Chucktshoes

:wave:

Even though I am a big supporter of the tech and am excited about the speed of advances, I would pretty much agree with your assessment. Where I personally see the value is that the democratization of manufacturing by making it cheap and easy to obtain scares the bejeezus out of the power structure. Whether practical or not, the idea than anyone can download a file and print out a working firearm is terrifying to them. They are going to run around in circles and wasting energy attempting to stop a signal that can't be stopped. All they will accomplish in the end is showing their impotence. 

Dolomite, you seem to conflate what is legal with what is right. They are not necessarily the same thing. When laws are just, they are right. When laws are unjust to resist them by whatever means one has available to them is more than right, it is one's moral responsibility. Every genocide, mass murder and imprisonment committed by a government was perfectly legal by the laws of that government. It doesn't make it right.   "...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...," Thomas Jefferson as written in the Declaration of Independence    "One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." MLK Letter from the Birmingham Jail

Mike , a mill removes material, this is an additive process.   (Or are you just being facetious?)

Gonna have to call BS on that. The 2A grants nothing, it only acknowledges a natural right of self defense, and specifically the tools to effectively mount that defense. The government, any government, can make whatever laws they choose. It has no bearing on my rights. The 2A, like the rest of the first 8 amendments, enumerates negative rights that are intended to prevent infringement by the government. However anything one claims as a right is only a right as long as they are willing to defend it. So if those rights aren't defended it doesn't mean that they were a privilege taken by the government who granted them, but rights willingly surrendered by a people unwilling to defend what was always theirs.

A company has 3D printed a 1911 in metal. That ought to pucker up a few asses in the gun control lobby.     http://www.solidconcepts.com/news-releases/worlds-first-3d-printed-metal-gun-manufactured-solid-concepts/

These psychopaths give bad cops a bad name.

Fair point. All I would add is that the efforts put into denying ballot access to minor parties by the majors is just as dirty and wrong. Lawsuits should not have to be filed for candidates to have their name placed on the ballot or to have their party affiliation properly listed on the ballot. Ballot access is still a large problem for the LP, Greens and other minor parties. Ever since Ross Perot, both the Republicans and Democrats have expended a lot of time and effort to deny ballot access.

G&A handled it the way a screwup of this magnitude should be handled. They owned the problem, corrected the problem and apologized for it.

Either Classic or Arms Fair will have what you are needing.

That too would be acceptable.

I think you are correct that this isn't a training issue. You can't train violent psychopaths not to commit heinous acts against people. You can only put them down like the rabid dogs they are.

There comes a time where violence isn't only justified, it is the correct and moral action. This qualifies.

Speak for yourself, I want a tank. :D

It could also mean he is a left libertarian, we don't know either way but that won't stop republicans from erroneously believing the libertarian vote belongs to them if only we would just quit wasting our time and votes. :D

Yeah, it does hold some folks back from taking a deeper look at libertarian ideas. They just can't let go of the idea that they have the right to tell other folks how to live their lives as long as they took a vote on it. ;)

Yep. Perot didn't cause Bush to lose the election, Bush's term as president cost him the election.

6.8, while there may be some evidence he was placed to spoil, there is equal evidence he wasn't as that specific bundler has a history of supporting libertarian candidates as well in the past. I think it may have been mentioned on here previously, but there are left libertarians who prioritize social issues above fiscal ones. In fact they were there first with regards to the Libertarian Party. The main point I would find difference with your response to Erik is that it is still operating from a left/right Republican/Democrat paradigm and it assumes votes not cast for a third party would have automatically belonged to one of the major parties. That is still an incorrect frame of reference.

Hydrocodone runs about 10-15¢ a pill.

All of them. Eliminate the FDA while we are at it.

I just ran across this story from ABC that contains some exit polling data that should put the "Sarvis caused Cuccinelli to lose" argument to rest. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/11/early-exit-poll-results-tell-a-tale-of-two-republicans/  

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/06/read-this-if-you-believe-your-candidate   Another good article hitting at the core red vs blue mindset that without a third party, the vote would have belonged to a Republican or a Democrat. I especially like this part.  

  It certainly was! :lol: Next thing we know Yeager will go all Gabe Suarez again and Dolomite will get challenged to a duel. :lol: :rofl:

I no longer have any faith whatsoever that the ending we both see can be avoided or that even if it could the Republicans are the way to do it. So here I am and my principled vote is the only thing I got left. Well...almost the only thing I got left. :whistle:

Here is a very good article that breaks down some of the takeaways that should be learned from the VA race.   http://thefederalist.com/2013/11/05/10-lessons-republicans-virginia/