and loyalty to the USA protect your right to feel that way?

That said, what interests me more are people. It's really important to see what principles they hold and understand them for what they really stand for and how they are applied in actuality. I see this as part of the intellectual self defense that a person can do to understand better the people in the community, the people who enforce the rules, and people who make the rules. If you understand the principle by which people operate, you can predict future actions.

Again, why didn't you just ask? I think most police do what they do out of a sense of making life better for their community.

As to how I would run society, I don't know and I have no desire to even attempt that.

Yet you fault others who wish to take on that burden?

People like you initiate force against nonviolent and peaceful community members all of the time. So, what principle is being displayed by people like you? I know the reason why you are doing it. The actions of said community members is against the law. What principle drives you to take the action you are taking?

That is insulting don't you think? How do you know what you intimate, that is, a non-caring, hateful desire to use more force than necessary at all times, is how people in this forum prefer to enforce law? And why do you assume that all enforcement of law against non-violent people is itself violent? Do you think all police prefer to get violent to enforce law? How about these non-violent people? They are using some force to violate the law, whether or not it is passive?

Forget the innocent part. If they are a law breaker, they are not innocent.

 

[Tgace]

Just another version of "I want you to do something about HIM but I don't want you to enforce THAT".

See it everyday. Its amazing how many people who want pot legalized will complain about why we don't do something TO a person who is doing something they don't like.

Makus opinions are not founded on any reality I have ever seen....just last week I had to explain to a family that "no I cant search your basement bedroom you allowed your drug addicted brother to live in without a warrant". That happens all the time.....Maku would have you think that its the "citizens" role to protect Constitutional rights from the cops when it seems to me that its frequently the citizens who would like us to ignore the constitution as long as it benefits them.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Makalakumu]

Forget the innocent part. If they are a law breaker, they are not innocent.

According to the definition of those in power. Even peaceful nonviolent members of the community can not be innocent of breaking a law. So, what principle is involved here? What principle does a government official display when they initiate force against peaceful non violent members of the community? This is important, because it will allow us to predict future human actions and this is ultimately the subject of this thread. Why do people worry about the power of the government officials in their neighborhoods?

Principles are displayed through action and people can readily see those even if they have never been taught to identify them.

 

[Makalakumu]

I mis typed. Even peaceful nonviolent members of the community CAN be innocent of breaking the law.

 

[ballen0351]

People like you initiate force against nonviolent and peaceful community members all of the time.

Prove it. Who have I initiate force against.

So, what principle is being displayed by people like you? I know the reason why you are doing it. The actions of said community members is against the law. What principle drives you to take the action you are taking?

Because I like my community more then your trippy hippy babble about the constitution not being valid because you didnt sign it.

 

[Makalakumu]

Just another version of "I want you to do something about HIM but I don't want you to enforce THAT".

See it everyday. Its amazing how many people who want pot legalized will complain about why we don't do something TO a person who is doing something they don't like.

Makus opinions are not founded on any reality I have ever seen....just last week I had to explain to a family that "no I cant search your basement bedroom you allowed your drug addicted brother to live in without a warrant". That happens all the time.....Maku would have you think that its the "citizens" role to protect Constitutional rights from the cops when it seems to me that its frequently the citizens who would like us to ignore the constitution as long as it benefits them.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

Actually, the principles that I'm driving at ARE founded in reality. They are demonstrated by the actions of those that hold them. These actions are observable facts in the real world. Logical conclusions can be drawn from these observations of principles in action. These conclusions are drawn all of the time by people even if they don't consciously understand that they are drawing that conclusion. Principles and observation of facts are an evolutionary mechanism that allows humans to survive.