1. Post #201
    GenPol's Avatar
    June 2012
    546 Posts
    No, GenPol. This is not Mass Conjecture. Stop hypothesizing and only make evidenced claims or I am going to ban you for not following the section rules.
    You can't make evidenced claims if the hypothesis hasn't been tested. You can only form a hypothesis, and either test it or not. And from what I know, you're a libertarian. This forum got ran over by libertarians, who have ruined this place. It was mainly left-wing before.

    Edited:

    Uhh, no not really.

    The police usually get a warrant first if they've got evidence like that.

    Arrest and detainment is upon probable cause.

    also

    when I said "levy charges" I was talking about a courtroom.
    To arrest somebody, the judge has to charge them. And in this case, which I presented, the woman got arrested for not reporting a crime. You keep cherry picking. That's a logical fallacy too.

  2. Post #202
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    To arrest somebody, the judge has to charge them. And in this case, which I presented, the woman got arrested for not reporting a crime. You keep cherry picking. That's a logical fallacy too.
    Holy shit, I'm done.

  3. Post #203
    President of the Westboro Baptist Church Fan Club
    Dennab
    February 2012
    2,084 Posts
    "Once you start, you can't stop"

    It'll start with major crimes, then it'll grow into lesser offenses. I say no. What if they don't report it for fear of their own life? If I had to choose between fear of a fine and fear of my life, I'll keep my life and take the possible fine later on.
    Textbook slippery slope fallacy. What leads you to think that "it'll grow into lesser offenses"?

  4. Post #204
    GenPol's Avatar
    June 2012
    546 Posts
    Holy shit, I'm done.
    Learn the difference between detainment and arrest. Those are different concepts.

  5. Post #205
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    Textbook slippery slope fallacy. What leads you to think that "it'll grow into lesser offenses"?
    Slippery Slope is not intrinsically false, only when misused.

    Slippery Slopes which are historically supported are valid supposition.

    Edited:

    Learn the difference between detainment and arrest. Those are different concepts.
    Oh my god with the semantics.

    Go back to hypothesizing.

  6. Post #206
    GenPol's Avatar
    June 2012
    546 Posts
    Slippery Slope is not intrinsically false, only when misused.

    Slippery Slopes which are historically supported are valid supposition.

    Edited:



    Oh my god with the semantics.

    Go back to hypothesizing.
    "Oh my god with the semantics.

    Go back to hypothesizing."


    Detainment and arrest have very different legal definitions. Detainment doesn't require a charge. Arrest, however, DOES.

  7. Post #207
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    "Oh my god with the semantics.

    Go back to hypothesizing."


    Detainment and arrest have very different legal definitions. Detainment doesn't require a charge. Arrest, however, DOES.
    Find one case of someone being convicted.

  8. Post #208
    You can't make evidenced claims if the hypothesis hasn't been tested. You can only form a hypothesis, and either test it or not. And from what I know, you're a libertarian. This forum got ran over by libertarians, who have ruined this place. It was mainly left-wing before.
    Stop hypothesizing

  9. Post #209
    GenPol's Avatar
    June 2012
    546 Posts
    Find one case of someone being convicted.
    You just keep cherry picking. I linked you with an arrest link (which requires a charge - detainment doesn't), and now you ask me for this. It's pointless and futile to argue with you. Bye. Anyone with a sane mind can scroll to the previous pages and see your cherry picking fallacies.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_..._%28fallacy%29

  10. Post #210
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,163 Posts
    i just realised why this forum is called mass debate

    because every thread is wank

  11. Post #211
    Gold Member
    Zally13's Avatar
    July 2008
    4,975 Posts
    "Oh my god with the semantics.

    Go back to hypothesizing."


    Detainment and arrest have very different legal definitions. Detainment doesn't require a charge. Arrest, however, DOES.
    No.

    The difference between detainment and arrest is time period and evidence.

    An officer can detain somebody for a few minutes to ask them a few question if they're suspicious, without needing to inform them of their rights and such.

    An arrest is when they're forcibly taken to a new location and put into custody, unable to leave.

    It has nothing to do with a charge.

    Edited:

    And Jesus Christ GenPol, your only defense is screaming "STRAW MAN" or "CHERRY PICKING", instead of actually providing evidence for your claims.

  12. Post #212
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,026 Posts
    I don't think there's any problem hypothesizing in itself; lots of important discoveries start off as purely hypothetical. The main problem with this hypothesis isn't that it's not been instantiated and observed to be true or not, it's just that it's so incredibly unmotivated, unfounded and loathsome. It's a matter of historical fact that so much infringement of rights, and such a deep level of coercion, is hugely damaging to society, and I don't see how anyone can support anything that so obviously contains a repugnant level of coercion.

  13. Post #213
    Gold Member
    wraithcat's Avatar
    December 2007
    12,631 Posts
    In nearly all justice systems, the main firepower is reserved for the lead offender in a crime; however, those who help that person escape punishment by concealing facts are not forgotten. Under the American system, failure to report a crime can amount to an offense in itself, depending on the circumstances.

    http://www.ehow.com/about_5558578_pe...ing-crime.html



    "If there's no cops there, how are you going to get a witness statement ABOUT witnesses so you can prosecute fucking witnesses?"

    Because the first 10% of witnesses to give out the information about the other witnesses would be rewarded.
    Generally speaking those are only for crimes where the witness has a legal obligation to report the crime from his position of power.

    For instance a teacher who was told by a pupil about a crime done to him has an obligation to report that crime to social services and the police depending on the crime.

    A broad obligation to report crimes would be against the merits of criminal law, as it would actually make it harder to solve crimes.

    What you're proposing is an insanely stupid system that's just broken on so many levels it's not funny. Are you seriously adding in an option to escape fines for the first 10% - who even thinks up stupid hell like that.

    Sorry but you're digging yourself into an even bigger and stupider position as you go on. You're essentially creating a situation that's a bigger danger to society than almost any amount of crimes commited inside of that society. Since it's going to lead to an escalation in retribution inside of communities and lead really brutal problems.

    Ever heard of the french revolution. And how a state system that was incredibly punishment happy resulted in a growth of it being used in intrapersonal feuds. Strong, broad and fast punishments did lead to less punishments overall, it instead lead to a society that was tearing itself apart with thanks to and due to the use of the inherently broken justice system.

    Again, you're proving that you have utterly no idea about the justice system at all, nor about human psychology or history for that matter. A state should exist to clean up intrapersonal relations and bring them down to a civil level and protect certain interests. What you're proposing does the very opposite on almost all accounts.

    -- By the way, in case you missed it, I've used historical evidence once more. A second good example are various authoritarian systems which often included similar clauses and rewarded snitching on people inside of your own community and similar things. After a while it led to an atmosphere of distrust, hate, broken down relationships inside of communities and led to an alienation of humans between each other.

    I don't know from what nation you are, but you seem to believe similar means have never been used before. The truth is, that you aren't the first with this kind of idea and we generally know what it leads to.

  14. Post #214
    President of the Westboro Baptist Church Fan Club
    Dennab
    February 2012
    2,084 Posts
    You can't make evidenced claims if the hypothesis hasn't been tested. You can only form a hypothesis, and either test it or not. And from what I know, you're a libertarian. This forum got ran over by libertarians, who have ruined this place. It was mainly left-wing before.
    You seem to be the only one who has trouble using evidence to support your "hypotheses".

  15. Post #215
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    Haha wow he's gone now for a completely different reason than I would have expected.

  16. Post #216
    It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen

    May 2011
    341 Posts
    Haha wow he's gone now for a completely different reason than I would have expected.
    Why'd he get banned?

    Also, to stay on topic, no, there shouldn't be fines for not reporting a crime.

  17. Post #217
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    Why'd he get banned?

    Also, to stay on topic, no, there shouldn't be fines for not reporting a crime.
    He literally flung his own shit and posted pictures about it.

  18. Post #218
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,163 Posts
    Why'd he get banned?

    Also, to stay on topic, no, there shouldn't be fines for not reporting a crime.
    follow the ban link, i guess the guy who complains about fallacies and logic all the time eventually decided he would shit on a printed piece of paper, then smear it in with his hands.

  19. Post #219

    June 2012
    1 Posts
    He literally flung his own shit and posted pictures about it.
    Because I got paid 50 euro for this by a rival of Facepunch, idiot. 50 euro for only 3 minutes of labor time isn't very bad.

    (User was permabanned for this post ("Alt of permabanned user GenPol" - JohnnyMo1))

  20. Post #220
    Gold Member
    wraithcat's Avatar
    December 2007
    12,631 Posts
    Because I got paid 50 euro for this by a rival of Facepunch, idiot. 50 euro for only 3 minutes of labor time isn't very bad.
    I say we all report this, so that we can't get banned for not reporting an alt.

  21. Post #221
    The Union Jack would look a shit ton better with a Hammer and Sickle in the middle of it
    Bobie's Avatar
    November 2007
    7,163 Posts
    Because I got paid 50 euro for this by a rival of Facepunch, idiot. 50 euro for only 3 minutes of labor time isn't very bad.

    (User was permabanned for this post ("Alt of permabanned user GenPol" - JohnnyMo1))
    'labor time' lmao good luck writing in 'smearing shit' as work experience when you apply for a job

  22. Post #222
    The best headhumper of the galaxy.
    RockmanYoshi's Avatar
    January 2012
    2,385 Posts
    'labor time' lmao good luck writing in 'smearing shit' as work experience when you apply for a job
    Plumbing?

  23. Post #223
    gay mexican
    Lankist's Avatar
    July 2006
    14,576 Posts
    Lankist seems to be a very stupid and hedonistic person, who uses emotion to justify his poorly constructed logically fallacious claims. He keeps cherry picking, and when his claims get debunked he resorts to personal attacks.

    He, as well as a large portion of this board, thinks that their libertarian values are widespread, despite the fact the opposite is the case - the vast majority of the world reject such values, even a large portion of the EU countries.

    The whole board is filled with libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, and other crackpots.
    At least we don't play with our own feces and take pictures.

  24. Post #224
    Gold Member

    February 2006
    2,985 Posts
    At least we don't play with our own feces and take pictures.
    Hes kinda right though, this forum does have a lot of right wingers, 'an-caps' being the most ridiculous.

  25. Post #225
    Gold Member
    Melkor's Avatar
    October 2006
    1,875 Posts
    "If there's no cops there, how are you going to get a witness statement ABOUT witnesses so you can prosecute fucking witnesses?"

    Because the first 10% of witnesses to give out the information about the other witnesses would be rewarded.
    Any evidence gained that way would be inadmissible because you're essentially bribing witnesses to incriminate other witnesses.

    They pulled the same exact shit during the Salem Witch trials. Take a guess as to how many were actually witches.