yes one should feel bad for taking life. otoh he struck down a couple lifelong criminals who were parading around larping and attacking people. one a child molestor the other a domestic abuser

the dead persons had several victims who were children and young women who still have family you know...

It is defended by force, but it is not aggression. There's a difference.

We might as well say that you let your neighbor have sex with your wife, sleep in your home, and eat all the food in your pantry.

You claim land and defend it with aggression. I walk through and pick fruit off a wild tree and you attack me because you shouted that you get everything from that tree.

You shout you get the resources under the dirt too and I cant use them even though before you made that declaration and attacked me I had just as much right to those resources as you did.

Property that extends any further than your body is aggression.

Now, I dont subscribe to the NAP so I dont see the aggression required to have property as bad, but we should be honest about what it is. When you say you subscribe to the NAP and exclude the aggression required to have property because you say its not aggression you are being dishonest. Libertarian philosophy is basically nothing but contradictions though so that's normal

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Nov 22 2020 12:37pm

We haven't established that anyone has a right to resources at all. You say we have a right to ourselves, but if someone wants peaceful use, I fail to see how, by your definition, that constitutes aggression. I suppose we can say that we spoke to the sky and the sky told us our bodies are off limits, but we're now no better than what we were arguing against.

We consider it aggression because it threatens harm. Defending yourself from harm is not aggression, by definition. Rittenhouse was protecting a local business from economic devastation and personal harm. That is not aggression. Now, was he looking for a fight? I don't know, and the decision for a 17-year old to go, armed, to a riot was not bright, but he was clearly not the aggressor that night insofar as words have meaning at all.

"peaceful use" is not the same as property. Property requires exclusion and exclusion requires aggression. If you eat fruit from a tree, then okay, you've eaten it. That's not aggression. If you hoard all the fruit from a tree and use violence against somebody else who wants to pick the fruit, you've established it as your "property" and you've used aggression or the threat of aggression to exclude others from using things they otherwise have the ability to use. At most you could extend this to defending things that are necessary for your short or medium term survival as non-aggression since you need them to survive, but that's more in the weeds than we need to go for now.

We don't need the sky to tell us our bodies are off limits. That comes from the definition of aggression. If aggression does not extend to unwilful actions against your body then literally nothing is aggression. I could kill you and it wouldn't be aggression.

You have a right to everything until something stops you from doing it. A right is an expectation that you can do something or be free from something. Until you threaten violence against me I have the right to do everything, at least while we're working under the NAP.

I don't really care about the Rittenhouse case. He'll be tried in court with the country watching. Whether he wins the case or loses he's gonna have a hard time for the rest of his life because he's infamous. It'll suck that he will be judged his entire life for something he did at 17, but he'll probably end up as a right wing grifter and never need money again.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Nov 22 2020 02:06pm

I love how hypocritical leftists are.

What you are saying is the equivalent of saying girls dressing slutty deserve to get raped and aren't actually victims.

Juvenile, treat him as such.

according to the media, 'he is evil incarnate' for defending himself from attackers that were 10+ years older than him. they're so scared of underage kids - just look what they tried to do to the kid who stood there smiling in DC.

Kids are scary.

I personally know of several teenagers convicted of terror plots and one that headed up an international terror org responsible for multiple murders.

Having said that - Kyle is also a victim.