Paris attack 11 have been killed calling it a terrorist attack.

**Todor** · 12-04-2015, 20:19

Originally Posted by JS4

Exactly.

So tell me again why normal, law-abiding folk should have their rights infringed upon because of the actions of criminals..?

Lemme guess - as per the gun-control lobby, its 'for muh chillrun', isn't it?

We are agreeing some more, but it feels (tone of voice lost over internet and all) that you think we are arguing ;)

Your argument is a tautology - without the law there is no law-abiding citizens and criminals. There's just people.

99% (95? 85? many?) people would never commit murder to begin with. Why do we need laws against it?

Without laws (definitions) we can't figure out who the "criminals" are so we can't give the government authority to act against them. Who decides and how?

The problem comes with crimes where the evidence is subjective - you took offense when I did not intend to give it. e.g you being offended with me talking about your dog.

I did not mean to offend your dog, but you assumed I did so you punch me (or take me to court). How would you prove such intent in court? That "something" which makes it an insult and not a casual example - THAT's the part we need to put into law so that "law abiding citizens" (like myself) don't end up facing the wrath of the government over misunderstandings over dogs.

**Todor** · 12-04-2015, 20:23

We truly spend faaaar too much time "misunderstanding" other people because of slight misalignment in definitions...

**JS4** · 12-04-2015, 20:49

Lol!

You've totally lost me now, with your insistence on insulting my dog. I looked over to see how he was taking all of this and whether his feelings were maybe hurt but the little man-whore was just busy licking his balls.

Why, you ask? Because he can. That's why.

**JS4** · 12-04-2015, 20:52

Of course there must be laws and there are.

In the context of this thread, the Charlie Hebdo people were acting within those existing laws. Calling for them to self-censor more than what the law requires because otherwise the result may be violence is ignoring that rule of law and acquiescing to the demands of terrorists.

**Todor** · 12-04-2015, 22:47

Originally Posted by JS4

Of course there must be laws and there are.

In the context of this thread, the Charlie Hebdo people were acting within those existing laws. Calling for them to self-censor more than what the law requires because otherwise the result may be violence is ignoring that rule of law and acquiescing to the demands of terrorists.

Those cartoons are fucking despicable (but not illegal), and Charlie Hebdo are assholes because they intended to offend. Murdering over cartoons is even more despicable.

Hebdo weren't asked to give up free speech - they were asked to stop insulting Muhammad by a billion Muslims. How I know this? My Muslim friends were all offended and they didn't murder anyone (sound familiar?). I want to be an asshole to people who will murder (over comics or otherwise), not to people I respect.

No different to

Originally Posted by JS4

Now. Kindly leave my wife out of this...

I didn't have to because it's not really illegal and I value my free speech, but I respect you or something ;)

**JS4** · 13-04-2015, 00:16

Yes, their cartoons were (are?) despicable.

Solution: don't read 'em.

On with the example... if you had decided to continue with my wife as an example I could have just not read your posts. Problem →solved.

(But, as an aside, calling my wife a whore would not be legal as it isn't true. That would then make it slander, so the example doesn't really work.)

**Todor** · 13-04-2015, 03:37

Originally Posted by JS4

Solution: don't read 'em.

Better solution: stop being so easily offended
Best solution which addresses the world's problems overnight - don't murder anybody!

We wrote it on paper and called it law. We did this like 2000 years ago, why the hell isn't it working already?! Maybe we need to work on our marketing?

As rational people we recognize there are people out there capable of murder and violence. We don't know who they, we don't what makes them tick and don't know how to tell them apart from us "normal people" because we know very little about how the mind works. Even if we could tell them apart I suspect we aren't going to change their mind with "please don't murder anyone" pamphlets.

Figuring this out for 6 billion people is anything but easy and you can thank our biased brains for the confusion - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False-consensus_effect

On insulting family members - maybe I'll get away with it because you are rational guy, maybe I get away with the next 100 guys whose wives I insult because they are all pacifists, but the more people I offend the more likely I stumble upon somebody who can't wait to punch me in the face at the slightest provocation. Law or no law against me saying such things.