Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Migs on March 25, 2009, 06:09:41 PM

Title: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Migs on March 25, 2009, 06:09:41 PM
I am writing a paper for my criminal justice class and the topic given was whether I was an individual rights or public order advocate. I'm on the fence because I believe individual rights are important, yet I can see when being a public order advocate is also important (preventing 9/11, oklahoma city etc).  I'm 50-50 at the moment. for this particular paper we have to be one or the other.  what are your views?
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Migs on March 26, 2009, 08:57:33 AM
great quotes, thanks.  I'm surprised no one else has mentioned anything.  After all with so much going on in government and potential losses of freedom, I figured there would be more opinions on this.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Deicide on March 26, 2009, 09:13:58 AM
I am writing a paper for my criminal justice class and the topic given was whether I was an individual rights or public order advocate. I'm on the fence because I believe individual rights are important, yet I can see when being a public order advocate is also important (preventing 9/11, oklahoma city etc).  I'm 50-50 at the moment. for this particular paper we have to be one or the other.  what are your views?

Individual rights..
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Decker on March 26, 2009, 09:28:24 AM
I am writing a paper for my criminal justice class and the topic given was whether I was an individual rights or public order advocate. I'm on the fence because I believe individual rights are important, yet I can see when being a public order advocate is also important (preventing 9/11, oklahoma city etc).  I'm 50-50 at the moment. for this particular paper we have to be one or the other.  what are your views?
You have the correct answer.  There's is a balancing of competing interests.  We want to maximize individual life, liberty and property while retaining for the society equity, fairness, health and safety, etc.

Judging by your answer on the cop forum, I'd say you are left with the choice of anarchy v. dictatorship.  Here's some shit from a decent website that can help:

1. Simple systems require less organization.
2. Organized groups grow naturally from anarchic individuals.
3. Teamwork is superior to isolated effort or hermitism.
4. Anarchy is actually organized by game theory and chaos theory.
5. A strategy is needed for every organization.
6. The larger the organization, the more its leader loses direct control and knowledge over it.
7. Democratic organization is better than dictatorial organization.
8. Self-interest and freedom should always coincide with the common interest, and be prevented when it does not.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-spectrumtwo.htm
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 05:11:33 PM
 It is a balancing act, but if you have to pick one or the other, I say "public order."  Public order is what allows the individual to prosper.  We can never have a successful, productive society if every individual is permitted to do whatever he or she wants.  Just look at what happened in New Orleans after Katrina.  Total anarchy.  Even the cops became criminals.  No society can survive in that kind of environment.
 
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 26, 2009, 06:43:19 PM
It is a balancing act, but if you have to pick one or the other, I say "public order." 
 

What a shocker.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 06:47:57 PM
What a shocker.

Yeah.  Who cares about law and order.  Kill, rape, pillage, plunder. 
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Hugo Chavez on March 26, 2009, 07:19:08 PM
Yeah.  Who cares about law and order.  Kill, rape, pillage, plunder. 
hahaha wtf? I don't think those are the liberties we're talking about ::)
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on March 26, 2009, 07:22:45 PM
hahaha wtf? I don't think those are the liberties we're talking about ::)

This thread cements my opinion of Beach Bum.  He is indeed a fool.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 26, 2009, 07:27:28 PM


Sometimes I think about explaining things like this to BB but I enjoy it when he expresses his stupid ass opinion. It's fucking funny.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: drkaje on March 26, 2009, 07:32:49 PM
Without rules individual rights cease to exist except for the very wealthy.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 07:56:00 PM
hahaha wtf? I don't think those are the liberties we're talking about ::)

Who is "we"?  And what liberties are you talking about? 
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 07:57:22 PM
Without rules individual rights cease to exist except for the very wealthy.

Pretty much true.  It's the "public order" that allows people to express themselves, etc. 
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: headhuntersix on March 26, 2009, 08:02:43 PM
Gotta start somewhere...u have to have a solid base before u can start welfare programs and crucifixes in jars of piss. I find myslef agreeing with Decker and BB.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 26, 2009, 08:48:13 PM
Yeah.  Who cares about law and order.  Kill, rape, pillage, plunder. 

So for you, indvidual rights is synonymous with behaving like a sociopath?
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: 240 is Back on March 26, 2009, 08:50:06 PM
So for you, indvidual rights is synonymous with behaving like a sociopath?

that's what he said.


Personally, I see the possibility of having individual rights and following the law, but that's just me.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 26, 2009, 08:57:42 PM
that's what he said.


Personally, I see the possibility of having individual rights and following the law, but that's just me.

I'd like to believe most people that advocate Individual Rights understand the responsibilites that come with it and the need to respect other  people's individuals rights.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 09:45:05 PM
Gotta start somewhere...u have to have a solid base before u can start welfare programs and crucifixes in jars of piss. I find myslef agreeing with Decker and BB.

Smart man.   :)
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 26, 2009, 09:46:02 PM
So for you, indvidual rights is synonymous with behaving like a sociopath?

What?  No.   ::)
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 27, 2009, 12:19:01 AM
What?  No.   ::)

Who is on first. What is on second.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: drkaje on March 27, 2009, 08:48:05 AM
Gotta start somewhere...u have to have a solid base before u can start welfare programs and crucifixes in jars of piss. I find myslef agreeing with Decker and BB.

This is in intervention....... put down the koolade and slowly back away.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Migs on March 27, 2009, 05:06:32 PM
personally i feel that we at times need to be able to give up certain freedoms for the greater good.  However, Once you give something up, especially to the government, good luck ever getting it back.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 27, 2009, 05:19:14 PM
personally i feel that we at times need to be able to give up certain freedoms for the greater good.  However, Once you give something up, especially to the government, good luck ever getting it back.

Exactly. Also, there are plenty of instances where public order can put individuals into a criminal catagory even if they arent doing anything harmful to anyone.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Migs on March 27, 2009, 05:20:11 PM
it is very hard to get the same people that take your liberties away to then be responsible to monitor them correctly.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Deicide on March 27, 2009, 05:21:57 PM
it is very hard to get the same people that take your liberties away to then be responsible to monitor them correctly.

Good Point.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: George Whorewell on March 28, 2009, 07:28:58 AM
In order to exercise your individual rights without being killed, silenced, ostracized or intimdated for doing so- You need a system of public order. Ideally, the constitution and our laws allow this. Without them, I can react to your individual right to express yourself, by exercising my individual right to stab you to death and set your house on fire. Or, I could react by firing you from your job, etc. Of course, nothing is absolute and the system can temper individual rights. This is necessary as well.

I believe that the "system" should be invoked only when necessary. In general, overreliance on the system is a bad thing. I'd probably arrange it 60%- 70% individual, 30%-40% system of public order.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: w8tlftr on March 28, 2009, 08:09:40 AM
It's a no brainer. Individual rights.

In my opinion "public order" is just another term for left and right-wing fascism.

Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 28, 2009, 08:49:48 AM
In order to exercise your individual rights without being killed, silenced, ostracized or intimdated for doing so- You need a system of public order. Ideally, the constitution and our laws allow this. Without them, I can react to your individual right to express yourself, by exercising my individual right to stab you to death and set your house on fire. Or, I could react by firing you from your job, etc. Of course, nothing is absolute and the system can temper individual rights. This is necessary as well.

I believe that the "system" should be invoked only when necessary. In general, overreliance on the system is a bad thing. I'd probably arrange it 60%- 70% individual, 30%-40% system of public order.

Thats the thing. Individual Rights doesn't mean you can do WHATEVER you want. As I already mentioned those rights come with responsibilities and respect for other peoples rights.

 I don't believe it's laws that outline public order that stop individuals from behaving like animals as much as  it's a natural  understanding that it's wrong to do so, more than anything. The overwhelming majority of people just want to be left alone and leave others alone. Groups that push public order tend to  creat conflict between other groups, not order.
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on March 28, 2009, 09:33:17 AM
Individual Rights are everything. 

Public order is just code for "Deterrent to Individual Rights".
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Bindare_Dundat on March 28, 2009, 09:40:16 AM
Individual Rights are everything. 

Public order is just code for "Deterrent to Individual Rights".

LOL @ the "artist formerly known as Ron Paul Fan".
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Soul Crusher on March 28, 2009, 09:42:14 AM
Thats the thing. Individual Rights doesn't mean you can do WHATEVER you want. As I already mentioned those rights come with responsibilities and respect for other peoples rights.

 I don't believe it's laws that outline public order that stop individuals from behaving like animals as much as  it's a natural  understanding that it's wrong to do so, more than anything. The overwhelming majority of people just want to be left alone and leave others alone. Groups that push public order tend to  creat conflict between other groups, not order.

The founders of this country knew, and even said, that our constitution will only work for moral people so that there is not the need to have excessive control over two legged animals like those in Oakland, CA. 

Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Eyeball Chambers on March 28, 2009, 09:53:49 AM
LOL @ the "artist formerly known as Ron Paul Fan".

HAHA  ;D
Title: Re: Individual rights vs. Public Order advocate
Post by: Dos Equis on March 28, 2009, 11:23:36 AM
In order to exercise your individual rights without being killed, silenced, ostracized or intimdated for doing so- You need a system of public order. Ideally, the constitution and our laws allow this. Without them, I can react to your individual right to express yourself, by exercising my individual right to stab you to death and set your house on fire. Or, I could react by firing you from your job, etc. Of course, nothing is absolute and the system can temper individual rights. This is necessary as well.

I believe that the "system" should be invoked only when necessary. In general, overreliance on the system is a bad thing. I'd probably arrange it 60%- 70% individual, 30%-40% system of public order.

Well said George.  I completely agree with this.