Good Visions thread

[steve74baywin]

Same boat. Just got unpacked and integrated into the Amboy household.
Looking forward to giving your blog a peek.

neal

I've been meaning to ask, what is the "Amboy" household?
And, is this a different place than the one you first moved into at the Bankster ordeal? Did you move out of the house with the Ghia basketball court and into another one?

It was a year almost to the week that we moved into the place we just moved from after my bankster ordeal.

[ruckman101]

When I met Cheryle she was in the process of building her house on her parent's tree farm acreage in Amboy. I was living in Tristessa's garage at the time. Bought the Snoozy's Hollow house as seen in the "Ghetto Garage" vid. When it was foreclosed and that process put me out, I hooked up with a lucratively cheap rental across the river in Vancouver, about a year ago, but now unemployed, even lucratively cheap rent was a burden, so we have finally combined, matrimonally, too, and are solely living in Amboy, where yes, the Ghia basketball court is.

Cheryle's folks live in a extra roofed double wide on the place, and the barns, outbuildings etc. are part of the tree farm operation. We have the house and a gravel floored open bayed pole barn garage.

No more town house, just the volcano home now.


neal

[steve74baywin]

When I met Cheryle she was in the process of building her house on her parent's tree farm acreage in Amboy. I was living in Tristessa's garage at the time. Bought the Snoozy's Hollow house as seen in the "Ghetto Garage" vid. When it was foreclosed and that process put me out, I hooked up with a lucratively cheap rental across the river in Vancouver, about a year ago, but now unemployed, even lucratively cheap rent was a burden, so we have finally combined, matrimonally, too, and are solely living in Amboy, where yes, the Ghia basketball court is.

Cheryle's folks live in a extra roofed double wide on the place, and the barns, outbuildings etc. are part of the tree farm operation. We have the house and a gravel floored open bayed pole barn garage.

No more town house, just the volcano home now.


neal

Cool, the timing is in sync with us.
We moved from my place last year into something where we could have some vehicles and our dogs. One year later a friend asked us if we'd stay in there place, it is bigger inside, bigger outside, in the old neighborhood I lived in, and much less rent.
Yea, I can now buy beer again. Is it still legal to consume beer in my house?

[BellePlaine]

Is it still legal to consume beer in my house?

Yes it is, but don't try to teach your children about alcohol; that is still illegal.

[Velokid1]

This is awesome. Any parent knows the power of positive reinforcement over negative. Not to say negative isn't necessary at times, but that it's a less-effective last resort.

This article has nothing to do with parenting though, so come all ye ramen-eating, late sleeping, book-reading childless people!

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/po ... 56400.html

[Amskeptic]

Is it still legal to consume beer in my house?

Sure.
It is, however, illegal to beat your wife, build bombs, starve your dog, make meth, produce childporn, in your own home!
This all-invasive government of ours won't even allow you to kill yourself if you want to.
Colin

[steve74baywin]

Is it still legal to consume beer in my house?

Sure.
It is, however, illegal to beat your wife, build bombs, starve your dog, make meth, produce childporn, in your own home!
This all-invasive government of ours won't even allow you to kill yourself if you want to.
Colin

This is where intelligence, clear thinking and logic need to be applied instead of emotionalism.
To beat a wife is to beat a human, this would be violating the womens right to be in charge of her life. This would fall under one of the reasons we instituted a gov.
To build bombs, there is nothing wrong with man building bombs, a knife, an ax or a gun, but what he does with it could be wrong. If he violates someones else' right to be in charge of or owner of their property that is wrong. Our gov uses bombs mostly in the wrong way yet they don't get arrested. A man builds one in his house and doesn't use it, arrest him. The gov kills people, which most certainly violates that dead humans right to life, but that is okay, you build one and do nothing with it, we lock you up.
1984
Starve your dog. Well, that implies he or I owns the dog, you said your dog. Deeper issue here, but watch it if your wanting more rights for a dog than a human. Remember, I'm the one that doesn't eat any animals for the most part. Vegetarian here. Don't starve a dog, but kill your cow or pig. This could lead to me speaking of doublethink, I will refrain for now.
Meth, go ahead, make it, just don't hurt or violate anyones right to their life/property. Really, can you do anymore than that without claiming ownership of that mans life?
Child Porn, big issue. Should a man be arrested because there is a nude picture of a child on his computer, no. Should adults be arrested for having sex with minors, probably yes, unless you don't think it is violating their rights.

[ruckman101]

Ouch, now you've stepped in it. Why would anyone need to build a bomb? By design, some weapons are obviously to kill humans. The sole purpose. No one is hunting game with bombs. Probably, and in my book, should be, illegal. Certainly isn't sporting. Yes explosives have their role in construction here and there, but that is an "on the job" kind of thing that usually just involves explosives, not bombs. Again, you apparently see no problem with a neighbor building bombs as long as they don't use them. Then why build them. And accidents happen. An accident that could take out your house and life, too. Same with a meth lab. Accidents happen of an explosive nature cooking meth. Then there are the toxins involved.

Sure, there are cute pics of the kids in bathtubs, on the proverbial fur rug that aren't pornographic in nature, but a collection of obviously pornographic images of children on someone's computer means that person is complicit in the sexual abuse of minors. Creating a market and demand that will be met because the honor system just doesn't work Steve. Whether that person was active in that abuse is inconsequential, they are just as guilty. There are sick puppies out there. Now if someone wants to cut their balls off, that's one thing, but snuff films fall into the same category, or torture, etc. People are harmed.

I'm hard pressed to find any "intelligence, clear thinking and logic" that would lead to the reasoning than ends in the conclusions you've posted along these subjects. Why shouldn't a pet have protections against abuse? Even livestock raised for food isn't tortured to death for fun before it hits a dinner table.


neal

[steve74baywin]

neal

You missed the whole point.
Point being to apply logic across the board.
You are right that bombs are usually only to kill people. What is the logic in a government building and having bombs? If the gov derives it's power from the people how can it do something the people can't do? How can it get a power from something that doesn't have that power? The gov gets bombs to kill people, I guess we can assume it is to bomb a group of people attacking us. Can't a person want it for the same reason? Do you jump to the conclusion that the gov is getting bombs only to unjustly kill people? Why do you jump to that same conclusion about your neighbor? Maybe your neighbor and his bomb would be the one thing that saves the town from being over taken by Chinese or Muslims?
This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches.

[ruckman101]

neal

You missed the whole point.
Point being to apply logic across the board.
You are right that bombs are usually only to kill people. What is the logic in a government building and having bombs? If the gov derives it's power from the people how can it do something the people can't do? How can it get a power from something that doesn't have that power? The gov gets bombs to kill people, I guess we can assume it is to bomb a group of people attacking us. Can't a person want it for the same reason? Do you jump to the conclusion that the gov is getting bombs only to unjustly kill people? Why do you jump to that same conclusion about your neighbor? Maybe your neighbor and his bomb would be the one thing that saves the town from being over taken by Chinese or Muslims?
This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches.

Is it just me? That sure seems a looooooooong stretch of across the board logic. I don't believe in war or violence as a resolution to problems and disagreements. Violence is debasing. So I also don't believe killing someone is ever just, but is always unjust. And what do you have against muslims and chinese?


neal

[steve74baywin]

neal

You missed the whole point.
Point being to apply logic across the board.
You are right that bombs are usually only to kill people. What is the logic in a government building and having bombs? If the gov derives it's power from the people how can it do something the people can't do? How can it get a power from something that doesn't have that power? The gov gets bombs to kill people, I guess we can assume it is to bomb a group of people attacking us. Can't a person want it for the same reason? Do you jump to the conclusion that the gov is getting bombs only to unjustly kill people? Why do you jump to that same conclusion about your neighbor? Maybe your neighbor and his bomb would be the one thing that saves the town from being over taken by Chinese or Muslims?
This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches.

Is it just me? That sure seems a looooooooong stretch of across the board logic. I don't believe in war or violence as a resolution to problems and disagreements. Violence is debasing. So I also don't believe killing someone is ever just, but is always unjust. And what do you have against muslims and chinese?


neal

How come you assume the person will use it for wrong and will punish him before he uses it when bombs seem to made all the time to "keep the peace". Why is it that only governments known to be corrupt can have bombs, but no person can have one? Is there an assumption he must be doing it to kill, so let's act as if it is so now?
It would seem to me, this thing Colin brought up called a bomb, most agree is only used for killing and is a bad thing, but we have a government that claims to be for peace and spreading democracy but has and uses bombs all the time, bombs that are only for killing. Seems like a huge lie, that is all the more reason why regular people here need one. The true criminals and liars, the government, has accumulated tons of these things called bombs, that you say are only for killing, then it would seem to me We the People need bombs to protect us from this gov that lied and said they were creating bombs for peace, while bombs are only for killing.
Which is it Neal? Are bombs only for killing, or can they be used for something else?

What do you mean by asking this "And what do you have against muslims and chinese?"
Me mentioning that in an example makes you think I have something against them?
Please explain what thought process brings you to this? Maybe I can understand your logic. What in my little example makes you ask that question?

[Amskeptic]

neal

You missed the whole point.
Point being to apply logic across the board.
What is the logic in a government building and having bombs? If the gov derives it's power from the people how can it do something the people can't do?
This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches.

The point of your logic has been missing for some time.
It causes you great consternation to deal with shades of grey.
Here in the Real World, somehow, people have been able to live with and discuss some of the compromises of modern life without drooling in rabid paranoia, veering from black to white to black to white to black.

The power of the government of the United States has been vested in it through our representative Democracy that we actually still have ... we still have effect on our legislation, we still have redress, we have, a majority of us, chosen to have more bombs than any other nation. It makes me sad too, but I own it, Steve, that my fellow citizens have decided thus. I do not turn and rant and rave about the dasdardly government, We The People have decided to be armed to the teeth. Since I do not like this state of affairs, I do write my representative and ask that she vote for reducing our insane military budget and to be very careful in her vote for military action.

When you write:
"This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches."
I say to myself, there is no conversation to be had with this man.
Colin

[steve74baywin]

When you write:
"This same logic, or lack of logic you use to justify not allowing man to be free in his home is the same logic that led to the burning of witches."
I say to myself, there is no conversation to be had with this man.
Colin

I'm sorry you can't understand that.
Maybe it is a good idea you take a step back.

Yes, upon closer observation you could say your right, you can't successful converse with me.
When I say the gov violates rights, you ask how.
I give examples and you tell me you like that, what they do, like your choice somehow erases the violation of rights in everyone else.
When I say taking money against someones will via a gun is stealing, you say it is not because you do it voluntarily....And that some how erases the gun/force means away for all those who wouldn't do it willingly.

Bombs can be used to kill, the US has bombs, but any man who was to have one is guilty of killing because bombs kill.
People let belief's and fears become reason to treat people thought to be witches as criminals.
People let belief's and fears become reason to treat people with a drug as a criminal.
People let belief's and fears become reason to treat people with a bomb as a criminal, when the country they support is the biggest user of bombs.
People let belief's and fears become reason to invade foreign countries.
All these things made possible when logic is thrown out the window.
Whether it is the burning of witches, or the arrest of a man with a bomb.
People pretending to be mind readers and god.

[ruckman101]

Obviously there are bombs. But I don't want to live next door to one my neighbor is building in his garage with the help of manuals and an online bomb making forum. Too dangerous. Mistakes happen. Boom.

A bomb for personal self defense? Again, this is a loooooooong stretch of logic in my book.



neal

[steve74baywin]

Obviously there are bombs. But I don't want to live next door to one my neighbor is building in his garage with the help of manuals and an online bomb making forum. Too dangerous. Mistakes happen. Boom.

A bomb for personal self defense? Again, this is a loooooooong stretch of logic in my book.



neal

Bombs ain't the best example to bring up. Colin brought it up, and he said the other day he was mystified by an example I brought up, raw, milk, something we just talked about.
Bombs, how often do we even need to worry about this, and, how often are we going to know about it if he never sets it off.

I feel this thread was soiled.
All because I joked about if beer was still legal.