Public Servants & Public Information

[mswas]

Originally Posted by hatesfreedom

So if I arrest you for pot, and you come and picket my house with revolutionary protest. Can I then track you down and protest at your house all night?

They don't need to track me down, if they have arrested me they already have my address on file.

I mean you came to my neighborhood and disturbed my wife, I won't stand for that type of immoral behavior.

I guess fair is fair. If they can muster enough people for an all-night protest at my home then they can do so. But if enough police come out and start picketing my block, you can bet they are going to piss off hundreds more people, so it would work out in my favor ultimately.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Khampelf

I think I've lost respect for you, mswas.

I think I don't give a shit.

[LurkMeister]

Originally Posted by mswas

Yes, I seriously believe this.

Originally Posted by mswas

Getting arrested is not a natural consequence of smoking pot. It is the consequence of someone trying to modify my behavior for not socially beneficial reason. It shouldn't be against the law.

In the reality we live in, I stand a chance of being arrested, and they stand a chance of being protested.

Please show me where I said I should be exempt from the law? I said it shouldn't be a law in the first place, and it shouldn't be enforced. Those who choose to enforce this wicked law, should be held accountable for those actions.

It's a Congressman's job to make the laws, if he makes a law I don't like, I protest him. Should I not protest him because he's just doing his job?

bolding mine

Originally Posted by mswas

No, do not repeat or paraphrase my argument, you don't understand it at all.

Are you denying that you said what I quoted above? Please explain the difference between what I said that you said, and what I just quoted you as saying. In the first quote, you agreed that you believe "Every police officer who enforces a law should be subject to possible protest at their home by anyone who feels that the law they enforced is immoral?" and in the bolded part of the second you repeat it, except that you do not refer to the law as "immoral", just that it shouldn't be a law.

[Khampelf]

Originally Posted by mswas

I think I don't give a shit.

That's too bad, I was probably one of the few left who kind of liked you.

Some argue to test ideas and enjoy exchange of info.

You seem to argue just to be argumentative.

You give enough of a shit to respond to this.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by LurkMeister

Are you denying that you said what I quoted above? Please explain the difference between what I said that you said, and what I just quoted you as saying. In the first quote, you agreed that you believe "Every police officer who enforces a law should be subject to possible protest at their home by anyone who feels that the law they enforced is immoral?" and in the bolded part of the second you repeat it, except that you do not refer to the law as "immoral", just that it shouldn't be a law.

I said that it shouldn't be a law and it shouldn't be enforced, not that I personally should be exempt from a law everyone else is subject to.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Khampelf

That's too bad, I was probably one of the few left who kind of liked you.

Some argue to test ideas and enjoy exchange of info.

You seem to argue just to be argumentative.

Another person who just makes a personal attack and then is like, "Oh you argued with my personal attack, therefore you are just being argumentative."

You said you lost respect for me because I think it's fair to protest outside of a police officer's home for enforcing an unjust law. How is that me just being argumentative?

I am not here because I want people to like me. I guess it's really important to a lot of you that you have this clique and get all gushy and emotional about it. I get that elsewhere, I don't need it from this message board.

You give enough of a shit to respond to this.

Sure why not, at any time you want to back out of the ridiculous line in the sand you just drew, feel free.

[Khampelf]

Originally Posted by mswas

I said that it shouldn't be a law and it shouldn't be enforced, not that I personally should be exempt from a law everyone else is subject to.

Nope. "you personally" doesn't have any part of the two different quotes. It's not about "you personally".

No one said you said you were personally exempt in the quotes we are examining.


Any person should be able to protest at the home of a police officer who has enforced a law the person feels to be immoral, because the immoral law should not be enforced.


Is this your argument, stated in a way our tiny monkey brains might have a chance of understanding your morally superior brilliance?

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Khampelf

Nope. "you personally" doesn't have any part of the two different quotes. It's not about "you personally".

No one said you said you were personally exempt in the quotes we are examining.

He was actually. What I am saying is that I shouldn't be exempt from the law, that it shouldn't be a law, and anyone participating in the crime of enforcing an unjust law is culpable for the harm it causes.

Any person should be able to protest at the home of a police officer who has enforced a law the person feels to be immoral, because the immoral law should not be enforced.

Yes. The enforcing officer should not be exempt from protest against the unjust law.

Is this your argument, stated in a way our tiny monkey brains might have a chance of understanding your morally superior brilliance?

The hive mind is strong today. lol It's funny that people feel the need to step into the line of fire. I guess I stirred some shit up for real, really bruised a lot of egos, even ones I wasn't targetting.

[LurkMeister]

Originally Posted by mswas

No, do not repeat or paraphrase my argument, you don't understand it at all.

Protests should be directed at the whole of the apparatus that makes and enforces the laws.

Originally Posted by mswas

I said that it shouldn't be a law and it shouldn't be enforced, not that I personally should be exempt from a law everyone else is subject to.

Which is exactly what I said that you said in the quote which you quoted when you said that I didn't understand your argument.* Please indicate where in that quote I made the statement that you feel you personally should be exempt from a law everyone else is subject to. Take your time, because I'm going to bed.

BTW, I admit that in other posts I may have given the impression that I thought you believed that you should be exempt from laws that you personally found immoral. I'm not sure where I got that from, and I apologize for the misunderstanding.

*I think that sentence makes sense. I have a bit of a headache and I'm tired.

[Khampelf]

Originally Posted by mswas

Another person who just makes a personal attack and then is like, "Oh you argued with my personal attack, therefore you are just being argumentative."

That wasn't a personal attack, it was an expression of sadness at the state of the world. I think you're being a bit sensitive.

Originally Posted by mswas

You said you lost respect for me because I think it's fair to protest outside of a police officer's home for enforcing an unjust law. How is that me just being argumentative?

No, I lost respect for you because you seem to be contradicting yourself and being belligerent about it.

Originally Posted by mswas

I am not here because I want people to like me. I guess it's really important to a lot of you that you have this clique and get all gushy and emotional about it. I get that elsewhere, I don't need it from this message board.

No one is less cliquey than me.
Well, there is the whole "Don't be an asshole" which is about our only rule.
You seem to enjoy running right up to the edge and waving your dick at the line. (still not a personal attack, just my impression)

Originally Posted by mswas

Sure why not, at any time you want to back out of the ridiculous line in the sand you just drew, feel free.

Line? Sand? I don't know of what you speak, nor can I remember why I trod in this mess.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by LurkMeister

Which is exactly what I said that you said in the quote which you quoted when you said that I didn't understand your argument.* Please indicate where in that quote I made the statement that you feel you personally should be exempt from a law everyone else is subject to. Take your time, because I'm going to bed.

I didn't say I should be exempt from consequences for breaking the law. I said that we should be willing to protest those who enforce those laws.

BTW, I admit that in other posts I may have given the impression that I thought you believed that you should be exempt from laws that you personally found immoral. I'm not sure where I got that from, and I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Ok, well in that case, there is no more misunderstanding.

*I think that sentence makes sense. I have a bit of a headache and I'm tired.

Yeah me too.

I think you do understand me now.

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Khampelf

That wasn't a personal attack, it was an expression of sadness at the state of the world. I think you're being a bit sensitive.

You're the one being manipulative with your affections *shrug*

No, I lost respect for you because you seem to be contradicting yourself and being belligerent about it.

I didn't contradict myself even once.

No one is less cliquey than me.
Well, there is the whole "Don't be an asshole" which is about our only rule.
You seem to enjoy running right up to the edge and waving your dick at the line. (still not a personal attack, just my impression)

I'm certainly not the only one in that regard. If people want to blame me for the expression of animus that the entire board just went through, that's fine. The only person who I think I was unfairly insulting to, I apologized to.

Line? Sand? I don't know of what you speak, nor can I remember why I trod in this mess.

Fair enough.

[Chacoguy]

Originally Posted by mswas

The hive mind is strong today. lol It's funny that people feel the need to step into the line of fire. I guess I stirred some shit up for real, really bruised a lot of egos, even ones I wasn't targetting.

No, no one cares as much as you hope that we might. The one thing you've proven is that it's pointless to respond to you. (I KNOW the irony.)

[mswas]

Originally Posted by Chacoguy

No, no one cares as much as you hope that we might. The one thing you've proven is that it's pointless to respond to you. (I KNOW the irony.)

He says in response to a direct response to someone.

I love it how people come and harass me and then people call me an egomaniac for responding to the harassment.

And lets not forget the dozens of responses I have gotten saying it's pointless to respond to me. It's kind of like how if you are typing mswas+ignore = win, you are not actually ignoring me.

This is such comedy. Yet, i am the one being accused of not being self-aware. It's always amusing when the very act of posting it contradicts the message contained within it.

[Khampelf]

Originally Posted by mswas

You're the one being manipulative with your affections *shrug*

*shrug* More playing off my rep as the least serious person on the board than affections, really.

Originally Posted by mswas

I didn't contradict myself even once.

Well you said

mswas: I said it shouldn't be a law in the first place, and it shouldn't be enforced. Those who choose to enforce this wicked law, should be held accountable for those actions.

Lurkmeister: But that's not what mswas is saying. He's saying that if he feels a law is immoral than it should not be enforced, and that those who enforce it anyway should be subject to protests.


And that's where you said Lurkmeister was totally misunderstanding your argument.

It seemed disingenuous and contradictory, and I felt compelled, Goddess knows why, to call you out on it.


I'm still not sure I agree, though. I've been a public servant, and in a small way, responsible for enforcing laws that I'm sure people disagreed with, and felt were 'immoral'. I felt that way too, I referred to my state job as being part of organized crime. I certainly wouldn't want a gang of contractors picketing outside my house because I sent a corrective work order to repair work judged shoddy by the state inspectors.

The place to protest immoral laws is to the legislators. Realistically, the police cannot decide themselves that a law is immoral and refuse to enforce it, it's too much of an intangible, and the police as human beings have the right to enjoy their life off duty.

There is no hard and fast to what is "immoral" or "wicked".
Hard core Xians may feel that the 1st Amendment is wicked because it permits people to produce and sell dirty magazines. Is a cop then "wicked" because he arrested a Xian in the course of committing arson against an adult book store? Should the cop then be subject to a Fred Phelps style invasion?

Immoral is in the eye of the beholder and the police cannot be beholden to all such views.

[u wan buy dvd?]

Originally Posted by mswas

No...it's not ok to enslave another human being, he owes me about 12 hours.

You know the average person spends three years of their life simply waiting in lines? I like weed, but seriously chill.

[Xploder]

Originally Posted by u wan buy dvd?

You know the average person spends three years of their life simply waiting in lines? I like weed, but seriously chill.

Not gonna happen and you know it.

It's like our own, personal Dioshow only it's the mswas show.

[Lord Blackmore]

Originally Posted by mswas

Yes, i was arrested when I got caught smoking pot. And I think it would be appropriate to picket the homes of arresting officers to protest what I see as an unjust law.

What would you hope to achieve by picketing the specific cops who enforced the law? They don't write the laws. The people who write the laws are the appropriate target of any protests.

The cops are, for the most part, working stiffs who have a job to do. They're not in the business of evaluating the morality of laws, they just enforce them.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by mswas

You hurt my family and you better believe it's personal. I will find out where you live. It's that simple. ... Pretty much the line for me going postal is hurting my kids.

I personally think we need to start protesting in front of their homes. If it scares their kids enough that they will say, "Daddy, please stop beating strangers in the street so that we can feel safe at home.", then that's a good thing.

So, mswas reserves for himself the right to take bloody, personal revenge for anyone who harms his kids — understandable.

But when someone enforces a law he doesn't like, he also hopes that he can frighten their kids enough that they'll a) knuckle under, b) forfeit their jobs by refusing to enforce the laws they're paid to enforce, and c) join him in his crusade against the law in question.

You do not get to do evil things to a person and then hide behind the state.

But you get to do evil things and then hide behind your self-appointed moral code?

I think the thread is done.

[Lounsbury]

Does this in any way seem surprising or inconsistent, taking for example the manner of 'argument.'