Skip to main content

View Diary: Book review: David Neiwert's 'And Hell Followed With Her' (240 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "I'd like the option". (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Smoh, Avila

    So would North Korea. Plus, I'd like the option of a button that would stop people from equating their "likes" to a constitutional or human right. But whatever. Let's vote on your wish list.   It's still a democracy.  

    That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

    by Inland on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 11:14:53 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe, maybe not: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Joieau
      Let's vote on your wish list.   It's still a democracy.  
      http://www.nationaljournal.com/...

      The majority of these "United States" have voted to deny me, a transgender woman, the right to marry whom I chose.

      Does this mean that what they did was constitutional?  Clearly by their own State Constitutions it was.  

      Do you support these efforts now?  Since you want to restrict the right to keep and bear arms through a popular vote?  

      See how "the tyranny of the majority" works yet?

      "If it be admitted that a man possessing absolute power may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should not a majority be liable to the same reproach? Men do not change their characters by uniting with one another; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase with their strength. For my own part, I cannot believe it; the power to do everything, which I should refuse to one of my equals, I will never grant to any number of them."
      Alexis de Tocqueville, "Tyranny of the Majority," Chapter XV, Book 1, Democracy in America
      You'd have us utilize the same method that the "Moral Majority" has to strip me of Equity Under Law.

      I find this position very dangerous to us all.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 12:39:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is it constitutional? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Smoh, Avila

        I dunno: is "I'd like" in the constitution?  Or more precisely, is what "You'd like" in the constitution, because for some reason, I'm supposed to bow down to your druthers in wanting to be as well armed as the United States Government and pretend like it's not the talk of a crazy person, and you never seem to give a shit what I'd like.  Not even to ask.  Such as, "How do you feel about me being the world's superpower? Do you like that or not"?

        When do I get rights?  Yes, I'm asking, since it seems to be up to your whims.

        That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

        by Inland on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 12:53:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've never advocated you losing any rights. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Joieau

          You wish for it to be true so that you can ignore what I've actually stated.

          My rights end where yours begin and vice-versa.

          You've never asked me what I wanted, you've told me what you're going to do, Government by Decree.

          As for this:

          I'm supposed to bow down to your druthers in wanting to be as well armed as the United States Government and pretend like it's not the talk of a crazy person,
          http://xroads.virginia.edu/...
          In America the majority raises formidable barriers around the liberty of opinion; within these barriers an author may write what he pleases, but woe to him if he goes beyond them.

          -cut-

          Fetters and headsmen were the coarse instruments that tyranny formerly employed; but the civilization of our age has perfected despotism itself, though it seemed to have nothing to learn. Monarchs had, so to speak, materialized oppression; the democratic republics of the present day have rendered it as entirely an affair of the mind as the will which it is intended to coerce. Under the absolute sway of one man the body was attacked in order to subdue the soul; but the soul escaped the blows which were directed against it and rose proudly superior. Such is not the course adopted by tyranny in democratic republics; there the body is left free, and the soul is enslaved. The master no longer says: "You shall think as I do or you shall die"; but he says: "You are free to think differently from me and to retain your life, your property, and all that you possess; but you are henceforth a stranger among your people. You may retain your civil rights, but they will be useless to you, for you will never be chosen by your fellow citizens if you solicit their votes; and they will affect to scorn you if you ask for their esteem. You will remain among men, but you will be deprived of the rights of mankind. Your fellow creatures will shun you like an impure being; and even those who believe in your innocence will abandon you, lest they should be shunned in their turn. Go in peace! I have given you your life, but it is an existence worse than death."

          I neither wish for your adulation's or scorn, I wish to be free to decide my own fate against your "tyranny of the majority".  A freedom defined by equity under law and enforced by our created government.

          You use your scorn in an attempt to deny me these things.  Thanks, but no thanks.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 01:11:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ever heard of citizenship? Democracy? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Smoh, Avila

            I think that my ability to vote for or against gun laws, or to elect reps who do it for me, is my right as a citizen.

            You don't.  

            And you want to make sure that my rights as a citizen in a democracy is eliminated in favor of your "I'd like".   Well, not just my rights, of course, but all the rights of the majority.  

            Amazingly, you consider any restriction on your whim in a democracy to be tyranny.   When in fact it's the other way around: the person who is free to do as he wishes without regard to anyone else's legitimate desires is the tyrant.  Just because your ambitions as far as we know is limited to your idee fixe on guns doesn't make you less antidemocratic, if not antisocial and dangerous in more ways than bullets.

            That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

            by Inland on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 02:29:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What does this have to do with what I stated? (0+ / 0-)

              You wish for the abrogation of rights you don't like or agree with.  The same ideological trick used by the "Moral Majority".  

              Government by Decree is tyranny hon, look it up.

              And by the way, I've never owned a firearm, this isn't about me owning one but about us all having the right to do so if we so chose.  

              Your "democracy" has denied me the right to marry.  Prove that your position isn't any different than theirs.

              -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

              by gerrilea on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 02:48:04 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not rights, and not "I". (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Smoh, Avila

                The actual majority, not some group, in our consitutional republic.That's not "I".

                But if it makes you feel better to pretend that laws passed by majority rule or through elected represenatives is "government by decree", go ahead.  But in reality, it's the person who declares that "I'd like" has the force of law is the person who is, literally, saying that his decree is the law.  

                Your "democracy" has denied me the right to marry.  Prove that your position isn't any different than theirs
                Shrug.  I already know you dislike democracy for all the wrong reasons.  I''m not impressed that you're searching for a good one.

                That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                by Inland on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 03:16:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Semantics meant to hide YOUR position. (0+ / 0-)

                  I believe in Equity Under Law and the rule of law that is just.

                  I believe in the expansion of our rights to all people, no matter, race, color or creed.

                  I believe our government must ensure these things, not take them away because you want it.

                  What I want is tempered by that goddamn piece of paper called the Constitution.

                  Did not the majority, through the popular vote, ie referendum, vote to deny me said Equity Under Law?  Are you not now espousing the same tactic???

                  Maybe you haven't reviewed what my State just did in January, The NYS SAFE Act denies me a right by decree, not by the "rule of law".  I am a recovered Alcoholic & Transgendered Woman, both are identified as "mental illnesses" and are part of who I am.  

                  The "rule of law" would demand that I be found guilty of some crime BEFORE I'm denied the exercise of any rights.  Not so today.  I'm denied the exercise of a right by decree, not by a court of law and a jury of my peers, as would be the requirement in our constitutional republic.

                  Soon you'll be telling me that "due process", as outlined in said document, does not mean "judicial process".

                  Oh, wait, is that you Eric Holder???

                  As for me "not liking democracy", that's a creation in your own mind.  The dangers inherent in the rule of the majority must be kept in check.  That is why we have a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy.  The masses can easily be led, to their own destruction or the destruction of minority rights.  The rights of the minority have throughout history, always been abrogated, never protected from the tyranny of "majority rule".

                  I'll never support a plan that will deny the expansion of rights to all people, clearly you do.

                   

                  -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                  by gerrilea on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 08:01:18 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And you want the right to be world's superpower. (0+ / 0-)

                    It's amazing how you managed to forget that among all your high ideals is your assertion of a constitutional right to have more arms than the USG.

                    Whatever.  No amount of wanting reasonable things can take away from the fact that you wanting...the "I'd like"...is elevated to a constitutional right, where as what I want doesn't count for shit.  I don't care how benevolent a dictator you are.   And you call ME the tyrant.  What a pile of crap.

                    The dangers inherent in the rule of the majority must be kept in check.
                    Maybe.  But not by you or any other individual who makes "I'd like" into the final word.  

                    That's not even "gun control". It's more like "massacre control".

                    by Inland on Tue Apr 02, 2013 at 08:57:12 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Wow, just because I want it doesn't mean I'll (0+ / 0-)

                      ever get it.

                      It's just on my "wish list", that's all.  I wish to have that right, which by the way, I currently do, if I move out of NYS.

                      ;0

                      All joking aside, the point was that we were to be the government and it's enforcer...  That our government should not have any more arms than we do.  That was to be the "check" on tyranny.  Can't have a dictator if they don't have the force.  Another reason why our government was spread out and localized or "diffused".  The concentration of power is dangerous, always has been and always will be.

                      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                      by gerrilea on Tue Apr 02, 2013 at 10:28:14 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site