Skip to main content

View Diary: Firearm Registration (284 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And everything on the internet is true. (5+ / 0-)

    "No officer, I was lying on DK for a purpose..." etc

    Great defense and there's no proof one way or another (for THEM) if I have the roughly 30 firearms I say I have or if I only have the handguns that are registered.

    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

    by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:37:07 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  So lying to authorities, a crime, is ok with you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Miss Blue, The Nose

      As long as there isn't any proof. Do you think that's a moral position?

      We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

      by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:13:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think there's a time to disobey authorities. (7+ / 0-)

        Don't most of us? Civil disobedience seems to be a tradition on our side of the fence.

        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

        by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:26:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't recall civil disobedience including lying. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          The Nose

          But I get the strategy of expanding that tent.

          We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

          by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:59:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  From Wiki: (7+ / 0-)
            Ronald Dworkin held that there are three types of civil disobedience:
            "Integrity-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys a law she or he feels is immoral, as in the case of northerners disobeying the fugitive slave laws by refusing to turn over escaped slaves to authorities.
            "Justice-based" civil disobedience occurs when a citizen disobeys laws in order to lay claim to some right denied to her or him, as when blacks illegally protested during the Civil Rights Movement.
            "Policy-based" civil disobedience occurs when a person breaks the law in order to change a policy (s)he believes is dangerously wrong.

            Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

            by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:06:09 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  still don't see lying in there. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The Nose

              I think it's a tough sell to call something "civil disobedience" when the authorities don't know you're doing it.

              We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

              by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:09:40 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  "No sir, there are no escaped slaves in my house." (6+ / 0-)

                Seriously?

                Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:11:12 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think that's a moral question... as I said. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  blueness

                  Setting aside the false equivalence of firearms and people.

                  I don't think lying about having slaves in your house is civil disobedience. It would certainly be willful breaking of the law.

                  I think you should watch this series, it discusses exactly the question you raised.

                  What's the right thing to do.

                  We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                  by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:15:54 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I've watched that and corresponded with (5+ / 0-)

                    Michael. I just received a form letter saying I might be interested in his book and hey, come join the forums, but I found the videos interesting.

                    Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                    by KVoimakas on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:23:52 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Wilful breaking the law IS (5+ / 0-)

                    civil disobedience by definition when it's done as a form of protest against the legitimacy of said laws.

                    That's what civil disobedience IS.

                    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                    by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:36:24 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I think "protest" is the key word here. (0+ / 0-)
                      Refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment. It is used especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing government concessions.
                      If the Government doesn't know you're doing it... I don't see how that qualifies.

                      We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                      by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:53:15 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  You're misunderstanding it then, no offense (7+ / 0-)

                        to you personally: it basically means you are opposing the law by following the law as you believe it ought to be. It does not always mean actively, which is what you're talking about -- that is active civil resistance. Sometimes it is as I point out here, passive civil resistance, which is refusing to participate in laws you don't believe in.

                        I'm adding these terms active and passive although I'm not sure you'll find these distinctions through Google or whatnot.

                        But no, categorically untrue that the point is for the Government to "know." That's usually referred to as "direct action."

                        Civil disobedience, again, is just refusing to comply with a law you don't believe should be a law.

                        Often it's driven by an internal moral stance more than an external statement. Of course sometimes you can be loud about it too.

                        Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                        by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 10:08:50 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I didn't make up the block quote I put above (0+ / 0-)

                          miriam webster did.

                          So obviously I am not alone in my definition.

                          and lying is not "refusing to comply with a law". Unless you think the law of not lying is an unjust law and you just lie to authorities about anything.

                          We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                          by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:24:59 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  Of course it's a moral question. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    43north, theatre goon

                    That's the entire point.

                    Sheesh.

                    Oh wait, are you saying that all the illegal OWS gatherings should have been arrested and jailed?

                    •  Your legal duty to OBEY outweighs (3+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      PavePusher, oldpunk, theatre goon

                      your moral duty to uphold your First Amendment Rights.

                      Apply for a permit to march/assemble for a protest.  

                      If denied, understand it's for your own good, the good of the Nation, and the preservation of Order.
                      Your right to be heard, to petition for redress has been weighed, measured, and found wanting.  The institutions of Wall Street must be protected from this sort of rampant hooliganism.

                      If a financial beating wasn't enough, we can arrange for a physical beating.  

                      "He resisted. I kept beating him, only because he continued in his refusal to comply.  I repeatedly instructed him to:
                      Lay flat, stay down!  Face away from me.  Face down! Put your hands above your head, arms out to your sides, legs spread. hands behind your back.  He just wouldn't do it, and kept his hands around his head where I was directing my blows.
                      Isn't that pretty much how the Rodney King trial testimony went?  A demonstrated refusal to comply with Law and Order.  The institutions of government are never wrong, nor are those persons employed to enforce the mandate:  OBEY.
          •  It very much is part of a tradition (7+ / 0-)

            of civil disobedience, perhaps not those you're more familiar with which are mainly based on Gandhi's Satyagrahi -- or nonviolent resistance -- which requires one to adhere to truth as well as nonviolence as a form of civil disobedience. But civil disobedience is a pretty neutral term in many ways; it would include things like some Black Bloc tactics like willful destruction of property for the purpose of making a statement that the law is unjust (in that case, it was probably more about corporatism being valued over human life than a full-throated embrace of communist principles, but it could have included communist ideals about ending private property and seeing private property laws as unjust as well).

            Just trying to clear the record; I'm not making any sort of argument or advocacy, just defining terms for the record.

            In short, it is just refusing to engage in, recognize, or obey laws that one feels aren't just. That doesn't mean you have to be a saint, ethical, or non-violent, let alone tell the truth to someone.

            Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

            by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:35:12 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think your definition is too broad as to make (0+ / 0-)

              the term meaningless. I expect most every criminal thinks the law they're breaking isn't just.

              We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

              by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:58:16 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You may think that (7+ / 0-)

                but the way I'm defining the term is how it's commonly used in practice. If you wish to define the term, you can, but that doesn't shift it in the common parlance anymore than renaming a "goat" a "fish" would?

                I believe, incidentally, that most criminals don't feel great about the laws they break and don't do so on moral grounds: if you've ever known anyone who has served time and spoken with them, you'll hear little self-advocacy other than here and there. It strongly depends on what "crime" was committed. Many drug offenders feel it's stupid that they have been jailed. But those who have stolen things aren't generally doing so because they're communists (!) and those who have killed kids by driving drunk didn't generally do so because they were opposing jack shit. I would say few criminals tend to stand by their actions other than in a few cases where the law has been contentious, such as with drug laws or prostitution, or when a criminal is simply morally depraved (an exceptional case).

                Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 10:14:29 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  *shrug* (0+ / 0-)

                  Lots of things are commonly used in practice in different circles. You're free to define it any way you want as well but you don't speak for the definition of "goat" either.

                  We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                  by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:26:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Look, we're talking in circles (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    oldpunk, PavePusher

                    and I think I'll just leave it to readers to decide about this conversation here at this point; I feel they've been offered adequate information to read this even from the most tabula rasa position.

                    I don't debate things I know to be factually true -- that's very dull in my humble view, and I haven't the foggiest what the purpose would be. I might as well play online Boggle to kill time. If you're angling for argument, try someone else. My intent to offer realistic definitional terms has been amply accomplished.

                    Good day to you.

                    Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                    by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:39:43 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

                      It's fine to disagree as long as we're being agreeable.

                      Just to sum up my position...

                      It is not "civil disobedience" to lie to police about owning firearms. It is simply criminally lying.

                      We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                      by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:42:04 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Sigh... (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        oldpunk, 43north, Oh Mary Oh

                        I'm not going to disagree about facts. Facts are facts.

                        I honestly don't understand where you've taken on this position about the meaning and definition of civil disobedience in theory and practice: for me, I come to it from having been an activist who practiced various forms of it for years and who worked with other activists and radicals ranging from the Black Panthers to the UFW to many other reformers, including volunteering in a radical book store, and at present, being an adult educator who deals with social justice and civil rights issues, in part. This is where I've gained understanding of this term, in no small part. So if it has a different tenor for you, that's fine. But again, this is what it means in the common parlance of the terms. And I'm not interested in "debating" fact, even nicely. I will debate interpretation, analysis, and all manner of things other. But I will NOT debate real, basic, true fact, particularly regarding such a truly, truly simple definitional matter.

                        Good day is generally regarded as a polite phrase meant to say "the conversation has been concluded." So there's no need to respond back.

                        Good day and enjoy your afternoon!

                        Click the ♥ to join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news & views written from a black pov - everyone is welcome.

                        by mahakali overdrive on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:50:39 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Enjoy your afternoon as well. (0+ / 0-)

                          But don't tell me whether I can respond to a post. You don't control our interaction, there are two parties here.

                          Asserting something as a fact does not make it a fact. I agree that you believe anyone breaking the law on supposed moral grounds is "civil disobedience". I don't agree. I will go with Miriam Webster on this one and stick with the definition I've seen as the term has been applied in practice and in dictionaries.

                          Lying to police is about owning firearms is not civil disobedience. Refusing to turn them over when lawfully demanded to do so (and so risk arrest for that refusal) could certainly be civil disobedience.

                          We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

                          by i understand on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:57:02 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

      •  Please cite to the law... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oldpunk, theatre goon

        that says I must answer honestly when asked by a government agent at my door about my firearms.

        Good luck with that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site