Richard Dress - Posted - 09/13/2011:  15:41:29

quote:

---

Originally posted by DanielT

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

You hurt your case with all long legal BS that nobody reads. 

---

Richard, I'm truly sorry to have troubled you with confusing words and meanings and stuff.  I will try to keep it shorter in the future. 

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

Some of us are more motivated by rightness or wrongness of an act than we are of legality or not.  What has law to do with right or wrong?

---

You're joking, right?  See, this is why we can't have nice things.

---

Tell us what you know about the law and ethics and how they relate.  Maybe there is a misunderstanding.

PS: And I wasn't talking about your legal BS at all.  Sorry for the confusion.  I was combining diverse ideas into one post.

Edited by - Richard Dress on 09/13/2011 15:44:54

Duke of Pearl - Posted - 09/13/2011:  15:47:00

Quote: "You hurt your case with all long legal BS that nobody reads. "  Response: You hurt your credibility by not knowing, or even wanting to know,  what you're talking about.

Quote: "Some of us are more motivated by rightness or wrongness of an act than we are of legality or not."  Response: So, without reading any of the evidence showing Gibson deliberately bought illegally harvested woods (already seized and not allowed to be moved) from endangered trees in a protected national forest, and thus choosing to put their factory at risk of being investigated, you're not concerned about whether those choices were right or wrong?

Quote: "...a violent, unnecessary act..."  Response: What "violence" was involved?  People in enforcement usually carry weapons, and Gibson was raided the first time for getting involved in "grey market" wood deals which Martin and Taylor wanted nothing to do with, and the second time because it appeared that there were paperwork discrepancies which could have indicated smuggling or falsified documents.

Quote: "What has law to do with right or wrong? "  Response: We all agree that some laws are good and others are bad, but laws only reflect a moral consensus based on some other ultimate source (the same source which allows us to even proclaim that some are "good" or "bad").  It's true that you "can't legislate morality" as far as changing what's inside a person; but, like it or not, every legal system does indeed have quite a bit to do with "rightness" and "wrongness" in any civilized society.  Maybe you prefer total anarchy?

Quote: "Trying to shove the law where it doesn't belong ."  Response: Concerning Gibson, how do you know where the law belongs or not since you haven't bothered to read how it may apply or not.  Your source of information remains limited to statements made by one person (Henry J.) through politically motivated media outlets -- do you actually trust everything you hear and read in the media?  Really? 

Quote: "In my opinion, of course. "  Response: Opinions are not arguments, and because they lack support can't attempt to prove anything; an argument is a supported opinion, with a necessarily logical link between the premises and the conclusion -- something you've managed to avoid up to this point.

Until this gets sorted out by the courts, try at least to do some homework that explores both sides of the issues.

Nick Danger - Posted - 09/13/2011:  16:07:25

quote:

---

Originally posted by Duke of Pearl



Quote: "What has law to do with right or wrong? "  Response: We all agree that some laws are good and others are bad, but laws only reflect a moral consensus based on some other ultimate source (the same source which allows us to even proclaim that some are "good" or "bad").  It's true that you "can't legislate morality" as far as changing what's inside a person; but, like it or not, every legal system does indeed have quite a bit to do with "rightness" and "wrongness" in any civilized society.  Maybe you prefer total anarchy?

Until this gets sorted out by the courts, try at least to do some homework that explores both sides of the issues.

---

Of course you are referring to 1938 Germany, correct?  Duke, my man, there is a HUGE difference between right & wrong and the 'law'.  And if I had to pick between Nazi or Stalanist 'law' and total anarchy, put me down for total anarchy ANY DAY OF THE WEEK.

(Un-friggin'-believable how some people's minds work, which is why we're in the mess we're in today!)  

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/13/2011:  16:18:05

DoP, ethics and law are different categories and when you try to mix them you can end up with very out-of-date conclusions (like "laws only reflect a moral consensus").  Best to leave the legal arguments out of the thread because they easily turn political.  Ethics has not been banned and I invite you to stay on this safer ground.

sugarinthegourd - Posted - 09/13/2011:  17:14:53

Speaking of laws, Godwin's Law has just come into play, and I would suggest that at this point, this once-informative thread should be left to die a peaceful death rather than shed further embarrassment on this forum and the banjo community at large.

DanielT - Posted - 09/13/2011:  17:45:21

Nick, just so I'm clear with your fact set, what exactly did the federal government do wrong?

DanielT - Posted - 09/13/2011:  17:49:28

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

Ethics has not been banned and I invite you to stay on this safer ground.

---

Richard, have you read this entire thread?

olsneelock - Posted - 09/13/2011:  17:52:55

"Speaking of laws, Godwin's Law has just come into play, and I would suggest that at this point, this once-informative thread should be left to die a peaceful death rather than shed further embarrassment on this forum and the banjo community at large."

Second this.  Think it's actually long overdue.

bricklifter - Posted - 09/13/2011:  19:06:32

third it

kill it....please

carlos - Posted - 09/13/2011:  20:52:08

The  only thing  that  will work out  is  Gibson is  moving  out of  america  putting  1200  people  out  of  jobs hows  that  working  out   for  you  america ,

Bill Rogers - Posted - 09/13/2011:  22:26:11

Political comment hidden.

dmiller - Posted - 09/13/2011:  22:38:36

quote:

---

Originally posted by carlos

The  only thing  that  will work out  is  Gibson is  moving  out of  america  putting  1200  people  out  of  jobs

hows  that  working  out   for  you  america ,

---

Are there 1,200 folks working at Gibson now?  I'm asking, because I don't know.

I'd like to think there were, but I'm guessing that there's not that many employed there.

Nick Danger - Posted - 09/14/2011:  04:13:11

quote:

---

Originally posted by olsneelock

"Speaking of laws, Godwin's Law has just come into play, and I would suggest that at this point, this once-informative thread should be left to die a peaceful death rather than shed further embarrassment on this forum and the banjo community at large."

Second this.  Think it's actually long overdue.

---

Mike Godwin is an idiot, yes, an idiot. 

You know WHY Nazi Germany is referred to so much during heated debates?  BECAUSE IT IS RELEVANT AND THERE IS A LESSON TO BE LEARNED.  And anybody who tries to flippantly dismiss the lessons of RECENT history is not only an idiot but ultimately part of the problem.

Mike Godwin, go stick your smarmy head in the sand.

olsneelock - Posted - 09/14/2011:  06:23:20

Nick Danger you are either disturbed or have way too much time on your hands.  This thread is a classic example of Godwin's law.  One of the best I've ever come across. The comment that elicited your reference to 1938 Germany was about as innocuous as it gets and had nothing to do with any particular political philosophy.  But you, inexplicably, went right to the Nazi reference. 

Bill can you not see that this is no longer a discussion but a vehicle for ranting.

jw

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/14/2011:  06:45:43

Nick, you can always tell you hit the mark when they they start crying to shut down the discussion.

Nick Danger - Posted - 09/14/2011:  06:52:15

quote:

---

Originally posted by olsneelock

Nick Danger you are either disturbed or have way too much time on your hands.  This thread is a classic example of Godwin's law.  One of the best I've ever come across. The comment that elicited your reference to 1938 Germany was about as innocuous as it gets and had nothing to do with any particular political philosophy.  But you, inexplicably, went right to the Nazi reference. 

Bill can you not see that this is no longer a discussion but a vehicle for ranting.

jw

---

I can see that I hit a raw nerve in Princeton (which is exactly what I was aiming for).  Have a nice 'Princeton' day!

KE - Posted - 09/14/2011:  06:54:05

Either hit the mark or fouled the footpath.  I'd say closer to the latter.

Lest this (mostly) great thread gets shut down -- Props to Duke of Pearl, btw.  Thanks much for your contributions.  It's been a worthwhile, albeit challenging read.

Edited by - KE on 09/14/2011 06:56:55

DanielT - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:00:16

Wait, before this thread gets shut, I just wanted to point out something.  After eight full pages of at times contentious but largely civilized discussion about the legalities of the Gibson issue, Richard Dress weighs in to invite us to talk about ethics instead.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

Best to leave the legal arguments out of the thread because they easily turn political.  Ethics has not been banned and I invite you to stay on this safer ground.

---

What a weird invitation.  He comes in, starts talking like he's read the thread (which it's clear he hadn't) and then wants us to talk about what we've already been talking about, only he wants us to do it in the way that favors his incredibly biased perspective.  Unbelievable.

Also, Nick Danger, no rational person would take you or your comments seriously.  Seriously, am I the only one who is through entertaining this kind of anti-rational crap?  You only come to Nick's or Richard's conclusions (and think you're right) when you listen to too much talk radio.  Nick (and carlos, too; Richard, I'd suggest you do as well but I know you won't because it's long and BS filled and I know that reading's not your bag) -- read this thread, go look at the primary sources and you will find some serious inconsistencies in Gibson's story.

If it's just that you don't like the evidence you find, fine.  Be honest with everyone and not just say that you don't like it but detail why.  But don't use your willful disregard for it to advance your "damn, the Nazis are coming!" agenda.  That's not productive, that's just ignorant.  This is not a "gut" conversation.  I mean, thinking with your gut is fine -- it's good at letting you know you're hungry -- but it won't serve you when you're asked to analyze government affidavits, or media bias.

Richard Dress - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:09:22

This sounds like a political rant.  I am not a lawyer and I stay away from lawyer stuff.  It makes people shrill and rude.  Lawyers are paid to lie, in most cases.  Why are you so set against ethics?

olsneelock - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:10:39

Not so much a nerve gentlemen but a circuit of neurons in the brain called the pathetic pathway.

BTW Princeton is maybe not the Princeton you're thinking of Nick, that's in New Jersey.  Princeton Massachusetts is a little town in central MA of about 3000 people with a couple of bars, a pretty New England Church with a 40 mile view, and little ski hill in it that votes Republican routinely.   In Princeton the dogs run free gentlemen, free to spread their feces on everybody else's lawns, much like what's occurred in this thread. 

Done here.

 Well said Daniel, and excellent Cliff Clavin avatar btw.

Edited by - olsneelock on 09/14/2011 07:15:37

DanielT - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:13:22

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Danger

I can see that I hit a raw nerve in Princeton (which is exactly what I was aiming for).  Have a nice 'Princeton' day!

---

Nick, you never answered my question from the previous page.  My question was "just so I'm clear with your fact set, what exactly did the federal government do wrong?"

I don't want this thread shut down before Nick answers my question and I have a chance to respond.

DanielT - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:15:07

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dress

Why are you so set against ethics?

---

Because that's not what we'd spent eight pages talking about.  Why are you so set against rational thought?

Nick Danger - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:22:39

Man, oh, man, it's like a pinball machine going off. LOL! (You're absolutely correct about your hitting-the-mark observation, Richard. Too funny!)

DanielT - Posted - 09/14/2011:  07:38:44

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Danger

Man, oh, man, it's like a pinball machine going off. LOL! (You're absolutely correct about your hitting-the-mark observation, Richard. Too funny!)

---

Ah, Nick, you're precious.