[pixl97]

I mean, you tend to see this everywhere.

Hopefully these people do realize that a lock is a promise saying "you belong to a society, be nice". They do very little beyond that, especially these days with small, powerful powertools.

[sandworm101]

>> these days with small, powerful powertools.

Maybe when attacking a padlock on a highschool locker, or the door on an amazon-basics "safe", but try attacking something not primarily designed to be cheap/light. Try cracking the door on a money safe at a substantial business, a safe approved by an insurance provider for the storage of large sums, Even an ATM will resist power tools far longer than it will take the cops to show up.

[TeMPOraL]

> Even an ATM will resist power tools far longer than it will take the cops to show up.

It'll also spit in your face with a paint that's incredibly hard to wash off.

[pipes]

I "belong" to a society? That suggests that a group owns me. Hrm I'm probably nit picking, but the idea of a society owning me isn't something I agree with. Also I'm free to leave.

[scubbo]

This is linguistic nonsense on a par with disliking the phrase "my spouse" because it implies ownership. You can easily talk of "my country" or "my university" without claiming ownership, just as one can talk of "a sense of belonging" or of "belonging to a club" without feeling owned. Words have several meanings.

[pipes]

Yet, if I said my wife belonged to me I think I would get a few rebukes.

[cush]

Why not just have a conversation in good faith?

Instead of assuming the person you're chatting with is talking about slavery, and then when they clarify they're not talking about slavery, and you saying that it could be about slavery, you could just as easily say, "oh I misunderstood you". Sometimes humans have misunderstandings. Languages are messy. Just let it go.

[Dilettante_]

They didn't misunderstand, they challenged the phrasing. Some people believe that words have power and language matters(or at least are entertaining the idea).

[pipes]

I haven't made any assumptions at all, reread what I said, then reread the replies. First one is a personal attack about being libertarian (an assumption), second one starts off as an attack too. I expressed a preference, in a light hearted way, hence the "hrm...". I come here for good faith debate and I'm genuinely grateful for it (I've said as much in other comments).

[cush]

I think you mixed up different threads. Nobody called you a libertarian in this one. Sorry you’re having a bad day. Hope it gets better.

[burkaman]

Right, because that's a completely different sentence with a completely different meaning.

[scubbo]

Yes, that's exactly my point. "X belongs to Y" and "Y owns X" and "X is Y's <noun>" are not perfectly synonymous - despite considerable overlap, they have different shades of meaning.

[sandworm101]

>> the idea of a society owning me isn't something I agree with.

Your agreement is irrelevant. Have you registered for selective service? Paid taxes? Have a drivers license? Check youtube for "sovcit traffic stop" to see what happens when people think they can live independent from the rest of society. The Amish must obey traffic laws just like everyone else.

>> Also I'm free to leave.

Nope. Many an american has fled to canada to avoid taxes/draft/jail. They are caught eventually. Citizenship is not property. You cannot just set it aside when you dont agree with its obligations. There is a process for leaving. It isnt short, easy, cheap or in any way guaranteed.

[TeMPOraL]

Would phrasing it as "your parents sold you into society" be more accurate for you?

[stackghost]

You live in a country with laws. You pay taxes. You can be put in prison. They both literally and figuratively own your ass.

You're free to leave only if another country accepts you which is not a given.