Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 99

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    There is no one here that can't handle as you try to return our own medicine. Nobody here is buying you line o' crap or spending the time you think is sufficient to counter it. This is making you angry but instead of leaving the forum to troll elsewhere, you whine about those here being bullies.

    What I really think bothers you is the fact that your theory can be countered with so few words that it casts a light on the fact that your theory is simply BS to begin with.
    So, then, sensibly counter with your few words.

    The attempt to engage in rational polemic among what turns out to be ignorant dummies,is always labelled as trolling by the dummies, who cannot possibly do rational debate.

    I keep challenging you to rationally counter the original OP entitled Law is Ontologically Unintelligible, however, you do not and cannot, though I wish you would try; I will be kind and consider your attempt with compassionate response. All you ever do is assert this and assert that, without reasoned explanation.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting determinatio
    View Post
    So, then, sensibly counter with your few words.

    The attempt to engage in rational polemic among what turns out to be ignorant dummies,is always labelled as trolling by the dummies, who cannot possibly do rational debate.

    I keep challenging you to rationally counter the original OP entitled Law is Ontologically Unintelligible, however, you do not and cannot, though I wish you would try; I will be kind and consider your attempt with compassionate response. All you ever do is assert this and assert that, without reasoned explanation.
    I did and you didn't reply. Go back to post #20.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    47.606 N 122.332 W in body, still at 90 S in my mind.
    Posts
    1,678

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    I'm the most stupidly brutal of the lot? Thanks! I'm touched! And you're the most asinine, thin-skinned, arrogant, sanctimonious, pedantic pseudo-intellectual it's been my misfortune to quarrel with on this board.

    So, go soak your head and get a grip. You are not the smartest person in the room, you don't lend yourself to rational debate and you continue to prate the same nonsense over and over again.

    Before you go on about your treatment at my hands bear in mind that you claimed I'm the most stupidly brutal of the lot so I'll require you to use simple small words. I can't comprehend beyond 2 or three syllables.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting Mark47n
    View Post
    I'm the most stupidly brutal of the lot? Thanks! I'm touched! And you're the most asinine, thin-skinned, arrogant, sanctimonious, pedantic pseudo-intellectual it's been my misfortune to quarrel with on this board.

    So, go soak your head and get a grip. You are not the smartest person in the room, you don't lend yourself to rational debate and you continue to prate the same nonsense over and over again.

    Before you go on about your treatment at my hands bear in mind that you claimed I'm the most stupidly brutal of the lot so I'll require you to use simple small words. I can't comprehend beyond 2 or three syllables.
    Fine. Worm-out and do not hold you word that you can dismiss my propositions via a few words. That's it. I hope to never interact with you ever again; I am sick of your inveterately pure ignorance and, stupidity.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    It appears as though I may have given you bad advice. From a rather cursory glance, it seems like the users in other forums find you insufferable as well. It is certainly a relief to know that Expert Law is but one of many forums that displease you.



    Forum: The Legal Junkies Forum

    Highlights:

    "So, what's your point, other than the self-aggrandizement you get from tossing out equally unintelligible nonsense?"

    Unfortunately, you've deemed this "site, populated by attorneys, is radically dishonest and ethically bankrupt, for, the team has erased ninety percent of my OP. Can't handle honorable critique of the construct ''law''!"

    I guess The Legal Junkies Forum wasn't receptive to you. Let's move on.

    -----------------------------
    Forum:City Data Forum

    Highlights:

    "Thats is incoherent psychobabble with philosophical pretentions."

    "I'm thinking if I can survive that rhetoric, this virus will be a breeze! Holy cow , that OP was ten minutes of my time I'd like back. Lawfully I'm deserving of a refund"

    "Hey Duane I expect you'll be moving on to yet another forum after this thread?"

    "I was wondering how long it'd be before you resort to homophobic insults that were your calling card on the other forums. Let me guess, everyone else who dismisses your ramblings, is a "bunch of little girls on the rag"?

    -----------------------------

    Forum:The US Message Board

    Highlights:

    "This must be why they blackballed people in the Roman Forum for reductio ad absurdum"

    Then you yourself explain:

    "The county I live in has a mandatory trash collection ordinance, wherein they want to take your home and property for failure to pay the mandatory fee; it is purely a peonage system and ilk of slavery prohibited under the fourteenth amendment. I have been going round and round with the county attorney for many years and have prepared a fifty page affirmative defense, whereby I believe I can beat them via their own instruments, however, to put the finishing touch on the defense by positing a theoretical overthrow to their so-called justice system, would be an interesting gamble..."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,301

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting darwinrules
    View Post
    It appears as though I may have given you bad advice. From a rather cursory glance, it seems like the users in other forums find you insufferable as well. It is certainly a relief to know that Expert Law is but one of many forums that displease you.



    Forum: The Legal Junkies Forum

    Highlights:

    "So, what's your point, other than the self-aggrandizement you get from tossing out equally unintelligible nonsense?"

    Unfortunately, you've deemed this "site, populated by attorneys, is radically dishonest and ethically bankrupt, for, the team has erased ninety percent of my OP. Can't handle honorable critique of the construct ''law''!"

    I guess The Legal Junkies Forum wasn't receptive to you. Let's move on.

    -----------------------------
    Forum:City Data Forum

    Highlights:

    "Thats is incoherent psychobabble with philosophical pretentions."

    "I'm thinking if I can survive that rhetoric, this virus will be a breeze! Holy cow , that OP was ten minutes of my time I'd like back. Lawfully I'm deserving of a refund"

    "Hey Duane I expect you'll be moving on to yet another forum after this thread?"

    "I was wondering how long it'd be before you resort to homophobic insults that were your calling card on the other forums. Let me guess, everyone else who dismisses your ramblings, is a "bunch of little girls on the rag"?

    -----------------------------

    Forum:The US Message Board

    Highlights:

    "This must be why they blackballed people in the Roman Forum for reductio ad absurdum"

    Then you yourself explain:

    "The county I live in has a mandatory trash collection ordinance, wherein they want to take your home and property for failure to pay the mandatory fee; it is purely a peonage system and ilk of slavery prohibited under the fourteenth amendment. I have been going round and round with the county attorney for many years and have prepared a fifty page affirmative defense, whereby I believe I can beat them via their own instruments, however, to put the finishing touch on the defense by positing a theoretical overthrow to their so-called justice system, would be an interesting gamble..."
    I couldn't find that US Messages post when I went looking for it after our buddy here denied that all of this was over a trash bill of some sort. Good work.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Yep - there are a few others floating around out there but I didn't really care to continue.


    Why he is unable to write something like what I've thrown together below is beyond me. I don't get it.

    "Hi Expert Law.

    The county I live in has a mandatory trash collection ordinance [cite statute or code so we can look it up] which requires payment from me regardless of my actual usage of the trash collection service. Because I don't use the trash collection service, I stopped paying the bill. Now, because I have stopped paying the bill, I'm also being fined. I've gone round and round with the county attorney for years over this but have gotten nowhere. Does anyone have any suggestions as to potential strategies available to me to fight this in court?

    Thanks!"

  8. #8

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    PayrolGuy;
    I have already extensively explained that all this is not over the trash peonage system, that I have been writing regarding the nonsense of law for decades before all the recent mandatory sanitation considerations; like you said to me: you don't read so good.

    Quote Quoting darwinrules
    View Post
    Yep - there are a few others floating around out there but I didn't really care to continue.


    Why he is unable to write something like what I've thrown together below is beyond me. I don't get it.

    "Hi Expert Law.

    The county I live in has a mandatory trash collection ordinance [cite statute or code so we can look it up] which requires payment from me regardless of my actual usage of the trash collection service. Because I don't use the trash collection service, I stopped paying the bill. Now, because I have stopped paying the bill, I'm also being fined. I've gone round and round with the county attorney for years over this but have gotten nowhere. Does anyone have any suggestions as to potential strategies available to me to fight this in court?

    Thanks!"
    I am not so stupid that I would ask a site like this to do my thinking for me. I am not being sued in regard to the issue, nor am I being fined. I was paying the bill plenty, then stopped, and, started up paying again; to keep the horrid savages from robbing me of my twelve acres and my home,which does not change the fact that it is a peonage system; and, I have explained that I do not want, as a senior citizen, to have to pay $132 at each court appearance, that $132 is to totally a solid guarantee that no justice will be readily available against the peonage injustice. I have prepared a fifty page affirmative defense which does not include, nor does it need include, a theoretical destruction of the notion that the prosecutor and the magistrate are not really acting on the basis of their language of law, i.e., Marion County Kentucky Fiscal Court Ordinance # 830.02.

    Quote Quoting llworking
    View Post
    If he uses the type of rhetoric in court that he has been using here I expect court to go something like this:

    Judge: Please use normal English,

    Judge: Use normal English or I will hold you in contempt of court.

    Judge: You are in contempt of court, Baliff, take him to the lockup. You can purge yourself of contempt by apologizing to the court and using normal English.
    That is just straight-up stupid, this is America, no judge is going to jail me for using whatever language I choose to employ, as long as I do not openly insult, which is probably what a professional insultationist like you would surely do. If I used my notion of jurisprudential illusion is a courtroom, it would be submitted in writing before the hearing in the pleadings; however, I have repeatedly explained why I do not, at this point, either plan or need to attempt a destruction of the legal system; which would be a viable proposition via the use of expert witnesses, who could explain to the court the validity of the ontological constructs being used by the defense.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    I did and you didn't reply. Go back to post #20.
    Your assertion had simply struck me as so profoundly mistaken, i.e., that since the police have guns, that language of law is a determinative agency among men, that I completely disregarded the absurd statement, when, precisely at that the time, another member, TaxingMatters, had just posted that he agreed that the language of law itself has no efficacy, and, I just assumed you would see TaxingMatters' post disagreed with yours and was agreed with my position. Also, it struck me very heavily that you had completely failed to understand the point that there is distinction between the language of the law, and, the violence of punishment, which violence is the only thing law pitifully has going for itself, which violence is precisely what law is acting against being done by persons, with law-violence, which doing violence to punish violence is self-inconsistent and barbaric.

    darwinrules;
    You have merely collected the retarded declarations of other dimwits alike persons on this site, too stupid to follow the OP, so they only issue brutal insult instead.

    To be balanced and fair, publish the uplifting, encouraging and agreed comments from the US Message Board, and, you are taking some to these out of context.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    47.606 N 122.332 W in body, still at 90 S in my mind.
    Posts
    1,678

    Default Re: Law is Not Determinative

    Quote Quoting determinatio
    View Post
    Your assertion had simply struck me as so profoundly mistaken, i.e., that since the police have guns, that language of law is a determinative agency among men, that I completely disregarded the absurd statement, when, precisely at that the time, another member, TaxingMatters, had just posted that he agreed that the language of law itself has no efficacy, and, I just assumed you would see TaxingMatters' post disagreed with yours and was agreed with my position. Also, it struck me very heavily that you had completely failed to understand the point that there is distinction between the language of the law, and, the violence of punishment, which violence is the only thing law pitifully has going for itself, which violence is precisely what law is acting against being done by persons, with law-violence, which doing violence to punish violence is self-inconsistent and barbaric.

    darwinrules;
    You have merely collected the retarded declarations of other dimwits alike persons on this site, too stupid to follow the OP, so they only issue brutal insult instead.

    To be balanced and fair, publish the uplifting, encouraging and agreed comments from the US Message Board, and, you are taking some to these out of context.
    Pay your trash bill.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources