Let's talk cops

[MarioB]

ive seen car SMOG check points. California CHP and a smog ramp. test your car on the side of the road if they think it wont pass

[bbeljefe]

^so you're saying that we should get rid of cops, and more than half of the laws?

No. I'm saying we should get rid of cops and all but one law.

And as I said above, there is nothing at all that a cop can do to stop a crime that you or I can't do. Once a crime (that has an actual victim) has been committed, common law courts can and have been used in the past to resolve the issue. Writing a bunch of nonsensical, bullshit legalese on paper has never, ever stopped or even so much as slowed down actual crime. It may slow some victimless crimes but therein lies the problem..... because if there is no victim, there can be no crime.

Now, that's not to say I'm opposed to policing an area or providing security to people who need it. However, handing guns to low IQ order following men and women who do not think independently does nothing to make anyone safe. Matter of fact, it makes a LOT of innocent people unsafe. And that's not my opinion, it's an empirically verifiable fact.

[Broke_Audio_Addict]

That wouldn't work either though.

Total freedom is anarchy and I doubt that's what most want.

You would also be handing over whole entire city's to gangs to do with what they please and I doubt you Want that either.

[MrSkippyJ]

^so you're saying that we should get rid of cops, and more than half of the laws?

No. I'm saying we should get rid of cops and all but one law.

And as I said above, there is nothing at all that a cop can do to stop a crime that you or I can't do. Once a crime (that has an actual victim) has been committed, common law courts can and have been used in the past to resolve the issue. Writing a bunch of nonsensical, bullshit legalese on paper has never, ever stopped or even so much as slowed down actual crime. It may slow some victimless crimes but therein lies the problem..... because if there is no victim, there can be no crime.

Now, that's not to say I'm opposed to policing an area or providing security to people who need it. However, handing guns to low IQ order following men and women who do not think independently does nothing to make anyone safe. Matter of fact, it makes a LOT of innocent people unsafe. And that's not my opinion, it's an empirically verifiable fact.

This is just not true. There is plenty of stuff I don't do simply because it is illegal. I don't drive illegally because I don't want to face the consequences. I would much rather drive following what I consider to be the right way, but the laws don't necessarily agree with me

It is true that laws can't really do anything to stop something, but they can provide consequences for different things. I do agree with you that existing laws can't stop something from happening though. But they can help deter some things.

[bbeljefe]

That wouldn't work either though.

Total freedom is anarchy and I doubt that's what most want.

You would also be handing over whole entire city's to gangs to do with what they please and I doubt you Want that either.

Really? Whole cities have already been turned over to gangs in blue costumes.

Don't believe me? What makes you more nervous.... being followed by a box Chevy with four rough looking guys in it or a black and white with red and blue lights on it?

Who are you most likely to be able to successfully defend yourself from in a home invasion.... a group of hooded thugs who want your jewelry or a group of SWAT members who want to rifle through your shit to see if you have the wrong plant in your house?

The worst possible outcome from anarchy would be that another state would form. So what you're saying is that if you have cancer now you can't cut it out, because you might wind up with cancer later on in life.....

[bbeljefe]

This is just not true. There is plenty of stuff I don't do simply because it is illegal. I don't drive illegally because I don't want to face the consequences. I would much rather drive following what I consider to be the right way, but the laws don't necessarily agree with me

It is true that laws can't really do anything to stop something, but they can provide consequences for different things. I do agree with you that existing laws can't stop something from happening though. But they can help deter some things.

Okay, what are those things and what victims would there be if you didn't follow those laws?

I don't know what "drive illegally" means but let's look at a few possibilities and if I'm off base, you can correct me....

Speeding: There are areas of the world right now where there are no speed limits and no traffic signals. Guess what? Accident rates are down remarkably from where they were before those rules were dropped.

Driving without a licence: If you don't have a license or if your license is expired, does that mean you no longer know how to drive? Does one forget where the brake and gas pedal are once he doesn't have that permission slip from his political masters?

Not signaling lane changes/turns or having burnt out lights: How many victims does this cause each day, relative to the number of people who don't use their signals or don't know they have one that's inoperative?

Running stop signs/traffic signals: This one is arguably the most dangerous one on the list so far. But... it's just as dangerous for you as it is for the person(s) you might hit and everyone knows this. Does it happen? Yes. But... does the fact that police exist stop it from happening? More importantly, if there were no road pirates, would you do it purposefully?

Also, if there were no state would you rape your neighbor's wife? Would you steal his lawn mower? Would you push old ladies out the way to get on a bus?

In short, if there were no state and thus, no laws.... what exactly would you do that would inevitably and purposefully create victims of any random person who unfortunately crossed your path?

My bet is that there is nothing you would do to purposefully or neglectfully cause actual, real victims if there were no laws to stop you. And frankly, if your moral compass is so fucked up that you would.... then you will do those things regardless of the consequences.

[ROLEXrifleman]

Glad I'm in the right gang

[Broke_Audio_Addict]

The problem is that there are lots of people who's moral compass is non existent and if the had free reign you can bet your ass it'd get out of hand real quick.

I'll take my chances with the boys in blue before I take my chances with the boys with blue and red rags on their heads, not all Leo's are bad.

If you don't think it would be bad or get worse look at what the drug cartels do, if you don't think that would happen here you're blind.

You might really like the idea of anarchy but I don't think you fully understand what would come with that.

[JEMT8]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. You aren't guarenteed by the constitution to be able to drive. You have to pass a certain criteria to show you are eligible to do so. You agree to following a certain set of rules and standards when using your license to drive and if you don't want to follow them or don't like them, then take public transportation. So in short, by using your license, you are agreeing to being subject to a check point.

[bbeljefe]

The problem is that there are lots of people who's moral compass is non existent and if the had free reign you can bet your ass it'd get out of hand real quick.

I'll take my chances with the boys in blue before I take my chances with the boys with blue and red rags on their heads, not all Leo's are bad.

If you don't think it would be bad or get worse look at what the drug cartels do, if you don't think that would happen here you're blind.

You might really like the idea of anarchy but I don't think you fully understand what would come with that.

Yeah and right now those people can become cops and legally carry deadly weapons. Rarely does a day go by where there isn't a news story where a cop shoots someone who's unarmed. They also taze the elderly and children and there are so many cops brought up on rape charges that it would make your head swim.

Bottom line is this... if it's true that most people are bad then it's also true that the bad people will gravitate to positions of power, which is what we see now. If a sociopath or psychopath can't become a cop or a politician, he's a lot less inclined to carry out his evil because he would know that everyone has the right to defend themselves from him. But when they don't, these people take jobs as cops and do all manner of evil to the innocent and guilty alike.

And in an anarchistic society there would be no prohibition on drugs and thus, no reason at all for drug cartels to exist. The mob came to be because the state prohibited alcohol and prostitution. Before those prohibitions, there was no mafia and there were no drug cartels.

Lastly, if you think I'm agitating for anarchy because I'm an idiot, you're sorely mistaken sir. I've studied philosophy an psychology for years and have come to the conclusions I've come to through a rigorous examination of human action. In short, you can't present an argument for statism that I can't soundly refute in a matter of minutes. ;-)