People don't kill people, guns do!

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 261 - 280 of total 287 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 10, 2014 - 05:04pm PT
Legitimacy is in the eye of the governed...

Are you really this much of a relativist about rights?

and while I repeatedly support the principles you wish to see embodied in a government, I don't see them as an exclusive approach, nor their imperfect implementation a justification for violent rebellion.

Are you really this much of a relativist about rights?

Why didn't the Founding Fathers implement Libertarianism at the State level?

I honestly have no idea what you mean with this question. It's not like state and federal libertarian principles are mutually exclusive.

They were after all, the political class and in a perfect position to do so.

Again, I don't know what you mean. Most of the guys attending the constitutional convention just went back home to their farms and shops. Most of them were not the "political class," and the founders that remained politically active wouldn't have thought of themselves as a "political class." Career politicians came much, much later!

I believe it was because they realized that those principles alone wouldn't work when it came down to the messy business of governing the interactions between people, not merely interactions between states.

I think it's clear that you have not read the federalist nor anti-federalist papers. Do you really believe that these guys were thinking something like this? "Well, let's take a shot at this. It's not really practically implementable, but, you know, what the hey? We've got some really cool theories, so let's just put our lives on the line as an academic exercise that we already know can't really work."

Honestly?

They themselves couldn't live up to those principles, how could they expect the lesser classes to act any better?

Wow... so much to say! Prolly better to say less than more!

I'll just repeat that when we bring the principles down to the level of practice, we GUARANTEE that the nation CAN only spiral the drain. And even our "imperfect implementation" has been a far cry beyond what any other nation has ever achieved. Probably because the principles themselves (until fairly recently) have acted as an almost sacred touchstone.

Abandon those, and this nation WILL descend into anarchy or a police state. Which do you prefer? Probably, actually, you'll get to experience both: anarchy followed by a police state.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Sep 10, 2014 - 05:31pm PT
I honestly have no idea what you mean with this question. It's not like state and federal libertarian principles are mutually exclusive.

The federal government in 1789 had little or no role in legislating the actions of individual people in their daily lives. It had no constitutional authority to legislate against personal crimes like murder, violence, theft or even slavery. None of the Federal Government's enumerated purposes would have presented any need to infringe on personal liberty, so implementing a non-infringing federal government wasn't so difficult. Even then, early federal laws regularly infringed on the Bill of Rights. Implementing a purely Libertarian state government however was so obviously impractical that no state has ever tried it. That is not to say they weren't inspired to improve their laws and constitutions toward the ideal.

TE
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Sep 10, 2014 - 05:37pm PT
The Civil War may have freed the slaves, but by allowing the federal government excess power it enslaved free men.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 10, 2014 - 06:33pm PT
None of the Federal Government's enumerated purposes would have presented any need to infringe on personal liberty, so implementing a non-infringing federal government wasn't so difficult.

Ahh, got it. Thanks for the explanation.

Well, it is the case that the states are not allowed to form state constitutions or laws that violate the federal constitutional principles. We regularly see even today that state laws are brought before federal courts and even ultimately the SCOTUS. So, it seems like the presumption (which has largely played out) was that the states would follow the lead of the federal constitution.

Now, we can argue 'till the cows come home about how "libertarian" the principles were. Anything productive would need to be handled step by step and chewed up in small bites. If you're game, I am. I just wonder how far down the rabbit hole we'll have to go to find clear cut common ground. I mean, as just one example, are you really as relativist as you seem? Are there any inalienable rights you would stake a claim about?
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Sep 11, 2014 - 08:17am PT
Dingus, you never met Xanthippe.


Socrates was happy to drink the hemlock.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Sep 11, 2014 - 08:36am PT
^^^^^^^^ HaHaHaHa! I tried marrying up too but I took the chicken's way out.
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Sep 11, 2014 - 11:49am PT
Well, it is the case that the states are not allowed to form state constitutions or laws that violate the federal constitutional principles

True today (although I hesitate at your addition of the word "principles"), but absolutely not true until ratification of the 14th Amendment and in practice not true until Supreme Court rulings early in the 20th Century. Is it co-incidence that this is about the time you claim the rot set in?

I'm away for a while, don't miss me too much, but as a last word, I'd like to add to DMT's comment: I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, not to its principles, or to John Locke's principles. If, as certain members believe, a revolution is coming, I have no doubt which side I will join.

TE
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 11, 2014 - 12:47pm PT
I swore an oath to the Constitution of the United States, not to its principles, or to John Locke's principles.

I didn't understand it when Dingus said it, and I don't understand it when you say it. What IS the "constitution" apart from this or that interpretation of it? And what IS an interpretation of it apart from the principles upon which our founders framed it?

That's like saying, literally, "I believe in dsal4sadj, and ajadl21o, and furthermore as;as;ld2309!!! And, damn it, if you try to revolt against asdljaf;l2390, I know where I'll stand!!!" You're just talking gobbledygook.

Like those people who think you can just laugh at "originalism" while being "proud to be an American," this sort of disconnect between what the constitution MEANS and whatever you want it to mean is patently absurd. WHAT do you think you are defending? Some verbiage "interpreted" in a vacuum? Some verbiage "interpreted" however the political wind or majority faction happens to be blowing?

Again, if you are as much of a relativist as you come across, then you are literally "defending" NOTHING.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 11, 2014 - 01:36pm PT
Dingus, there are times in which you strike me as a full-on whack job. Your attitude is simply beyond belief, which is why I don't generally respond to you at all.

"Cowboy?" Wow....

Get over yourself.
donini

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Sep 11, 2014 - 01:50pm PT
Whatever....people with guns or guns with people. Folks are dying from gunshot wounds here at a far higher rate than in the rest of the First World.
apogee

climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
Sep 11, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
"Wow... so much to say! Prolly better to say less than more!"

Did you really write that? Are you trying to be ironic, or what?

Your posts over the course of this thread contain way more verbiage than anyone else's (excluding cut & pastes). Not that this is bad...just sounds pretty hypocritical, that's all.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Sep 11, 2014 - 02:12pm PT
donini compared us to the rest of the First World.
By many accepted measures we are now Second World.
Could it be because so many of us take delight in and are prideful of burying their heads in the sand?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 11, 2014 - 02:14pm PT
just sounds pretty hypocritical, that's all.

Or, just maybe, I'm learning the level at which people can cope. ;-)
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Sep 11, 2014 - 02:33pm PT
From the Any Idiot Can Carry a Concealed Weapon in School department:
A Taylorsville elementary school teacher somehow shot herself in the leg while in a school restroom.

The woman, who was not immediately identified, was in a faculty restroom at Westbrook Elementary School (3451 W. 6200 South) on Thursday morning when her handgun went off, said Ben Horsley, spokesman of Granite School District.

The gunshot occurred a little before 9 a.m., before school started. No students were around at the time, Horsley said.

The bullet entered and exited her leg, and she was taken to Intermountain Medical Center, where she was listed in good condition later Thursday.

Granite School District police are still investigating how the handgun accidentally discharged.

Classes were proceeding as normal as possible, Horsley said.
.
.
.
The teacher — a concealed carry permit holder — was allowed to have the weapon on campus per school district policy, as well as state law, Horsley said.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58402182-78/teachers-carry-concealed-utah.html.csp

Teachers carrying guns in an elementary school?
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger???
No Darwin award for her, she's still among the living. Although obviously she was already brain dead.

.....how the handgun accidentally discharged
You could infer the safety was off.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Sep 11, 2014 - 03:20pm PT
You could infer the safety was off.

If an external safety was even designed into it in the first place.

For the record, I'm all for making gun manufacturers responsible to determine how a gun "accidentally goes off" and change their designs so that that can't happen. Liability suits if their designs are not safe. There is no excuse for any gun "accidentally going off." Yikes!

Just based upon the design of my gun (H&K P30), I can tell you that it's not going to "accidentally go off," even with a round in the chamber, which is how I carry it.

Anything made by humans can fail, including an external safety switch. But at least it should be there and properly designed upon manufacture!
TradEddie

Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Sep 12, 2014 - 10:54am PT

The first power, viz. of doing whatsoever he thought for the preservation of himself, and the rest of mankind, he gives up to be regulated by laws made by the society, so far forth as the preservation of himself, and the rest of that society shall require; which laws of the society in many things confine the liberty he had by the law of nature.

 John Locke

Obviously I'm just cherry-picking, but that's a pretty tasty cherry.

TE
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Sep 12, 2014 - 11:28am PT
Sixth-grade teacher Michelle Ferguson-Montgomery’s concealed 9 mm Glock handgun went off in a faculty bathroom at 8:45 a.m. Thursday. Horsley said the teacher was hit by fragments from the toilet and possibly the bullet in her lower left calf. Ferguson-Montgomery, a 14-year veteran of the school, was taken to Intermountain Medical Center for treatment and released.
So does a 9mm Glock have a safety?
jstan

climber
Sep 12, 2014 - 11:35am PT
Here is on topic news. John McCain’s comments will hopefully soon appear.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/sarah-palin/11091080/Sarah-Palin-and-family-caught-up-in-Alaska-mass-brawl.html


Ernst Photo: AP
By Raf Sanchez, Washington8:00AM BST 12 Sep 2014

Sarah Palin and her family were reportedly involved in a mass brawl at a snowmobile party which had to be broken up by police.

Alaska's gossip blogs lit up with accounts of the Saturday night fight, claiming that the former governor's son and daughter both threw punches while Mrs Palin herself shouted: "Don't you know who I am?" as the scene descended into chaos.

Police confirmed that "some of the Palin family members" were at the party, where a "physical altercation [was] taking place between multiple subjects". A spokesman added: "Alcohol was believed to have been a factor in the incident."

According to Amanda Coyne, an Alaskan political blogger, the incident took place at a party celebrating the Iron Dog snowmobile race, a contest won several times by Mrs Palin's husband Todd.

Mrs Palin's 25-year-old son Track apparently emerged from a Stretch Hummer limousine and got caught up in a fight, soon joined by his younger sister, Bristol. The blogger suggested that the other participant in the fight was a man who had previously dated another sister, Willow Palin.

Track Palin stumbles out of a stretch Hummer, and immediately spots an ex-boyfriend of Willow’s. Track isn’t happy with this guy, the story goes. There’s words, and more. The owner of the house gets involved, and he probably wished he hadn’t. At this point, he’s up against nearly the whole Palin tribe: Palin women screaming. Palin men thumping their chests.

Word is that Bristol has a particularly strong right hook, which she employed repeatedly, and it’s something to hear when Sarah screams, “Don’t you know who I am!” And it was particularly wonderful when someone in the crowd screamed back,

“This isn’t some damned Hillbilly reality show!”


Anchorage Police would not confirm whether the former governor was at the scene, saying that "no arrests were made" and the incident was being looked by detectives and prosecutors.

It wasn't the only drama to befall the Palins in recent days. On Sunday, the day after the fight, a man was arrested for allegedly stalking Bristol Palin.
Miss Palin, now 23, first came to international attention during the 2008 election when it emerged she was pregnant at 17. She was twice engaged to the baby's father, Levi Johnston, but the pair split up without marrying.
Mr Johnston later wrote a book titled "Deer in Headlights: My Life in Sarah Palin's Crosshairs".

Police said that Miss Palin returned to her home on Sunday to find Peter PW Ferrero, a 25-year-old man from Florida waiting in her driveway. He had allegedly bombarded her with hundreds of Facebook message has been charged with felony.

Ferrero claimed he had climbed up to a third-floor balcony at the house and tried to open a door there, according to a police report.

Sarah Palin’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

See? I said there was climbing.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Sep 12, 2014 - 11:42am PT
am I the only one surprised no one in Palin's party pulled a gun?
Isn't Ms. Palin supposed to be a Bad Ass Mama Grizzly?
The Gorilla from Wasilla?
The Moose Mauler?

I'll bet they'll be packing at the next party.

“This isn’t some damned Hillbilly reality show!”
wrong
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Sep 12, 2014 - 12:33pm PT
Glocks have a safety built into the trigger that prevents the gun from firing if dropped.


In general guns never go off accidently. There was a poorly designed japanese pistol with an exposed sear that, if bumped the wrong way, would cause the weapon to discharge, and the Hollywood favorite SPAS-12 gauge would sometimes discharge when merely the safety was flipped off, but over all for an accidental discharge to occur a weapon must be handled incorrectly.

Most people I see with guns don't even exercise trigger finger discipline; scary.
Messages 261 - 280 of total 287 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta