Sunday, 3 February 2019
Vegan Gains Threatens a Lawsuit, Dodges Obvious Moral Questions.
Okay, so I'll make a video proceeding with your statement that (1) you
do not currently own (real) firearms because the police do not allow
you to, under the terms of your probation, (2) correct me if I'm
wrong, but you have lied (and you continue to lie) in claiming that
you do not own any real weapons (you claim that all of your weapons
are "fake" and are "toys") because the knives, assault batons, swords,
etc., are indeed real weapons, (3) you still want to own guns in the
future, as soon as you are allowed to do so legally. Is this correct?
Do you want to clarify what your position on firearms ownership is?
Do you believe that someone who has hallucinations of the kind you
describe yourself (including auditory hallucinations, "hearing voices"
that are not there, having paranoid and aggressive reactions to
strangers, with the specific delusion that people are trying to kill
you when they just say hello to you, or shake hands with you, etc.)
…do you think that sort of person should be allowed to own, use and
If I described that person to you, as someone other than yourself,
would you agree with the statement, "The government is justified in
doubt their responsibility to safely use firearms"?
Do you think that the military would be willing to recruit or employ
someone with this list of symptoms, and to trust them to use guns
responsibly in a high-pressure situation?
Would you not agree that someone who had your checklist of symptoms
might be disqualified from owning/carrying firearms in at least some
Richard: when people write in to me saying, "He should be on
psychiatric medication", I write back saying, "No, he should just take
a vow that he's not going to do any of these things again."
You say that you're a changed man: what you're showing me is that you
You presented yourself as a victim of censorship; you then become a
hypocrite the moment it suits you ("You're putting me and my wife in
danger!" —as if this were more true of you than (e.g.) a bodybuilder
claiming his life is in danger if his apartment is searched for
illegal drugs, because you've accused him of using illegal drugs).
Richard, you have just been morally grandstanding about the right of
free speech, critique and satire, and then the moment it's convenient
for you, you do everything in your power to "oppress" someone else
—while continuing to play the victim card.
You know that I could make a telephone call to the Toronto police
TODAY with no difficulty, and simply express my concerns about you,
and THAT would more likely entail problems for you and your parole
officer. I didn't do that: I engaged in exactly the kind of rational,
philosophical discussion about ethics (on youtube) that you claim to
support and defend —but not when it questions your own most sacred
value (namely, wasting time playing video games).
Newspapers make criminal allegations all the time: it is part of
journalism. If a newspaper says, "the alleged bank-robber", that's an
allegation (it is reporting an allegation: the etymology of the two
words is clear).
In Canada, telling the truth is always a defense against defamation: I
have been telling the truth. You have completely failed to provide
even one example of me (1) lying, or (2) making a criminal allegation
against you. However, yes, e.g., you have openly talked about using
illegal drugs (e.g., hallucinogenic mushrooms) on your youtube
channel, so if I report that you've used illegal drugs, then I am
making an allegation in the same sense that a newspaper is, in
reporting the facts. That doesn't mean I'm doing anything wrong:
talking about criminal allegation is one of the most important parts
of (protected) freedom of speech.
There are legal consequences for making reckless and irresponsible
criminal allegations, but that's not what I've done in my videos: you
are the one who has made irresponsible criminal allegations (accusing
Durianrider of rape, although this is certainly not the only example)
and you have been callous and cruel toward others when doing so.
Richard, you've been a complete hypocrite here: you've become
everything you always said you despised. You are (1) playing the
victim and (2) at the same time, you're really engaging in bullying
and harassment yourself ("I'll shut down your channel!", "I'll sue
you!") in response to legitimate criticism and satire.
Really think with some detachment and objectivity about the contrast
between the criticism-and-satire I've directed at you, and the
criticism-and-satire you've directed at so many other people. Even
think about the difference between the criticism I've directed at you,
and your replies to me (just insulting me, basically).
The golden rule would be pretty easy for you to apply here, Richard:
why can't you act toward me the way you'd want others to act toward