Christine777

Ok. Let them do it here. I'm sure that the first line of millions fined will be our government establishments/offices. :tongue:

@ Maxwell To you as the author of this thread, I guess I owe you an apology. Sorry for my useless adding "a new, entirely fictitious system to the options". (I'm presumming you're refering to me. :sweat: I just can't help it, seeing that I can't favor any of them standing alone. Let's go back to your thread. :sleep:

@nosisab Point taken. :smile: But just an added note: Yes, I agree that "it's not those things happens because we believe them"(a quote from you). It is what we do that make them real. But most, if not all, of our doings are intrinsically geared by what we believe. :happy:

Well, I think that book could be right. And I think if that's the case there will be two option then: 1. You can wait until your death. 2. Or if you survive and escaped the trap, the first few things you will ask most probably is - what time is it? :smile:

What do you mean by this? I think this statement is really generalizing all beliefs. Because: I do believe that a meal can nourish my body, and it does. I do believe that a car can make me travel faster in land, and it does. I do believe that I breath oxygen (as Balagor stated earlier), and it does. I do believe that my cousin has a father even if we did not see him. Surely he has. I do believe in (I just can’t mention it here due to forum rules). And invoking “beliefs are neat but can’t make reality” would certainly hurt me and many others with this belief I’m referring to. And I do believe that if this is the case = “Beliefs are neat but can't make reality” then all our dreams in life, which is very much connected to what we believe that we can do, are all void. :sad:

Oh yes, a poll would be better. And please include this one in the poll :teehee: - The Combined Sytem. I think no one among the four is really qualified to take the floor. And I do believe that if one among them is given a chance to dominate among the rest, a monster will be created, which later on will dominate even the whole system it oath to serve. I still go with the contention that they should be equitably combined. Perhaps through this, there will be balance. In balance, I mean, a self checking system that can accommodate not only single aspect/need of the society but a variety of those aspects/needs. Allow me to give these four a simple definition: Socialism – economic and social system under which essential industries and social services are publicly and cooperatively owned and democratically controlled with a view to equal opportunity and equal benefit for all. (Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. ©) Communism - a theory and system of social and political organization that holds the idea of a society based on common ownership of property and wealth. (Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. ©) Capitalism - economic system in which private individuals and business firms carry on the production and exchange of goods and services through a complex network of prices and markets. . (Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. ©) Feudalism - contractual system of political and military relationships existing among members of the nobility in Western Europe during the High Middle Ages. It was characterized by the granting of fiefs, chiefly in the form of land and labor, in return for political and military services - a contract sealed by oaths of homage and fealty (fidelity). . (Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. ©) As you may have notice, there is always good in each and every one of them. Why don’t we put them together and take the better part of it. :thumbsup: I have this weird (if not stupid) suggestion. With these definitions allow me to coalesced things in order to create a New System: The Combined System - An economic and social system wherein basically most industries and social services are publicly and cooperatively owned (Socialism), but also allowing private individuals and business firms to carry on the production and exchange of goods and services through a complex network of prices and markets (Capitalism). And not denying the rights of granted fiefs to some nobles but enforcing them to a contract (sealed) for military, economic and social service to their country (Feudalism). Since every citizen is an essential part of society, the notion of a society based on common ownership of property and wealth is implied (Communism). PS: Re-editing is allowed. We can cancel any of the four which we think would not do any benefit to the whole. (e.g. Feudalism)

In its "purist" form? I say NONE OF THE ABOVE (as Vagrant said). BUT, if those four combine in a balance and pack together in a DEMOCRATIC form of government, then ALL OF THE ABOVE. My apology (to Maxwell) if I mention Democracy here, but I don't Identify it with those four - I want it to be the "wrappings" for those four. All four has its strength and weaknesses, but hitting the balance would be a more profound and beneficial (economic) system I think. @nosisab I think we are talking of economic ideologies here not form of government.

You forgot the 95% of non american and non criminal people in occident: The ones who thinks guns (civil ones) aren't needed if you have an advanced society. And btw, fireguns have only one purpouse, kill living things, including persons, so the right of having em implies the possibility of use em for manslaying. Me, an 90% of european people wouldn't ever use lethal violence (guns) for defending their material possessions, i don't wanna be robbed but i would prefer lose some wealth for it than kill another one for a matter of money. And, luckily, 95% of europeans will EVER not being in a situation to need a gun to defend their lifes. For my material stuff there's something called insurances. So, the damages free gun possession means in a society are far worse than the "few" chances you really should have the need for using it. Oh… I really don’t like to disagree with you in this post Crivil, because this view is very humane. I am a peace loving person. I love people as well as their lives. In fact, almost all good fellows (even the not so good ones) here in our town is a friend of mine. And I hate to kill any living thing that cross this world (except for necessity – such as chickens, etc.. for food). But I can’t just accept your view regarding robbers. Many of them will not just rob you, but will also kill you so that there will be no evidence and complain after the crime. And this idea of yours will just give a “push of encouragement” for them to do the crime again, and again, and again. If this will be the view of everybody, the criminals will rule this world.

@ Balagor, Darkwolf and Ginnyfizz. I am just amuse seeing how differently our countries consider lethal weapons. Here in our town many villager are involve in cane production. Since we dont have very good technology yet, so cane harvesting is done manually. With this many people/workers are carrying very large sword-like things (sorry I'm really in trouble describing this sword), we called "Spading" : It is very sharp one edged sword, about 5 inches wide and about one meter long. During harvest season almost all "Sakadas"(Sugar Cane Harvesters) are carrying this everywhere. even in public utility vehicles. The sad thing is when they got drunk and find disputes in their converstaion they are cutting its other's limbs instead of sugar canes lol... @ my friend Balagor (on dogs) Yes, a dog can be a very good defense. That is why we keep a Doberman, a German Shepherd and 2 Rottweilera, and many other ordinary dogs at home (we have 11 dogs here in our home). I really trusted them especially the very master-faithful Zorro(the Doberman). But, last year's event chages my perspective on them. Because someone really break through our fence and steal 3 of my uncle's high-breeded Cockfighting Roster. They did'nt get through the house though, since if they did, I just can't imagine what will happen to them. I dont know what charm those robber has, but the dogs scattering around our compound has not allerted us and they(the dogs) did nothing to defend us that time.

You certainly have a point in there... And this current government of ours too, has someting to do with it. Well, I can't blame everything to them. But some way or the other they play a vital role in most of our people's poverty. Don't worry we're not off topic, I think. :biggrin:

Added to morality and culture (your claim), I think our Government has something to do also. We have very weak law enforcement capability here. This perhaps add to condition that civilian possession of weapons (in our case) for dire need of self defense are presumed valid.

Oh.. Hi to both of you.. I’m glad we three meet here. (Giving pause to image section in DAO) I do too agree. Morality is a big factor here. But I think it also has something to do with the balance of civilian weapons possession in the country too. In our case, most of the people are aware that bandits are just lurking nearby since law enforcement is very weak. And these criminals are well armed, from improvised home-made shotgun/pistols to high caliber long barrel weapons such as M16s or M14s. As a result, many of us, remote town residence acquire weapons either taking it legally of illegally (most of the case). At present we are under strict gun-ban rule, due to a coming National Election. But even with this strictest arm rule for the moment people are all the more readying their weapons and keep it at home – to make them safe against this Commission on Election Gun-Ban. Because we all knew that bandits are taking this gun-ban as an opportunity in advantage to them. This is from our experience already – and damn it is deeming right, for just last month until present bandit attacks are rampant already. Allow me to post a situation: Just last week, two public utility vehicles were hijacked just 3 kms from our Village (Barangay) and passengers are being robbed. First attack was Sunday last week, followed by that amusing Tuesday event. I find it amusing because during that hijack, all 2 bandits are both shut dead by a passenger happen to bring his 45 caliber pistol. And guess what, all the passengers are thanking their hero. Eventually the police knew the indecent but did not bother to hunt the killer. – Self explanatory, I supposed. The police would even be thanking that fellow, I presume. And as a matter of fact, if they (the police) are being called to respond to the place of incident surely they will not comply. Not because they are cowards, but because it takes two hours for them to reach the area and they will be risking their lives for nothing if they do. The last time I remember the police step their foot in our town was two months ago. When they give a symposium to all residence on how to defend themselves against robbers, hold uppers, hijackers, etc.. Sadly there are only three (as far as I know) among us here who has access to the internet. If all these residence are in this forum – this thread would be swarming with YES – to the right to bear arms argument, I supposed. We need these weapons to balance ourselves on the real situation. And these weapons are oftentimes the ones giving those bandits pause or something to think about before they strike.

If I were in the game. I would be the ArchDemon and make sure the game cannot be defeated easily, and give time to the scriptwritter to make the Expansion (Awakening) story better. :teehee:

@Christine777 "Don't tell me that it is not Conditional/Situational. I have'nt heard (yet) a Criminal sentence to death, and acused his executioner (his government) because his Inalienable right to life supersedes them." The example in question, at least 26 cases and counting in state and federal court that I could find, that's just going back 10yrs. Cruel and unusual punishment is more common than that as a vehicle for contesting DP cases. You set the agenda for a DP debate, I'll be there. :thumbsup: I did not see any fallacious error in that. I assume you know the difference between a statement "in question" for needs of facts and a fallacy. And still, you even have'nt named what fallacy that is. I have not post any topic yet in the debate fora. Perhaps, I'm not just good at posting new topic/s. And I'm sorry I can't post DP for this reason alone. Let's go back to the thread. :smile:

Yes it (DP) would be another topic. And I, too, is willing to debate it with you. But before we go any further, may I know - What Fallacy did I commit? Please name it, for me to know.