1. Changelog 1.161

    Hello Queens and Kings,
    The update to 1.161 will take place on Wed, Sept 18, 2019. There will be a short period of downtime during the update, we apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.
    For the detailed description of the upcoming changes, please see the details here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. GvG Improvements Update

    Hello Queens and Kings,
    First up, we wanted to thank you once again for taking the time to continue to contribute your feedback on the upcoming changes to Forge of Empires, especially in relation to Guild Battlegrounds.
    For the detailed description of the upcoming changes, please see the details here.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

vote your conscience not your wallet

Discussion in 'Debate Hall' started by yee yee boy, Jul 22, 2019.

  1. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    And you wouldn't be safer if you had a gun in your pocket because he/she wouldn't give you the chance to pull it out and use it. You are ignoring this point because it is inconvenient to your faulty argument.

    Incidentally, you need to quit with the personal attacks before I am forced to edit your posts.
     
    anyempire likes this.
  2. yee yee boy

    yee yee boy Active Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2019
    idk its like war
    HIT THE DIRT!!!
     
  3. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Ah, I see now. So, you’re just wrong.

    Anarchy, like monarchy or oligarchy, is a type of government (or lack thereof). Anarchy does not mean chaos. They are not the same thing. Understand that before you comment more. If you can understand that, then you should also understand why anarchy is real freedom. (That’s a big “should”, my therapist would be disappointed with me) Freedom is not based on others. It is solely an individual. These are definitions. Just understand this, please. This is not a partisan issue, these are facts. It’s okay to be wrong, but don’t live a lie.
     
  4. Godly Luke

    Godly Luke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2018
    So everyone, get ready for the 2nd Civil War
     
  5. Super Catanian

    Super Catanian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2018
    2nd Civil War within the United States, to be specific. After all, there have been several within the history of mankind.
     
  6. 22prentwil

    22prentwil Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2019
    You are incorrect again. Well not entirely. Yes anarchy does mean a lack of government but it also means this:

    Definition of anarchy

    b: a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority

    Chaos would be a very good description of a disorderly state of lawlessness.

    But not for everyone. The government exists to protect freedom for EVERYONE not individuals (as you said everyone’s liberty). That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you for practically the past 10 posts bud. What about that doesn’t make sense?

    Answer that before you comment more.

    I have never said that there isn’t freedom for individuals, you seem to not even know what you are arguing about.

    I have said that the government exists to protect freedom for everyone and prevent anarchy (which is not freedom for everyone)

    Your replies have absolutely nothing to do with what I am actually trying to say, I don’t know why you are implying that I said things I never said.
     
  7. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    No. YOU are incorrect again. READ it again. LAWLESSNESS. POLITICAL disorder. This means chaos to POLITICS. Not the people.
     
  8. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Anarchy is a state without government. This means that the government in this state has nothing to do with anyone. Therefore, not everyone. You conveniently forget this fact. Anarchy then means that there is no government that can limit me from murdering someone. THAT is what I have been saying the past 10 posts. I am not your bud, friend.

    Which is exactly what I have also been saying.
     
  9. Emberguard

    Emberguard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2018
    [​IMG]

    How is being free to murder chaos to politics only and not chaos to the people themselves? If the law is ever put to use in regards to consequence of having murdered then without it the people would have chaos due to the nature of murder
     
    22prentwil and Super Catanian like this.
  10. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Because that is just an example. Find me an example of a law that allows something to happen that is not merely creating an exception of something that is already against the law. That is why that phrase exists: against the law. Because law restricts freedom. We have laws due to human nature. If human nature meant that we would all skip and get along and love each other without constraint, that is why we have this definition of Anarchy: a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government. Utopia does not exist, however.
     
  11. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Getting back to voting your conscience, why not ask your candidates whether they support for-profit prisons? The prison system is a real problem in America.
     
  12. Emberguard

    Emberguard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2018
    When you were little you followed your parents rules and that freed you to be a kid without having to worry about your safety, what to eat etc. when your parents tell you not to touch the fire or boiling hot pot of soup it’s not about taking away freedom - if you disobey and no ones able to aid you quick enough you could wind up seriously malformed for the rest of your life or dead

    You can be free and still have guidelines to provide structure to your decisions

    now that I agree should never be a thing
     
  13. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Correct, these guidelines are called liberties. Liberty is what the government provides, not freedom, and that is the only think I'm trying to argue.
     
  14. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Correct ... Government prevents Anarchy because Anarchy is the absence of government.

    But ... Any kind of goverment prevents Anarchy (oligarchy, or republic) ... So saying Government is anything other than Anarchy is true but irrelevant to my point.

    All I said is that government is not freedom and goverment can only limit freedom. There is no need to argue with that because it is a fact.

    Feel FREE to argue some more if you care, but it isn’t going to ever change that fact.
     
    lannister the rich likes this.
  15. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    Freedom includes the ability to make what someone else may deem to be a poor choice.

    And likewise the ability to tell someone who wishes you wouldn’t do something ... “I didn’t ask you if I could”.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2019
    Emberguard likes this.
  16. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    That’s false using your own rebuttal ... Because the chance you stated is more than no chance at all. You cannot determine the outcome of something that hasn’t happened.

    I am not asking you to carry a firearm because you may be incapable of defending yourself. I am not going to subject myself to your certain doom because you cannot figure out how to defend yourself.

    You have nothing to offer but reliance on the State which consistently fails to offer an adequate defense ... No thanks buddy, I am not interested in living in a police state.
     
    RazorbackPirate likes this.
  17. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    The government cannot give you liberty ... They can only give you privilege ... Like a drivers license is a privilege, not a freedom or liberty.

    If you mean in a sense of allowing you to do something ... At that point they are giving you permission and not liberty of freedom.
     
    lannister the rich likes this.
  18. Super Catanian

    Super Catanian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2018
    Yup. That's what your conscience is for. To help you make good (or bad) desicions.
    The more liberties a people has, the more responsibilities they must manage.
     
    lannister the rich likes this.
  19. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    I think you have come the closest to indicating Anarchy is the desire to self govern. It still doesn’t exist in a vaccum and is a condition in which individuals govern their own activities in order to exist within a cooperative community.

    It does not mean that the cooperative community will not take action against offenses ... Just that offenses and penalties are not prescribed by or in laws.

    Edit: 10th Amendment
    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.“

    If you read it correctly, the 10th Amendment has respect towards a form of Anarchy. The very last provision (or to the people) allows for the people to self govern in circumstances where the Government has not been granted the power to govern.

    Albeit it is concept that is generally rejected in our current state of affairs, because people victim to their insecurities and inadequacies, would prefer to write laws that restrict the freedoms of others.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2019
  20. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    I didn't state that there was a chance. In fact my point is that if there was a gun in your face your chances would be exactly the same whether you had a gun or not.
    I don't need to figure out how to defend myself. That is where your argument falls down. Your argument depends on the inevitability of facing a situation where you need to defend yourself and the fact that you had a concealed weapon would make a difference, and the chance of that occurring is miniscule at best. Just look at how easily armed police officers have been ambushed. Why does that happen? Because the perpetrator(s) did not telegraph their intentions, just like any criminal. The only scenario where your argument holds water is if a criminal did in fact telegraph their intentions. Have you ever been faced with/attacked by a criminal? I have. A weapon, concealed or otherwise, would not have made me safer in that situation. In fact, it would have probably made me much less safe, because the person robbing the convenience store where I worked would have ended up with it and possibly used it on me. I also know quite a few police/state troopers/deputies, and they all have told me that concealed/open carry has made their job of protecting the public much, much more difficult.
    As for the first part of this statement, the NRA is most responsible for any shortcomings in the "State's" ability to offer adequate defense. And as for the second part, I don't recall anyone proposing a "police state".

    The ridiculous position that a concealed weapon makes you safer against everyday criminals would only make sense if they gave you warning. "Hey, buddy, I'm about to rob/assault you. Better get your weapon out."
    And in an active shooter situation, it would only increase the carnage if people start pulling out their concealed guns. It would make everyone in the situation less safe and complicate the job of the police responders because they would have no idea who the actual active shooter is. That is exactly what happened a couple of years ago in Dallas. There was an active shooter targeting police officers and with so many people openly carrying weapons it took them a while to figure out who the actual active shooter was. Which gave him opportunity to kill/wound more people than he would have otherwise. I would much rather take my chances with one active shooter than with one active shooter and a bunch of untrained John Wayne wannabes.
     

Top