Inasmuch as 90 is an abject coward and his personal idiot is

Posted on: February 11, 2019 at 14:55:02 CT

...the pickle, i would like to solicit thoughts from others on the board concerning their thoughts on crime and punishment. With no connection to the raskol.

The two of them, 90 and his idiot, believe in something called natural rights and suggest or even advocate the abolition of laws and even government itself.

Because we are free sovereign people. Whatever that means.

Earlier this afternoon, I asked 90 the following question:

"So if the Hell's Angels ride into an Amish town, rape
terrorize and murder whomever they wish, burn the town to the ground and ride off… What consequences could they expect to face in your idiot's perfect
world?"

After the question was left unanswered, i offered again:

..........
After 90 ducked the question initially, i offered again:

"I would appreciate an answer. Your perspective here
Would be interesting.

Not trying to pick a fight, not trying to be confrontational. But natural laws apply on some level, do they not, on the Serengeti plain.

Where the only strongest survive. The strong eat the weak. They prey on the defenseless.

There are no laws. Each individual enjoys his or her natural rights. Until they are eaten by someone exercising their natural rights.

I would appreciate your perspective on the question: what consequences would or should the Hell's Angels expect in the scenario I described?

(I would not appreciate the pickle's perspective.)

What natural laws would be enforced and by whom? What incentive do they have for being a kind and generous and "law-abiding" person?

What deterrent exists that would keep them from marauding as described in my original post?

Laws and governments are needed to protect the weak from the strong. And from many times to protect the good from the evil.

To suggest otherwise just pickle level stupid."

...............

Both 90 and his personal idiot said i was not capable of understanding the debate.

90 said, 'I'm serious when I say this - you're not capable of
abstraction; not capable of this discussion.

I'll pass."

I will not debate their opinion of my abilities but instead i offer them (90 anyway) a THIRD opportunity to show a touch of integrity, he vestige of vertebrae, and the symptoms of a spine and afford him this opportunity to explain to the enlightened among you what the absence of laws and government would mean in the scenario i described.

90, can you screw up your "courage" enough to answer this for the enlightened masses on the board? Maybe one of them can explain it to me after you're finished...

Or are you just too shallow, too phony, too pickle to attempt a reply or rebuttal?

You have sunken to the depths of the raskol in your pseudo intellectual clap trap, saying nothing, without the courage or integrity to even attempt a serious reply, and instead to label others as too stupid to comprehend your awesome intellect.

Well, here's your chance to strut for the smart people on the board.

I'm calling your bluff...