Just out of curiousity, where do many of you draw the line between ownership and regulation? For example, you could argue that criminals in prison are regulated. They are free to do as they please, but only in the confines of the prison, yet the state basically owns them.
Originally posted by whodey Just out of curiousity, where do many of you draw the line between ownership and regulation? For example, you could argue that criminals in prison are regulated. They are free to do as they please, but only in the confines of the prison, yet the state basically owns them.
Originally posted by whodey Just out of curiousity, where do many of you draw the line between ownership and regulation? For example, you could argue that criminals in prison are regulated. They are free to do as they please, but only in the confines of the prison, yet the state basically owns them.
Ha! Classic. Oh, yes, it is like a holiday in prison. You do as you please. Lounge around, watching t.v. and playing bocce.
Originally posted by CliffLandin Ha! Classic. Oh, yes, it is like a holiday in prison. You do as you please. Lounge around, watching t.v. and playing bocce.
This is not a thread on Assange, this is a legitimate question.
Originally posted by utherpendragon First you said "within the confines of the prison" now you move the goal post to "within their cells". Both are wrong and not based in reality.
My question is, at what point is regulation be interpreted as ownership? Throw out the prison/prison cell example if you like.
Originally posted by whodey Just out of curiousity, where do many of you draw the line between ownership and regulation? For example, you could argue that criminals in prison are regulated. They are free to do as they please, but only in the confines of the prison, yet the state basically owns them.
There is no line whodey, it all depends on the language you use to describe these hypothetical situations. at this very moment you are property of the state, if you don't pay your bills you suffer consequences, you are already enslaved by the society you live in, freedom is an illusion. There is no freedom if you can't run around naked while refusing to pay bills, I personally believe its for you to rebel against your government and your society for keeping you down for so long.
so raise your fists in the air at begin the revolution at once comrade!
Originally posted by generalissimo There is no line whodey, it all depends on the language you use to describe these hypothetical situations. at this very moment you are property of the state, if you don't pay your bills you suffer consequences, you are already enslaved by the society you live in, freedom is an illusion. There is no freedom if you can't run around naked while refusing ...[text shortened]... down for so long.
so raise your fists in the air at begin the revolution at once comrade!
27 Dec '10 02:19
Regulation vs. Ownership
Back to Top