nashall

how about when someone takes your parking ticket off your car...(drunk bastards)..and you come back...you see no ticket on your car...then what?

imported_Bruce Fee

"I guess the problem is that most honest people think very little of dishonest people who go to lengths to avoid their legal obligations and responsibilities under the law."

I consider myself a very honest person.

I also believe I have absolutely zero legal obligations and responsibilities to or under the law. I have never agreed to follow what the powers that be have proclaimed.

i think being forced to pay heavy taxes to support others while the politcians get rich sucks... i'm forced to pay unemployment insurance for example.. i don't want to... to hell with it.

work the system as best you can... cause the system gets us more than we can them.

rrspexpress

THANK YOU

motti

Consider the following statement:

That's considered anarchy, which matches your anarchist avatar. That sort of philosophy may work well for an individual living alone on a desert island, but as population and density increases, such a philosophy can only lead to chaos and disorder, or in other words, anarchy, and nobody benefits from anarchy in the long run except for the strongest, at least until someone even stronger comes along.

I know an apologist for Paul Bernardo. No doubt that given the opportunity, Bernardo would also express his thanks for the "understanding".

Speaking of Paul Bernardo, I'm sure he also felt "absolutely zero legal obligations and responsibilities to or under the law." It doesn't change the fact that he was still held answerable to them.

Before you say that Bernardo is far and away from what we're talking about here, consider that Bernardo represents the ultimate expression of where your line of thinking leads. Once on the slippery slope, one can rationalize or excuse any action.

As for "thank you", you will always be able to find someone to back your position, no matter what that position is or how wrong it is. That a self-acknowledged anarchist backs your anti-regulation view is no great achievement.

By the way, just for you, rrspexpress, see Save your feeble excuses

imported_Bruce Fee

motti... I agree with your highly detailed understanding of anarchism.

harming another human being for passion and simply not respects the wishes of one for monetary gain are two very different things.

Murder and disrespect are very very different things.

What do you think of police officers who are charged with corruption? Are they like Paul Bernardo?

Are people who work a cash job once a month without claiming it on their taxes to be equated with a rapist and murderer?

--

the strongest will always be at the top, regardless of what 'laws' are established.

why do people listen to police? because they have guns which makes them more powerful. what happens when people don't listen and follow the rules? let's look at george bush.

i believe hitler created rules and established a lot of laws, would you equate Paul Bernardo to German's in Germany who did not respect Hitler's laws?

motti

Actually, murder and disrespect are the same thing - murder is merely a disrespect for the victim taken to extremes.

Any person who willfully violates one law has already cross a personal threshhold from which it becomes easier to violate the next law. The only thing standing in the way is the law, the probablility of getting caught breaking the law, and the social and legal consequences that will follow.

When people choose to break the law, they effectively assess the potential penalty against the risk of being caught. A parking ticket has a fairly kow penalty, which is why I'm surprised at the mock indignation and the extent to which rrspexpress would go to avoid payment for that violation. I mean really, is avoiding a $20 civil penalty worth the time and effort to go about fabricating a fake alibi, the time to go to court to fight a charge with a fabricated alibi, and risk potential criminal charges of perjury in doing so? The way some people's minds work, I don't know...

Regarding Hitler and deliberately violating some of the laws he enacted, there are two sides to that. Hitler enacted some incredibly unjust laws from a human rights standpoint, even by the lower human rights standards of that time. But he also enacted a number of laws and regulations that made per-WW2 Germany one of the most efficient and orderly societies in Europe. A Hitler stripped of his antisemitic and conquestual ambition could have built Germany into the commercial and industrial powerhouse of the world today, well ahead of the US. Unfortunately, such was not to be.

I won't argue that some laws should not be disregarded, but there is a difference between civil disobediance against laws that are obviously unjust from a universal human rights point of view, and those that are inconvenient from a personal point of view.

Had our rrspexpress guy been railing against laws enshrining apartheid, I would have sympathy and would stand with him on the issue.

But he's not. He's railing against having been caught violating laws intended to facilitate the flow of traffic in the city. In other words he placed his own self-interests, however he chooses to define them, above those of the greater social interest.

Unlike railing against obviously unjust laws such as apartheid and other forms of discrimination, there is no noble purpose in violating parking or other driving regs. It is simply an exercise of furthering one's own selfish interests over others, and cannot be compared with opposing, say, one of Hitler more unjust laws.

The same goes for tax cheats and others who avoid their part of the social contract. You can argue that you were not personally consulted on tax and other regulatory laws, and because you do not accept them, that you should not be subject to them. However, by continuing to maintain residence in this jurisdiction, you tacitly agree to be bound by those laws, and agree to be prosecuted for violating them if caught.

If you truly disagree with such laws, be they minor or major, you always have the option to express your opposition by working to change the laws through the democratic process, or failing that, to move to a jurisdiction where there are laws that you do agree with. But you do not have the right to expect that you should be able to disgregard with impunity whatever law of the day you do not agree with.

imported_Bruce Fee

you take your arguments with extreme examples, but you say others may not take things to the extreme.

Read what you wrote.

I do not have to follow your rationale. Canada is a great place to live. I do not have to agree to anything to continue living here. By not jailing or deporting me and using your logic, Canada agrees to let me live my life the way I have up to this very moment. If not, they are free to get rid of me.

I don't choose to break the law. I choose to ignore it.

When a person who has murdered his family does not get charged because of a stupid mistake the police made I lose faith in you legal system.

When a person is charged with assault, possession of a firearm, kidnapping, break and entering, and a whole bunch of other charges over one incident and they only get 2 weeks jail (that's with priors) I lose faith in your legal system.

When those responsible for maintaining your rules of justice are constantly being charged with corruption, theft, collaboration with corporations and criminals I lose faith in your legal system.

When those responsible for enforcing your justice system oppose being tested to see whether they comply themselves (ie drug testing), and especially when they themselves committing illegal actions to the point where other 'law enforcement agents' report them and have them charged, I no longer have any faith in your legal system.

From what I see, what I read, what I observe, human society is not something worth helping.

people = ****

I spit on your legal system.

I will live my life however I want, and I will do whatever I want. I am against murder, theft, violence for reason other than physical survival. My idea of theft may be different than yours.

I am just glad that most of the morals my parents have instilled upon me co-incide with that of our government.

Democracy is a waste of time. Helping society is a waste of time. I live my life to pursue my goals, my dreams, and try to hold fast a successful future. As long as the ones I love are close to me, the rest may perish.

----

So Motti, you've never taped a show off TV? You've never copied a computer game? You're never copied an audio tape or burnt a CD which you never purchased? My guess is you're a hipocrite and you like to argue. If that is the case, more power to you.

motti

Actually, the fact that those responsible for maintaining OUR rules of justice are also subject to being charged shoulkd they violate those rules says much about our system. It says that nobody is above the law, not the cops, and certainly not you.

You say that "human society is not something worth helping."

If that's your world view, then you are a taker. Perhaps you feel that is an admirable trait, but that kind of thinking does not make society a better place.

imported_Bruce Fee

the enforcers do not want to be subject and represent themselves officially as that.

how many government officials have you heard of being in scandals and how many have been charged/arrested for theft and collaboration?

They ARE above the law if you look at their actions vs consequences.

The law is flawed. A good lawyer will get you off almost no matter what.

I am not a taker. I give my love, respect, and help to those who I know deserve it. I do not waste it on ingrates.

If this makes me a taker, then so be it.

motti

That's a consequence of the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. I suppose we could make the system more "efficient" by replacing that with a presumption of guilt until proven innocent instead, but I shudder at the possible consequences of such a shift. Even as it is with a presumption of innocence, we still manage to mistakenly convict the innocent far too often.

Like they say, even once is too much, so I'll settle for a few more guilty escaping punishment rather than seeing a few more innocent convicted wrongly.

And you are a taker. Your own comments paint you as such. You care only for yourself, and the collective society be damned. If that works for you, fine, but that promotion of self-interest over all else does not help improve the greater society in which we live our lives.

imported_Bruce Fee

how about abolishing the legal system.

someone does something, you do something about it. don't hide behind others.

If that is your definition of a taker, sure, by your definition I am.

I do not believe in helping everyone. I am an elitest. I do give to my friends, quite a bit actually, because to me, they matter.

So we're no longer debating because we agree.

You never do anything illegal at all, in any form... because downloading mp3s for albums you haven't purchased is illegal, is theivery, and would later bring you to murder.

while i'm a taker, who doesn't help greater society.

---

i do have a question. i give taxes and do not believe in frauding the government for money really, so am i more of a taker then someone who has been on welfare and barely ever worked?

motti

Ah yes, get rid of the legal system and replace it with what - vigilante justice. Have you ever looked into the success/failure rate of vigilante justice with respect to action taken against persons later found to be innocent?

As for the slippery slope to murder path - I'm leaving out crimes of passion here and focusing strictly on premeditated, intentional crimes - take a look at the biographies of some of the more notorious people in prison today. Very, very few ever started with murder. Their histories show a definate progression.

I'm not saying every thief or scam artist will one day progress to the ultimate crime, but someone who eschews such conduct entirely will be far less likely to go further down that slope.

Dishonesty in a person, propensity to commit premediated crime, has a way of growing exponentially, so to speak. There's plenty of research on the topic available. Go do some reading about slippery slopes.

imported_Bruce Fee

1. Physical justice will occur at one point or another. Either the community, the local authorities, or the military, someone will eventually force violence upon another. How can you say You should never break the law when the German's in world war 2 had some interesting laws that you may not agree with. Putting humans into ovens was not a passion crime, but a day job for some *****. Would you consider them criminals? To their countrymen, they were honest workers.

2. Not paying York university a parking fee because you don't want to has nothing to do with dishonesty. I fail to see any logic saying that not paying an institution for you leaving your car there will lead to rape and murder. If someone is torturing an animal for fun, then I would be inclined to agree, but pissing on the rules and regulations of governments, organizations, and institutions really does not make one a criminal, weasel, or scum bag.

3. You're logic is entirely flawed. For example, if you look at people charged with drunk driving, almost all of them not only have sped at one point in their lives, but most of them have driver's licenses. Thus, not only does speeding encourage people to drink and drive, but the root of the problem is getting a driver's license. If people charged with drinking and driving never got a license, and never drove, they would have never comitted that crime. This is what you are saying.

All slippery slope arguments I have read are by religous fundamental nimrods who are not in any position to discuss anything with logic or reason considering their view on the world is based on faith, not logic, data, and fact.

Masturbation leads to sexual deviancy and rape

marijuana leads to crack and heroin (suprisingly caffiene doesn't necessarily lead to speed which would have a much stronger link)

acceptance (not just tolerance) or 'evil' movies like harry potter involving blasphemous material such as witchcraft will lead to satanism.

yes, i know the slippery slope argument. It's a good thing it's a shallow argument.

-----

Seriously now, I wish to ask you, do you own a computer with absolutely zero pirated software and data? I don't really need an answer, I already know it. You don't need to be dishonest about it, I don't want to be morally responsible for your future actions.

motti

The software on my computer is 100% legitimately obtained. It is either freeware, or it is shareware for which I have paid the suggested price, or it is retail software properly purchased and licensed through retail channels.

Any mp3s on my computer are legally obtained, downloaded either with explict permission to do so by the given artist from the artist's web site, or by purchase through Puretracks, or by downloading music tracks put out for download with the artist's and/or label's explicit permission through the mp3.com site.

I don't try to rationalize why I should be able to take without payment that which is not mine, why certain traffic regs should not apply to me, why I should evade fine payments resulting from my choices, or why I should cheat on my taxes.

Others may do so for whatever reason, but it still comes down to varying degrees of dishonesty, period. Some think if you can get away with it that it is not dishonest. That's like cheating on the wife - if nobody knows, nobody gets hurt, right? But it is still dishonest.

I think that those who deliberately do so are doing wrong. They may not yet be master criminals of the worst sort, but they are cheats and scofflaws no matter how they justify what they do. If you fall into that bucket, then you do so by your own choices.

I don't apologize for living my life as honestly as possible. As far as I'm concerned, it's the thieves and scofflaws that should apologize to the rest of us for their deliberate moral lapses, lapse of which the rest of us ultimately end up paying for.

imported_Bruce Fee

It's not about rationalizing.. it's about caring.

Congrats to you though.

sheep.

motti

So you equate honesty as being sheep-like?

Ok, but it's rarely the sheep who create problems in society. The wolves are another matter though...

imported_Bruce Fee

I believe you are a liar.

Just because one does not follow the herd, does not mean one is a sheep.

I try to avoid the government and police as much as I can, yet,

-I have a career driven full time job.
-I do not believe in casual violence.
-I do not believe in the destruction and vandalism of the property of others.
-I ensure all hardware/software at the company I am with is legal with audits of my own.
-I give my legal share of taxes.


Just because I spit on the legal system, does not mean I'm a criminal. Have you ever thought maybe some people have had experiences other than your own? Try being 17, walking home, and a cop throwing you to the ground, putting his boot on your throat because he thought you were involved in something going on in the area.

Cheating with your wife and copying a Metallica album are two very different things. Your wife/woman has given you her trust and you have accepted it (assuming you're not in an open relationship). The two of you have an agreement and it is understood you will not share your peepee with anyone else.

Metallica on the other hand, whatever. They're a bunch of whining idiots. You have made no promises to them whatsoever. You owe them nothing. Not paying for a copy of their garbage album in no way involves you breaking anything you have sworn to uphold, thus, you are not being dishonest.

Copying am album involves theft of intellectual property, not something tangible, as if that were the case, I would agree with you. But copying 'intellectual property' from Metallica or Jay-Z.... whatever.. if you weren't going to buy it in the first place.. they wouldn't have made that sale anyway.

The problem isn't the sheep or the wolf. It's the sheppard who leads his flock down a rocky cliff 'cause he wants to get laid.

The sheep would be better off free to roam the plains.

imported_gatherer

while I completely agree with Bruce that Parking illegally isn't going to lead to rape and murder. I find that the amount of time and effort spent trying to avoid the ticket can be greatly reduced if someone was to just park legally. ok so you might have to walk. or take a bus or leave home earlier to have enough time to find a place to park. or buy a parking pass. but hey it's much less hassle. personally I can't be bothered trying to find a way loop hole to defeat the system when I can just play within the rules in the first place. seriously when I was in school I had time to ride buses and look for parking spots and walk... I was also healthier because of it.. hmmm that could be something there...

anyways reading Bruce's last post it looks likeyou guys are completely off topic...

motti

You can believe anything you want. Does the concept of honesty real shock you? Maybe that says more about your attitude than anything else.

You make no promises to the local storekeeper or auto mechanic either. Does that make stealling off the shelves or refusing to pay labour charges ok? There is an implied social contract that you will pay for goods or services that are offered for sale and that you receive (or take) from others. Anything less is theft.

Metallica's music is their livelihood. It earns them money, and money is tangible. If you don't believe so, let me steal the fruits of a few hours of your work against your will and without any payment to you, and then you tell me if I haven't taken anything from you.

For you to take without payment is theft no matter how you rationalize it.

That makes you a thief, no matter how you rationalize it.

If that represents your moral compass, you're headed down the wrong path.

imported_Bruce Fee

I disagree.