Jan leads Rep. Eliot Engel to a principle (on crime)
Uploader Comments (janhelfeld)
Top Comments
-
It is just a joy to watch Jan tear hypocrites apart.
-
You can't judge without a principle. He wants it both ways.
All Comments (47)
-
How about the god damn principal of freedom of choice???
-
Your description is wrong. He is says weed is cool because weed heads don't kill people as much as heroin.
Get it? You are smart than engel so you should have caught that.
-
Engels here is just another pragmatist. Helfeld here is pretty good at sniffing them out and shinning the light on them.
-
those are two good comb overs.
-
another fun fact google or research how meny members of the obama adminstration have had trouble forgeting to pay their taxes.
-
Vices are not crimes as a matter of fact.
-
source of these statistics?
-
535 members of the United States Congress.
* 29 have been accused of spousal abuse* 7 have been arrested for fraud
* 19 have been accused of writing bad checks* 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
* 3 have done time for assault* 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit* 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges* 8 have been arrested for shoplifting* 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits* 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year
-
You could make a case that any action should be criminalised - this is not law based on principles but on whims. The fact is that if it does not cause harm or loss, an action is NOT a crime.
-
"What is the principle that integrates the first examples and differentiates the second"
Very nice application of Rand's theory of concepts.
Jan is all for non violence, until someone states that they are against non violence *in all forms*. Jan perceives that as a threat, and is willing to use violence against that person. Listen to his debate with Larken Rose, Jan is not as principled as he would have you believe, and even admits to such in the debate with Rose.
Kawlinz 2 years ago
Would you violate another persons property rights under extreme duress, such as stealing to get food when starving to death? Rose first said yes, then no. I would.
janhelfeld 2 years ago
I think that depends on the reason why you're starving to death. If you're starving because you live in North Korea, then I say do whatever you need to do to survive and get out of there. If you live in a free country it would have to be something really crazy for me to be okay with it, not you just being a bum. For example if your plane crashed in the woods and you had been walking for miles and finally came to a house in the woods with food in it and there was no one there. Then I say take it.
Beethovens7th 2 years ago
For example if your plane crashed in the woods and you had been walking for miles and finally came to a house in the woods with food in it and there was no one there. Then I say take it. This is what I AM TALKING ABOUT.OR THEY SAY NO.
janhelfeld 2 years ago