Oh, that poor "deprived" and "abused" Walmart corporation!

[Dan From Smithville]

Some programs have issues of efficacy & cost effectiveness.
And all cost, meaning raising taxes.
With all the money spent on war, more spending is a tough sell.

Just "some"?

I agree.

Sometimes we have to consider the benefits that are much longer term, but most of us cannot see that far. It certainly does not help that we have spent so much money on wars that have achieved so little and in many ways have left us less well off.

 

[Curious George]

Sure. It is a big thing in movies. I have to admit that it probably has even meted out justice by accident on some rare occasion. But I am not sure that is an endorsement with much value from a practical, moral and legal standpoint.

Well vigilantism is by its nature outside the law. Regarding its practicality, it is by its nature practical. Looking to morality is a little harder. There was a case of a karate instructor who kidnapped and sexually abused a boy. When the offender was caught and brought back to the state where the kidnapping occurred the father shot the man. This was caught on camera and is readily available on the internet, if you are interested. Many support and applaud the father. I think that vigilantism is more than just popular "in the movies."

While I disagree with the previous poster regarding, well everything, i would be lying if I said there is no instance of vigilantism that I do not find cathartic. Now, I understand that we need consistency and order. I think we do a pretty good job at providing that all things considered. But, I understand whence the emotional appeal comes.

I think that it is necessary to point out this origin, because what is really being discussed is how we ought mete out justice.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'm willing to kill.
(Remember that I designed weapons...or parts of them.)
But I see it as more of a last resort.

I would kill in defense of myself or others. I have no issue with that. I would rather be prepared to the point that it makes that resort unnecessary. Killing in war is not desirable, but it is sometimes necessary. Isn't that a sort of paraphrase of something Pershing said about the job of a soldier?

It is killing for some untried abstraction that I find myself less willing and interested in engaging in death as a means to an end. The idea of picking out people and putting them on a hit list, because I do not like them or their politics or I have judged them and found them wanting is the sort of killing for a cause that I am not interested in.

I am trying to remember if I knew this. I know you mentioned a physicist that you know and he was part of the strategic space defense initiative, but I did not recall if you outlined your participation or not.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well vigilantism is by its nature outside the law. Regarding its practicality, it is by its nature practical. Looking to morality is a little harder. There was a case of a karate instructor who kidnapped and sexually abused a boy. When the offender was caught and brought back to the state where the kidnapping occurred the father shot the man. This was caught on camera and is readily available on the internet, if you are interested. Many support and applaud the father. I think that vigilantism is more than just popular "in the movies."

While I disagree with the previous poster regarding, well everything, i would be lying if I said there is no instance of vigilantism that I do not find cathartic. Now, I understand that we need consistency and order. I think we do a pretty good job at providing that all things considered. But, I understand whence the emotional appeal comes.

I think that it is necessary to point out this origin, because what is really being discussed is how we ought mete out justice.

I know of an instance in the community where I got my BS degree, there was a case of a farmer and his son acquitted of homicide by jury nullification. Parts of the community saw itself as the victim of entitled college kids and in one area, those students were actually notorious for ignoring property rights and littering laws. One of the land owners and his son disagreed with a few of these students that were partying on their property one night and it escalated into homicide. A jury of peers did not find the farmer and his son guilty.

Emotionally, I have to admit that I find a sort of catharsis and even justice in the vigilante slaying of a clearly guilty pedophile, but even there, I have to fall on the rule of law. My emotions have also been wrong.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am trying to remember if I knew this. I know you mentioned a physicist that you know and he was part of the strategic space defense initiative, but I did not recall if you outlined your participation or not.

I was invited to join the program, but declined.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well vigilantism is by its nature outside the law. Regarding its practicality, it is by its nature practical. Looking to morality is a little harder. There was a case of a karate instructor who kidnapped and sexually abused a boy. When the offender was caught and brought back to the state where the kidnapping occurred the father shot the man. This was caught on camera and is readily available on the internet, if you are interested. Many support and applaud the father. I think that vigilantism is more than just popular "in the movies."

While I disagree with the previous poster regarding, well everything, i would be lying if I said there is no instance of vigilantism that I do not find cathartic. Now, I understand that we need consistency and order. I think we do a pretty good job at providing that all things considered. But, I understand whence the emotional appeal comes.

I think that it is necessary to point out this origin, because what is really being discussed is how we ought mete out justice.

That is one of the problems of vigilantism. It is not just popular in the movies. Though that does go to support your claim about it as part of American culture.

I am not sure which previous poster you mean for certain, but I think I can guess.

 

[Curious George]

I know of an instance in the community where I got my BS degree, there was a case of a farmer and his son acquitted of homicide by jury nullification. Parts of the community saw itself as the victim of entitled college kids and in one area, those students were actually notorious for ignoring property rights and littering laws. One of the land owners and his son disagreed with a few of these students that were partying on their property one night and it escalated into homicide. A jury of peers did not find the farmer and his son guilty.

Emotionally, I have to admit that I find a sort of catharsis and even justice in the vigilante slaying of a clearly guilty pedophile, but even there, I have to fall on the rule of law. My emotions have also been wrong.

Without doubt our emotions have been wrong. To say that our emotions are right is not my point. Rather, i am suggesting at trying to understand what is being suggested and why. Posters are offering the ills of Walmart as justification for inflicting nominal damage on Walmart. This is very much discordant with our current legal system. So the questions that should be addressed to meet in the actual disagreement is how ought we mete out justice and why.

I agree with you that our current justice system is better than enabling vigilantism.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I was invited to join the program, but declined.

That is what I recall you mentioning. I have used weapons that others have designed. I once made a shiv out of my pudding spoon, but then I realized I was not in prison, so it did not end up being very useful.

So you worked for a company and designed weapons there. I knew somebody did. Those things didn't just show up in the arsenal one night while we were all sleeping. Think of the size of the sleigh we would have to believe in to accept that story.

It does not change my opinion of you one bit, not that that should matter. As much damage (maybe more) has been done with the Bible as has been done with bombs. You built weapons in defense of this country and I am the offspring of a man that used weapons to defend this country. Along with some of my brothers, uncles, and ancestors.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Without doubt our emotions have been wrong. To say that our emotions are right is not my point. Rather, i am suggesting at trying to understand what is being suggested and why. Posters are offering the ills of Walmart as justification for inflicting nominal damage on Walmart. This is very much discordant with our current legal system. So the questions that should be addressed to meet in the actual disagreement is how ought we mete out justice and why.

I agree with you that our current justice system is better than enabling vigilantism.

I think we agree on a lot of things here.

If Walmart is guilty of some crime or is doing something that is legal, but still wrong, how does one go about making sure that the company and the relevant employees are brought to justice.

I think pointing out that emotions are a shaking ground on which to base action is important to mention even if it is not a point that either of us is promoting.

Most technology has risks. Cars have the risk of accident and weaponization. Chemical discovery programs could end up creating a carcinogen so virulent it could reduce the human population. Some of the risks are greater than others. Some are trivial, but not zero. People have argued against the deployment of some technology using the precautionary principle as the basis. If there is even a trivial or non-zero chance something could go wrong, we should opt out of discovery, creation or production and distribution as a precaution. The flip side to that is the sometimes trivial chance that not doing something could have an equally devastating unintended consequence. I personally know about this from the point of genetically modified plants. Some people feel that despite all the regulation and testing, the very minute chance that something could go wrong should be enough to cause companies to be forced to withdraw from their production and farmers to be kept from their use. But what if we did and in some future time, an issue develops that genetic modification could have dealt with, but is not there for us. The development of some new, virulent plant disease, the consequences of climate change, or something we have not even thought of could jeopardize our food security. It is much the same argument I have seen used against abortion. A nurse or a paramedic is depicted as having survived abortion and we are to see how bad it would be if that person was not there to save the lives they have saved. Of course, the flip side is Hitler, Stalin, Charles Manson, John Wayne Gacy, etc. For every conceivable reason to be cautious, no matter how trivial, there are equal reasons to press on.

I find myself in the awkward position of having spent so much time writing this last paragraph, that I have forgotten why I was writing it. It had something to do with your post and I apologize for now not being able to tie it together. I cannot blame a teleprompter for this and must accept my responsibility, but I am leaving it here just in case I recall my thoughts.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's also not normal to think that way. My posts are more directed towards what should be sane people in positions of authority, (i.e.) store managers, police, judges, etc.

Regardless, acting on conscious is acting on enotion. Emotions have no place in law. Things often and usually go bad when emotion guides justice, because the destination is surely vengance, not justice.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, many of them are still preaching the gospel of Milton Friedman (greed is good) because doing so pleases the wealthy directors and patrons of the colleges they work for.

And thats a reason to scoff at the idea of learning it? And do you not realize they teach actual business stuff? Like what this is called and what thats called (people will give you weird looks if you dont know what theyre all called even if you are aware of the same idea, such as tracking every penny that comes in and out of your business).

 

[PureX]

Yes. I have read much of history where your extreme solution was so useful. It helped start WW1, heralding four years of destructive war and the deaths of 20 million people. So wonderful, this final solution.

There will be no choice but violent revolution when the greed becomes so powerful that the suffering it causes becomes unbearable. And that is exactly where unchecked greed will go. Every time, without exception. The only question now is how bad will things have to get before we become willing to fight for our lives.

And you are already living under a fascist regime. You just haven't figured it out, yet, because the greedy fascists are destroying OTHER people's lives so far, and not yours. But when they come for everything you have, and that you love, you will be singing a different tune. And they will come for you and yours, eventually. Because greed cannot be satiated. It swallows everything and everyone within it's reach, like a bottomless black hole.

 

[PureX]

That's foolish. We all know about this man due to the OP bringing him to our attention.
And make no mistake, I didn't indict him. The legal system did.

You answer, so what, when it is pointed out the man described in the OP is a thief?
If you're ever robbed don't complain or prosecute. Then you'll actually walk your talk here.

You are placing the ideal of ownership above the lives and well-being of humanity. I think you really ought to rethink your moral imperatives.

 

[PureX]

You cannot guarantee anything of the sort. All that you could guarantee is bloodshed. You have no idea what would rise up out of the ashes you created.

When these greedy, corrupt turds in business and government have to face some real consequences for their misdeeds, they will change their behavior lightening fast. You can bet on it. They are nothing more than clever bullies, using our own idealism against us. Sooner or later we're going to have to stand up to them. It's just a question of how much abuse we're going to take from them before we wise up, and find the courage to do it.

 

[Revoltingest]

There will be no choice but violent revolution.....

And we will enjoy a workers' paradise just like in N Korea, Cuba, & China, eh?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There will be no choice but violent revolution when the greed becomes so powerful that the suffering it causes becomes unbearable. And that is exactly where unchecked greed will go. Every time, without exception. The only question now is how bad will things have to get before we become willing to fight for our lives.

And you are already living under a fascist regime. You just haven't figured it out, yet, because the greedy fascists are destroying OTHER people's lives so far, and not yours. But when they come for everything you have, and that you love, you will be singing a different tune. And they will come for you and yours, eventually. Because greed cannot be satiated. It swallows everything and everyone within it's reach, like a bottomless black hole.

I am singing Smoke on the Water right now.

Gosh, this sounds just like a fundie rant. Instead of going to Hell, I am going to be chopped to teenie tiny bits by ravenous fascists of Greedonborg. Or by people like you in your zest to spill blood, you just start tearing into whoever is near.

If I live, I will be under the rule of authoritarian nuts that got control by slaughter of anything and anyone in their path. Then the real Hell with begin.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

When these greedy, corrupt turds in business and government have to face some real consequences for their misdeeds, they will change their behavior lightening fast. You can bet on it. They are nothing more than clever bullies, using our own idealism against us. Sooner or later we're going to have to stand up to them. It's just a question of how much abuse we're going to take from them before we wise up, and find the courage to do it.

How can they change their behavior, because you are going to slit them from grin to groin and drape yourself in their still warm intestines. Not much room for behavioral change after that.

You must really have been hurt.

I think it is a question of how many people you can lather up so that you all feel enough courage by mass to actually do something. Go on out now. Why don't you. Get the ball rolling. Makes sure they get your name for the history books.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And you are already living under a fascist regime.

Please learn what a fascist is, because no matter what the cute checklists say we are not living under one.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You are placing the ideal of ownership above the lives and well-being of humanity. I think you really ought to rethink your moral imperatives.

This coming from a guy that thinks slaughter is a reasonable means to cause social change. Glad you are not in the child care industry. Of course, any of those babies get in your way when you are going all self righteous bloodshed mania, they are toast anyway. Right? Right.

You are putting your personal political/religious beliefs above all human life.

 

[PureX]

This coming from a guy that thinks slaughter is a reasonable means to cause social change.

Ever heard of warfare? It may not be reasonable, but it is sometimes necessary, as a last resort. And not all our enemies are outside our borders. In fact, the most dangerous ones are not only among us, but are in positions of great wealth and power.