Jury Nullification (1 Viewer)

Government does not operate by coercion? Ok... Try not paying your taxes, or ignoring a warrant.

You can get back to me on that one.
under this framework, Education also operates by coercion, right?
not arguing just seeking clarity - interested in this line of reasoning
 
under this framework, Education also operates by coercion, right?
not arguing just seeking clarity - interested in this line of reasoning
I would think so. If I don't pay school district taxes, they will come coerce me to do so even if I have no kids in the government school system.
 
Government does not operate by coercion? Ok... Try not paying your taxes, or ignoring a warrant.

You can get back to me on that one.
You choose to live here and subject yourself to that power. That's not coercion.

And that's an interesting argument style you have there.
 
You choose to live here and subject yourself to that power. That's not coercion.

And that's an interesting argument style you have there.

Yeah, I agree. I tend to think people have a choice to live under the social contract. Most of us can move to another country, or live out in the country. In both cases people are ordinarily free to do so. As for taxes, there's few places on earth you can go and not be taxed. That's not coercion. It's a prerequisite for living in a modern society.
 
Yeah, I agree. I tend to think people have a choice to live under the social contract. Most of us can move to another country, or live out in the country. In both cases people are ordinarily free to do so. As for taxes, there's few places on earth you can go and not be taxed. That's not coercion. It's a prerequisite for living in a modern society.
The "social contract" is two-fold. However, the main premises of the social contract is that if the government does not uphold their end of the contract - they have broken the contract.

A broken contract means:
1. you do not have to follow your end of the bargain.
2. You are absolved from the legalities of violating the contract as the action of the state has released you from your obligation.

Y'all need to read (chapter 3 - I think) of Hobbe's work - that is the intent of the manuscript.
 
You choose to live here and subject yourself to that power. That's not coercion.

So I have to follow a contract just because it was thrust upon me by a group with power? So you are saying, that if someone's rights are violated that person have to bend to that authority?

Yes it is coercion. Definition:
"the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats."

If you do not do something by the law, there are always punishments in those for failure to follow. THAT sir, is a threat. Do this or else. Pure and simply. If you or I do it, is assault.

Just because it is a law, you are not morally bound to follow it. Do not confuse morality and legality.
If 51% of the people may vote for it, does not legitimize it. In the end it is the violence of the state that will enforce it. Just because it is legal (a law) does not make it right. The term for it is "tyranny of the majority" -(i.e. Democracy). That is why the Founding Fathers wanted a Republic. It is not the perfect government, but it protected minorities as well as any form of government could.
Realize that over time, Jim Crow laws were legal.
Slavery was legal.
Setting your slaves free was illegal.
Helping runaway slaves was illegal.
It was legal to shoot 7 or more indians going across the Missouri River from west to east.
It was legal to assault and steal from Jewish people in Germany pre-WW2.
It was legal for a man to end his wife's life for "displeasing him" at one time in Alabama.
Gay people were prevented the luxury of being joined in a civil union.
etc... etc....

There are hundreds if not thousands of illegal laws (still) on the books. Only a few ever get overturned.

However, I digress.
Coercion and violence is how the state gets you to play by their rules. It is why the Constitution LIMITED the authority of the Federal Government and thus applied to all others via the 14th Amendment, which reads:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Too bad our own government does not follow the rules that created the government.... THAT is a violation of their end of Social Contract.
....
Just being born somewhere does NOT make you required to obey. If so, the country would be a CAST system. You would be bound by the rules of your fathers and you would probably be in the same trade. Additionally, any debts incurred by your parents could be passed down to you. You are not responsible for the previous generations failures - Legality is based on action by an individual not based on what happened before you.
 
Yeah, I agree. I tend to think people have a choice to live under the social contract. Most of us can move to another country, or live out in the country. In both cases people are ordinarily free to do so. As for taxes, there's few places on earth you can go and not be taxed. That's not coercion. It's a prerequisite for living in a modern society.
‘Most’ could be a stretch
 
I think you may be surprised how many libertarians are anarchists.

How about this though? If you are living in an area that is being controlled by organized crime, are you consenting to their authority because you choose to live there? You could move right?

Wait. You mean there are people in this country who claim a political party affiliation because they don't know that party doesn't actually align with what they believe?

This is my shocked face...
 
No I meant from Education’s POV
That ‘forcing’ kids to study/test for grades is a form of coercion if taxes are, no?

Kids very definitely aren't forced to do it. If you've ever been in a high school "on level" classroom, you would see that's the case very quickly. They try their hardest to convince the kids that they have to do it, but the administration and the teachers are well aware they can't force the kids to try to pass their classes (and a lot of those kids know it, too, so they don't bother trying because they fully intend to drop out as soon as they turn 18 anyway).
 
Last edited:
Yall this is a helluva conversation.

Really enjoying this thread
 
Are you separating choice and ability?
Not really. I do think more people have the ability than they might realize if they want it. That said, people tend to stay near where they grew up or where their family/friends are. Most people aren't willing to give that up though. So they could move out of the country, but there's not reason enough to.
 
Wait. You mean there are people in this country who claim a political party affiliation because they don't know that party doesn't actually align with what they believe?

This is my shocked face...

Well, I am mostly talking about the small "l" libertarians, but some anarchists have joined the big "L" Libertarian party also.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom