Liberty Dollar office raided

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can have laws without government.

You can have agencies without government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I´m gonna tap my shoes and wish to get home to Kansas. I used to be libertarian, but now Im ashamed when I see what kind of lunatics who really make out the libertarian people.

I honestly admire Ron Paul on some of hes points, but hes following scares me more than the Waco-crowd

[/ QUOTE ]

The standard "zomg wackos" response. Contrary to what you might think, decentralized law provisioning not only works, but has produced some of the most enduring and influential legal systems known.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Merchant

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, you didn't answer it. You went straight to "gunning them down".

Be serious. An FBI/secret service raid. Agents come in. Someone runs. You're seriously going to tell me you don't know if a gun is going to be unholstered?

[/ QUOTE ]

unholstered, probably, fired, unlikely. Reholstered once the agent realized the person wasn't running back to a desk to grab a weapon to kill the agents, yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

So this is not force? Then if someone robs a bank without actually drawing a weapon, it's not force, right?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was trying to explain the difference in the two. Obviously, it's not worth having a conversation with someone too immature to see the difference in legally serving a warrant and robbing a bank.

[/ QUOTE ]

Run to the ad hominem.

Please, tell me the difference. We're talking about using force. Is a bank robbery where no gun is actually shown an event that involves a use of force or not? It's a simple question. If you want to claim a FBI raid without guns drawn does not involve force, please explain why a bank robbery without guns drawn does involve force. What is the difference between the two than makes one a forceless event and the other a forceful event? You say I can't tell the difference, you're implying that you DO know the difference, so enlighten me.

[/ QUOTE ]

FBI agents not saying "I'm going to kill you if you do not comply" would be a very good start. But in your book, they are saying that, so this argument is quickly becoming pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lots of people rob banks without saying "I'm going to kill you." They just flash the gun. Sometimes they don't even have a gun, they just say they have one. Do you think the transaction that happens after that is voluntary?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I want *an answer*. I'm still waiting. Assume the threat is "credible enough" to get the teller to give up the money. That should have been obvious. Quit squirming.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, wearing a mask into a bank, hand in your pocket, handing a note to a teller saying "I have a gun, I will kill you if you do not give me the money" is a forceful threat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, it's possible to walk in a bank, hand a note to the teller that says "I have a gun, put money in a bag" and get a bag full of money. Is this a forceful transaction or not?

What's the difference between this and an FBI raid?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to call myelf a libertarian, that was when I ued to think that libertarianism was : let people do whatever they want unless they harm other people.

My understanding of libertarianism never meant that you had to break up the state, the issue of the government having a monopoly of issuing currency or haing a monopoly of using violence (police) has never been something I had problem with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, if you're going to let people do whatever they want, what are you going to do with the ones who don't want to fund the police force you like, or use the currency you like?

[ QUOTE ]
I am in favor of a small government, but that government should have total monoploly in using force to enforce the laws inside that society. I am basically in favor of letting people do whatever they want to as long as it is not intruding anyones rights, but I do favor a government that has monopoly in issuing currency.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't want to intrude on others' rights, except for a few things that you personally think are important? Why are your preferences so special that they should be exempt?

[ QUOTE ]
I believe in a structured society, with an elected government that has an agency that have a monopoly to use violence when needed. I think that individuals should be able to do whatever they want to as long as it doesnt harm other people, but I do believe that can be achieved within a set system and powerful (when needed) government, and not that a near total abolishment of government is the way to go.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fabulous. Now please explain why anyone else should be compelled to be a part of your ideal society, or be forced to fund it.

[ QUOTE ]
I believe in a government that has certain rights, that includes the right to make currency, imprison people, enforce the laws that the people has mad and such.

[/ QUOTE ]

Governments have no rights. Only people do.

But if you want to join a social organization that prints its own money and has its own police force, that's fine with me. Have fun. Why do you need to drag others along?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're [censored] right I do. All men are created equal. Government agents are not some morally distinct class, with special dispensation to do things that are immoral for commoners.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not morallydistinct, but distinct in the way that the system supported by the people beleive that an agency should be able to use force to enforce the laws of the system.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the difference?

[ QUOTE ]
Are you opposed to democracy? Think that the system approved by the vast majority of the citizens of the US shuld not be in place? Has there ever been any leading politician in the US (from 1700-till now) that has agreed with your sentiment?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm not opposed to democracy. You should be free to have all the democracy that you want. Just don't impose it upon anyone against their will.

If the majority makes such activity legitimate, then surely the US would be justified in using violence to bring Canada into our system. After all, there are more Americans than Canadians, right? If they want to be seperate, do they "oppose democracy"?

[ QUOTE ]
Think it is smart to make assumptions based on feelings that you and hardly anyone else share, and ignore what 95% of other people feel?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not ignoring what they feel. On the contrary, what I advocate allows them to pursue what they want, while what you advocate is what ignores people.

Imagine if 55% of people liked coke, and 45% liked pepsi, so the 55% felt that they could violently confiscate all pepsi property and put it to use making coke. They wouldn't actually force pepsi-fans to drink coke, but they would prevent anyone from drinking pepsi.

Now I suggest that both coke and pepsi be free from violent interference. Am I "ignoring 55% of the people"? Think about the mental twisting you'd have to go through to believe that.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Do you think that civilians and law enforcement should be equal when it comes to legally using force or threat of force?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're [censored] right I do. All men are created equal. Government agents are not some morally distinct class, with special dispensation to do things that are immoral for commoners.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this, with all of my heart. The reason we're arguing here is that he disagrees with the basis for the raid, so therefore it's "immoral". I've come into contact with child molesters who certainly felt no moral issues arose from their behavior, and that it was just a harmless activity on their part.

Remember, if we don't enforce what you don't like because you think it's immoral, someone somewhere doesn't think raping your six year old daughter is immoral. Either both laws can be enforced, or neither.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course. It always comes to this. If you support people minding their own business, you're supporting child molestation. Think of the children!

The thing you're forgetting is that child molestation doesn't involve just the child molester. If it did, it wouldn't be a problem. But you ignore the fact that there is also a child, who isn't consenting to the act. Since there isn't any consent, this isn't an example of people doing what they want, because the child does not want to be molested.

This is a pathetically sloppy argument, and it's been ripped to shreds about 200 times in this forum, but it comes up again and again.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Your error here is in assuming I think Liberty Dollar did anything wrong. I don't. However, I also do believe that if the FBI feels the need to investigate the actions of the Liberty Dollar people, the field agents who served the search warrants aren't "evil", they're merely doing their jobs. Anyone who can consider serving search warrants even close to equal to Nazi's killing people needs a head exam.

[/ QUOTE ]

So it's OK to bust someone's door down and take their stuff if you get paid to do it?

[NasEscobar]

[ QUOTE ]
OK, let's hear it. Pros/cons of private currency in the US today.

[/ QUOTE ]
How about you let people make decisions for themselves instead of granting government the right to be act as a fascist nanny.

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your error here is in assuming I think Liberty Dollar did anything wrong. I don't. However, I also do believe that if the FBI feels the need to investigate the actions of the Liberty Dollar people, the field agents who served the search warrants aren't "evil", they're merely doing their jobs. Anyone who can consider serving search warrants even close to equal to Nazi's killing people needs a head exam.

[/ QUOTE ]

So it's OK to bust someone's door down and take their stuff if you get paid to do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who does this?

[NasEscobar]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would just like to say that all those who participated in this raid are doing their job, and they deserve . . . their paychecks in federal reserve notes.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I always wonder why people are always so mad at Hitmen I mean they're just doing their job amirite?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would just like to say that all those who participated in this raid are doing their job, and they deserve . . . their paychecks in federal reserve notes.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I always wonder why people are always so mad at Hitmen I mean they're just doing their job amirite?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because it's exactly the same thing, right? Wow, people that think like this truly make me begin to rethink my stance on gun rights. Its scary to think that you, and people that think like you, might actually gun down some highway patrolman for "infringing on your liberties" by asking to see your drivers license during a traffic stop.