Jacinda

[TheDemonLord]

That explains a lot about your posting.

I want to smoke while I’m having dinner inside my favourite restaurant, but the government said no. Authoritarian bastards, how dare they dictate what I can and can’t do for my own good.

See, I don't smoke, never have. Don't like the smell of smoke. I'm happy that most bars/restaurants are smoke free....

but I disagree that it should be legislated for.

If tomorrow, the rule was removed - how many Bars would keep a smoke free policy? If you were going out to a restaurant or Bar and it stank of Cigarette smoke, would you go there or would you take your business elsewhere?

I want to drive my car without wearing a restrictive seatbelt, but the government said no. Authoritarian bastards, how dare they dictate what I can and can’t do for my own good.

Absolutely. See, I always wear my Seatbelt. Not because the Government tells me I have to, but because I know that in the event of a crash, it's more likely to help than Hinder.

That's me taking personal responsibility for my own health and safety.

The Government could issue a law tomorrow forbidding me to wear my seatbelt, and I'm still going to wear it.

And yes, these examples are comparable to what happened with Covid. Follow some fairly simple rules, that in Covids case are short term and there for yours and everyone else’s protection.

I agree - and you'll notice... I disagree with those other rules too.

I'm fine with them being suggestions. But rules? Enforceable rules? Not at all.

And here's the rub - those rules have consequences, it's pretty clear from a brief review of History that when you maximize personal freedom, you get net positive results. The Inflation and myriad of other problems that NZ is facing right now (Crime, Child Poverty etc. etc.) - they are a consequence of (and I'm being extremely charitable here) well-intentioned rules that are there for 'yours and everyone else's protection'.

I'd rather a dangerous freedom, than a gilded cage.

If you don’t want to, perhaps you should try living in Taiwan and see how your ‘freedoms’ are treated there.

We'll see if the National Government that is likely incoming actually try being conservative for a change or are going to be Labour-Lite. I don't have very high hopes (pointing to my 'Fuck National' flag in the corner) - but Luxon has been talking about repealing legislation, so there's a ray of hope.

[Kendog]

I think you’re living in the wrong country, perhaps even the wrong century if you want that much freedom.

[TheDemonLord]

I think you’re living in the wrong country, perhaps even the wrong century if you want that much freedom.

Okay - hear me out for a second.

Think of every single hobby/activity/food that you enjoy.

I can repackage your argument and ban you from it, for your own good. You have no moral basis (if you agree with the presuppositions that you've indicated) to say otherwise.

Motorcycling? Too dangerous, not enough protection, burden to the Taxpayer - Banned.
Racing? That's just as bad as Motorcycling - Banned.
Gaming? You're just practicing to be the next Christchurch Terrorist - Banned.

And so on and so forth.

What would be your argument about me banning those for your own good that somehow could not also be applied to the laws you are attempting to ridicule me for disagreeing with?

I've considered moving elsewhere to countries that have a greater emphasis on personal freedom, as I said - we'll see what National do - whether they govern like conservatives or if they do what they usually do.

As for wrong Century - I could make the argument that the decline of the West is directly tied to our distancing from these principles. History will be the judge of whether I was righteous or wrong. I should point out that of late, it's been exceptionally generous to many of my positions.

[Kendog]

As a kid of the 70s many freedoms I enjoyed are a thing of the past.
Is the world a more pc, bubble wrapped place 50 years later? Absolutely
Are we worse off now than 50 years ago? Depends on the metrics you choose to measure I guess.

But isn’t the difference the laws enacted for Covid were short term. I know some people here said and probably continue to say it was just the Govt wanting total control over the people, Covid isn’t real, Covid isn’t that bad etc etc.
But I think the reality is we needed some strict rules like lockdowns, border restrictions etc. Did they last a bit longer than necessary, maybe. Hindsight is a real bitch for times like these.

[TheDemonLord]

As a kid of the 70s many freedoms I enjoyed are a thing of the past.
Is the world a more pc, bubble wrapped place 50 years later? Absolutely
Are we worse off now than 50 years ago? Depends on the metrics you choose to measure I guess.

Allow me to quote yourself back at you:

Typical avoidance.

The question was, if you truly believe in the points you made, how would you argue against the government systematically banning everything you enjoyed?

The avoidance is because, despite how much of an asshole you think I am/am being, you know that I'm correct on this point - you would have no basis to argue for the things you liked. This is only a non-issue because they haven't been banned... yet...

I would have been charitable and allowed an appeal to pragmatism - but again - you didn't make it.

Now, to be fair to your point you've made - it's complicated - there are some things that aren't as prevalent that have been a positive for society, there are some things that aren't as prevalent that have been a negative for society.

I put it to you that there are some things that on the surface have no redeeming properties, but that is because we are blind to the value they provide.

I'll give an example that is fairly grounded in uncontested science, even before the Pandemic, we used Hand Sanitizer, especially for young children - I'm not different with my young children, although I tried to limit it's usage (due to the reasons below):

At the population level, our usage (perhaps, overusage) of things like disinfectants, bleach, hand sanitizer etc. has been theorized to be a causal link between that and the rise of allergies, auto-immune diseases etc. This was first observed IIRC with East/West Germany - with doctors noting that the East German children didn't suffer these ailments at the same rate as their west german counterparts, despite being from the same gene pool and having much the same in terms of environment.

When they were unified, the East german children (now being exposed to things like bleach/hand sanitizer etc.) started to develop allergies at a rate similar to their west german counterparts.

From this - we can conclude the following:

We need our children to be exposed to enough germs and bacteria that their Immune system develops properly, but not so much exposure that they are seriously ill or dead.

The same ethic could also be used for children playing unsupervised - enough danger that they learn to assess risks and act accordingly, but not enough that they die.

I appreciate that this is a long-winded response - but it's important: Some of the things that we stopped doing, that we thought were 'bad', had a very real and very beneficial aspect to society that isn't self-evident.

What are the consequences of that Bubble wrapping and PC culture? I'd say that the rise of the Woke Movement, rise in mental illness and other assorted issues are related.

But isn’t the difference the laws enacted for Covid were short term.

So, it's Moral if it's short term? I mean the Rwandan genocide only lasted 100 days, so...

Something is either moral or immoral - the length of time doesn't enter into it.

I know some people here said and probably continue to say it was just the Govt wanting total control over the people, Covid isn’t real, Covid isn’t that bad etc etc.

I mean, when the Government is taking total control over people by dictating where they can go, what they can do and demanding that they see your papers to do so...

those people here and there aren't exactly wrong.

But I think the reality is we needed some strict rules like lockdowns, border restrictions etc. Did they last a bit longer than necessary, maybe. Hindsight is a real bitch for times like these.

Border restrictions - sure, I could agree with that, even in hindsight.

Everything else was wrong and we are reaping the consequences of it being wrong. A Consequence, which I think I've proved was absolutely due to government policies.

[pritch]

Sadly some people are just too stupid to look after themselves or anybody else. So because of them we have mandates. The idiots that are complaining are the very fuckwits that necessitate us having mandates.

[TheDemonLord]

Sadly some people are just too stupid to look after themselves or anybody else. So because of them we have mandates. The idiots that are complaining are the very fuckwits that necessitate us having mandates.

Why?

Let them suffer the consequences of their own Stupidity or reap the rewards of their own cleverness.

It's what they want afterall.

And again, same question to you - what basis would you have to argue against someone banning something you like, for the same reason(s)?

[pete376403]

Pretty much everything that doesn't have a basis (tangential or otherwise) in Natural Rights.

You posted recently about getting stopped for speeding and (IIRC) you were given a warning. So it seems most of the time it appears you obey the law wrt to speed limits. Why? Are speed limits not infringing on your "natural rights" to go where you will at whatever speed you deem appropriate? At the time you were probably wearing a seat belt. Was this not an unnatural restriction of your body within the car?

[TheDemonLord]

You posted recently about getting stopped for speeding and (IIRC) you were given a warning. So it seems most of the time it appears you obey the law wrt to speed limits. Why? Are speed limits not infringing on your "natural rights" to go where you will at whatever speed you deem appropriate? At the time you were probably wearing a seat belt. Was this not an unnatural restriction of your body within the car?

I've addressed the Seatbelt one previously. It's the same reason why I wear Leathers, Gloves etc. on a Bike, even though I don't need to.

To answer your question - they are an infringement of natural rights - this is why the Germans still believe in the mostly unrestricted Autobahns.

You can raise some pretty compelling pragmatic argument for speed limits - in residential areas for example.

The focus on speed as an enforceable (and fineable...) offence has long been a subject of much contention. Do I need to pull out a myriad of articles and commentary about speeding and 'Revenue Gathering'?

To answer your question directly - about speeding - there are times when I have deemed it safer to exceed the speed limit (such as overtaking a bad driver) - I have done so in the past and would do so again in the future, regardless of what the law says.

Is there any here that can hand-on-their-heart say they have not done otherwise? I doubt it. And therein lies the validity of my point - regardless of how you say you feel about it - when push comes to shove, you'd act in the same way that I say.

Should I find myself in front of a Jury, then it will be my burden of proof to convince them that I had a very real and immediate need to disregard the road rules.

The closest set of laws that have dubious basis in Natural Rights, that I otherwise agree with - are laws pertaining to the creation of risk. Things like Negligence, Drunk driving, reckless endangerment etc.

[FJRider]

The question was, if you truly believe in the points you made, how would you argue against the government systematically banning everything you enjoyed?

In my younger years ... I enjoyed traveling at high speeds (well over posted speed limits) on various 3rd world Countries roads (and I'm not even referring to NZ roads either. Although there are similarities with the quality of current NZ roads). Sometimes in small groups ... and sometimes alone. However ... the factors of poor roads quality ... high traffic volume ... piss poor standards of local drivers ability/attitude (sound familiar ??) ... made the odd prang highly likely. In my case ... it DID happen. I did live to tell the tale ... in case you were wondering ...

The key to the popular personal attitudes (in this modern world) ... is doing what you want ... WHEN you want. Regardless of whom you offend or injure.

Regardless ... of it either being illegal ... or ... plainly "Just" bloody dangerous. Some just don't give a single fuck if they hurt or kill somebody. But they'll scream bloody loudly if someone hurts them. Go figure.

Any systematic arguments you might have regarding the "Banning" of things YOU enjoy ... might be simply be because YOU (and others with same/similar objections ... are the reason the rules (like speed limits) get changed.


But you stick to your natural rights ... and we'll see how long your natural life will last.


After all ... like it or not ... it is is your best interest (health wise and longevity wise) ... to actually obey the restrictions. It may well save YOUR life.

Regardless of how good a rider/driver you are ... there are plenty of unskilled people operating motor vehicles on NZ roads ... that will NOT miss a minutes sleep ... if they hit you and kill you.


As per usual ... the rules are simply based on the worst the case scenario of accidents ... involving worst case possible drivers/riders. Such is current Government Policy of saving yourself from yourself.

[NZIrish]

Sadly some people are just too stupid to look after themselves or anybody else. So because of them we have mandates. The idiots that are complaining are the very fuckwits that necessitate us having mandates.

....simple and well put

[NZIrish]

In my younger years ... I enjoyed traveling at high speeds (well over posted speed limits) on various 3rd world Countries roads (and I'm not even referring to NZ roads either. Although there are similarities with the quality of current NZ roads). Sometimes in small groups ... and sometimes alone. However ... the factors of poor roads quality ... high traffic volume ... piss poor standards of local drivers ability/attitude (sound familiar ??) ... made the odd prang highly likely. In my case ... it DID happen. I did live to tell the tale ... in case you were wondering ...

The key to the popular personal attitudes (in this modern world) ... is doing what you want ... WHEN you want. Regardless of whom you offend or injure.

Regardless ... of it either being illegal ... or ... plainly "Just" bloody dangerous. Some just don't give a single fuck if they hurt or kill somebody. But they'll scream bloody loudly if someone hurts them. Go figure.

Any systematic arguments you might have regarding the "Banning" of things YOU enjoy ... might be simply be because YOU (and others with same/similar objections ... are the reason the rules (like speed limits) get changed.


But you stick to your natural rights ... and we'll see how long your natural life will last.


After all ... like it or not ... it is is your best interest (health wise and longevity wise) ... to actually obey the restrictions. It may well save YOUR life.

Regardless of how good a rider/driver you are ... there are plenty of unskilled people operating motor vehicles on NZ roads ... that will NOT miss a minutes sleep ... if they hit you and kill you.


As per usual ... the rules are simply based on the worst the case scenario of accidents ... involving worst case possible drivers/riders. Such is current Government Policy of saving yourself from yourself.

..as i said well said

[TheDemonLord]

....simple and well put

And I trust, when you are on the receiving end, having your rights stripped away, you will likewise say 'Simple and Well put'


But I doubt that...

[FJRider]

And I trust, when you are on the receiving end, having your rights stripped away, you will likewise say 'Simple and Well put'

And I don't like the idea of someone taking away MY (Natural) RIGHT to live.

But I doubt that...

I doubt you actually give a flying fuck about anybody but yourself.

[TheDemonLord]

And I don't like the idea of someone taking away MY (Natural) RIGHT to live.

Completely agree - which is why I support your natural right to self-defence

I doubt you actually give a flying fuck about anybody but yourself.

Depends how you frame it:

I want everyone to live their lives as they see fit. I'm pleased when they succeed, I'm disapointed when they don't, where I have absolutely *zero* empathy, is when you've been given sound advice, ignored it and then suffered the consequences.

Does it mean I directly give a flying fuck about anyone else? Unless they are directly beholden to me, not really.

But, that doesn't mean I don't want the best for them, I'm just unwilling to violate their right to irrevocably fuck their life up to do what I think is best for them.

And that difference happens to be very important.