GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-18-2013, 10:25   #221
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 23,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
...

Abiding by the sign is not a rights thing...its a respect thing. ...

So tell me why should I respect their sign. You want respect...show it. I show respect to everyone until they don't show me respect,... Because in case you haven;t noticed I don't give a damn what you think. ....
Once again there seems to be some confusion between "respect" and "criminality." Not giving a damn about what someone else thinks when they disagree with you hardly shows respect. Abiding by the sign is respecting the rights of the owner, even if one disagrees with the owner.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 10:29   #222
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockapede View Post
No, the sign CAN'T do that because it's already asked you not to come in to begin with...
I've never heard a sign ask me to do anything. I can make a sign that says nobody with blond hair is allowed in my store. Are my rights being violated if someone with blonde hair comes in my store...NO. If I want to exercise my right as a property owner the law has established that is done by asking the specific customer/group of customers to leave. A sign is insufficient, a sign is meaningless. A sign has what do we call this...no force.

How can I get you to understand this?

You want to know what the difference between you and me is? I have tried to understand your point of view, but your arguments are just nonsensical and just plain wrong. You on the other hand are clearly unwilling to see that you are wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
Once again there seems to be some confusion between "respect" and "criminality." Not giving a damn about what someone else thinks when they disagree with you hardly shows respect. Abiding by the sign is respecting the rights of the owner, even if one disagrees with the owner.
That's because based on your responses here I've lost all respect for you as a person. That simple. You want to show me disrespect why should I continue to show you respect?

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-18-2013 at 10:31..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 10:35   #223
rockapede
Senior Member
 
rockapede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
I've never heard a sign ask me to do anything. I can make a sign that says nobody with blond hair is allowed in my store. Are my rights being violated if someone with blonde hair comes in my store...NO. If I want to exercise my right as a property owner the law has established that is done by asking the specific customer/group of customers to leave. A sign is insufficient, a sign is meaningless. A sign has what do we call this...no force.

How can I get you to understand this?

You want to know what the difference between you and me is? I have tried to understand your point of view, but your arguments are just nonsensical and just plain wrong. You on the other hand are clearly unwilling to see that you are wrong.
Whatever. Some very logical, well-spoken people (not that I count myself among them) have tried to explain the concept of rights and respect to you but you've done nothing except to insist that everyone but you is wrong and won't admit it. Whether you're being willfully obtuse or simply lack the mental ability to understand that concept I don't know, but I'm tired of beating my head against a red brick wall that insists it's blue. Over and out.
__________________
“Do you like being a cop?"
"I love it, when it doesn't suck, sir.”

-Edward Conlon

Last edited by rockapede; 05-18-2013 at 10:36..
rockapede is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 10:45   #224
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockapede View Post
Whatever. Some very logical, well-spoken people (not that I count myself among them) have tried to explain the concept of rights and respect to you but you've done nothing except to insist that everyone but you is wrong and won't admit it. Whether you're being willfully obtuse or simply lack the mental ability to understand that concept I don't know, but I'm tired of beating my head against a red brick wall that insists it's blue. Over and out.
Your concept of rights has no absolute, and this no value because what you say everyone's rights are will likely differ from your neighbor, ect.

The role of law is this. It give an absolute structure societal norms, and established penalties for ignoring them. This includes not just basic rules and privileges but rights as well.

To say it doesn't is to say rights are not absolute and if that's the case then I guess you are no more right or wrong than I am. Without an absolute nobody can be right or wrong. All points are just as valid as others because my point is valid to me and your to you. And there is no absolute to decide who is right or wrong.

With your thinking I am not wrong in saying I have the right to drive as fast as I want on the road. Because under you way of thinking i have what ever rights I think I have. But then to you I don't have that right. See what kind of mess such thinking could create. Non-absolute rights are meaningless.

Last edited by Ryan WA; 05-18-2013 at 10:46..
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 10:53   #225
rockapede
Senior Member
 
rockapede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Your concept of rights has no absolute, and this no value because what you say everyone's rights are will likely differ from your neighbor, ect.

The role of law is this. It give an absolute structure societal norms, and established penalties for ignoring them. This includes not just basic rules and privileges but rights as well.

To say it doesn't is to say rights are not absolute and if that's the case then I guess you are no more right or wrong than I am. Without an absolute nobody can be right or wrong. All points are just as valid as others because my point is valid to me and your to you. And there is no absolute to decide who is right or wrong.

With your thinking I am not wrong in saying I have the right to drive as fast as I want on the road. Because under you way of thinking i have what ever rights I think I have. But then to you I don't have that right. See what kind of mess such thinking could create. Non-absolute rights are meaningless.
LOL WUT? If I was such a relativist why would I be trying to enlighten you at all? Wouldn't that be counter to my worldview? Did I even hint at anything you just belched into your keyboard? Haven't I and many of my peers tried to make the point that a property owner has an "absolute" right to regulate what goes on on his property and signs are one way of doing that? Do you lie because it's not illegal? Do you even understand why I asked that last question? Do you know what you're writing anymore?

Ok, really out this time.
__________________
“Do you like being a cop?"
"I love it, when it doesn't suck, sir.”

-Edward Conlon

Last edited by rockapede; 05-18-2013 at 10:54..
rockapede is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 11:00   #226
Ryan WA
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockapede View Post
LOL WUT? If I was such a relativist why would I be trying to enlighten you at all? Wouldn't that be counter to my worldview? Did I even hint at anything you just belched into your keyboard? Haven't I and many of my peers tried to make the point that a property owner has an "absolute" right to regulate what goes on on his property and signs are one way of doing that? Do you lie because it's not illegal? Do you even understand why I asked that last question? Do you know what you're writing anymore?

Ok, really out this time.
I don't try to make sense on antis...

You clearly ignore the relation of rights to the law, so how then are the rights absolute apart from the law? Secondly the law which establishes their rights and how they exercise them has established a sign is NOT a way of doing so. Unless you're aware of a RCW I am not pertaining to this. Lying is a respect thing, I tell the truth out of respect not because you have a right to hear the truth. Conversely I lie because I don't respect you enough to tell you the truth or possible because I have too much self respect to admit the truth as the case may be.

But in this case I tell you the truth, not out of respect because you have lost it but out of hoping to teach you something. There is no law that establishes a sign as sufficient means to exercise property rights in WA. Thus a sign is not exercising said rights and thus there is not claim to violation without it being exercised.
Ryan WA is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 11:48   #227
wprebeck
Got quacks?
 
wprebeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In a flooded corn field
Posts: 8,725
Yep - its everybody else that is wrong. You are the sole arbiter of truth. Granted, you're wrong in every way possible, and are arguing with people who actually deal with the law in real life - but hey, you go on thinking that laws establish rights.
wprebeck is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 12:29   #228
Ryobi
SummertimeRules
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,471
You make stuff up out of thin air (don't get me wrong it's hilarious), then you "lose all respect" for not joining you on pretendville? You don't know how funny you are. So unless the right phrase enters your earhole, you are magically unburdened by the real world. Sounds awesome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
I've never heard a sign ask me to do anything. I can make a sign that says nobody with blond hair is allowed in my store. Are my rights being violated if someone with blonde hair comes in my store...NO. If I want to exercise my right as a property owner the law has established that is done by asking the specific customer/group of customers to leave. A sign is insufficient, a sign is meaningless. A sign has what do we call this...no force.

How can I get you to understand this?

You want to know what the difference between you and me is? I have tried to understand your point of view, but your arguments are just nonsensical and just plain wrong. You on the other hand are clearly unwilling to see that you are wrong.



That's because based on your responses here I've lost all respect for you as a person. That simple. You want to show me disrespect why should I continue to show you respect?
Ryobi is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 12:47   #229
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryobi View Post
You make stuff up out of thin air (don't get me wrong it's hilarious), then you "lose all respect" for not joining you on pretendville? You don't know how funny you are. So unless the right phrase enters your earhole, you are magically unburdened by the real world. Sounds awesome.
I can't help but think, and not meaning this as an Ad Hom, that he sounds like a high school senior or college freshman, with some intellectual potential who finished their first civics class or poli sci 120 course, got a "C+" due to underachieving and the fact that selective retention allowed him to retain fragments of things he liked and dismiss anything that didn't fit his predetermined narrative. Hence the "C+" just purely because he spelled his name right and constructed a resemblance of an argument on the final, completely wrong of course, but well written.

I can see the instructors notes on the bottom,

"Structurally well executed, but lacking in supporting evidence with personal bias substituted where facts do not support conclusions. Fragments of principles removed from context and used to support predetermined conclusion.
Too much preconceived personal bias at play to allow for true education to take place. Potential for development exists but requires releasing false/incomplete perceptions to grasp complete concepts"
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 13:28   #230
actionshooter10
CLM Number 19
Charter Lifetime Member
 
actionshooter10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,971
STILL waiting for Ryan to post the mythical statute that says signs don't carry the force of law..
__________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States
actionshooter10 is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 13:34   #231
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by actionshooter10 View Post
STILL waiting for Ryan to post the mythical statute that says signs don't carry the force of law..
I'm still waiting for him to show why his State discriminates against mute business owners since they can't "verbally" tell anyone anything I guess his State doesn't recognize their rights.
countrygun is offline  
Old 05-18-2013, 15:29   #232
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,661
Blog Entries: 64
Let me see...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
In the same way I have a right to bear arms. If I don't buy a gun I am not exercising my right and have no claim to infringement on said right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
Thank you so very much!!!

Sir, he bought, he leased his real property. At that point he placed a sign on the property prohibiting certain behavior. That is, he exercised his Right as a property owner, lessee to control his property.

You exercise your Right to keep and bear arms. He exercises his right to control his property.

The law only provides tools to enforce those Rights. It doesn't say, the Right does not exist until another takes some action.

The Right exists. It exists before you arrive at the threshold of the property.

You exercise your Right by owning and carrying your firearm.

He exercises his right by posting notice about the conditions required for using his property. THAT is his Right. His tool to enforce that Right is the trespass law.
Results in...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
He exercises his right to control his property...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan WA View Post
Yes by asking those he does not wish to have on his property to leave. A sign does not do that.
Lets leave it at this...

Washington law allows you to violate the private property rights of others.

Oh, and about your willingness to lie, it's been duly noted.

This has gone around in maybe three, four circles too many.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline  

 
  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:27.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 554
144 Members
410 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31