There was no comprise, you just wanted my paycheck. You did not even bother to explain why. And now you retreat because i have given you a lot of real life examples and i exaggerated a bit with the girlfriend thing or the bend over thing. Common, you want to kiss me and you know it. Put it there !
Ok, i agree it was exaggerated except for the US enforcing the EU by using the IMF and buying of officials. But hey who is counting....
How have I retreated? I gave you an example, and you confirmed that there can be no compromise. This can be extended to many hot political topics where there can be no compromise. My basic easy to understand example is that stealing is wrong. To someone who believes that stealing is wrong, proposing compromise by stealing only half doesn't make it less wrong, thus arriving at a compromise on every political issue is an idealist fantasy and a fallacy.
The phrase "the government that governs least governs best" sums up this dilemma best. It recognizes that the best way to rule on an issue that has strongly opposing views is... wait for it... simply not to rule on it at all! Individuals are free to choose the view that best suits them, with the caveat that they cannot force others to a specific view either (and this is where government steps in to enforce). This includes the taking or limiting of property that you might think they should not be allowed to have.
Not until this principal is realized by every politician in office will the political situation in this country improve.
And it once again reinforces my believe that loaded guns should not be easy to buy in a civilized society. Guns without bullets yes and together with shooting ranges does not destroy the market , nor does it mean people cannot shoot guns. It does mean that having a loaded gun in public should be a felony. Because in my view, the threshold to use a gun is much lower then using other weapons.
Fortunately this is merely a fantasy, your pipe dream. Guns in the hands of the public will never fade in America. If you tried, the bloodshed would be 100 times worse than you fear it is now.
So seriously, do yourself a favor and get it out of your system, it's a waste of energy to pursue the impossible. Spend your energy more wisely coming up with ideas to help keep people from getting angry and killing other people.
Hint: see above; with the exception of your standard issue career thug who chooses not to keep his hands to himself, or the mentally ill, normal otherwise law abiding people simply just do not like being told what to do or having their property taken from them, especially in response to what someone else wants or did (again, see above).
I'm not talking about thugs, we will always have thugs, and it's never right to punish all the kids by taking the toy away because one couldn't play nice. I'm talking about the rising dissent and anger and political unrest across the nation that is causing otherwise normal people to snap and do stupid shit.
And to get cars efficient is not so difficult. People claim those efficient cars break down faster. So what, they are dirt cheap and you can just buy a new one. Is good for the free market. You people are never happy are you...
Your failure here is that that you believe if the market does something, then everybody should be coerced, or at the least, penalized, for not going with what everyone else wants. Or that someone *should* or *will* want or be made to want what someone else wants, or that something is wrong with them if they don't. That is not a free market, that is the illusion of free market by eliminating or limiting alternatives that don't fit your agenda, your single sided desirable outcome.
Not everyone buys global warming, and you can't prove or disprove it, nor is "what if though, we can't take the chance" acceptable; this is no different from the Church compelling you to live a certain way under threat of going to hell, then using force to coerce you.
Free market is letting people buy and own whatever they want. If people continued buying SUVs people like you would propose we tax gas so high that people want fuel efficient cars, that is not free market, that is manipulation and coercion to get people to do what you want them to do.
People with higher performance cars have already decided that they are willing to pay extra for gas by accepting the trade off of 8 mpg for the increased performance. You don't need to add more taxes and fines and incentives to try and change them or make it more prohibitive because it's not the tradeoff *you* want them to make.
William Gaatjes said:
I tried to explain that life is not simple and that sometimes you have to give up some desires to have in the long run pleasure and benefits from it.
What you forget is that we have long already lived in compromise. I have already agreed that in exchange for the same guarantee from others, that I will not use my guns to arbitrarily shoot people or solve disputes myself, that instead I will defer to proper authorities and appointed peacekeepers (eg: the police) so that due process can be employed, unless an immediate threat to my life, liberty, and property leave me no other choice. I have given up my right to shoot anywhere I please like public places or residential areas out of respect for the rights and safety of others.
When arriving at compromise C between A, and B, it's important to not forget C over time such that it becomes the status quo such that it appears to be A, and then ask to compromise again... and again... and again. If you want to ban high capacity magazines in hand guns, I want machine guns back. THAT is compromise, not you just getting what you want little by little until I have nothing left.
I could go on all night about all the "desires" and "rights" that I have willfully given up to society. Actually taking my property like you propose, will not be one of them, ever!
Some people choose to break that societal pact, and they are held accountable for it. Just be happy this time the shooter wasn't able to kill himself so you have the appropriate someone to blame, punish, and vent your frustration on.
Too often in these incidents, the killer kills himself, and with no outlet to turn your anger too, you turn it on your fellow citizens by proposing we invade their lives and take their property as if to somehow punish the dead killer or bring back his victims.