[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Woman Fakes Autism to Lure Caregiver Into Sex Trap

FDA threatens to pull e-cigarettes off the market

The Rise of Trump

Prepare for President Trump to call upon American citizens to defend the Republic against the lawless deep state

Roger Stone: Deep State plans to remove POTUS Trump, VP Pence, to install Pelosi and Hillary in COUP

As Marijuana Legalization Expands, the NFL Clings to Prohibition. For Now.

Facing populist assault, global elites regroup in Davos

Man who rescued deer from frozen lake faces fine after taking animal home to nurse back to health

Muslim mob ACID attacks people leaving London nightclub Muslim mob ACID attacks people leaving London nightclub, gang jailed for a total of nearly 60 years

ANOTHER Junk #ANOTHER Junk #FakeNews Report Implodes: Russian Hooker Admits She Made Up Trump-Russia Collusion So Mueller Would Spring Her Report Implodes: Russian Hooker Admits She Made Up Trump-Russia Collusion So Mueller Would Spring Her from Jail

Police Officers more likely to die by suicide than line of duty

Phil Robertson Explains Why America Needs a Wall

Facebook employees were caught writing 5-star reviews for its Portal device on Amazon (tr)

I Believe: The Best She Can Be? | Gillette (Response Film) BANNED ON FACEBOOK

How To Make a WordPress Website - 2019 - For Beginners

Donald Trump is Finished

This is why Native Americans are marching on Washington

Eisenhower’s Nightmare on Steroids; graduated nuclear escalation v2.0

Trump Tweaks Border Stance in Bid to Shift Shutdown Blame

Trump Backs 'Path To Citizenship' For H-1B Recipients: 'Rest Assured That Changes Are Soon Coming'

Television Networks Put Out 90 Percent Anti-Trump Spin in 2018

What We Own...

“NewsGuard” organization founded by globalists to censor independent media has ties to pro-Monsanto American Enterprise Institute propagandists

Driver attempts to destroy giant snowman, not realizing it’s built on a large tree trunk

Newly Elected Sheriff Arrested for Stealing Meth from Evidence Room—Second Day on Job

Chicago cop gets 81-month sentence in Laquan McDonald murder

The circular firing squad: Mueller targets turn on each other

Retired cop, arrested by Bloomfield PD, fatally shoots himself inside police headquarters

LAWSUIT CLAIMS SHEILA JACKSON LEE FIRED A STAFFER TO COVER UP A RAPE

18 U.S. Code § 1622 - Subornation of perjury

New York Bill Allowing Abortions Up to Birth Says a Person is Only “A Human Being Who Has Been Born”

Feds say ‘star’ DEA agent abroad stole millions

Black People Dismantle "White Privilege"

Liberals Threaten to Terrorize and Imprison Trump Supporters

William Barr’s ‘Deep State’ resume: Cover-ups, covert ops, and pardons

Innocent Marine Vet Falsely Arrested, Brutally Strip Searched in Horrific ‘Punishment’

Oklahoma Cops Jail Four Men for Transporting Legal Hemp

Watch a Florida Cop Botch a Drug Field Test on Video, Then Arrest an Innocent Man

Vigilante Anarchist Bus Driver, git 'er done

Racist Bitch Kamala Harris Tries to Bully Kirstjen Nielsen then Kirstjen Gets Fed Up And Fights Back!

Assad points to attempts to divide Church of Antioch in Syria, Lebanon

Trump Cancels Pelosi's Brussels Junket (Gov Shutdown, no jet)

Despite ban, N.H. lawmakers say they will continue to carry guns in the State House

Gun Owners of America Funds Challenge to National Firearms Act in U.S. Supreme Court

War Whores Scramble To Say Syria Attack Means Troops Must Remain

Volunteers Kicked Out of Nat’l Park for Cleaning It During Shutdown—Without a Permit

William Barr’s Connection to Ruby Ridge, Defending FBI Snipers

The 100th Anniversary of the Ratification of the Amendment That Led to Prohibition Is a Reminder of the Lasting Damage Bad Policy Can Do

Are You Suffering From Toxic Masculinity? Know The Warning Signs

Hillary Clinton ran weapons into Libya for the Obama administration, while Michael Flynn was targeted because he knew the details


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles

Title: Laws Always Mean Guns to the Face
Source: Everything Voluntary
URL Source: http://everything-voluntary.com/laws-always-mean-guns-to-the-face
Published: May 10, 2018
Author: Skyler J. Collins
Post Date: 2018-05-15 10:29:46 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 180
Comments: 4

One of the very first red pills a person swallows on the journey toward becoming a voluntaryist is the idea that every law is guaranteed by an act of violence. In our day and age, that means a gun to the face. In days past, it meant a sword, a club, or a fist. Thus begins the critical analysis of every type of government law that is proposed, passed, and enforced.

It often proceeds as follows: laws regulating the use of private property are summarily dismissed as obvious violations of liberty; laws regulating the use of one’s body are likewise summarily dismissed as obvious violations liberty; laws requiring fees for permission to do things or fines for doing the wrong thing are next; and sooner or later, laws requiring people to give a part of their income to the government and laws protecting businesses from competition are seen for what they are: extortion and protectionism.

Finally, the budding voluntaryist recognizes that the claims of territorial jurisdiction made by people who call themselves “government” are without factual merit. They are nothing more than, “Pay us and obey our rules, or else!” The commands wouldn’t be so bad if not for the “or else!” What is the “or else!”? It’s a gun to the face. Always.

Mind-bogglingly, some people at some point in this journey fail to understand that government laws always mean a gun to the face. Their argument is that because the law is not always enforced at the point of a gun, the law does not always mean a gun to the face. It is perfectly observable the fact that laws are not always enforced at gunpoint. Most people hand over their income, follow business regulations, drive the speed limit, et cetera, without any guns to their face. This is all well and good, but begs the question: why do they do this?

There are two reasons why people obey government laws: 1) to avoid a gun to their face, and 2) other self-interested reasons. The ongoing threat of a gun to the face is why laws are obeyed as a matter of law. If people calling themselves “government” were not willing to enforce their laws at gunpoint, their laws would deteriorate (as many specific laws do). Anybody seemingly obeying them at this point are not doing so to avoid a gun in the face. They are doing so for some other self-interested reason.

I don’t murder people, but not because there’s a government law that says I’m not allowed to murder people. I don’t murder because I consider murder wrong and want to avoid hurting other people, and my conscience. Same goes for speeding on the freeway. I drive the speed I’m comfortable driving. As does everyone else in the absence of speed limits. Government laws prohibiting liberties are wrong, and government laws prohibiting crimes are redundant.

One of the final red pills swallowed by the voluntaryist is the idea that people can be peaceful and cooperative in the absence of people calling themselves “government” and forcing others to pay them and obey their rules. What begins as a critical analysis of these rules rightly ends as a rejection of the people making them.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Deckard (#0)

There are two reasons why people obey government laws:

No. One reason: The people wrote the laws, not some government dictator.

If the people want to change the laws they can. But the author would have us believe that forces beyond are control are making us miserable and there's nothing to do about it -- except write articles for money.

misterwhite  posted on  2018-05-15   10:38:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Deckard (#0)

Finally, the budding voluntaryist recognizes that the claims of territorial jurisdiction made by people who call themselves “government” are without factual merit. They are nothing more than, “Pay us and obey our rules, or else!” The commands wouldn’t be so bad if not for the “or else!” What is the “or else!”? It’s a gun to the face. Always.

Mind-bogglingly, some people at some point in this journey fail to understand that government laws always mean a gun to the face. Their argument is that because the law is not always enforced at the point of a gun, the law does not always mean a gun to the face

What you say is true: all law always means a gun (or its equivalent) to the face. The law of God, for example, is not usually immediately self- enforcing, but there's final judgment and the Lake of Fire waiting for those who defy it.

The place where you and I part ways is here, when you say this: "One of the final red pills swallowed by the voluntaryist is the idea that people can be peaceful and cooperative in the absence of people calling themselves “government” and forcing others to pay them and obey their rules. What begins as a critical analysis of these rules rightly ends as a rejection of the people making them."

I know you believe that is the truth. But I am certain that it's not. If men were angels, we would not need laws, and we would not need to resort to the gun. But men are not angels, and they cannot ever become angels, no matter how well they are treated. Children who are treated very well in every way nevertheless often go postal and become drug addicts and violent "brats". And to keep kids from becoming brats, some inherently violent force must be applied - even if the violence is indirect.

Nothing changes when a child crosses an imaginary age barrier and becomes an adult. The only difference between a 50 year old and a 17 year old is that the 50 year old has a lot more experience with reality and getting battered around by the world. 17 year olds have quicker minds and healthier bodies, and are more naive.

I think it is completely naive - a hallucinatory fantasy - that human beings can live anywhere close to volunteerism. We are animals who need SUBSTANTIAL resources in order to be healthy, let alone happy. And resources are scarce. Humans have to compete for those resources, and in competition, cunning, strength and brute force are all effective.

Looking with a hurt face and tut-tutting those who have greater strength and less empathy, who shove the more sociable and honest and empathetic aside and take by force what is best for them - this is what one is left with: turn the other cheek and let the strong take advantage.

Trouble is, the strong will then go on to impose taxes, laws, rules, etc.

There is no combination of policy, laxness and upbringing that will prevent a substantial number of human beings from using violent force, if they can, to grab what they want and make others submit to them. Rape is not caused by acculturation, and cannot be trained or taught out of men.

This is a natural reality: chimps are violent and murder each other too, and they can't be taught not to. Men are smarter than chimps, and the ability to use greater intelligence to compel those beneath exists.

Pure "Voluntaryism" will not and cannot ever work among human beings or chimps. We did evolve to be that way. We're not bonobos, and we're not vegans like deer or sheep (and even deer or sheep are pretty violent in mating season). We're men, and while we're not wholly evil, we're by no means wholly good either. All of us won't abuse the weak, but a substantial number of us WILL do so, unless constrained by greater force.

This is where we differ philosophically: on the actual composition of the heart of man.

You believe that the heart and mind of man is pure, and that if men are allowed to make decisions without force, they won't resort to violence and compulsion. I am willing to allow that in Garden-of-Eden conditions that might even be true, maybe. But actual natural conditions of earth are far, far less ideal. Scarcity is real, and pervasive, and that drives men much farther along the line of force and defense.

I'm not a Calvinist. I do not believe that men are TOTALLY depraved and TOTALLY without any good in us. I've never observed that to be so, and it is not.

Men are capable of great good and also great evil, and humanity overall does not change. We have laws, enforced by the gun, because we HAVE TO. The alternative is violent rule by OTHER men with guns. Pure "voluntaryism" simply will not work for the organization of a society, or a family farm, or anything in between.

Where we can find common ground, I think, is in the realization that we don't, as a society, need to REVEL so much in the application of force and the boot to the face. We can do with LESS restriction and regulation, at least in some areas, than we currently have. I can work with someone like you to lessen the encounters with the gun, to reduce the things that are regulated, though in the course of loosening the restrictions, it becomes clearer and clearer over time that where restrictions DO remain, they have to be enforced pretty strongly - perhaps even stronger than they currently are - simply because the "grey zone" is substantially reduced, bringing the "red zone" of behavior closer to most people.

I think you believe that if the gun were taken out of law and things became voluntary, we would move to a much better place. I think we'd move straight back into the Dark Ages.

I certainly can agree to LESS restriction than we currently have. We have gone much too far, in my opinion, and a good amount of that is driven by the desire to police petty morals and vices. I think we should cut that stuff way back.

But "zero" is never a realistic option. One does not cure obesity through utter famine, one simply kills people in a different way.

Vicomte13  posted on  2018-05-15   11:28:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Deckard (#0)

Laws Always Mean Guns to the Face

So do no laws.

What we need to keep doing is seeking the happy medium ground between the extremes of a police state and anarchy.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-15   12:26:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: misterwhite (#1)

The people wrote the laws, not some government dictator.

HorseHillary!

Name just ONE law YOU wrote.

In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.

sneakypete  posted on  2018-05-15   12:27:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com