Let's fight back against the NDAA

[dsheinem]

Bolded for emphasis. I'm not commenting on either your stance or mjmjr25's, but Inazuma, you have to stop thinking that your perception is the only correct one. Because if you think that then you're exactly the same as a religious fundamentalist.

This. This is why nobody likes you Inazuma.

that's not fair. I like you, Izzy, and so do plenty of others around here. It is your mode of arguing and the way you allow fallacious reasoning to obscure what could be a compelling and sympathetic argument that is the main irritant (for me, anyway).

[mjmjr25]

This is a video game forum - so i'm not about to spend hours on a dissertation about my personal views to other guys who's main purpose on this thread is to discuss video games. Not that I have an issue discussing politics at all, however the majority of political debates on forums end up w/uninformed folks saying generic things like, "it is the governments fault..." and "Republicans are stupid" among other non-sensical, unsubstantiated rhetorical commentaries that dumb us all down.

So, i'll briefly explain it in this manner.

We, as a peoples, have too much freedom. Yes, there is a thing as too much freedom. You can not claim to have freedom but also have a series of institutions in place preventing the majority from acting on their free choice.

Example: Donald Blom, a known and convicted kidnapper, child molester and rapist was released early from prison (for good behavior), was released on additional kidnapping / murder charges due to an alibi from his wife (which turned out to be a lie), allowed to change his name legally, in order to purchase property, was allowed to travel to other counties and eventually murdered and repeatedly raped a girl in a town 15 mins. from where I live.

What is my point? Bad things happen, right? Right - they do, but because of all "the freedoms" we have created in this country, some horrible things happen that should be avoided. He should have never been released the first time - in fact, in a truly "free" country, he would have been hung by a mob in that first small Minnesota town. But yes, he should not have been released, he should not have been allowed to buy property under a new name, he should not have been allowed to locate anywhere w/o the folks in that town knowing who he was. But what happened, this poor poor guy was being harrassed, people called him a rapist and a molestor and this just isn't fair? Right, the ACLU doesn't want us to insult members of NAMBLA, the ACLU thinks its wrong to paint "PEDOPHILE" on the garage of a, wait for it, pedophile. So they, and other liberal minded organizations fight for the rights to not only register if your level 3, among other "ideals" for sake of "freedom for all". Until there is absolute freedom (ie, lynch mob / utopian ideals - which are not realistic either) then yes, I 100% support the holding of people who are suspected of anything horrendous: rape, child abuse, and absolutely terrorism.

Will mistakes be made, yeah, probably. But I would think someone as idealistic as you would understand the idea of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. But, obviously, only when it suits your needs. Hypocrite.

[RyaNtheSlayA]

Bolded for emphasis. I'm not commenting on either your stance or mjmjr25's, but Inazuma, you have to stop thinking that your perception is the only correct one. Because if you think that then you're exactly the same as a religious fundamentalist.

This. This is why nobody likes you Inazuma.

that's not fair. I like you, Izzy, and so do plenty of others around here. It is your mode of arguing and the way you allow fallacious reasoning to obscure what could be a compelling and sympathetic argument that is the main irritant (for me, anyway).

I like Izzy too, he just makes me pull my hair out every now and then.*

*But I completely agree with MrPopo

[AmishSamurai]

Right, the ACLU doesn't want us to insult members of NAMBLA, the ACLU thinks its wrong to paint "PEDOPHILE" on the garage of a, wait for it, pedophile.

To be fair, I don't want people painting words that summarize who I am on my door either. If it was painting "FAGGOT" on the door of a gay couple, or the N-bomb on the garage of a black family, would you support this too?

[mjmjr25]

Right, the ACLU doesn't want us to insult members of NAMBLA, the ACLU thinks its wrong to paint "PEDOPHILE" on the garage of a, wait for it, pedophile.

To be fair, I don't want people painting words that summarize who I am on my door either. If it was painting "FAGGOT" on the door of a gay couple, or the N-bomb on the garage of a black family, would you support this too?

Are you comparing a pedophile to someone who is black? I think that argument is beyond the confines of a slippery slope. Its just silly actually.

*btw - the "N" word, means to be lazy, nothing more. It is only children and racists who use it and extend its incorrect usage. Pass it on.

[AmishSamurai]

Right, the ACLU doesn't want us to insult members of NAMBLA, the ACLU thinks its wrong to paint "PEDOPHILE" on the garage of a, wait for it, pedophile.

To be fair, I don't want people painting words that summarize who I am on my door either. If it was painting "FAGGOT" on the door of a gay couple, or the N-bomb on the garage of a black family, would you support this too?

Are you comparing a pedophile to someone who is black? I think that argument is beyond the confines of a slippery slope. Its just silly actually.

*btw - the "N" word, means to be lazy, nothing more. It is only children and racists who use it and extend its incorrect usage. Pass it on.

What I was trying to get at is that despite who it belonged to, it was still vandalism. I just worded it poorly.

[dsheinem]

Because of all "the freedoms" we have created in this country, some horrible things happen that should be avoided. He should have never been released the first time - in fact, in a truly "free" country, he would have been hung by a mob in that first small Minnesota town. But yes, he should not have been released, he should not have been allowed to buy property under a new name, he should not have been allowed to locate anywhere w/o the folks in that town knowing who he was.

No justice system is perfect, and substituting mob rule for what we have would be equally as problematic.

its wrong to paint ANYTHING on the garage of a, wait for it, garage that doesn't belong to you

FTFY

yes, I 100% support the holding of people who are suspected of anything horrendous: rape, child abuse, and absolutely terrorism.

Indefinite detention based only on suspicion? Yikes. How'd that work out for the Soviets? Are you suggesting that this country needs a Stalinist purge?

greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Ah, tyranny of the majority. Got ya.

Look, I have a lot of respect for you as I hope you know, but the way you are stating your claim - well it looks like you are calling for the overturning of a lot of core principles of American society...

I'd rather have the occasional convict get out and murder once again, the occasional terrorist slip through, or the occasional rapist running loose than have to live in fear that the state will lock me up and throw away the key on the grounds of suspicion or on the belief that personal reform is impossible.

[mjmjr25]

^Ok, I see (in response to Amish Samurai).

From a vandalism standpoint - that is what greater point of what i'm saying. We want our laws to be black and white - vandalism is vandalism. But therein lies the problem, it isn't black and white, there are always situation circumstances. In this situation, we are talking about holding folks suspected of terrorism (or ties to). But wait, AMERICAN CITIZENS! That's the point, sometimes we need to look at the grey areas, don't we? We need to look at the majority, the greater good. Holding a guy suspected of putting his trash into his neighbors trash can indefinately - nope, that's a problem, and the majority most likely feels that way. Holding a guy suspected of wanting to blow up your city, umm, I don't have a problem with that, and it sounds like a slight majority, including many politician's elected by us, don't either.

Direct example:
I would not have a problem with someone painting PEDOPHILE on Donald Blom's door. Neither would "most" of the people in my town (a minority would though, yes). But in a truly free society, majority rules.

I would have a problem with someone painting "faggot" on someone's door, yes. I think the majority also would, but I don't know for certain.

[Inazuma]

This is a video game forum - so i'm not about to spend hours on a dissertation about my personal views to other guys who's main purpose on this thread is to discuss video games. Not that I have an issue discussing politics at all, however the majority of political debates on forums end up w/uninformed folks saying generic things like, "it is the governments fault..." and "Republicans are stupid" among other non-sensical, unsubstantiated rhetorical commentaries that dumb us all down.

So, i'll briefly explain it in this manner.

We, as a peoples, have too much freedom. Yes, there is a thing as too much freedom. You can not claim to have freedom but also have a series of institutions in place preventing the majority from acting on their free choice.

Example: Donald Blom, a known and convicted kidnapper, child molester and rapist was released early from prison (for good behavior), was released on additional kidnapping / murder charges due to an alibi from his wife (which turned out to be a lie), allowed to change his name legally, in order to purchase property, was allowed to travel to other counties and eventually murdered and repeatedly raped a girl in a town 15 mins. from where I live.

What is my point? Bad things happen, right? Right - they do, but because of all "the freedoms" we have created in this country, some horrible things happen that should be avoided. He should have never been released the first time - in fact, in a truly "free" country, he would have been hung by a mob in that first small Minnesota town. But yes, he should not have been released, he should not have been allowed to buy property under a new name, he should not have been allowed to locate anywhere w/o the folks in that town knowing who he was. But what happened, this poor poor guy was being harrassed, people called him a rapist and a molestor and this just isn't fair? Right, the ACLU doesn't want us to insult members of NAMBLA, the ACLU thinks its wrong to paint "PEDOPHILE" on the garage of a, wait for it, pedophile. So they, and other liberal minded organizations fight for the rights to not only register if your level 3, among other "ideals" for sake of "freedom for all". Until there is absolute freedom (ie, lynch mob / utopian ideals - which are not realistic either) then yes, I 100% support the holding of people who are suspected of anything horrendous: rape, child abuse, and absolutely terrorism.

Will mistakes be made, yeah, probably. But I would think someone as idealistic as you would understand the idea of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. But, obviously, only when it suits your needs. Hypocrite.

Holy shit. You were serious?

Molesting kids and murdering people is bad, but you shouldn't be able to just throw anyone you want in jail forever, without a trial. What's so bad about having a trial anyway? If someone is really a molester or murderer, there is a good chance that he will be determined guilty. Assumptions are not always 100% correct. If you are going to lock someone away forever, wouldn't you like to learn more and have a better idea if the guy is actually bad or not?

Here is a simple example of how your way of thinking could fuck things up. You turn a corner and see one person kill another. You assume that the killer is a horrible person and want to lock him away without a trial, but you have no idea that he was only defending himself from a real killer.

Once again, why is it so bad to have a trial?

[MrPopo]

greatest good for the greatest number of people.

Ah, tyranny of the majority. Got ya.

Look, I have a lot of respect for you as I hope you know, but the way you are stating your claim - well it looks like you are calling for the overturning of a lot of core principles of American society...

I'd rather have the occasional convict get out and murder once again, the occasional terrorist slip through, or the occasional rapist running loose than have to live in fear that the state will lock me up and throw away the key on the grounds of suspicion or on the belief that personal reform is impossible.

I think your chances of being imprisoned under suspicion of terrorism are about equal to your chances of being murdered by that occasional convict. I'd rather take the option where I'm not being murdered and I could potentially be released.