Where does anyone get off restricting space to anyone?

On Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:33:12 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

"If you just simply occupy a place and no one else can access or use it, aren't you the de facto owner?"

No. Because how it is used can still be subject to law.

You did your usual irresponsible "editing" again, peterson. I had suggested that a self-supporting colony, run by a private concern, could be beyond the reach of any laws you (ie, the collectivists) might try to impose.

You then responded to some other statement that _I_ did not make.

Typical.

On Saturday, October 18, 2014 12:33:12 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:18:27 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

A private concern that physically occupies a moon or planet via a self-supporting colony could be just as civilized, if not more so, as any civilization back on Earth. They could claim ownership, declare independence and if no government had the means to interfere...

They could. But happily we have treaties that seek to prevent that
sort of unfortunate throwback to the times when countries or companies
could simply claim land and resources.

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

On Sunday, October 26, 2014 6:18:02 AM UTC-4, RichA wrote:

A democrat would afford a bacterium equal rights. Kindred that they are.

Quit insulting the bacteria.

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

Logic and reason are not your strong points, are they?

Your posting pattern is interesting. I assume it is structured around
your periodic releases from institutionalization or rehab? Or maybe
even jail, given your clear sociopathy.

On Thursday, 30 October 2014 15:34:32 UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
wsne = sociopath.

Tea Party membership is the new sociopathy?

Jail bate? Blue is the new black?

Beat them black and blue!

[At the polls.]

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:34:32 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

Logic and reason are not your strong points, are they?

Was the land that YOU now own/occupy "claimed" by the French or the Spanish? That is, did the US obtain it from Mexico or from France?

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 10:34:32 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:

Your posting pattern is interesting.

What, exactly, is a "posting pattern?"

I assume it is structured around
your periodic releases from institutionalization or rehab? Or maybe
even jail, given your clear sociopathy.

Wrong on all counts.

On 10/30/2014 9:34 AM, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

Logic and reason are not your strong points, are they?

Your posting pattern is interesting. I assume it is structured around
your periodic releases from institutionalization or rehab? Or maybe
even jail, given your clear sociopathy.


Occasionally librarians need to clear out vagrants and welfare bums to
make room for productive use of their facility. Mr. Contrary had to do
without Internet until he bathed, put on clean clothing and the smell
of disinfectant and insecticide dissipated from the building.

LdB

On Saturday, November 1, 2014 1:36:57 PM UTC-4, LsD wrote:
On 10/30/2014 9:34 AM, chris l peterson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

Logic and reason are not your strong points, are they?

Your posting pattern is interesting. I assume it is structured around
your periodic releases from institutionalization or rehab? Or maybe
even jail, given your clear sociopathy.


Occasionally librarians need to clear out vagrants and welfare bums to
make room for productive use of their facility. Mr. Contrary had to do
without Internet until he bathed, put on clean clothing and the smell
of disinfectant and insecticide dissipated from the building.

It is truly amazing that you both now not only take issue with comments with which you disapprove, but also with WHEN and HOW often such comments are posted.

On Thursday, October 30, 2014 8:34:32 AM UTC-6, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

It would appear that you are a hypocrite since you now occupy land that, until
a few centuries ago, had not yet been "claimed" by a country or a "company."

Logic and reason are not your strong points, are they?

While I would say that accusing you of being a hypocrite is a bit much, I
wouldn't say his statement is devoid of logic.

It is *possible* to believe that stealing the Americas and Australia from their
indigenous peoples was wrong without having to demand that they be returned to
the descendants of their original owners.

John Savard