# Divisions along Rule of Law versus Criminal Rule **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 4, 2015, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009 "2015-08-04T21:07:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/421 "2015-08-25T02:24:56Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > “Your understanding,” _i.e._, your interpretation. Yet, now you want to claim, erroneously, that it is not your personal interpretation. > > Yes. It very much is. > Mt 7:12 is not a rule of law, but an admonition for personal behavior that does not set itself up as a law, (a rule set forth by a government or society.) Any attempt to pretend that it is a “rule of law” is very much a personal interpretation. > > Those who initiate personal attacks are those who choose not to debate, and the inculpatory evidence is published in English for anyone caring to see how Rule of Law is set aside by those who initiate personal attacks. I was with you up until your last paragraph, when all of a sudden, you started speaking in tongues. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/422 "2015-08-25T02:28:20Z")
Obviously, I should not have posted from my short screen tablet without reviewing the entire post that would go out. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/423 "2015-08-25T02:53:25Z")
When I need cheering up, I search youtube for “freeman tased”. ---
**Author:** ![Josf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d78d45/32.png) [@Josf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Josf)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/424 "2015-08-25T04:52:13Z")
Offered: > [@](#): > > The inability to divide objective information (what is written on a page) from subjective information (the personal interpretation of what those words mean and how they relate to other written material) is noted. The above is quoted so as to accurately identify the subject matter that sets in motion, or causes, the action known as a response. The words in quotes is alone. The words in quotes is lacking reference. The lack of reference for the cause that inspired the action of responding with the words quoted is noted. A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as The British caused a list of names to be written upon a list. > **[American Prisoners of the Revolution Names of 8000 Men Aboard the Old Jersey...](http://www.usmm.org/revdead.html)** > > Names of 8000 American privateers and other prisoners held on Old Jersey prison ship in Wallabout Bay, Brooklyn, New York during Revolutionary War The people were alive and then those people were no longer alive. They did not die of natural causes: so called. A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation outlawed slavery in at least one independent state. A number of people who are not even listed were alive at the time the federation still existed as a voluntary association. Then slavery was subsidized and a number of people were bought and sold for profit because there was no effective defense, and worse, the crime of slavery was paid for by “National Tax” Funds. 1. Those who know this do. 1. Those who prefer never to acknowledge this expend their energy to ignore these facts. Ignorance is said to be bliss. Professional liars also make a living. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/425 "2015-08-25T05:09:41Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > Ignorance is said to be bliss. Professional liars also make a living. Oh, the irony. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/426 "2015-08-25T05:16:37Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > Offered: “Offered”?? What do you mean by “Offered”? This isn’t a contract or business transaction of any sort. This is a conversation taking place between people on a message board on the internet. For what reason do you avoid using the word “said” when quoting others? ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/427 "2015-08-25T05:17:42Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > Professional liars also make a living. To whom exactly are you referring to by this? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/428 "2015-08-25T05:22:10Z")
It’s why he spells BAR in all caps. ---
**Author:** ![Spoons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spoons/32/3141_2.png) [@Spoons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoons)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/429 "2015-08-25T06:05:07Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > It’s why he spells BAR in all caps. A BAR is a Browning Automatic Rifle, of course. The OP reminds me of the poster who used to refer to Canada as “Kanada,” as if that would make us all aware of the Fascist/Nazi/Communist/Socialist/Whateverist true nature of Canada. Nobody listened to that poster then, and based on that experience, I see no need to listen to the OP now. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/430 "2015-08-25T09:38:26Z")
Your belief that you are communicating in English or otherwise exchanging information is incorrect. This thread began as nonsensical rumblings and when asked for clarity you produce ersatz oxen koans. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/431 "2015-08-25T10:35:44Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > The people were alive and then those people were no longer alive. They did not die of natural causes: so called. The list is of all the prisoners held at Wallabout Bay, not of those prisoners who died, so your premise is wrong. Many prisoners did die from the poor health conditions on the prison ships. They were not, however, murdered as your statement poorly implies. The conditions for maintaining prisoners of war in the eighteenth century were routinely poor. This was a terrible thing that the Geneva conventions of over 100 years later attempted to address, but they are not examples of murder. > [@Josf](#): > > A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation outlawed slavery in at least one independent state. Repeating this claim (and repeating this claim and repeating this claim), does not make it true. It demonstrates that you are fixated on an idea and unconcerned with actual facts. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/432 "2015-08-25T10:37:35Z")
> [@Spoons](#): > > A BAR is a Browning Automatic Rifle, of course. Why does this [sound familiar](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=18609886#post18609886)? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/433 "2015-08-25T14:00:16Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation outlawed slavery in at least one independent state. Not true. But even if it was, the Constitution of the United States, through the amendment process, outlawed slavery in all of the remaining states. Divisions are thus: 1. People who accept the Constitution and abide by the Rule of Law 2. People who refuse to accept the truth ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/434 "2015-08-25T14:43:22Z")
Divisions are thus : 1. People who divide everyone into two groups. 2. People who deny the groups exist. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/435 "2015-08-25T14:58:04Z")
Joe I don’t understand your argument: A _ **formerly** _ federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation \*\*\*did not \*\*\*outlaw slavery in all states. On two counts it was CRIMINAL and ceased having authority of its acts including amendment of the Constitution regarding slavery. Slavery still exists. RULE OF LAW is by way of Paul’s Epistle to Philemon 1:1-1:25: return slaves and ask slave owners to be nice. We’ll just have to disagree on this one, Josef, for I think that the USA’s constitution was and is the supreme law of the land in the USA, so its 13th amendment stands, regardless of you not believing in the authority of the constitution, and regardless of you believing in the law of slavery in the new testament. Good luck in re-instituting slavery on a constitutional technicality. ---
**Author:** ![Josf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d78d45/32.png) [@Josf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Josf)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/436 "2015-08-25T17:27:35Z")
The following words are offered in response to other words offered: > [@](#): > > A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation did not outlaw slavery in all states. Here are other words offered: A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation outlawed slavery in at least one independent state. 1. The states are federated, and therefore independent, so the people in at least one state can outlaw slavery, because the are independent, and so they did outlaw slavery. That is offered, and it was a competitive sanctuary for runaway slaves running away from criminal human traffickers. 2. A response is to claim a lack of understanding concerning what was offered and then that one who does not understand is the one who then offers words concerning a power that was not abused, in part because it was a power not given, to people running the federal congress under The Articles of Confederation: they could not (while congress was part of a federal union) make slavery “legal” in all states. Back to the offer of words offered in open Debate: > [@](#): > > Joe I don’t understand your argument: A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation did not outlaw slavery in all states. I do not argue, what would be the point? The information offered in the historical record shows the following evidence by official sounding testimony: [http://www.rightsofthepeople.com/freedom\_documents/anti\_federalist\_papers/anti\_federalist\_papers\_15.php](http://www.rightsofthepeople.com/freedom_documents/anti_federalist_papers/anti_federalist_papers_15.php) > [@](#): > > The abuse which has been thrown upon the state of Rhode Island seems to be greatly unmerited. Popular favor is variable, and those who are now despised and insulted may soon change situations with the present idols of the people. Rhode Island has out done even Pennsylvania in the glorious work of freeing the Negroes in this country, without which the patriotism of some states appears ridiculous. The General Assembly of the state of Rhode Island has prevented the further importation of Negroes, and have made a law by which all blacks born in that state after March, 1784, are absolutely and at once free. > [@](#): > > Good luck in re-instituting slavery on a constitutional technicality. Arguments, as far as my experience goes, cause people to “win” at any cost, so long as the “loser” is made to pay the costs. Moving on: As to the competitive idea (offered by people in one group) that the casualties of Aggressive War for Profit (The British were the aggressors in the Revolutionary War) are not murder victims because the murderers, and those on their side, say so, as to that idea from another point of view, they, those on the Murder by Aggressive War for Profit side, they offer proof of their authority, as to that idea, which is a competitive idea for sure, as it is what it is, and the proof does pile up, as the argument commences when the murderers initiate the commencement of hostilities. That argument is an argument that is “won” by those who perpetrate Aggressive War for Profit as a Rule: they win their argument by murdering the opposition, as a rule. That is how those murderers rule. They give themselves license to murder at will, and they manage to pile up a lot of “casualties” including a lot of “Collateral Damage” piled onto piles of murder victim bodies. > **[The Prison Ship Martyrs’ Monument: More Americans Died Emprisoned in New York...](https://keithyorkcity.wordpress.com/2012/11/03/the-prison-ships-martyrs-monument-more-americans-died-emprisoned-in-new-york-harbor-than-in-all-revolutionary-war-battles-combined/)** > > Looming over the trees atop one of the tallest hills in New York City stands a 149-foot-tall Doric column topped by an immense green copper lantern. At its base reads the inscription: “1776 T… > [@](#): > > And since the dead were buried in mass graves only 2 or so feet deep on sandy beaches, storms and tides regularly uncovered their rancid and decaying corpses, adding an increased air of death and misery to the already-gloomy bay. No records were kept of the dead, and last rites were rarely performed before they were unceremoniously dumped into their pits. Most prisoners remain nameless; their families would never have the closure of knowing what had happened to them. Inculpatory evidence. Divisions are therefore: 1. Those who understand that willful use of public funds so as to initiate War of Aggression for Profit is unlawful and cause to act in defense of innocent victims who are targeted by the murderous criminals: those who fought on the Liberty side in the Revolutionary War for one example of people in this group. 2. Murderers who make their murders legal for them to perpetrate while anyone else suspected of questioning murderous authority is a problem in need of a final solution: those who fought on the murderous criminal rule side, known as The British, for one example of people in this group. Returning back to the actual Topic is not my form of “argument,” rather it is merely an opportunity to offer information useful in debate as the information concerns the actual topic subject matter. 1. Those who offer information relevant to the actual topic debated. 2. Those who target individuals and an argument is offered as to the relative worth of the individual who is targeted personally. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/437 "2015-08-25T17:38:11Z")
Shucks, I’m all out of salad dressing. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/438 "2015-08-25T17:43:04Z")
> [@Josf](#): > > The following words are offered in response to other words offered: > Here are other words offered: > > A formerly federated (voluntary association) group of people known as the people of the United States of America under The Articles of Confederation outlawed slavery in at least one independent state. > > 1. The states are federated, and therefore independent, so the people in at least one state can outlaw slavery, because the are independent, and so they did outlaw slavery. That is offered, and it was a competitive sanctuary for runaway slaves running away from criminal human traffickers. > > 2. A response is to claim a lack of understanding concerning what was offered and then that one who does not understand is the one who then offers words concerning a power that was not abused, in part because it was a power not given, to people running the federal congress under The Articles of Confederation: they could not (while congress was part of a federal union) make slavery “legal” in all states. > > Back to the offer of words offered in open Debate: > I do not argue, what would be the point? The information offered in the historical record shows the following evidence by official sounding testimony: > > [http://www.rightsofthepeople.com/freedom\_documents/anti\_federalist\_papers/anti\_federalist\_papers\_15.php](http://www.rightsofthepeople.com/freedom_documents/anti_federalist_papers/anti_federalist_papers_15.php) > > Arguments, as far as my experience goes, cause people to “win” at any cost, so long as the “loser” is made to pay the costs. > > Moving on: > > As to the competitive idea (offered by people in one group) that the casualties of Aggressive War for Profit (The British were the aggressors in the Revolutionary War) are not murder victims because the murderers, and those on their side, say so, as to that idea from another point of view, they, those on the Murder by Aggressive War for Profit side, they offer proof of their authority, as to that idea, which is a competitive idea for sure, as it is what it is, and the proof does pile up, as the argument commences when the murderers initiate the commencement of hostilities. > > That argument is an argument that is “won” by those who perpetrate Aggressive War for Profit as a Rule: they win their argument by murdering the opposition, as a rule. That is how those murderers rule. They give themselves license to murder at will, and they manage to pile up a lot of “casualties” including a lot of “Collateral Damage” piled onto piles of murder victim bodies. > > [The Prison Ship Martyrs’ Monument: More Americans Died Emprisoned in New York Harbor than in All Revolutionary War Battles Combined | Keith York City](https://keithyorkcity.wordpress.com/2012/11/03/the-prison-ships-martyrs-monument-more-americans-died-emprisoned-in-new-york-harbor-than-in-all-revolutionary-war-battles-combined/) > > Inculpatory evidence. > > Divisions are therefore: > > 1. Those who understand that willful use of public funds so as to initiate War of Aggression for Profit is unlawful and cause to act in defense of innocent victims who are targeted by the murderous criminals: those who fought on the Liberty side in the Revolutionary War for one example of people in this group. > > 2. Murderers who make their murders legal for them to perpetrate while anyone else suspected of questioning murderous authority is a problem in need of a final solution: those who fought on the murderous criminal rule side, known as The British, for one example of people in this group. > > Returning back to the actual Topic is not my form of “argument,” rather it is merely an opportunity to offer information useful in debate as the information concerns the actual topic subject matter. > > 1. Those who offer information relevant to the actual topic debated. > > 2. Those who target individuals and an argument is offered as to the relative worth of the individual who is targeted personally. Which specific post are you responding to with this missive? ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/439 "2015-08-25T18:43:58Z")
Is our friend able to count to three. or are all these two-fold divisions just different labels for the same groups. For convenience can we label these two groups; 1. Josf 2. Everyone else? ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 25, 2015, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009/440 "2015-08-25T19:33:30Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Agreed. This mountain of text simply amounts to: Things I believe are positive=the Rule of Law. Things I believe are negative=Criminal Rule. > > If one disagrees with something, then a quote is cherry picked from a founding father to show that the Rule of Law is a good thing, therefore my position is right. Similarly, if one agrees with something, then another cherry picked quote shows that criminal rule is bad and therefore the position is incorrect. > > It is simple question begging. I might call it epistemic closure, but that’s a little misleading. I suspect the closure is driven by other factors. Question begging, or assuming the conclusion, is more relevant. I’m trying to mine this discussion for sociological or rhetorical insights. Let me follow up with my argument via association framework. I used to think that argument was composed of 2 components. But actually there are 3: [ul] [li]Facts (observation)[/li][li]Logic[/li][li]Emotive Buttons.[/li][/ul] Buttons are pretty important. I make a fair amount of use of [loaded language](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_language) on this message board: it complements factual evidence and substantiated claims pretty well. But you can secure an audience just with buttons. Donald Trump is a terrific practitioner of this technique: factual refutations just bounce off his supporters. As for logic, I’ll quote part of post I made in the elections forum: > [@What the hell is Trump?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-the-hell-is-trump/726581/180): > > To see this, consider [Scott Adam’s latest post](http://blog.dilbert.com/post/127158474091/anchors-away). CNN asks Trump to comment on the Pope’s latest critique of capitalism. That’s a trap, albeit a mild one. Trump could evade, which looks evasive. Trump could engage which on television looks like, “_Trump-capitalism-corruption_”, given realistic attention spans. Now skilled politicians know that when you answer a question on television, you don’t answer the question asked but rather the question you wished they asked. That’s press conference 101. Newt Gingrich cracked the code by recognizing that the real way to answer questions during a debate format is to… turn everything into an attack on the media. The crowd loves that. > > But Trump operates on a even higher level. Much higher. Trump says, “I’d say ISIS wants to get you. You know that ISIS wants to go in and take over the Vatican? You have heard that. You know, that’s a dream of theirs, to go into Italy.” > > Wait whuh? Scott Adams: [INDENT][INDENT]Do you even remember the question anymore? > > Now compare the wattage coming from these two thoughts: > > 1. A boring discussion about corruption in capitalism. ([CNN]’s question) > > 2. A mental picture of ISIS taking over the Vatican. > > No comparison. Corruption and capitalism are mere concepts that have no visual appeal. The ideas are important yet inert.\*\* But an ISIS overthrow of the Vatican is so visual you wonder why it isn’t already a movie.\*\* And that visual is all anyone will remember of that interview in a week. > > Do you still think Trump’s clown act is random? > > Read more: [http://blog.dilbert.com/post/127158474091/anchors-away#ixzz3jPk4oAPe](http://blog.dilbert.com/post/127158474091/anchors-away#ixzz3jPk4oAPe) > [/INDENT][/INDENT] Emphasis added. Segueing from a discussion of capitalism to a terrorist organization makes no logical sense. But such emotive language certainly lights up the neurons, much like a jingle that you can’t get out of your head. I had thought that buttons were a complement to facts and valid logic. But for some they can wholly crowd them out. For some, buttons can carry the conversation on their own: some will draw conclusions on the basis of them, even if their factual backing is refuted. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/divisions-along-rule-of-law-versus-criminal-rule/727009.md?page=23)