A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Da Mayor" At Work



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old May 7th 05, 01:48 AM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Chris W wrote:

The problem, as I see it, is there are too many small groups
fighting for only certain rights, what we need is for them all to
combine to fight for all rights.


You will never get any of those groups to agree that all the "rights" one of the
others claims to have are actually rights.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.
  #22  
Old May 7th 05, 01:55 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chris W" wrote in message
news:JMOee.2463$cf5.417@lakeread07...
Matt Barrow wrote:

"Chris W" wrote in message news:Agqee.2401$cf5.1910@lakeread07...


I think the only way we are going to stop this kind of thing,
is for EVERY rights group to join forces and fight every stupid
political move or law that restricts the rights of any group.



How about fighting any law that restricts the rights of any INDIVIDUAL?

Groups don't have rights...only individuals.



Well if you want to get nit picky, you replied to the wrong post.
Obviously it is the individual people that have the rights. However,
the only way to effectively fight for those rights is to organize into a
group.


Whole different context -- gathering force in numbers.

The problem, as I see it, is there are too many small groups
fighting for only certain rights,


Actaully, most groups fight for rights they maintain are applicable to the
group (blacks, woemn, gays, straights, French...).

what we need is for them all to
combine to fight for all rights.


Well, first they have to understand that rights can only pertain to the
individual...otherwise they're farting into the wind of special interests.





  #23  
Old May 7th 05, 01:57 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jose" wrote in message
news
The problem, as I see it, is there are too many small groups fighting

for only certain rights, what we need is for them all to combine to fight
for all rights.

Rights conflict with each other.


Not if they're RIGHTS rather than special interest privileges.
The theory of individual rights maintains it can't be a right if it
conflicts with another persons rights. Also, that rights are "negative" and
that positive rights can't exist (i.e., someone has to do something for you
or give something to you).




  #24  
Old May 7th 05, 01:57 AM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

AES wrote:

Don't quarrel with these assertions. But suppose the corp has multiple
stockholders, who own (ergo, in the last analysis control) it . . .
Then, everything the corp does is, at least in a certain sense, done by
those stockholders -- and they're a group.


That would be like saying that I do whatever my car does.

First off, the stockholders do not have any control over the corporation (with
the exception of the one, if there is one, who owns the majority of the stock).
The board of directors controls a corporation. Assuming that the board is in
agreement, then the corporation (an entity) does what the board wants it to do.
But the corporation is not a group. What is done by the corporation is not
necessarily done by the stockholders.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.
  #25  
Old May 7th 05, 02:13 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"EL" wrote in message
m...
Although I realize this is oversimplifying a complex issue, what you state

actually is not true at least in the USA.

Under law, a corporation is considered an entity unto itself. It has been

established by statute & precedent that
corporations have a number of rights, free speech being one of the better

known ones.


ANd a corporation is en entity comprised of individuals; they neither gain,
nor lose, any rights by virtue of their incorporation. In the same way, you
neither gain nor lose rights by virtue of your being a member of a HUGE
group or a group of one.


The effective result of this is that those who control corporations have

"double rights". If I run a corporation I have my
personal right of free speech, plus my corporation's right (which of

course is under my control).

You have the right you originally hold as an individual and your rights as
spokesman for the corporation derives from that right. Again, you are
neither gaining any rights, nor should you lose any.

Eric Law


"Matt Barrow" wrote in message

...
"Chris W" wrote in message news:Agqee.2401$cf5.1910@lakeread07...
I think the only way we are going to stop this kind of thing,
is for EVERY rights group to join forces and fight every stupid
political move or law that restricts the rights of any group.


How about fighting any law that restricts the rights of any INDIVIDUAL?

Groups don't have rights...only individuals.









  #26  
Old May 7th 05, 02:16 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"EL" wrote:

Although I realize this is oversimplifying a complex issue, what you

state
actually is not true at least in the USA.


?


Under law, a corporation is considered an entity unto itself. It has

been
established by statute & precedent that
corporations have a number of rights, free speech being one of the

better
known ones.


corporation group. A corporation is an entity. Singular. Not a

group.

Correct. You'd not gain/lose rights as a family member, either.


  #27  
Old May 7th 05, 02:16 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"AES" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Bob Noel wrote:


corporation group. A corporation is an entity. Singular. Not a

group.


Don't quarrel with these assertions. But suppose the corp has multiple
stockholders, who own (ergo, in the last analysis control) it . . .
Then, everything the corp does is, at least in a certain sense, done by
those stockholders -- and they're a group.


As a group of individuals. See earlier post about gains/loses.


  #28  
Old May 7th 05, 02:41 AM
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actaully, most groups fight for rights they maintain are applicable to the
group (blacks, woemn, gays, straights, French...).


"French?"
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


  #29  
Old May 7th 05, 02:57 AM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:HnUee.50$N_5.14@trndny09...
AES wrote:

Don't quarrel with these assertions. But suppose the corp has multiple
stockholders, who own (ergo, in the last analysis control) it . . .
Then, everything the corp does is, at least in a certain sense, done by
those stockholders -- and they're a group.


That would be like saying that I do whatever my car does.

First off, the stockholders do not have any control over the corporation

(with
the exception of the one, if there is one, who owns the majority of the

stock).
The board of directors controls a corporation. Assuming that the board is

in
agreement, then the corporation (an entity) does what the board wants it

to do.
But the corporation is not a group. What is done by the corporation is not
necessarily done by the stockholders.


Think of "Power of Attorney", or "delegation".




  #30  
Old May 7th 05, 03:10 AM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt Barrow wrote:

Think of "Power of Attorney", or "delegation".


I've never signed one yet.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! [email protected] Naval Aviation 2 December 17th 04 10:45 PM
Best Home Base Work Reynard Simulators 0 November 9th 04 05:39 PM
Best Home Base Work Reynard Instrument Flight Rules 0 November 9th 04 05:37 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 4 August 7th 03 05:12 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 July 4th 03 04:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.