Chucktshoes

That's my text tone. My ring tone is a Dalek. "EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!"

The Weeping Angels are the creepiest of all the villains the Doctor has faced in my opinion.   I have Doctor Who ink. On my right arm I have the Tardis framed by a Dalek, a Cyberman and a Weeping Angel on 3 sides.

The Constitution already is a worthless piece of paper. If the Constitution actually held any power, we would not have the government that we do. Once again I shall quote Lysander Spooner,   “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

When the government abandons the rule of law, the citizenry can be expected follow suit. The rule of law doesn't protect the citizenry from the government, it protects the government from the citizenry.

Personally I think this was a genius move on the part of Daniel Defense. They had to know that this commercial would never get approved. Look at the production values of the commercial, you don't spend 10 million to put that on the air. Now they get to sit back and enjoy all the free advertising as the spot goes viral.

As soon as this goes live I'm going to order 50 dildos and play "Ride of the Valkyries" on a loudspeaker.

Nobody ever should. :lol:

Somebody forgot the first rule of carrying in a non permissive environment. Concealed means concealed. Without evidence to the contrary, I am going to assume the student was just carrying for self defense without any other ill intent. One gun and two spare mags is less than my daily load out of 2 guns and three spare mags (2 for the primary, 1 for the secondary). If he had a bag full of 10 or 20 mags, that might be a little suspicious but not 2.

I'll look for the link later but the GAO just released a report recommending that the TSA be dismantled and security returned to private contractors.

Exactly! It has no solution. That's the point being made. So we should dispense with the security theater of unreasonable searches and sexual assaults so folks can accept that there are risks in life that can't be eliminated and go back to enjoying flying.

On weekend nights they bring out the wands and use them at the entry and exit points to Beale.

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bETCusT5kNM[/media]

I think you underestimate the allure of the third selector position for the target demographic of this item. See Macgyver's post for further explanation of the target demographic.

Here is an example of how this sort of situation would play out with me. I believe that if there is not an identifiable victim, there is not a crime. Any prostitution, nonviolent drug, or other consensual act offense I would vote not guilty. I'm not telling the lawyers involved because if I did, I wouldn't be able to stop the state from committing the immoral act of putting someone in a cage for a consensual act.

I never would have believed that anybody could say that sort of thing and expect people to believe it, and then I worked in a gun store... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Having someone else do the deed for you doesn't absolve you of culpability in that deed. If you have the opportunity to serve on a jury where you can prevent the state from committing an immoral act and actively have yourself removed from that jury, you share responsibility just the same as if you voted to convict. I believe that jury nullification is not only a right of the people, it is a duty. If the lawyers don't ask about my views on the subject, I am not going to volunteer that information and remove myself from a position of being able to actually do something about it. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[quote name="East_TN_Patriot" post="1068707" timestamp="1385334142"] If your idea of "really being free" is anarchy, then yes, I am scared of that, and for good reason. Anarchy does not create a happy and peaceful society. I've thought a while on this before typing my reply and I can think of no situation where anarchy resulted in a peaceful and productive society. In the absence of law and order, there is chaos and misery. Just think about the aftermath of Katrina or any scene of a natural disaster. There is crime, disorder, and vigilante justice. There's a reason the Wild West is called the "wild" west. It's also interesting you mentioned slavery because I had planned to talk about that anyhow. Slavery is the perfect example of what I am talking about in regards to my point on the distribution of wealth and power. Following the Civil War, former slaves were freed, but the pre-existing power and wealth structure was still in place. The result was another form of slavery that was created and implemented at the state and local levels of government in the South. Former slaves who lacked the resources to purchase their own land, start their own businesses, or leave for more favorable conditions were required to be sharecroppers and were subject to legal restrictions under the "black codes" that were simply "slave codes" that had been tweaked a bit. Under these revised legal codes, blacks were commonly arrested for simple "crimes" like loitering, "wandering about in idleness," leaving a sharecropping plot without permission of the landlord, and many other illegitimately defined crimes. As punishment, they were fined amounts that were as much as one or two years' wages. When they couldn't pay, they were imprisoned and "leased" to private employers who needed cheap labor to work in the fields, mine coal and other resources, work on railroads, and other forms of hard labor. Many of the people subjected to this convict-lease system were beaten, abused, starved, and not given medical care. The result was that many died from the terrible conditions and the attitude held by many businessmen who used convict-lease labor was described as "one dies, get another." This is the same sort of outcome we could expect in a society as you call for without a redistribution of wealth, resources, and power. Wal Mart wouldn't suddenly stop doing what it does now, including its practice of leveraging their massive economic power to artificially lower prices in order to drive smaller businesses out of business or intimidating workers. George Soros and Warren Buffet would not suddenly become generous and let people live their lives as they want. It's just not possible. Clearly, we are not going to agree on this point, but I do think we agree on many points. This discussion has also inspired me to do more reading on your perspective because my knowledge on it is not as good as it could be. I may be completely misunderstanding the perspective, so I want to know more.[/quote] I too think that we would find ourselves in agreement on many points. I passed through libertarianism on my way to my current position as an ancap. I would encourage you to read the works of Lysander Spooner, Murray Rothbard and Benjamin Tucker. This graphic actually represents my progression quite well. P.S. Please take note that all of your examples of the mistreatment of former slaves was done by using the government to commit said violence. ;)

Yet another example of the terrible wrongness of laws that are malum prohibitum.   No victim, no crime.

Indian Ocean in the area of Reunion Island. LOTS of shark attacks. So many that they banned surfing.

It reminds me of a game of three card monte.

I would. Well, I would if the lever opened a trap door...

It's not blame shifting if it is true. Every administration in the modern era has helped build in the surveillance apparatus that is being used against US citizens. That's the danger of building these kinds of tools and granting these kinds of powers to the government in the first place. This guy might not be so bad but you are leaving something that would be very easy to abuse lying around and waiting for the next guy who it turns out is a wannabe tyrant.

Harry Reid May 18, 2005

I liked Pacific Rim. Mech Warrior vs Godzilla, what's not to love? Unplug brain and enjoy!

I have thought about these issues, and there are no easy answers. In my core I am a utopian but not a naive one. Much of the currently powerful will remain so, that can't be helped. The reason I called BS on your point about the redistrubution of amassed wealth is that it was the exact same sort of reasoning used in calls for reparations for slavery. What has happened in the past, though wrong as it may have been, cannot be addressed now through any sort of forced larceny on the inheritors of those enriched by that wrongdoing. To legitimize that sort of plunder under the auspices of "creating a level playing field" would simply be Marxism. I'm an ancap, not an ansoc. ;)   As I mentioned before, I have a large pragmatic streak and I understand most folks are scared of the idea of really being free, so in theory I could accept a return of our government to its initial state. The problem is that we know it doesn't work. Lysander Spooner summed up the problem quite nicely in his pamphlet "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority". If people could mind their own business and go about living their lives instead of other people's lives then it would work. That just doesn't happen though as the world is filled with insufferable busybodies and wannabe petty tyrants who wish to control what other people do in thier lives, on their property and in their homes. Government gives them a framework to enforce their will on others and the mantle of legitimacy because they took a vote on the issue and called it "democracy in action". If the choice is between something that is known to not work and something untried, I will go for the untried every time. Our governmental framework, while more successful than any other so far, doesn't work. Lysander had it right, the Constitution either explicity authorizes what we have, or was powerless to stop it. It just didn't work.