Current Events > $100mil, but there are no laws for a week.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Do you accept and if so, what do you do
---

How would this even work? Cops would still uphold their civic duty because they are getting paid to do so. After the week shit goes back to normal. If anything the cops would just be more trigger happy because it makes shit easier. They could wage a war with those criminals they hate and snuff out a lot of the small timers.
---

Fuck no, Im black.
---

And I get the 100m for that week? Do you know how many people I'm going to kill? There is a LOT of shit I can get done in a week with those resources.
---

Yes. I doubt that many people would go on a murderous rampage, and those that did would be kept in check by the majority of society.
---

No, because the damage that a week of anarchy would do would be irreparable and would probably make my cash worthless.

the_cajun88 posted...

Fuck no, Im black.

black or not I'm just going to hunker down in some hidey hole for a week and then cash out.
---

Bullet_Wing posted...

nicklebro posted...

Yes. I doubt that many people would go on a murderous rampage, and those that did would be kept in check by the majority of society.

The guy above you would

He'd get checked real quick. Plus I bet he's lying.
---

the_cajun88 posted...

Fuck no, Im black.

Agreed.

(...and you spelled Asian wrong.)
---

nicklebro posted...

Bullet_Wing posted...

nicklebro posted...

Yes. I doubt that many people would go on a murderous rampage, and those that did would be kept in check by the majority of society.

The guy above you would

He'd get checked real quick. Plus I bet he's lying.

It's not even the murderous rampages you would have to be worried about. No law means no law. No corporate laws, no international law. Terrorism, foreign invasions, crashing the entire stock market, corporations wholesale slaughtering their competition and creating corporate dominions. All perfectly legal. The damage this would do probably would take lifetimes to repair, and would likely create instability that would render your money worthless.

Dash_Harber posted...

nicklebro posted...

Bullet_Wing posted...

nicklebro posted...

Yes. I doubt that many people would go on a murderous rampage, and those that did would be kept in check by the majority of society.

The guy above you would

He'd get checked real quick. Plus I bet he's lying.

It's not even the murderous rampages you would have to be worried about. No law means no law. No corporate laws, no international law. Terrorism, foreign invasions, crashing the entire stock market, corporations wholesale slaughtering their competition and creating corporate dominions. All perfectly legal. The damage this would do probably would take lifetimes to repair, and would likely create instability that would render your money worthless.

I doubt any of that happens, seeing as how it isn't the illegality that prevents most of that from happening.
---

nicklebro posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

nicklebro posted...

Bullet_Wing posted...

nicklebro posted...

Yes. I doubt that many people would go on a murderous rampage, and those that did would be kept in check by the majority of society.

The guy above you would

He'd get checked real quick. Plus I bet he's lying.

It's not even the murderous rampages you would have to be worried about. No law means no law. No corporate laws, no international law. Terrorism, foreign invasions, crashing the entire stock market, corporations wholesale slaughtering their competition and creating corporate dominions. All perfectly legal. The damage this would do probably would take lifetimes to repair, and would likely create instability that would render your money worthless.

I doubt any of that happens, seeing as how it isn't the illegality that prevents most of that from happening.

You seriously don't think that laws prevent corporations from vampiristic ambitions? Or, like, legal ramifications stopping despots and tyrants from just killing off their enemies wholesale? I mean, Russia could just annex all of Europe and no one could legally stop them.

Then you have the problem that enough people being killed would create massive work shortages, disrupt required services, and create surplus resources that would greatly affect the economy.

If Russia could annex all of Europe they likely would. It isn't laws that are stopping them, it's the fact that they don't have the capability to pull it off. And sure thered be some shady dealings for that bweek, but it'd be mainly individuals helping themselves, not businesses in general. Plus a week is not a very long time in the business world, definitely not enough to trash the economy to the point you're talking about.

Even if there's no laws, there's still repercussions for screwing someone over. And that MAD would keep most people in check.
---

nicklebro posted...

but it'd be mainly individuals helping themselves, not businesses in general.

I don't think you understand how corporations work. The things that would benefit them individually, would also benefit the corporation.

Let's say Pepsi sees there are no laws for the week. They hire a bunch of guys with guns to kill all the Coke brass and firebomb all their factories. Pepsi now has a monopoly. Their shareholders greatly benefit.

People tend to think of murderous rampages, but there are tons of other crimes that would destabilize society. Abusive dad wants his kids back? He goes and shoots his ex-wife and takes the kid. Gang wants to secure their hold on a territory? They all walk into a gun shop and buys every gun they have. They now legally own them, since they were purchased while it was legal. There are countless things.

However, trade embargos and war crimes are still a deterrent to bigger problems. Not just that, though, but terrorism would be legal. People could legally get into the country, legally purchase explosives, legally kill anyone, etc.

Whats the downside?
---

No laws means that my money could easily be stolen by whatever banking institution or investment firm that it'd get sent to.
---

nicklebro having no idea what he's talking about, as usual.

In real "the purge" type kill situations it would probably be decent sniper/campers killing everyone.
---

As long as my money is secure, sure. I would just buy a gun and hijack a helicopter, or force someone doing helicopter rides to take me and a week's worth of supplies, rations, water, etc to some sort of island or boat big enough to live in off the coast (where the news likely hasn't hit) and camp it out.
---

Sure.
---

RE_expert44 posted...

How would this even work? Cops would still uphold their civic duty because they are getting paid to do so. After the week shit goes back to normal. If anything the cops would just be more trigger happy because it makes shit easier. They could wage a war with those criminals they hate and snuff out a lot of the small timers.

Cops duty is to protect property, not people.

Thats a fact.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

Let's say Pepsi sees there are no laws for the week. They hire a bunch of guys with guns to kill all the Coke brass and firebomb all their factories. Pepsi now has a monopoly. Their shareholders greatly benefit.

LMAO
---

If i gett the money before the week starts sure.

Ill buy a boat and go out to sea with some 10/10 thicc asf models and have orgies while the rest of society burns
---

Sure. The ensuing chaos would likely cause irreparable damage in ways we can scarcely fathom, but after the week I had, I'm all for some unchecked mayhem.
---

People really think that week would be that chaotic huh? Methinks you guys watch too much TV
---

nicklebro posted...

People really think that week would be that chaotic huh? Methinks you guys watch too much TV

Maybe you just don't quite grasp how important legal codes are nowadays.

Deal. I live in a fairly peaceful town.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

nicklebro posted...

People really think that week would be that chaotic huh? Methinks you guys watch too much TV

Maybe you just don't quite grasp how important legal codes are nowadays.

probably cuz he's warned

Dash_Harber posted...

No, because the damage that a week of anarchy would do would be irreparable and would probably make my cash worthless.

In the abscence of laws, people(in power) will uphold their own.
basically, the guys with the guns, tanks and bazookas (ie the police and military) will still keep things in order, for the most part.

FluttershyPony posted...

Dash_Harber posted...

No, because the damage that a week of anarchy would do would be irreparable and would probably make my cash worthless.

In the abscence of laws, people(in power) will uphold their own.
basically, the guys with the guns, tanks and bazookas (ie the police and military) will still keep things in order, for the most part.

The problem is that many of the people with the money to fund any sort of security force are actually not part of the government and could easily capitalize on the anarchy. Like I said, say Pepsi want's to dump a bunch of waste in public lakes, gun down all Coke distributors, and kill any government or health officials who have been scrutinizing them. What is stopping them?

Since the scenario is that all law is gone, that means no government is capable of enforcing any sort of law. It then falls to the other major power of our modern world, corporations. They generally are checked by legislature at best, but all bets would be off if there were no laws. Hell, Nestle could hostage the water supply and enslave everyone in legal contracts.

I mean, I'm just an average guy and I can think of huge ways to exploit this. Don't you think that people with the money to buy the best minds in the world might have even better ways to exploit that?

Dash_Harber posted...

The problem is that many of the people with the money to fund any sort of security force are actually not part of the government and could easily capitalize on the anarchy. Like I said, say Pepsi want's to dump a bunch of waste in public lakes, gun down all Coke distributors, and kill any government or health officials who have been scrutinizing them. What is stopping them?

The fact that every company capable of doing so will likely arm themselves to the teeth, while heavy duty military arms are still going to be reasonably hard to get. No law's means any currency will quickly turn to shit for awhile. So you're going to have to bribe government or military personnel with gold or something to get even heavy duty explosives.

Also, there's very likely going to be a large portion of the government and military protecting the law and important people. I believe there's a bunker underneath the Whitehouse too. The military will probably dominate the public to maintain some sense of order. No law's doesn't make every single person or even the majority into blood thirsty killers.

Dash_Harber posted...

Since the scenario is that all law is gone, that means no government is capable of enforcing any sort of law. It then falls to the other major power of our modern world, corporations. They generally are checked by legislature at best, but all bets would be off if there were no laws. Hell, Nestle could hostage the water supply and enslave everyone in legal contracts.

No law's means the military, national guard, federal agents, police, etc can step in and enforce whatever they want. How can you not understand this. Just because there at no official law's, doesn't mean there won't be unofficial ones, made up rules. Private militaries, militia groups, and rogue defense venders would be the biggest concern

Dash_Harber posted...

I mean, I'm just an average guy and I can think of huge ways to exploit this. Don't you think that people with the money to buy the best minds in the world might have even better ways to exploit that?

There are going to be plenty of ways to exploit this, but generally not the way you're thinking of. If there are no law's and Pepsi starts dumping toxic waste into the water, groups of now free to act eco terrorists can use homemade bombs to blow Pepsi to shit while they try to assemble an army and firepower

This isn't even mentioning the possibility of other nations stepping in to keep order and or carve out their own territory
---

Hmm, yeah I'll take my chances that society won't collapse.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

Let's say Pepsi sees there are no laws for the week. They hire a bunch of guys with guns to kill all the Coke brass

Coke would have thought of it first, and done it better *runs*
---

itachi15243 posted...

The fact that every company capable of doing so will likely arm themselves to the teeth, while heavy duty military arms are still going to be reasonably hard to get. No law's means any currency will quickly turn to shit for awhile. So you're going to have to bribe government or military personnel with gold or something to get even heavy duty explosives.

Even if we pretend that they would all be equally armed, that's not a deterrent for most corporations. The collateral damage from a fight could be catastrophic.

itachi15243 posted...

Also, there's very likely going to be a large portion of the government and military protecting the law and important people. I believe there's a bunker underneath the Whitehouse too. The military will probably dominate the public to maintain some sense of order. No law's doesn't make every single person or even the majority into blood thirsty killers.

So basically, you are saying that laws don't matter if there are people to enforce what they think the law should be? Even if we pretend that not a single one of them is going to use this to their advantage or misinterpret their vision of the law (or that this isn't a massive loophole that assumes that people operating for the law doesn't count as laws existing), are we assuming that every single one of them will refuse to take advantage? Seems like a lot of faith.

itachi15243 posted...

No law's means the military, national guard, federal agents, police, etc can step in and enforce whatever they want. How can you not understand this. Just because there at no official law's, doesn't mean there won't be unofficial ones, made up rules. Private militaries, militia groups, and rogue defense venders would be the biggest concern

I never said that PMCs and militias wouldn't be a problem. I actually agree. But I would also argue that if the executive branch is still in operation then the premise that, 'there is no law' isn't true. Also, again, you are pretty optimistic if you think that the entirety of the executive branch will continue to operate above board with no oversight.

itachi15243 posted...

There are going to be plenty of ways to exploit this, but generally not the way you're thinking of. If there are no law's and Pepsi starts dumping toxic waste into the water, groups of now free to act eco terrorists can use homemade bombs to blow Pepsi to shit while they try to assemble an army and firepower

Except, corporations like Pepsi already have the resources to do things like this, while eco-terrorists would have to organize. However, even if we assume there will a problem, you are actually just agreeing with my premise; that amount of conflict is going to end up with collateral damage. You'd basically be turning the entire US a multi-faction civil war.

itachi15243 posted...

This isn't even mentioning the possibility of other nations stepping in to keep order and or carve out their own territory

I actually mentioned this in the first post.

the_cajun88 posted...

Fuck no, Im black.

---

Dash_Harber posted...

Even if we pretend that they would all be equally armed, that's not a deterrent for most corporations. The collateral damage from a fight could be catastrophic.

You missed my point. It wouldn't matter because neither side is going to be very heavily armed.

Dash_Harber posted...

So basically, you are saying that laws don't matter if there are people to enforce what they think the law should be? Even if we pretend that not a single one of them is going to use this to their advantage or misinterpret their vision of the law (or that this isn't a massive loophole that assumes that people operating for the law doesn't count as laws existing), are we assuming that every single one of them will refuse to take advantage? Seems like a lot of faith.

Exactly, those who have power in this situation are going to be in control. While they may not all agree, it doesn't matter. Justice is subject to dispute; might is easily recognized and is not disputed. So the mightiest military group, mostly people with families and loved will give might to justice and claim control. Also, just because they enforce their own sense of justice, does not make it law.

Dash_Harber posted...

I never said that PMCs and militias wouldn't be a problem. I actually agree. But I would also argue that if the executive branch is still in operation then the premise that, 'there is no law' isn't true. Also, again, you are pretty optimistic if you think that the entirety of the executive branch will continue to operate above board with no oversight.

The executive branch would not operate in any capacity. They'd have no ability to do so. The military and other people who defend this country, would be free to do what they want. Which is so far, protecting this country. It's an odd thought to think the majority of people who volunteer to protect us would just say fuck it.

Dash_Harber posted...

Except, corporations like Pepsi already have the resources to do things like this, while eco-terrorists would have to organize. However, even if we assume there will a problem, you are actually just agreeing with my premise; that amount of conflict is going to end up with collateral damage. You'd basically be turning the entire US a multi-faction civil war.

Are you really arguing that Pepsi has at all times a bomb making facility, people who know how to make them, are experienced in doing so, and targets mapped? Compared to groups of terrorists who for tight knit groups to get all this down pat for the right opportunity?

Yes, there will be serious collateral damage, but most of it isn't going to come for major companies. When you say resources, what resources? How many bombers does Pepsi own? No law's means no money because of nothing to enforce it. The biggest damage relating to big business is going to be done to the economy
---

itachi15243 posted...

You missed my point. It wouldn't matter because neither side is going to be very heavily armed.

itachi15243 posted...

Are you really arguing that Pepsi has at all times a bomb making facility, people who know how to make them, are experienced in doing so, and targets mapped? Compared to groups of terrorists who for tight knit groups to get all this down pat for the right opportunity?

No, my point is that some groups already have massive resources they could easily exchange for materiel and boots on the ground if need be.

itachi15243 posted...

Exactly, those who have power in this situation are going to be in control. While they may not all agree, it doesn't matter. Justice is subject to dispute; might is easily recognized and is not disputed. So the mightiest military group, mostly people with families and loved will give might to justice and claim control. Also, just because they enforce their own sense of justice, does not make it law.

Yes, but without a codified law and an oversight committee, you are going to have decent and everyone is going to enforce what they think the law should be.

itachi15243 posted...

The executive branch would not operate in any capacity. They'd have no ability to do so. The military and other people who defend this country, would be free to do what they want. Which is so far, protecting this country. It's an odd thought to think the majority of people who volunteer to protect us would just say fuck it.

Well, firstly, you assume all people who join the military do it for altruistic reasons. Second, the entirety of the military is not stationed in the US. Third, even if we ignore the first two issues, we still have the problem that each soldier is no free to interpret any law or order (up to and including the very chains of command) anyway they please.

itachi15243 posted...

Yes, there will be serious collateral damage, but most of it isn't going to come for major companies. When you say resources, what resources? How many bombers does Pepsi own? No law's means no money because of nothing to enforce it. The biggest damage relating to big business is going to be done to the economy

I would assume they don't own any, but they have the resources to hire people that do. What's to stop them from, say, recruiting some of those soldiers to fight for their interests instead?

Also, since the effect is temporary, they can easily promise funding. They also have tons of other resources that can be sold, traded, or liquidated. Land, machines, stock, etc.

But I think you are focusing on that way too much. If you read my first few posts, I pointed out that there are a number of different groups that could easily exploit it, all the way from individuals to governments. Corporate warfare/espionage is just one example.

Deal.
---

Dash_Harber posted...

nicklebro posted...

People really think that week would be that chaotic huh? Methinks you guys watch too much TV

Maybe you just don't quite grasp how important legal codes are nowadays.

There's a difference between having no laws and having now laws for one week. You guys sound ridiculous
---

I'll take the money and spend the week in a helicopter

When shit has calmed down and everyone is broke I'll come back to earth and what's left of my $100m will make me a king
---

BlockAddition posted...

I'll take the money and spend the week in a helicopter

When shit has calmed down and everyone is broke I'll come back to earth and what's left of my $100m will make me a king

I don't think there are any helicopters that can fly for a week.
---