new | show | ask | jobs Github

jamilton 3 days ago

It's still crime if it's moral! I think it's really important to not conflate the law with morality.

▲

wat10000 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

“Crime” has multiple meanings. It can be used to describe a violation of morality, not just law.

▲

carefree-bob 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

No, crime does not mean violation of morality. It only means violation of the law.

Now some people, say, look at a pair of expensive shoes and comically blurt out "these prices are criminal!"

That type of usage is a linguistic device known as "exaggeration", but these types of comical exaggerations don't actually change the meaning of words. Like when someone says "You're robbing me!" when a seller proposes a high price, they are not actually changing the meaning of the verb "to rob" and this does not mean that the definition of "to rob" involves charging high prices. That, too, is just an exaggeration.

▲

wat10000 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

May I suggest reading a dictionary?

Incidentally it appears that the meaning of sin or breaking God's laws came before the meaning of breaking secular law.

▲

kdhaskjdhadjk 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You don't get to decree whatever it is that you like and then call it "law". If a "law" is un-Constitutional, as most US "laws" are--or in violation of the highest laws of the Universe (the Laws of Nature), as the most US "laws" are--then it is not law. It's the scribblings of a tyrant.

There just might be an entire army of goons ready to enforce that so-called "law." With an Empire, there always is. But any so-called "law" enacted without permission of the The People are in fact the workings of a tyrant and deserve no serious consideration among free individuals, except whatever minimum is necessary to protect oneself from the tyrant while awaiting (and planning for) his inevitable downfall.

▲

carefree-bob 2 days ago | parent [-]

This is called a "strawman" argument. I am not decreeing anything and calling it a law, so you must be responding to some interlocutor that lives only in your imagination, and then pointing out flaws in this imaginary conversation makes you feel better I guess. Or it gives you some kind of virtuous thrill. Why would you do this? Imagine yourself winning verbal victories with imaginary debaters in the shower, don't do it in public in social media.

And now you are going off on some laws being unconstitutional and that "most US laws are", when the point I made had nothing to do with a particular jurisdiction or nation, but when laws are deemed unconstitutional they are struck down and are no longer laws, so by definition you have now positioned yourself as a one man supreme court, voiding most US law, when the actual supreme court does not do this. Wow, what an active imagination you have. How you glorify yourself. But please do all that stuff in the privacy of your own home, no need to do it online. Here, e.g. outside of your imagination, people make arguments and you can if you want respond to that argument. Think about it.

	▲	kdhaskjdhadjk 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		"I am not decreeing anything," he said, as he attempts to argue me into the grave concerning the definition of the words "crime" and "law." As if the tyrant's definition should be the only definition and God's (or Nature's, if you prefer) can just be ignored. It's going to surprise the shit out of you one day when you wake up to find that this entity called the "US Supreme Court" no longer exists, and has been replaced with some other entity which has vastly different ideas about things. This will likely be accompanied by many people being put on public trial and convicted of various crimes that you and they will vehemently insist weren't against this "law" that you believe you understand the definition of. Yet despite your protestations they will be tried and convicted nonetheless, and in many cases executed. On that day you will finally understand the definition of Law.

▲

card_zero 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's like a crime against literality.

▲

adeelk93 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Wouldn’t that be a sin?

	▲	wat10000 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Oddly enough, not only can a word have multiple meanings, but a meaning can have multiple words.

▲

kdhaskjdhadjk 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

47282847 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

You may enjoy the movie “Sovereign”.

▲

kdhaskjdhadjk 3 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

red-iron-pine 3 days ago | parent [-]

kdhaskjdhadjk is a 1 day old account pushing anti-US and soverign citizen BS

remember: this is the loud bot, so that you think you've found all of the agit-prop; it's a distraction. the real shill-botting is far more subtle

▲

kdhaskjdhadjk 2 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

mothballed 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

>>kdhaskjdhadjk is a 1 day old account pushing anti-US and soverign citizen BS

I'm shocked no one has figured out who this is. For anyone that hasn't figured it out -- hi weev!

>Your Empire murdered my Cherokee ancestors and made up lies about them; said they were all a bunch of dirty savages.

Weev has native american ancestry.

>Your Empire murdered my Confederate ancestors and made up lies about them; said they were all a bunch of inbred racist losers.

Weev is well known for southern / confederate rhetoric

>Your Empire has fucked me over personally in numerous ways that I will never, ever forget or forgive. And no, it wasn't my fault, as you Imperial goons always like to claim about your victims.

Weev was falsely convicted under fraudulent jurisdiction, then the morons that did it were forced to release him, and then essentially run out of the country before it could happen again.

>Your Empire continues to murder people around the entire world in my name, which despite being against everything I stand for, will in the end only bring more destruction to my doorstep.

Weev also has jewish ancestry.

>I am only one of a giant growing horde of Others who feel exactly the same way about the crookedness of your dying Empire. Finally, hundreds of years of murder, robbery, and lies are coming to their ultimate conclusion. Many are much less kind and charitable than I. Some of these guys and girls have entire warehouses full of axes to grind, and are establishing machine shops just to grind those axes.

Weev used this rhetoric during his trial.

>You accuse me of being a bot, but in fact the mindless automaton is you. Your nation is doomed, but you are incapable of perceiving this information as it conflicts with your programming. I predict your future will be a difficult one.

This sort of high IQ, boisterous, machine-gunned shock rhetoric followed by Revelations sort of premonitions for his enemies is the exact sort of unique rhetoric weev uses, and the unique application of it is pretty obvious on inspection. There is no on else on HN I've ever read that uses quite this same method of speech in this exact style with the same background (look up user 'rabite' for other examples).

	▲	kdhaskjdhadjk 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		[flagged]

▲

peyton 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

alphawhisky 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same, that's why I get super abortions every week. Might even get gay married. If it's not immoral, it's not a crime.

▲

wookmaster 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Good luck telling that to a judge

	▲	mothballed 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's probably a better system for what to live by. The government can and will imprison anyone they want by a variety of methods they have for putting anyone they want away at any time. If you follow "god's / natural law" as they put it, it is a better guide to whether you will anger some victim who will call the police on you. Most of the rest of the law are just the excuse the powers that be will use for putting you away if the powers that be find you threaten their order. The vast majority of victimless crime laws are selectively chosen to be "enforced" for the actual reason that you've done something to challenge the ruling class, trying to adhere to them as if they are applied as 'rule of law' is probably irrational.
	▲	kdhaskjdhadjk 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I make it a point to keep a healthy distance between myself and Imperial Officials. During any unavoidable interaction with Imperial Officials, I always pretend subservience and submission. I am aware that many others do also. The result is a large and growing body of people who secretly despise Imperial Officials, while said officials are under the increasingly detached from reality impression that everyone loves them. It usually doesn't end well for them.