Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 101
  1. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NW of KSTL
    Posts
    2,554

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    Quote Quoting Tyrant Slayer
    View Post
    It's getting easier and easier to discern.
    Wrongo cheesewhiz, my dogs are polite and well-mannered. They would probably hang out with someone with terminal stage-4 bullshitoma. NOT ME!

    It's an art, the whatever it is you hem, haw, and harangue about. Takes a lot of wasted freetime to come up with the tripe that you do! Totally useless and nonsensical as it is.

    My "evidence"? Why that'd be your posting history dimbulb! Please stock up on wits better so as to make this just a bit more entertaining.

    Quote Quoting Tyrant Slayer
    View Post
    ...your so-called "evidence" cannot contain any logical fallacies, or circular arguments.
    Lawdy lawd!!! Logical fallacies. Circular arguments. Can I quote you? I know a lot of folks that'd get a ROTFL outta this.

    One more thing, sparring with you leaves me with some sorta mom's basement, pile of twinkies impression.
    Growing old, mandatory. Growing up, optional!

  2. #72

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    We're waiting Dave..."history" is an appeal to tradition...and...a logical fallacy. Feel free to provide ACTUAL, IRREFUTABLE, EVIDENCE anytime.

    Quote Quoting souperdave
    View Post
    It's an art...Totally useless and nonsensical as it is...My "evidence"??... Logical fallacies....Circular arguments...
    ...ARTIFICE: Clever or cunning devices or expedients, especially as used to trick or deceive others. (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/artifice)
    You couldn't have said it better yourself @souperdave...the phenomenon of parapraxis is a great discernment device or expedient.

    ...just not so clever or cunning these days...

    Quote Quoting souperdave
    View Post
    I strive every day to be the kind of person my dogs think I am, my dogs are polite and well-mannered (nonsensical, as they think they won't eat if they shit in your shoes). NOT ME! I know a lot of folks that'd get a ROTFL outta this.
    Can I quote you? Lawdy lawd cheesewhiz!!! Takes a lot of wasted freetime with mom's basement, & a pile of twinkies to come up with Logical fallacies & Circular arguments. It's an art you hem, haw, and harangue about. Please stock up on wits better so as to make this just a bit more entertaining. ROTFL!!!

    The ego uses several defense mechanisms to protect against the conscious experience of excessive anxiety and associated emotions such as shame and guilt.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    NW of KSTL
    Posts
    2,554

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    Really? Well now I'm getting a prison library/KY sorta 'vibe'.

    You had to have looked up "parapraxis". It's not a phenom missy! Simple mistaken speech.

    Parapraxis won me a 4th grade city-wide spelling bee......still got the trophy.

    BTW, I'm persistent to a fault, determined, and relentless. And I NEVER tap out! Especially when it comes to diatribe-esque, bloviating maroons with scary sounding screenames!!!!!!!!!! Embrace the horror sweetpea. Once the 'radar' locks on, I don't relent til the proverbial missile finds its way up your nethers. At Mach 7.

    Anxiety? Shame? Guilt? Obviously you relate to whatever it is that looks back at you in the mirror. Or well-mounted polished sheet metal.

    I have to admit though, you're not all that challenging. Unless challenged is your difficulty, in which case I have to say, I love you!
    Growing old, mandatory. Growing up, optional!

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,728

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    TS, would not artifice and parapraxis be antonymic? Given a parapraxis is an error and an artifice is an intentional tactic, it would seem an artifice cannot also be a parapraxis and vice versa. You can’t have an intentional error. That would make your statement defining artifice and attempting to define parapraxis by using the definition of artifice incorrect.


    ya know bro, when you want to impress others by using big words, you should understand their definitions before tossing them into the conversation.

    You should also understand the art of communication is not a continual attempt to show your claimed intelligence. Rather, it’s to use your intelligence to cause the participants of the conversation to understand your point or to persuade them your position is correct . Continual interjections of dictionary entries of words suggests you are doing little more than attempting to impress others by scouring dictionaries to seek words you find impressive. What it does show is you know how to use a thesaurus and a dictionary adequately. Your error of attempting to define a parapraxis as an artifice shows your underlying intent of not wishing to communicate but merely attempt to impress others. That would mean this is not a conversation but merely your attempt to impress others. You surely have impressed others. I suspect it isn’t the sort of impression you hoped it would be.


    Your rambling and verbose postings appear to be nothing more than your manifesto.

  5. #75

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests


  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,728

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    Nice post. The brevity is a welcome relief but the content is just as meaningless as the rest of your posts.

  7. #77

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    @jk....I'm merely stating, via the process of observation, that the artifice of avoidance, per se, may be being brought about and expressed as impulsive parapraxis, becoming manifest as a defense mechanism, because there is no evidence that i've been able to ascertain, or at least none which has been provided by the legal professionals here, that sufficiently clarifies the factual basis relied upon in determining a written instrument's applicability to people based solely on their physical presence in a geographic location.

    "The law applies because the law applies", can be circularly asserted ad infinitum, but provides no factual evidence in support thereof.

    "The law applies because we lock people up", a blunt assertion of dominance or power, serves only to demonstrate an appeal to authority, tradition, and/or consequences, and cannot be considered valid arguments. Especially when weighed against mala prohibita legislative efforts, and subsequent prosecutions.

    If the claim of contractual obligation arises, based solely on physical presence in a geographic location, implied or otherwise there is no valid factual evidence to support the existence thereof. For example, if a City Attorney asserts representation of "The People of the State", there would be actual fraud present, because the law of agency refutes such an assertion, as does power of attorney law. Although the answer, however unilateral it is, may be inferred via the employment of capital or lower-case lettering to denote which "S[s]tate" it is, that the written instrument actually describes, corporate or geographic.

    Another example...I did not grant power of attorney, to the City Attorney, conferring any such apparent authority to prosecute the person whose name is called after mine, and it is highly doubtful that said person granted the same. Under California law, a presumption is not evidence.

    The entire process is presumed, at the foundational level, from allocation of jurisdiction, to the coercive threat of bench warrant if one does not "voluntarily" participate in a proceeding in which no quantifiable damages can be assessed, and no harm, injury or loss can be shown to exist, due to one's own "criminal" agency. These are exploitable flaws one can utilize as a defense to baseless mala prohibita accusations, even without Constitutional protections present, which undermines a prosecutor's entire so-called "case". There can't exist, a justiciable controversy under such circumstances, and against a written instrument, ultimately constituting a fraud upon the court. In other words, prove the law/written instrument's applicability, in order to substantiate the claim of it's violation, prior to filing a formal complaint.

    An acceptable solution, would be to provide the factual evidence proving a prosecutor's prima facia assertion of jurisdicion, with respect to the issues discussed above, or file a nolo prosequi. OR...just leave people alone.

    Quote Quoting souperdave
    View Post
    "parapraxis" [or parapraxes]...Simple mistaken speech.
    Avoidance of additional and qualifying information = Artifice. Point made. But, @jk...yes...I DO see your point of the terms being antonymic.

    *jurisdiction

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,728

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    An artifice cannot be a parapraxis. If you feign a parapraxis with the intent of it being an artifice, it is not a parapraxis but actually an artifice.


    if it is truly a parapraxis, it cannot be an artifice.

    The law applies because the law applies is true in its statement but more completely, the law applies because the people of this country have enacted and continue to support a form of government that enacts laws and the power to punish those who refuse to abide by the laws. A person doesn’t have to agree for the laws to apply to them because our society has accepted the laws apply to all persons within the jurisdiction in question.

    The only way way to change that would be to have a civil war and depose the government as it is and enact a new form of government. Of course, that new government will also create laws and punish those who break them. The only other option is anarchy but anarchy will exist for a very limited time. After that some form of government will form.

  9. #79

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    @jk...at least we see eye to eye on the necessity for a set of rules...but, the way the government employs coercive and compulsory methods to achieve compliance, is more akin to a ruling class, rather than any form of equity, as the maxim "all equal under the law", so implies. If there were no overbearing immunity, protecting those who are supposed to be protecting natural rights, there would be a far less chance of the corruption experienced by the less fortunate or "undesirables" being subject to that very thing at present, in violation of the law of the land, cf. the Equal Protection Clause. True Anarchy may be the best option at this point, because our politicians have taken things way too far, and are showing signs of treason.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,728

    Default Re: Restraint of Liberty and Privacy Interests

    Youíre free to vote for whomever you believe will seek to enact or remove laws as you believe they should be. Youíre free to write all the legislators and seek they enact and remove laws as you believe they should be.


    Thatís how we work within the system.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. McCain At New Hampshire Liberty Forum
    By blueeagle in forum Banter
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-12-2008, 06:51 AM
  2. Speeding Tickets: Speeding Ticket In Liberty New York
    By beach34957 in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-21-2008, 07:03 AM
  3. Liberty Dollar redux
    By jk in forum Debate the Issues
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-24-2007, 08:40 PM
  4. Couple Arrested for Using Liberty Dollars
    By Madmanmike1972 in forum Debate the Issues
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-20-2007, 06:16 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources