[ExI] ccp struggles

Stathis Papaioannou stathisp at gmail.com
Wed Apr 15 06:48:20 UTC 2020

On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 16:11, The Avantguardian via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Tuesday, April 14, 2020, 08:33:11 PM PDT, Stathis Papaioannou via
> extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 at 11:18, The Avantguardian via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> Quoting Stathis Papaioannou:
> If a policeman tries to arrest you for something that you think is
> unconstitutional, you don?t have the right to shoot him, or even threaten
> to shoot him. You will likely be punished if you shoot him or threaten to
> shoot him even if it is subsequently agreed in court (in a case separate
> from your criminal trial) that the policeman was acting on laws that were
> unconstitutional.
> An armed American might not have the explicit right to shoot a policeman
> for violating his constitutional rights, but he certainly does have the
> option to do so. That option alone might prevent the policeman from barging
> into that American's home to see if he has anything he might want to take,
> demand free room and board from him, or otherwise excessively abuse police
> powers. Both the American citizen and the policeman have to deal with the
> consequences of their actions. By being armed, you can make sure those
> consequences are evident to the policeman. Armed citizenry keep the police
> honest.
> Ever since Australians gave up their gun rights, the government can now
> just arrest their journalists and treat them like criminals, if they write
> or say the wrong thing. Can you imagine if Trump had that power here in
> America?
> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-15/abc-raids-australian-federal-police-press-freedom/11309810
> Do you really think the Australian Federal Police would not have pursued
> the journalists if they feared they had guns? Do you think that the US
> Government might have not have pursued Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning
> if they had guns?
> Those individuals would probably still have been pursued in those specific
> cases, but if the government started targeting a specific class of people, let's
> say journalists or jews. In that case guns would allow those people a
> chance to band together and formed a meaningful resistance.  There is
> ancient saying: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who watches the watchers if
> not for we the people? The capacity for violence is like a currency
> accepted and appreciated not just by a single country or government but by
> all living things both known and unknown.

The obvious example is not the journalists or the Jews but the criminals
with guns: why do the police and the courts keep pursuing them?

> --
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20200415/41a44c73/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list