Shouldn't have resisted arrest

rednosereddit · 2012-02-06T20:39:17.139873+00:00

We currently have an ongoing dispute with the neighbors. They call the cops on us to harass us saying we swore at their kids or drove by their house honking the horn and stupid shit like that. It happens all the time. Their family are a bunch of trashy felons (on is a registered sex offendor for molesting young girls and the other was convicted of drug trafficking way back). They throw nails in our drive, blast music at us, have ran us off the road, and got my sister-in-law fired from her job and evicted by harassing her boss and landlord enough that they just got rid of her to stop the badgering.

The police can do nothing for us. We have been told that. One of the officers for our area is part of their family. He has their back. Even if this wasn't the case nothing can be done. If one of those assholes decides to come in my house one night there is nothing the cops can do. Sure, they could respond AFTER a crime has taken place. But I'm armed, I know how to defend myself, and by that point the problem will have already "worked itself out". I honestly have no use for the cops. They are impotent to help me. This has always been the case, and probably always will be the case.

slaterhearst · 2012-02-06T19:31:10.789488+00:00

This'll never happen. The humans already understand the threat and will begin to try and understand the pythons. They will learn the python language, breed with them, and in time, their differences will be forgotten.

rednosereddit · 2012-02-06T19:03:22.997420+00:00

Dunno. I only ever carry the minimum, so I've never gotten a pay-out. Once I was hit by a drunk driver that drove off in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. Someone else called the cops because my truck was literally undrivable. Was an entirely fruitless endeavor. Cops didn't do anything, insurance company didn't give me a dime, I scrapped my pickup. The money from the scrap didn't even cover towing.

rednosereddit · 2012-02-06T18:53:20.194242+00:00

I live in a no-fault state. It is of no advantage to call the cops over a traffic accident. Insurance pays the same either way.

foszae · 2012-02-06T08:38:04.221737+00:00

Not really sure how to explain a hierarchy to you.... it's kind of a common term to describe the delegation of authority in an organization and how rights and responsibilities flow from the few at the top to the many at the bottom. Have you never heard this term?

When I talk about a direct democracy I am speaking of either a system which could or might not allow direct drafting of legislation by the general public. I only mean that at the very least, the public would have direct democratic means of deciding on whether or not that legislation would be implemented. For instance, you could have a direct democracy in which only elected officials may propose legislation, but all legislation must be voted in by popular vote. I'm just brainstorming a quick example here.

Also, I don't think your analysis of direct democracy or representative democracy takes all the factors into account. For instance, you seem to assert that representatives are "the best and the brightest"; however this is not so. Remember, the uneducated populace you so distrust to run a democracy directly? Those same people are electing uneducated and distrustful representatives to run the government. Therefore, the problem you perceive for one form of democracy is also a problem for the other, though one is once removed (which can be good or bad) from the direct will of the people.

The reason this problem affects both systems is because it is a problem of cultural and social nature, and not a problem of the methodology of the system of government. If people are educated and trustworthy, they can draft their own legislation or elect good representatives. If they are uneducated, then they can not. So I do not see how this argument is pertinent for why one is better than the other in the way you have presented.

I understand what you are saying about corruption in politics, but I don't see how your solution would be better than a direct democracy. Of course, everyone wants to remove corruption from politics, but how do we accomplish this with corrupt politicians when they will not pass legislation to combat it effectively (and therefore ruin their own career)? This is where I feel a direct democracy could be more effective. It is harder to manipulate the general voting populace to support something entirely corrupt, as it is to corrupt select individuals in power. This is what I'm seeing right this moment with ACTA/SOPA/PIPA and the mass resistance publicly, yet strong support from obviously corrupt individuals. In a direct democracy, these acts might be possible, but I think the bar would be raised on actually getting them implemented.

Anyhow, like I said, I think most of the problems we both agree on are of a cultural and societal nature. I feel you have good ideas as for solutions (transparency and such), but ultimately applicable in a direct democracy as well as a representative one. The crux of your argument is flawed and I don't see how it demonstrates why the people should relinquish some of their power to representatives, if we already understand that all things being equal, it would be unnecessary.

fart_lover_5000 · 2012-02-06T08:03:36.363483+00:00

Well, like I said, taken the scene in context with what he's saying, the backdrop, the crowd, the time, the place, it's pretty obvious that he's pandering to racists.

georgewashingtonblog · 1 day

I understand what you are saying. However, it still doesn't absolve the hypocrisy here. It's a clear contradiction of ideology.

georgewashingtonblog · 1 day

It's also hypocritical because he wants the government to take away earned benefits because of how individuals chose to engage themselves economically in the 'free market'. How un-libertarian of him.

georgewashingtonblog · 1 day

If the representatives earned those benefits for the work they did, why does Rand Paul, a libertarian, support a federal law taking away their earned benefits? Seems 100% hypocritical to me.

foszae · 1 day

It certainly has drawbacks but I have to disagree with the general idea you are presenting. In some ways direct democracy can pose a risk to the uninformed masses. But remember, in congress (USA) we already have this issue; look at Michelle Bachman or many of the ignorant bills that have been popular to protest as of late. So you say that ignorance will reign under a direct democracy; I say it does in a representative democracy. Is one worse than the other? I don't know. So it seems to me that the failures you are really speaking of are failures of culture and societal values, rather than democracy itself.

On the other hand I think that change would happen quicker under a direct democracy. Take Marijuana reform, for instance. The large majority supports legalization and regulation. So what's holding it back? The representatives, not the populace. Yeah, I realize this goes against the point I just made in a way, but I feel its valid to look at the other side. Again, I also think this all depends on societal values and culture.

Anyways, I suppose in a way I agree that democracy could backfire in the way you have described. It is certainly a double-edged sword. However, I don't feel that it is fair to compare our dysfunctional representative democracy to a healthy democracy that is much flatter and more direct. I also don't think its entirely fair to blame our cultural and social shortcomings on the system of government, as if it's responsible.

foszae · 1 day

Well, I mean there was and probably still is an idea that the transition to socialism be done through an authority figure or group, i.e. the vanguard. I think that this idea has lost much credibility and popularity through its historic failures. That's why I said 'preferred'.

Especially with the advent of the internet and the increased ease at which direct democracy can be implemented. I don't know if Marx could envision that then, but it certainly coincides with the ideology he presented.

foszae · 2 days

I think direct democracy is the preferred method of government for most forms of socialism. We certainly advocate direct democracy in the workplace. For most socialists and anarchists, we view a hierarchical structure as inherently authoritarian in nature.

Think of it like this, if you remove private ownership without removing hierarchy then you are left with equally oppressive systems as capitalism at best, and more oppressive systems at worst. What's the point of changing the slave owner from an individual to the state if you still have no say in what goes on? I think the socialist movement has largely learned its lesson (in a big way) in this area.

So yeah, public ownership, community control, and all that jazz has to be democratically controlled in a flattened matter if it is to be anything more than lip service to our ideals.

almodozo · 2 days

We were being sarcastic jerks.

rednosereddit · 2 days

Seriously, can I get one example?

fart_lover_5000 · 2 days

Everything, though not overtly.

almodozo · 2 days

Wait wait. Corporations would LIKE to pay us more but the minimum wage is preventing them. Just allow them to pay the majority of people third world salaries and a few of us in upper management can get a raise!

RON PAUL 2012!

cityofcranes · 2 days

I love her silly name.

"Hi, I'm Gary: Street pharmacist. People call me 'Apothegary'."

anutensil · 2 days

I think the opposite. It's misleading not to consider all taxes when talking about how each class is taxed.

justrun7 · 3 days

darkles

Sindragon · 3 days

The article is incorrect. The court can find his actions are an attempt to hide assets and rule they are fair game. The system isn't that crippled, guys. Sheesh.

fart_lover_5000 · 3 days

Ron Paul is so not racist that he only had a few meetings and conference calls with racist leaders from nationalist organizations and happens to keep running into this embarrassing issue over a 20+ year period! He's trying to beat them back with a stick but they just keep forcing him to talk to them, give speeches pandering to them, hiring them to write letters for him, get his picture taken with them, and so on. How could I have been so blind!?

fart_lover_5000 · 3 days

By standing up in front of the confederate flag and arguing that the south was right (states rights and all that regardless of how factually incorrect Paul is on the matter) is a direct megaphone to all the racists in the room screaming "LOOK AT ME! I'M RON PAUL, A GUY WHO HAS THE SAME VALUES AS YOU!" It's the dogwhistle racism that Atwater was talking about. He isn't saying anything overtly racist, but his message is absolutely clear to the racists in the crowd.

I'm not just looking into nothing here. I used to live near Pulaski, TN, birthplace and still current home to the KKK. I've known members. I was a correctional officer at the state prison in Clifton, TN. I've dealt with these Aryan Nation/Aryan Brotherhood individuals. This is the fucking code they speak in. Ron Paul is speaking in their tongue, but you don't have to have been around a bunch of mouthbreathing racists to see that.

fart_lover_5000 · 3 days

It's a speech pandering to a certain crowd. He may not be saying "NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER" to them, but that's what they are hearing. He knows it. They know it.

And if he didn't he is the biggest buffoon in the republican race right now and that is saying a lot considering the competition.

fart_lover_5000 · 3 days

If he quacks like a duck, runs a duck newsletter, gets his picture taken with duck leaders, speaks in front of a duck flag about how the ducks have a point, well then. I don't know. Maybe he isn't a duck but I'm pretty sure he'd peck at some tale bread by the pond.

But hey, I think his policies are dogwhistle racism, too. So claiming that he isn't overt about his racial tendencies doesn't really fly with me.

fart_lover_5000 · 3 days

Give it up dude. Just accept the fact that Ron Paul was too incompetent to run a newsletter. The guy made the case pretty well. Now won't you elect him president?

/sarcasm

dezmodium

TROPHY CASE

dezmodium

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login