HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Dec 06, 2012, 11:36 PM
Cat Rack
MtnGoat's Avatar
Lyle, WA
Joined Dec 2000
1,478 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LcJ View Post
Like tobacco, and of course at one time it was asbestos. We get screwed twice at least with most things government does.
This is because it's free of the constraints, limits, and disincentives which apply to all private entities.

Make them personally liable for mistakes, harm, and the costs and prosecution of both where applicable.
MtnGoat is offline Find More Posts by MtnGoat
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:19 AM
sensitive artsy type
Treetop's Avatar
Tucker, Georgia, United States
Joined Feb 2004
3,156 Posts
Goat, law enforcement is restricted by the fourth amendment. Probable cause is an important part of that and you have made a specious argument claiming 100% enforcement of laws somehow justifies abandonment of constitutional principles restricting enforcement methods.

It is uncanny how many folks are employed by government or contractors for the government who hold anti-government positions on this board. Frankly, it is ironic watching the pretzel logic that justifies those positions. It does undermine the perceived tenacity some folks try to project about themselves regarding what they speak of concerning their principles.

Drones are one of those tools which the use of has preceded thoughtful policy. Personally, I think this will get attention very soon, especially the domestic use of them.
Treetop is offline Find More Posts by Treetop
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 10:17 AM
All under control, Grommit!
leccyflyer's Avatar
United Kingdom, Aberdeen
Joined Sep 2000
12,308 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treetop View Post
Goat, law enforcement is restricted by the fourth amendment. Probable cause is an important part of that and you have made a specious argument claiming 100% enforcement of laws somehow justifies abandonment of constitutional principles restricting enforcement methods.

It is uncanny how many folks are employed by government or contractors for the government who hold anti-government positions on this board. Frankly, it is ironic watching the pretzel logic that justifies those positions. It does undermine the perceived tenacity some folks try to project about themselves regarding what they speak of concerning their principles.

Drones are one of those tools which the use of has preceded thoughtful policy. Personally, I think this will get attention very soon, especially the domestic use of them.
yep. That is pretty much it~ sputong a long line of anti~gubmint vitriol whilst simultaneously avoiding the 600lb. Gorilla which is that use of drones. It is all very strange.
leccyflyer is online now Find More Posts by leccyflyer
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 10:44 AM
Model Flight Addict
fhpe77's Avatar
Erial, NJ
Joined Jul 2009
376 Posts
"What do you call synergy between Government and Corporations? "

It's called national socialism. They tried it in the 1930's and 1940's in Germany. History shows us how well that worked out. National socialism is where the government is the corporations and the corporations are the government. Seems to be the direction we are headed in today.
fhpe77 is offline Find More Posts by fhpe77
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 11:38 AM
Cat Rack
MtnGoat's Avatar
Lyle, WA
Joined Dec 2000
1,478 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treetop View Post
Goat, law enforcement is restricted by the fourth amendment. Probable cause is an important part of that and you have made a specious argument claiming 100% enforcement of laws somehow justifies abandonment of constitutional principles restricting enforcement methods.

It is uncanny how many folks are employed by government or contractors for the government who hold anti-government positions on this board. Frankly, it is ironic watching the pretzel logic that justifies those positions. It does undermine the perceived tenacity some folks try to project about themselves regarding what they speak of concerning their principles.

Drones are one of those tools which the use of has preceded thoughtful policy. Personally, I think this will get attention very soon, especially the domestic use of them.
I'd love to see an explanation of how the observation of public actions, in public is a 'search' of any kind, of how it violates the constitution.

I'd love to see an explanation of why someone seeing a new shed without permits in your yard from the street and turning you in is not a violation of rights but seeing it from a drone would be.

I'd like to see a principled and non self contradictory explanation of how the ability to violate law in public be because no one should look is an issue of 'privacy'.

I'm not the one with the pretzel logic here. My points are thoroughly defined, testable, and no one has shown a single actual contradiction yet.

The pretzel logic award goes to those who day in day out justify a massive State presence in every detail of all of our lives public and private, and who now are complaining about the increasing ability to enforce more and more of all of those laws.

The threat to privacy is making such a vast network of intrusive laws to begin with, and by intrusive I mean their legal presence in private sphere actions. When something is not illegal it doesn't matter who sees it or does or doesn't look for it, in fact when something isn't illegal there's no basis at all to expend public funds to look for it.

The hallmark of modern leftism is fixation with superficial items and the studious and intentional avoidance of the actual root of real problems caused by the addiction to contradictory and poorly examined ideas. Here we see this in spades. Instead of addressing the *cause* of a police state and State privacy intrusions, which is laws which empower and justify enforcement and looking for the crimes they wanted to be crimes, now we have complaints about the increasing ability to enforce the very laws they very likely demanded.

Arguing that so much should be controlled then complaining about the ability to do what is demanded is the highest form of pretzel logic. It openly and intentionally shirks responsibilty for the first cause..the laws themselves and support for them.
MtnGoat is offline Find More Posts by MtnGoat
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:22 PM
Registered User
flyzwell's Avatar
So Cal
Joined May 2008
2,633 Posts
Are you saying you're against the massive State presence in every detail of all of our lives public and private, but once the laws are in effect you're all for the State using every means possible to make sure all citizens comply?
flyzwell is offline Find More Posts by flyzwell
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 12:51 PM
Registered User
peterp1964's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
659 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyzwell View Post
Are you saying you're against the massive State presence in every detail of all of our lives public and private, but once the laws are in effect you're all for the State using every means possible to make sure all citizens comply?
it's worse than that...it's OK that drone lobbyists are currently writing the laws and are stuffing them down our throats through the politicos they have in their pocket. Somehow the Objectivist gobbledygook he spews regularly can provide a rationalization for any contortion he will have to perform...it's designed that way.

Libertarianism for thee but not for me (and my pocket).

A thoroughly bankrupt ideology on full display.
peterp1964 is offline Find More Posts by peterp1964
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 01:28 PM
Registered User
peterp1964's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
659 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by David A Ramsey View Post
Nice try, but a corporate "Galt" wouldn't resort to any lobbyist.
I was talking about the real world self-proclaimed Galts/producers/etc. Not the imaginary Galt from a ridiculous novel.
peterp1964 is offline Find More Posts by peterp1964
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 01:59 PM
Registered User
New Jersey, USA
Joined May 2003
1,968 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterp1964 View Post
I was talking about the real world self-proclaimed Galts/producers/etc. Not the imaginary Galt from a ridiculous novel.
So which do you prefer?
David A Ramsey is offline Find More Posts by David A Ramsey
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 02:23 PM
Registered User
College Park, MD
Joined Sep 2002
4,712 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterp1964 View Post
it's worse than that...it's OK that drone lobbyists are currently writing the laws and are stuffing them down our throats through the politicos they have in their pocket. Somehow the Objectivist gobbledygook he spews regularly can provide a rationalization for any contortion he will have to perform...it's designed that way.

Libertarianism for thee but not for me (and my pocket).

A thoroughly bankrupt ideology on full display.
Cha-ching!
thunder1 is online now Find More Posts by thunder1
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 05:36 PM
Registered User
peterp1964's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
659 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by thunder1 View Post
Cha-ching!
So we find ourselves, in the near future, under the 24/7 gaze of drones (gratis the drone manufacturers who are presently busy _creating_ the US market for their product, and are lavishly paying their politicians to force this market on us)...

we turn to LTUP and, lo and behold,

come across Goat ranting and raving about that Obama thug that has everybody under surveillance, as part of his program to "fundamentally change Ah'Murica," with the drones he forced the FAA to approve for the US airspace.
peterp1964 is offline Find More Posts by peterp1964
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 07, 2012, 07:55 PM
sensitive artsy type
Treetop's Avatar
Tucker, Georgia, United States
Joined Feb 2004
3,156 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtnGoat View Post
I'd love to see an explanation of how the observation of public actions, in public is a 'search' of any kind, of how it violates the constitution.

I'd love to see an explanation of why someone seeing a new shed without permits in your yard from the street and turning you in is not a violation of rights but seeing it from a drone would be.

I'd like to see a principled and non self contradictory explanation of how the ability to violate law in public be because no one should look is an issue of 'privacy'.

I'm not the one with the pretzel logic here. My points are thoroughly defined, testable, and no one has shown a single actual contradiction yet.

The pretzel logic award goes to those who day in day out justify a massive State presence in every detail of all of our lives public and private, and who now are complaining about the increasing ability to enforce more and more of all of those laws.

The threat to privacy is making such a vast network of intrusive laws to begin with, and by intrusive I mean their legal presence in private sphere actions. When something is not illegal it doesn't matter who sees it or does or doesn't look for it, in fact when something isn't illegal there's no basis at all to expend public funds to look for it.

The hallmark of modern leftism is fixation with superficial items and the studious and intentional avoidance of the actual root of real problems caused by the addiction to contradictory and poorly examined ideas. Here we see this in spades. Instead of addressing the *cause* of a police state and State privacy intrusions, which is laws which empower and justify enforcement and looking for the crimes they wanted to be crimes, now we have complaints about the increasing ability to enforce the very laws they very likely demanded.

Arguing that so much should be controlled then complaining about the ability to do what is demanded is the highest form of pretzel logic. It openly and intentionally shirks responsibilty for the first cause..the laws themselves and support for them.
You address a lot of things which ignore my specific argument, which was fourth amendment protections.

There are satellite pictures taken of folks houses very often and also Google publishes street views. From my experience with building codes, it is very dependent on where you live. Due to economic constraints, most counties only respond to reports from neighbors and if you live in a higher end neighborhood, you are more likely to be reported than in a neighborhood where most of the sheds in the back yard were actually built without permits.

So, the county is not likely at this time looking at satellite photos or having the county police chopper fly over areas looking for permit violations. They also have choppers flying over looking for heat signatures of marijuana grow houses, and use them to track suspects after crimes using infrared technology. They use airplanes to gauge speeders on the highway.

The special interest of law enforcement on individuals without cause is, in my opinion, the only issue worth discussing with regard to drones.

I realize you like to use any simple issue to expand on your ideologies and pontificate at length repeating the same points over and over while attacking your perceived ideological enemies based on what you refer to as your specific logic and reason, which while mostly unproven in a real world sense, certainly doesn't warrant a diversion of every single specific issue to "not following my ideology".
Treetop is offline Find More Posts by Treetop
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question What do you do with a new brushless motor before you use it for the first time? Kcal Racing Boats - Electric 6 Oct 16, 2012 06:30 PM
Discussion Banana and fms. What do you think you are doing? kusunokimasahige Banana Hobby 36 Jul 20, 2012 02:00 PM
Discussion Call It What You Want, I'll Call It Divine Justice Real Ira Life, The Universe, and Politics 5 Jul 11, 2012 07:54 PM
Discussion What do you guys call this- parallel discharge plug? Lpbug Batteries and Chargers 5 Jul 06, 2012 05:08 AM
Question What do you do when you're between props? Mr. Wiz Power Systems 8 Mar 30, 2012 12:09 AM