6 ms·

All government mandates are enforced at the barrel of a gun.

by x3n0ph3n3 5y ago

lalaland1125 5y ago
Are you opposed to all vaccine mandates? Including for diseases like measles?
- refurb 5y ago
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216452/ This is a nice article about immunization requirements in Canada a decade before Covid hit. In 2011, only 3 provinces had mandates for students and also had plenty of exceptions. And this is for vaccines with decades of use and highly effective at preventing transmission and disease.
jleyank 5y ago
I’ll get shot if I drive without a license and insurance? Damn….
- mwint 5y ago
  For sure. You may get a ticket the first couple times, then they'll take you to jail (where you cannot drive). If you insist on continuing to drive, that means you have to resist going to jail. Resisting going to jail is an excellent way to have force used on you, up to and including guns. Heck, if the right country wants you in jail for the right reasons, you could flee somewhere else and have the _Air Force_ used against you.
- feanaro 5y ago
  No, but you'll get detained and then you'll like your freedom back so you'll try to walk away, but they won't let you. If you insist, you'll eventually get shot.
  - mortenlarsen 5y ago
    Really? Where I live, cops only shoot if necessary, and someone getting away is not a valid reason. Maybe in some very extreme case they would, but it is better that someone escapes custody than someone (including the suspect dying). Then again, just a cop drawing a weapon or firing a weapon usually makes the news.
    - mwint 5y ago
      So you're saying that, in your region, it's possible to have a warrant (say, for failure to appear at your unpaid-ticket trial) and avoid jail by... running away? Indefinitely? They won't arrest you the next chance they get (say, when your plate shows up on a scanner)? I'd propose that avoiding jail indefinitely will eventually lead to violence in any halfway-organized jurisdiction. And if you start shooting, eventually the government will shoot back. All over a driving misdemeanor. We just assume that reasonable people won't let these things escalate that far, but yes: Every law written is ultimately enforced by a man (or woman) with a gun.
      - lovecg 5y ago
        If we’re arguing technicalities, a gun is not strictly speaking required. If it’s you against 20 cops they can just physically subdue you and throw you in jail. At no point they even need to threaten to shoot you. So a threat of physical force - yes. Actual guns and deadly force - not in every situation.
      - mortenlarsen 5y ago
        They will shoot you to defend themselves and others if necessary. But not to prevent you from escaping. They will overpower you if they get the chance. Bottom line: If you are not a danger to anyone, they will let you escape rather than kill anyone (including you), even if it means you are never brought to justice. It makes a lot of sense, if you don't have a revenge based justice system.
- aksss 5y ago
  Do it enough, and ignore the authority of the government to require these things of you, and eventually violence will come of it (forcibly ensure your appearance or imprison you, and that force knows no upper limit if you keep resisting).
CogitoCogito 5y ago
> All government mandates are enforced at the barrel of a gun. So is enforcement of contracts between private parties. Are you against private property as well?
- amscanne 5y ago
  No they aren’t. You must go to the government via the legal system, since they are the only one authorized to use force.
  - wk_end 5y ago
    Are we talking about "first order enforcement" or not? If we are, neither private contracts nor vaccine mandates are directly enforced at the barrel of a gun - the RCMP aren't busting down people's doors to shoot them for failing to get vaccinated, just as people aren't immediately killed by the feds for violating legal contracts. If we're talking about how they're ultimately enforced, if all else fails...well, they're both enforced the same way.
    - amscanne 5y ago
      The police (who carry guns) have shut down events for mandate violations in Canada, and arrested people. (There was a particularly stubborn anti-vax pastor in Alberta IIRC.) For private disputes, it’s also not uncommon to have an armed officer help enforcement. Consider an extremely common private contract dispute - an eviction - where the police may come to remove the tenant. The “barrel of a gun” is of course a metaphor, but first order enforcement can be closer than you think.
      - wk_end 5y ago
        All you're doing here is arguing with yourself: you agree that the barrel of a gun is, in the final analysis, ultimately used to enforce both vaccine mandates and private contracts. Therefore an opposition to things being enforced at the barrel of a gun alone is an incoherent reason to oppose vaccine mandates and not private property.
jbay808 5y ago
This sounds scary, but is it a bad thing? It depends on the mandate but the gun barrel is generally at the end of a long chain of escalating non-cooperation that starts with a sternly worded letter. Some governments are more trigger-happy than others, but at least in gentler societies, to get to the point where you're looking at a gun barrel, you'd probably have to respond somewhere along that chain with significant violence yourself. In societies where you are allowed to carry a gun, the government having an even bigger gun is rather implied by the word enforced, because a mandate couldn't be called enforced if the police could only hand sternly-worded letters to you while you ignore it and shot at them.
brianpan 5y ago
I don't understand what this argument means. Aren't all rules enforced by whatever incentive or deterrent attached to the rule? Is "No parking from 9pm to 6am" enforced at the barrel of a gun?
- iqanq 5y ago
  Certainly yes. You are fined. If you accumulate several fines, you will eventually be arrested. If you resist the arrest, you will find where the barrel of the gun is ;)

All government mandates are enforced at the barrel of a gun.

lalaland1125 5y ago

Are you opposed to all vaccine mandates? Including for diseases like measles?

refurb 5y ago
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216452/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216452/ This is a nice article about immunization requirements in Canada a decade before Covid hit. In 2011, only 3 provinces had mandates for students and also had plenty of exceptions. And this is for vaccines with decades of use and highly effective at preventing transmission and disease.

jleyank 5y ago

I’ll get shot if I drive without a license and insurance? Damn….

mwint 5y ago
For sure. You may get a ticket the first couple times, then they'll take you to jail (where you cannot drive). If you insist on continuing to drive, that means you have to resist going to jail. Resisting going to jail is an excellent way to have force used on you, up to and including guns. Heck, if the right country wants you in jail for the right reasons, you could flee somewhere else and have the _Air Force_ used against you.
feanaro 5y ago
No, but you'll get detained and then you'll like your freedom back so you'll try to walk away, but they won't let you. If you insist, you'll eventually get shot.
- mortenlarsen 5y ago
  Really? Where I live, cops only shoot if necessary, and someone getting away is not a valid reason. Maybe in some very extreme case they would, but it is better that someone escapes custody than someone (including the suspect dying). Then again, just a cop drawing a weapon or firing a weapon usually makes the news.
  - mwint 5y ago
    So you're saying that, in your region, it's possible to have a warrant (say, for failure to appear at your unpaid-ticket trial) and avoid jail by... running away? Indefinitely? They won't arrest you the next chance they get (say, when your plate shows up on a scanner)? I'd propose that avoiding jail indefinitely will eventually lead to violence in any halfway-organized jurisdiction. And if you start shooting, eventually the government will shoot back. All over a driving misdemeanor. We just assume that reasonable people won't let these things escalate that far, but yes: Every law written is ultimately enforced by a man (or woman) with a gun.
    - lovecg 5y ago
      If we’re arguing technicalities, a gun is not strictly speaking required. If it’s you against 20 cops they can just physically subdue you and throw you in jail. At no point they even need to threaten to shoot you. So a threat of physical force - yes. Actual guns and deadly force - not in every situation.
    - mortenlarsen 5y ago
      They will shoot you to defend themselves and others if necessary. But not to prevent you from escaping. They will overpower you if they get the chance. Bottom line: If you are not a danger to anyone, they will let you escape rather than kill anyone (including you), even if it means you are never brought to justice. It makes a lot of sense, if you don't have a revenge based justice system.
aksss 5y ago
Do it enough, and ignore the authority of the government to require these things of you, and eventually violence will come of it (forcibly ensure your appearance or imprison you, and that force knows no upper limit if you keep resisting).

CogitoCogito 5y ago

> All government mandates are enforced at the barrel of a gun. So is enforcement of contracts between private parties. Are you against private property as well?

amscanne 5y ago
No they aren’t. You must go to the government via the legal system, since they are the only one authorized to use force.
- wk_end 5y ago
  Are we talking about "first order enforcement" or not? If we are, neither private contracts nor vaccine mandates are directly enforced at the barrel of a gun - the RCMP aren't busting down people's doors to shoot them for failing to get vaccinated, just as people aren't immediately killed by the feds for violating legal contracts. If we're talking about how they're ultimately enforced, if all else fails...well, they're both enforced the same way.
  - amscanne 5y ago
    The police (who carry guns) have shut down events for mandate violations in Canada, and arrested people. (There was a particularly stubborn anti-vax pastor in Alberta IIRC.) For private disputes, it’s also not uncommon to have an armed officer help enforcement. Consider an extremely common private contract dispute - an eviction - where the police may come to remove the tenant. The “barrel of a gun” is of course a metaphor, but first order enforcement can be closer than you think.
    - wk_end 5y ago
      All you're doing here is arguing with yourself: you agree that the barrel of a gun is, in the final analysis, ultimately used to enforce both vaccine mandates and private contracts. Therefore an opposition to things being enforced at the barrel of a gun alone is an incoherent reason to oppose vaccine mandates and not private property.

jbay808 5y ago

This sounds scary, but is it a bad thing? It depends on the mandate but the gun barrel is generally at the end of a long chain of escalating non-cooperation that starts with a sternly worded letter. Some governments are more trigger-happy than others, but at least in gentler societies, to get to the point where you're looking at a gun barrel, you'd probably have to respond somewhere along that chain with significant violence yourself. In societies where you are allowed to carry a gun, the government having an even bigger gun is rather implied by the word enforced, because a mandate couldn't be called enforced if the police could only hand sternly-worded letters to you while you ignore it and shot at them.

brianpan 5y ago

I don't understand what this argument means. Aren't all rules enforced by whatever incentive or deterrent attached to the rule? Is "No parking from 9pm to 6am" enforced at the barrel of a gun?

iqanq 5y ago
Certainly yes. You are fined. If you accumulate several fines, you will eventually be arrested. If you resist the arrest, you will find where the barrel of the gun is ;)