Fire Hydrant of Freedom

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/everythings-fine-theres-absolutely-nothing-see-here

I know this guy that went to go hunt drug cartels. He used to tell me about not knowing whether he was paranoid or not. He'd say that it was better to side with one's instincts and be paranoid, than to not side with them, fail to act, and wind up dead because you didn't listen to yourself.

He survived.

The power of stupid people in large groups though.

***'The dollar isn't backed by ... anything at all'.

The dollar is backed by the 'full faith and credit of the US government', which unfortunately does not contradict the statement above.***

crying and laughing out loud

"I'll gladly pay you Tuesday, for a hamburger today."

https://yourdentalhealthresource.com/when-is-gold-used-in-dentistry/[/url]

The trend is down in electronics too.
https://www.delltechnologies.com/en-us/blog/how-much-gold-is-in-smartphones-and-computers/
Silver is more conductive.  Copper is cheaper.  Gold is more resistant to corrosion.

The main 'uses' of gold are a store of value and jewelry, also a store of value.
https://www.physicalgold.com/insights/15-uses-gold/

Thank you. I didn't realize that.

Quote from: G M on January 13, 2021, 06:00:26 PM

Constitutional?

You really think that still applies?

Yes, the constitution still matters.  Do you remember our 6-3 majority on the US Supreme Court?   And 300 other new federal judges.  As I say when things aren't going well in sports, at least we haven't shown them our offense yet.  The casual observer could look at every case in the last I don't know how many years and have no idea that constitutional conservatives control the Court. 

More seriously, these new justices did not want to make their first big mark by standing up for Trump.  That does not mean they will side with Biden, Harris and the assault on the constitution by the Left.

The Constitution has never mattered.

It's never been consented to (expressly, implicitly, tacitly or otherwise - consent can be withdrawn) etc.

The elite of this world usurp power at will.

Voting has never mattered either. Stalin talked about the importance of those who count the votes.

Lawyers and bankers are perhaps the worst people in the world. The laws only protect them from the masses, but not the masses from them.

Eminent domain. Seatbelt laws. Taxes. Gun laws. Commerce laws. Net neutrality. There's literally no end to their blatant trouncing of anything the Constitution pretends to stand for.

Fortunately, even people who want to mind their own business that usually prefer to put their head in the sand, are waking up....because they don't have any food.

I can't count how many businesses have closed in San Francisco.... Marshall's on Market Street just today in the news.... San Jose had tracts of homes that the people had moved out of.... San Francisco is worse.

The economy.... Has been eviscerated.... But "Orange man Bad."

Biden is not the president any more than someone that cheated on a test, aced it.

Kamala.... Her entrance exam into politics was x rated and doesn't fly with any major religion's standards of moral conduct, but we'll continue pretending that lawyers are all moral people.

"Corn Pop was a bad dude..  "

These things sort themselves out...in spite of the elite trying to protect themselves. They always have.... Only .. The Left is attempting to provoke that, in order to cause a civil war and have other countries (China) come to the rescue of those who push a New World Order. It's the only way to disarm the American populace, which is necessary in order to bring about a Nee World Order (also supported by Bush and other so called Republicans)... All the police and the US Military, by themselves, could not achieve this. They'd need help.

GM's appraisal on other threads is correct.

Buying weapons... Nobody needs to. There will probably be lots of them to be scavenged sooner or later. History already dictates what happens to multicultural (Not race...but CULTURE.)..societies.

Back to the Constitution.... at its best, it pretended to protect YOU...by taking your rights....without you voting on it...never with your consent....and never with an opt out clause (which would be necessary in order for the claim of consent to be true).

Never mattered. Not once...except to those in power.

Not unlike Nancy Pelosi's (set up) and Gavin Newsom's and London Breed's mea culpa, stating that they "have to do better," (Breed), after having been found to have violated their own mandates, Dorsey states that they "have to look at," several areas where they could do better.... Always after the fact.

Rules for thee, but not for me.

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-jack-dorsey-843c3e5fb72c0cfb89c1fd1132a525d8

I'm glad you asked. No British law was broken. They broke American law...which mandated a 13-0 unanimous vote. When did that happen? That's politicians breaking AMERICAN law. 1787.

Rhode Island had declared nationhood.


Patrick Henry and others were adamantly against it.

It was the elite (those with coastal access to trade) attempting to set themselves up and they did.

Respect? Surely you jest.

By the way....every legal agreement you'll enter into, in your life requires a signed contract. Where's the contract you signed agreeing to this set of laws? In fact... Have you ever seen anyone sign a contract of the sort, expressing explicit consent, as happens with ANY other legal transaction?

The Constitution having authority? It pretends to protect rights through empowering itself by stripping individuals or their rights. Consent? Never granted by anyone other than the signatories.

Doug... Better yet... Since the Constitution is not the founding document of this country...nor even are the Articles of Confederation, as the Declaration of Independence was finished first..and war being declared before the Articles were even finished.... It is the defacto founding document of this country and not anything else.

The Declaration speaks to "just power" obtained by consent...
And those that do not consent? What is the option for opting out? If there is no option, there can be no consent. If there can be no consent, there is no just power.

"If no right is "absolute," then a constitution, illegally drafted, and never consented to, by anyone other than the authors....even less."


Am I missing the humor or do we have a Libertarian with no respect for the constitution here?

Did they break British law when they drafted it?  Was it not ratified?


"This principle mistake of this country is in thinking that the Constitution ever had any authority."   - ?

The right is absolute until you give it away....by attempting to deprive another of theirs.

Still absolute.

Modifying this to cite an example that others also hold this view.
https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-and-anti-discrimination/human-rights-scrutiny/public-sector-guidance-sheets/absolute-rights

Really any government position is meaningless, as all governments require a consent that in practice, is absent; which, is why I earlier stated that the rights are absolute to the individual, because any wolf will quickly justify why the sheep's life doesn't matter, so long as they retain the upper hand. This, is a given.

Rights are absolute, or they aren't "rights," and they remain that way, until one attempts to take another's, and are only surrendered to that other, while the moment of aggression exists. As soon as the aggression is over, so os the offering of the right that was being surrendered.

I've no doubt that others will disagree, but that goes to prove my point.... Lysander said a lot about this...

If you're already saying that rights are not absolute... Then why even bother using the term? To do so is dishonest. Call them what you think they are - privileges given to the subjects of a ruler.

How can one use deadly force in self defense if the other party has an ABSOLUTE right to life?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 13, 2020, 03:01:36 PM

Maybe something we picked up at work. Maybe not.

Quote from: G M on November 13, 2020, 02:56:12 PM

At least as much as you do, it seems.

You don't like answering questions, do you?

If someone murders your loved one, do they have an absolute right to their life?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 13, 2020, 02:18:40 PM

Not to repeat myself, GM....but to repeat myself.... Is the right to life absolute? A simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.... The smoke cloud attempting to distract a clear act of aggression and pawning it off as freedom of speech isn't what we're discussing here.

We're discussing defense of self. I'm confident that you can grasp that without attempting to twist it into child porn.

Is the right to life absolute? Yes or no?
 

Quote from: G M on November 13, 2020, 01:14:56 PM

So, if there is an absolute freedom of speech, then would that include the freedom to publish child exploitation media?

In my LE career, I deal with more than a few individuals who were in the system for such things. One individual was charged for possessing images of a 4 year old being violently sodomized. Was this individual wrongly imprisoned?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 13, 2020, 08:21:00 AM

If no right is "absolute," then a constitution, illegally drafted, and never consented to, by anyone other than the authors....even less.

Edit: great article GM.

To me... Rights are absolute...to the individual. Im fairly certain that everyone views their right to life that way, regardless of what another might think. I know I do. You don't view your right to life as "absolute?" Doug? Crafty? Your wives' lives?

Fair question. Is their right to life absolute? Because... If theirs and your right to life is absolute.... then so is your right to defend it, against any enemy, including when that enemy is dressed in a uniform, pretending to have dominion over you.

If no right is "absolute," then a constitution, illegally drafted, and never consented to, by anyone other than the authors....even less.

Edit: great article GM.

To me... Rights are absolute...to the individual. Im fairly certain that everyone views their right to life that way, regardless of what another might think. I know I do. You don't view your right to life as "absolute?" Doug? Crafty? Your wives' lives?

Fair question. Is their right to life absolute? Because... If theirs and your right to life is absolute.... then so is your right to defend it, against any enemy, including when that enemy is dressed in a uniform, pretending to have dominion over you.

I'll try this question a third time.  Is there any reasonable restriction on the right to bear arms that is constitutional?  How extreme do we need the example to be in order to agree there is a line - somewhere?

From NK thread:  "NK has 15 to 60 nuclear weapons and hundreds of missiles"

Can Jeff Bezos have this (in America), private stock on private property? Is any law that restricts this an unconstitutional abridgement of an absolute right?

No. There is no reasonable restriction.
Also, the Constitution has no inherent authority. It never has..

Fundamentally.... Bezos having nukes is no different than Soros, Rothschilds et al and their connections.

There can never be "reasonable" restrictions because the right to defend one's life is always greater than someone else's right to their idea of "safety;" in that, "safety" is intangible, or even a fabrication....a lie.... whereas the ability to protect oneself against tyranny, is not.

One of the root causes of this problem, is the view that the Constitution ever had any validity.

The first constitution..."the Articles of Confederation," stipulated a unanimous vote. There was never a unanimous vote, nor a public debate...in the adoption of a new Constitution or creation of an executive branch of government....so we have fruit of the poisonous tree.

You know it.

Even if the Constitution did carry weight... It still isn't the origin of our Rights. The Declaration of Independence makes that clear.

Then... The entire implied, tacit, and explicit consent arguments....

There is no reasonable gun control. Ever.

The leftist coast is crushing the libertarian interior of Oregon in a dozen different ways, yet you think because of drug legalization freedom is winning?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 11, 2020, 09:19:59 PM

Quote from: G M on November 11, 2020, 02:08:01 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 11, 2020, 01:57:18 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/libertarian-ideas-are-great-voting-libertarian-self-defeating_3574826.html

Someone else expresses this view.

Roger L. Simon is an award-winning novelist, Oscar-nominated screenwriter, co-founder of PJMedia, and now, a columnist for The Epoch Times. His most recent books are “The GOAT” (fiction) and “I Know Best: How Moral Narcissism Is Destroying Our Republic, If It Hasn’t Already” (nonfiction). Find him on Parler and Twitter (for now)

Yale educated Liberal masquerading as a conservative because he didn't like the OJ verdict.

Our votes just had "real world implications."

I'll end there as to show the requisite amount of respect.

Edit: it bears mentioning, that Libertarians pilot many of the freedoms you're seeing enacted now.

Johnson ushered in legalized marijuana.
Jorgensen ushered in legalized drugs in Oregon.

You'll see more of it.

Libertarians play the long game. It works.

"2020: Arizona, Montana, New Jersey, and South Dakota approve ballot measures to legalize recreational cannabis. Mississippi approves a ballot measure to legalize medical cannabis. South Dakota voters also approve medical cannabis."

Odd. I don't see the "Leftist Coast" in any of that. I'll leave the "dozen ways" ambiguity out of it and speak with specifics.

Libertarians' most powerful weapon of enacting process is by doing exactly the opposite of what Simon says to do, and by actively holding Libertarian votes hostage....until Republicans or Liberals yield.

This tactic is frequently used in countries where three party (or more) politics is the norm. I suggest adherents of the Right and the Left here, accustom themselves with it. Terribly effective.

Tordislung:

The culture of this forum is different than the snarkfests so common elsewhere. 

https://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=961.0

Tuhon Crafty,

I'm not being "snarky," and I have respect for everyone here.

Doug and others have mentioned that Libertarians should support Republicans, even when they trample the 2nd Amendment.

The ATF is actively interpreting and dictating what legislation will be, a job for the courts and legislative branches respectively - this... from the current Republican administration.

I've not called anyone any names, nor told them how they should vote. I backed up what I have to say with facts.

Trump and his ATF are dismantling the 2nd, and if they're going to do that, they neither get credit for defending it nor our votes. Perhaps, the Republicans will learn to include more libertarian principles in their actions if they want to earn our votes. It's a fair challenge.

100% they cheated. Everybody knows it. They've had congressional hearings on the software....etc...etc....etc...

I voted Libertarian and make no apologies.... Still....

That election was rigged as s..t. But....what's anyone going to do about it?

I feel like it's the United States of Zimbabwe...because....it is.
We all know it.

Not answering your questions? My apologies. I thought I had.

"How many did you bring to the table?"

Zero - we dont garner enough votes to elect our own. Ask Crafty. He'll tell you, being that he's run three times... Hence... We've defeated not one of your candidates....

It appears that you have this illusion that we owe you our support. We don't. We vote our principles....

If everyone votes to jump off a cliff...and the others vote to stand in the rain and catch pneumonia, we're not obligated to support either of them.

Did Trump support gun control? He did. Four years ago...you didn't support Trump.... You have to give a little to get a little...the drug war finally being called in Oregon.... Liberals certainly caught our attention with that. The Right might try that....you know...actually supporting the freedom that you PRETEND to represent.

Hope that's clear....because BOTH of your parties shun freedom on a regular basis.

You want our support? Do something to earn it. Otherwise....let the whole thing burn. It's your parties that set it on fire anyways.

T - You  write nicely but are unresponsive to my questions.  That's okay.   - Doug

60 votes all Democratic in the Senate to pass Obamacre, 2010.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00396

There are no Democrat Senators who would join hypothetic R Senators to repeal any gun "safety" law and there will NEVER be 60 Republican or Libertarian Senators if the movements are divided.

The "52" you refer to in 2016 include McCain, Murkowski, Collins, Flake and Corker.  That leaves 47 to support a good bill.  How many did you guys bring to the table?  Zero, nothin', nada.  You defeat Republican Senators in places like Montana and then wonder why good bills don't get passed and bad laws don't get repealed.

I don't know what Trump was thinking banning guns....red flag gun laws...bump stocks....honey badger....ATF making long barreled pistols illegal...two years of House and Senate control....zero gun laws repealed...when he acts the same as Democrats.... He's got to know that's got a price tag..

"Have you considered the possibility that maybe it's time for your consistent trampling of rights, and the ostracization of others, to die?

Many on the right, even here and now, do what I've just mentioned, and then you expect support?

Alrighty then. It's your funeral."

"Me? I would never own weapons. Some criminal would likely break in and steal them."

little dramatic don't you think!

so vote libertarian and vote your principles - your funeral
BTW you did not answer my question


I asked so what should we do and I get some vague platitude about principles

and what rights do you speak of besides guns that you do not own?

There was nothing dramatic about that at all. It was a legitimate question. You disenfranchise people, expecting them to obey you, and then get upset when they obtain a voice against you, because they managed to jump whatever imagined hurdle you've placed in front of them?

I did answer you. I clearly stated....every person needs to answer that question for themselves... Or.... Do you require others to hold your hand when making decisions for yourself?

Rights? If I had weapons... I wouldn't broadcast it... Setting that aside... Whether I have them or not, is immaterial...as...the failure to exercise a right does not negate its existence.... Does it? Does the failure to exercise a right mean that you should be deprived of it, counselor?

The Right routinely strips people of their rights in terms of the 2nd amendment, they hate being called on it....enforced by police who pretend to support the 2nd amendment, when really... They support a more draconian system of government, so long as them or their cohorts (the Left), remain at the helm....

There are really only two types of people that support that.... Both Right and Left....

Those who wish to remain in a position of advantage or those who wish to be given handouts by the government.... Libertarians in general...want neither. Why would you think they'd support that?

As for answering what you or others should do? I'm not in the habit of holding people's hands.... That's the worst way to help them. You'll figure it out.

Drama? An impending 3rd civil war is pretty dramatic.

Nice dodge.
Cheers.

I'm not a republican, and I'm not happy with being sold out by either side.

I am never turning in my guns.

Quote from: Tordislung on November 06, 2020, 11:07:42 AM

I believe I asked first.

How have the Republicans not been Beto?

In regard to the trampling the 2nd Amendment....
Republicans > Beto

Being that they already stomped on it and Beto just wants to catch up.

Am I lying?

Quote from: G M link=topic=2647.msg129788#msg129788
date=1604689475

You are avoiding my question. Ready to turn in your guns?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 06, 2020, 10:53:44 AM

I don't blame you for not answering....because we both know that you can't....so you attempt to misdirect.

Ever watch them do the shell game in the street? Teaches you everything you need to know about people, once you catch on.

And thusly ends the Libertarian support of Trump.

Quote from: G M on November 06, 2020, 10:42:50 AM

Are you going to turn in your guns when Beto is Biden gun control czar?

Quote from: Tordislung on November 06, 2020, 10:28:00 AM

GM... I highlighted the pertinent portion of it for you.

Quote from: G M on November 06, 2020, 10:16:49 AM

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/politics/joe-biden-gun-control-plan/index.html

Quote from: Tordislung on November 06, 2020, 10:07:40 AM

Quote from: ccp on November 06, 2020, 09:22:26 AM

"Trump stepped all over that as do Republicans in general and have for over a century.

That's a dealbreaker....because we all know where it leads to and ends."

I don't follow you

how did he and the party do that
he trampled all over your right to exist?

Red flag gun laws
Bump stock bans
ATF interpreting legislation without voter input.
Two years of House, Senate, and presidential control = ZERO REPEALED GUN LAWS

What....in any of that ☝is pro 2nd amendment? Please point out where I'm mistaken, without using "the Democrats would be worse," as we're talking about the Republican side of the street.

I'll wait.

My guns were lost in the Sacramento River during a boating accident. They all went overboard.

The day Crafty made me a dog... He had strict misgivings regarding this. Now it's acceptable?

Principles.
I'm glad that you have them. I do too.

Which part is dramatic?

The parlance.

My sincere condolences.

Well, I have conceded the election. SCOTUS will not side with Trump, no matter what. They do not want to see the debacle to come in civil unrest if they do.

The America of my youth is gone forever. Just a distant memory now. Never to return.

The 4th Turning has shown where it is leading. A socialist America for a decade at least, then who knows?

In the meantime, I shall just hunker down and make my little carve out of life as comfortable and easy as I can, until my expiration date hits.

That's a little dramatic.

besides voting for a candidate that has zero chance of winning (or qualifications to be president IMO)
what do you recommend I do so my rights do not get trampled by Democrats or Republicans ?

Each person has to answer that for themselves.

Principles. They matter.

If someone (I love Trump's economy), betrays those principles, you can't support them.

The FIRST principle....above all others... Is the right to guarantee one's existence. Sine qua non.

Without this.... Nothing.

Trump stepped all over that as do Republicans in general and have for over a century.

That's a dealbreaker....because we all know where it leads to and ends.

if you are stating that felons , once they "paid their debt to society"

should have right to vote

I do actually tend to AGREE ;  indeed, Trump at least had signed and pushed legislation to get felons back into society and not keep them locked up . ( I am not sure I agree with this and in my opinion it is risky  but time will tell who in the end is right )

I don't agree with rich Democrats paying for their fines in return for their promise to vote fo Democrats
Naturally James is not shelling out money so people will vote for whomever, including Trump or for that matter Jorgenson

" Free from bump stock bans, unconstitutional red flag laws... while the government helps itself to more of your rights"

I am not sure who is doing this if not Democrats

Trump was working towards the opposite
If you want to talk of national debt and Trump made it worse not better - we have all posted here on this board that it is a major concern

Not sure what you mean by this:

" Have you considered the possibility that maybe it's time for your consistent trampling of rights, and the ostracization of others, to die?"

ARe saying my consistent trampling of rights to die - or ME?

" Alrighty then. It's your funeral."

let me get this straight - is this a threat?

Of course it's not a threat. I have no idea who you are.

Ideas whither away and die with time.

Don't be coy for dramatic effect.

Ps. You conveniently skipped the questions regarding your expectations of democrats to support you or those that didn't even vote.

Nice.

Edit II: Libertarians.... We adhere to the non aggression principle... Unlike Republicans and Democrats. Just saying.

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/selco-surprise-shtf/

Paradise!

Quote from: Tordislung on November 04, 2020, 02:00:27 PM

Quote from: G M on November 04, 2020, 01:50:18 PM

Yes, true Libertarian eutopia! Living in the shattered ruins of a burnt-out country. No oppressive government, except the gangs and warlords, of course.

Quote from: DougMacG on November 04, 2020, 01:35:00 PM

"... gets us back to freedom faster by forcing a reset..."

That is a logic string I can not follow.  Make things worse to make things better, lose your freedoms in order to gain them back.
-----------
If someone else pays your debt to society, have you paid your debt to society?

Some tears are to be expected.
People never cede control willingly nor with a light heart.

Seen worse. Still prefer freedom. Sooner or later the Right and Left will have to learn that they're not the ones that dictate things.

Ps. Americans don't really know what it is to fight a war on their own soil. Some of us do. To live with it...every day.

Good article though.

"... gets us back to freedom faster by forcing a reset..."

That is a logic string I can not follow.  Make things worse to make things better, lose your freedoms in order to gain them back.
-----------
If someone else pays your debt to society, have you paid your debt to society?

"Debts to society."

Let's see the contract that was signed. I trust you have one. It's the basis of every legal agreement.

It should include mutual assent, expressing offer and more importantly, acceptance....

Do you have any of that?

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/lebron-james-michael-jordan-help-bloomberg-pay-felons-fees-florida-amendment-4-voting-rights-election-day-024025571.html

Bloomberg. once a democrat than an republican then an independent

now a democrat globalist elitist

I don't know what he is. frankly

self described problem solver

always in way that helps his businesses.

Have they completed their sentences?
Are they law abiding?
Do they pay taxes?

Anything outside of that, is an infringement on their rights, IF society expects them to be self supporting and abide by the laws.... If not.... They don't owe anyone any allegiance at all. Why would they? You've shunned them.