3 ms·

> Conscription and the draft have been abolished in > most places in the developed world But not America, the topic under discussion, so what's your point?

> Conscription and the draft have been abolished in > most places in the developed world But not America, the topic under discussion, so what's your point? > contempt of court may get you jailed but will not - > and can not - be used to force you to create something That is factually incorrect. There are plenty of counter-examples. One I can remember getting plenty of news coverage is: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/maybe-we-could-try-schools/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/m... > eminent domain can only be used to take something away > from you ... it was given as an example of coercive power of governments. > it would mean that ordinary citizens that have broken no > laws can be forced to create something that does not > currently exist against their express desire Only if you ignore conscription, which is alive and well in the US (Selective Service), and the counter-examples where contempt of court is used to compel people to "create" something.

jacquesm 11y ago
The US uses an all-volunteer force. Selective service is a back-up plan that has not been used. > That is factually incorrect. There are plenty of counter-examples. One I can remember getting plenty of news coverage is: > http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/maybe-we-could-try-schools/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/m... It's in 'weird news' for a reason, it's not there because this is the normal state of things. Yes, there are idiot judges, and yes, the system is broken to the point where you have no recourse. But to use that as examples to prove that the whole system is broken is reaching. > Only if you ignore conscription, which is alive and well in the US (Selective Service), and the counter-examples where contempt of court is used to compel people to "create" something. Neither of which prove that you could use either of those mechanisms to make a computer programmer create a piece of software, which was 'the topic under discussion', so what's your point? That the US is a crazy country? That some judges are crazy? That you ought to place some checks on Judges power? Or that you actually feel that any of the examples above would be enough to prove to any person reading this that a judge will order a person (not Apple, the company) to create some intellectual property or be jailed if they don't?
- peteretep 11y ago
  I wasn't sure at first, but now I think you're being actively dishonest to try and ...? Who knows. > Selective service is a back-up plan that has not been > used Right. Except for WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam, which drafted collectively 15m people, when has it ever been used? Either you knew that, and lied, or you didn't know that, and decided to speak authoritively on the point anyway. It would have taken you 10 seconds with Google to know either way. > It's in 'weird news' for a reason, it's not there > because this is the normal state of things Right, because the Apple case is run-of-the-mill? The Apple case is "the normal state of things"? You said it was a new low for the courts. It's not even close. That's my point. You're twisting yourself and your words in circles.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    > I wasn't sure at first, but now I think you're being actively dishonest to try and ...? Who knows. That's all in your mind I'm afraid. > Right. Except for WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam, which drafted collectively 15m people, when has it ever been used? Yes, they were drafted. And since then the draft has been abolished and the US is at present operating an all volunteer force. Nobody got drafted into Iraq or Afghanistan. That they can re-instate it does not change anything to the fact that right now the US does not have a draft. If you don't like the situation the way it is right now you have the following options: (1) you can resist if a draft is re-instated, and you'll probably end up in a lot of trouble (I did this and got away with it (not in the US)) but it is possible to resist (2) you can leave the country (3) you can give up and get shot at for someone else's reasons > Right, because the Apple case is run-of-the-mill? The Apple case is "the normal state of things"? No, the Apple case is very much in the public eye and Apple is a very wealthy company. The courts may see fit to compel Apple to do this but if the employees resign I don't see how the courts are going to conscript them back into working for Apple, and so far nothing you've shown has made me change my mind on that. > You said it was a new low for the courts. It's not even close. That's my point. You're twisting yourself and your words in circles. No, I said it would be a new low. If you feel that these other things are already below that then that's your right but for me there is a huge difference. Anyway, I'm kind of tired of your personal attacks so I'll let this rest. Bye.

jacquesm 11y ago

The US uses an all-volunteer force. Selective service is a back-up plan that has not been used. > That is factually incorrect. There are plenty of counter-examples. One I can remember getting plenty of news coverage is: > http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/maybe-we-could-try-schools/ http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17598441/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/m... It's in 'weird news' for a reason, it's not there because this is the normal state of things. Yes, there are idiot judges, and yes, the system is broken to the point where you have no recourse. But to use that as examples to prove that the whole system is broken is reaching. > Only if you ignore conscription, which is alive and well in the US (Selective Service), and the counter-examples where contempt of court is used to compel people to "create" something. Neither of which prove that you could use either of those mechanisms to make a computer programmer create a piece of software, which was 'the topic under discussion', so what's your point? That the US is a crazy country? That some judges are crazy? That you ought to place some checks on Judges power? Or that you actually feel that any of the examples above would be enough to prove to any person reading this that a judge will order a person (not Apple, the company) to create some intellectual property or be jailed if they don't?

peteretep 11y ago
I wasn't sure at first, but now I think you're being actively dishonest to try and ...? Who knows. > Selective service is a back-up plan that has not been > used Right. Except for WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam, which drafted collectively 15m people, when has it ever been used? Either you knew that, and lied, or you didn't know that, and decided to speak authoritively on the point anyway. It would have taken you 10 seconds with Google to know either way. > It's in 'weird news' for a reason, it's not there > because this is the normal state of things Right, because the Apple case is run-of-the-mill? The Apple case is "the normal state of things"? You said it was a new low for the courts. It's not even close. That's my point. You're twisting yourself and your words in circles.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  > I wasn't sure at first, but now I think you're being actively dishonest to try and ...? Who knows. That's all in your mind I'm afraid. > Right. Except for WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam, which drafted collectively 15m people, when has it ever been used? Yes, they were drafted. And since then the draft has been abolished and the US is at present operating an all volunteer force. Nobody got drafted into Iraq or Afghanistan. That they can re-instate it does not change anything to the fact that right now the US does not have a draft. If you don't like the situation the way it is right now you have the following options: (1) you can resist if a draft is re-instated, and you'll probably end up in a lot of trouble (I did this and got away with it (not in the US)) but it is possible to resist (2) you can leave the country (3) you can give up and get shot at for someone else's reasons > Right, because the Apple case is run-of-the-mill? The Apple case is "the normal state of things"? No, the Apple case is very much in the public eye and Apple is a very wealthy company. The courts may see fit to compel Apple to do this but if the employees resign I don't see how the courts are going to conscript them back into working for Apple, and so far nothing you've shown has made me change my mind on that. > You said it was a new low for the courts. It's not even close. That's my point. You're twisting yourself and your words in circles. No, I said it would be a new low. If you feel that these other things are already below that then that's your right but for me there is a huge difference. Anyway, I'm kind of tired of your personal attacks so I'll let this rest. Bye.