Robo
Verified User
By any other name, property is property, only a damned fool & other leftist are confused by such truth & logic!
Who's really responsible aside from the bleeping shooter?
- Thread starter Robo
- Start date
By any other name, property is property, only a damned fool & other leftist are confused by such truth & logic!
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
You can't keep track of the flow of a discussion if it bit you in the ass... This thread is not at all about trespassing; it is about who is responsible for mass shootings. This trespassing talk is a side discussion which popped up due to you not liking my response to StoneByStone's false claim that illegals are not invading this country. That naturally led into discussing trespassing.
What we've learned by way of this side discussion is that you don't want people trespassing into YOUR house and onto YOUR property, yet you are perfectly fine with people trespassing into other people's houses and onto other people's property. Basically, you are fine with trespassing so long as the issue stays "over there" and doesn't burst into your little bubble in any way...
I'm no expert on etymology, but here you are rejecting the very etymology of the word 'citizen'. This word, as far as I can tell, comes from the Latin words 'civitas' and 'civis', which both relate to "city".
There are many different levels of "community". City is one such level, and is the level that the word "citizen" seemed to originally hone in on. State is another level. Country is another level. Your own household is the base level of such "community". What do all of these levels of "community" have in common?? They are all owned and operated by somebody; they are all private property, belonging to somebody.
It's a shame that we, as a society, have seemingly all but forgotten about these lower scales of "community", and are instead hyper focused on larger scales (a lot of times without even having the smaller scales in working order). How can one expect to properly handle State issues if one can't even properly handle their own household?
It's completely relevant... It is the very notion of trespassing vs permitted entrance.
No, I am shining light onto your inconsistent reasoning regarding small scale vs large scale trespassing. You don't support trespassing on the smallest scale (ie, your own property), but you are perfectly fine with it on any scale beyond your own household (ie, someone else's property).
See above.
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
You can't keep track of the flow of a discussion if it bit you in the ass... This thread is not at all about trespassing; it is about who is responsible for mass shootings. This trespassing talk is a side discussion which popped up due to you not liking my response to StoneByStone's false claim that illegals are not invading this country. That naturally led into discussing trespassing.
What we've learned by way of this side discussion is that you don't want people trespassing into YOUR house and onto YOUR property, yet you are perfectly fine with people trespassing into other people's houses and onto other people's property. Basically, you are fine with trespassing so long as the issue stays "over there" and doesn't burst into your little bubble in any way...
I'm no expert on etymology, but here you are rejecting the very etymology of the word 'citizen'. This word, as far as I can tell, comes from the Latin words 'civitas' and 'civis', which both relate to "city".
There are many different levels of "community". City is one such level, and is the level that the word "citizen" seemed to originally hone in on. State is another level. Country is another level. Your own household is the base level of such "community". What do all of these levels of "community" have in common?? They are all owned and operated by somebody; they are all private property, belonging to somebody.
It's a shame that we, as a society, have seemingly all but forgotten about these lower scales of "community", and are instead hyper focused on larger scales (a lot of times without even having the smaller scales in working order). How can one expect to properly handle State issues if one can't even properly handle their own household?
It's completely relevant... It is the very notion of trespassing vs permitted entrance.
No, I am shining light onto your inconsistent reasoning regarding small scale vs large scale trespassing. You don't support trespassing on the smallest scale (ie, your own property), but you are perfectly fine with it on any scale beyond your own household (ie, someone else's property).
See above.
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
In Roman times, a city was the equivalent of a modern U.S. state. And this "side discussion" is the result of your insistence on equating trespassing with invasion.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
You can own a house. Can you own a country? I hope that logic doesn't confuse you, but I don't have high expectations.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Trespassing is a specific type of invasion.
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Yes, trespassing can be a type of invasion. But you are trying to treat all the different types of invasion as if they were identical. A false equivalence fallacy. One that you are quite fond of.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Individuals do not own countries, unless they are royalty or other dictators.
You appear to be just as delusional as Robo.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Correct, it is a specific type/form of invasion.
Earth to Planet X... Earth to Planet X...
I thought I was "attempting to equate a house with a country"... Now I'm "attempting to equate all the different types of invasion"??
The only point I've been making (and you've been side-stepping) this whole time is that your reasoning regarding small scale vs large scale trespassing is inconsistent. In other words, you don't support trespassing on the smallest scale (ie, your own house and property), but you are perfectly fine with it on any scale larger than that (ie, your city/township, state, country). As long as people aren't invading your little bubble, trespassing isn't an issue for you. That's rather selfish, I'd say.
I'm not attempting to equate anything. Rather, this discussion is about consistency in reasoning, and your lack thereof.
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
Last edited:
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Welcome to Paradox City, good buddy! So, which one is it?
[1] Individuals do NOT own countries.
[2] Individuals DO own countries.
The delusion is all yours, good buddy...
You continue to try to treat all forms and scales of invasion as being identical. A few, even a few million, "invaders", in a nation of over 300 million is hardly the disaster that you make it out to be.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Lie.
That's precisely what they are. They are trespassing onto property which doesn't belong to them. They are invading.
Yes, it is. We don't know who these people are or what they are doing in our country. They are trespassers; they are invaders. They need to be removed. If they want to enter, they need to have permission to enter. They need a passport/work visa/citizenship, etc...
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
You are completely paranoid and unable to consider the issue rationally.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Inversion Fallacy. Stop projecting your own issues onto me.
They ARE invaders. They are trespassing onto property which doesn't belong to them.
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
They are your issues, as you continue to demonstrate.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Do you leave your house door open for any "opportunity seeking" foreigner to enter, or do you lock it? Why is this?
Continuing with the false equivalence fallacy. My house is not a country. The two situations are not comparable. Not only is the scale vastly different, but so is the intent. But you are blind to all reason.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
gfm7175
Mega MAGA
Fallacy Fallacy. I am not attempting to equate a house with a country. I am, rather, consistently extending the morality/legality of "it is wrong to trespass" from a micro scale into a macro scale. The point is that it doesn't matter in the slightest whether we are speaking of a house or of a country, trespassing is morally/legally wrong. If you don't want people invading into your house, then why do you want them invading into your country?
Yes, they are. They are both about trespassing. They are both about invasions.
Irrelevancies.
Inversion Fallacy.
Who besides the shooter is responsible? The person who gave him or sold him the weapons and ammo. The politician who voted for keeping guns in the hands of unchecked people. The masses want background checks. They want people to be qualified to own a gun. The gun show loophole and all the people and politicians who allow it to exist. Throw in the NRA and the gun manufacturers who fight any laws that will make America safer because it cuts profits.
A crazy or ill person should not have access to a gun. Anyone who fights to allow him to have shared responsibility. That includes people who ignorantly claim the constitution permits anyone to own any weapon they want.
A crazy or ill person should not have access to a gun. Anyone who fights to allow him to have shared responsibility. That includes people who ignorantly claim the constitution permits anyone to own any weapon they want.
Last edited:
You continue with your complete lack of any arguments. And complete lack of any understanding of the issue.
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk