226209 Bullies, 3737 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 101 to 110 of 213
Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 7891011 1213141521 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Matt Phillips is online now
    Matt Phillips's Avatar

    NOTE TO SELF - MOAR GRAPPLE - GET A NORMAL HAIR CUT - REPEAT

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    9,696

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 1:59pm

    supporting member
     Style: Submission Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Kambei Shimada View Post
    It always amazes me how soo many libral, intellegent Americans become so right wing when the issue of gun control comes up.
    That's because our right wing is not the same as your right wing. In the UK the far right means the British Movement, British Union of Fascists, Nutty Fairy party, or whatever the National Socialist flavor of the day is. That is because the national political argument is between Democratic Socialism and National Socialism. In America the debate is between Any Socialism on the one hand, and Libertarianism on the other.

    I don't expect you to understand American conservatism, as you have nothing like it. At the end of the day it's the political expression of the belief that Man can not be G-d.
    Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


    KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

    In De Janerio, in blackest night,
    Luta Livre flees the fight,
    Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
    Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!
      #101
  2. jake8267 is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    55

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 2:40pm

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Not Currently Training

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Robstafarian View Post
    Bullshit! If the Second Amendment was truly the guarantor of the First, all those violations of the First Amendment that took place during the Bush administration wouldn't have happened.


    What the **** does God have to do with owning a firearm or appreciating the Second Amendement?!


    The FCC has been denying that Freedom of Speech doesn't apply to radio and television for decades. Furthermore, Circuit courts and the Supreme Court have been stumbling over First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment rights (to name but a few) in the context of telephones, computers, or the internet for almost a century."

    This is full of half-completed logic and ignored aspects of fact. The 2nd amendment was intended to provide citizens the tools with which to effectively protect their rights when (and this is the important part) they felt that the gov't was restricting those rights to a sufficient degree as to need armed rebellion. Obviously few Americans felt that Bush's rights violations reached a level where armed resistance was necessary (a decision reached repeatedly during multiple presidents' time in office). Thus, the 2nd amendment does not guarantee other rights in and of itself. It simply provides that citizens may choose to collect the tools needed to protect those other rights.

    God, as referenced by the framers (and alluded to by MTripp and ignored by you) was a generalized concept that contains all religious concepts of a "higher power" as well as non-religious concepts that can most easily be described (in my opinion) as "the way it should be."

    The FCC argument is pretty much nullified by the fact that the gov't has long held that the airwaves (both TV and Radio) are owned by the Gov't and thus can be regulated in the same way the post is regulated. (I personally feel that the Gov't "owning" airwaves is crap but until it is challenged successfully it stands). The courts don't stumble over the rights, what they stumble over is a combination of: precedence of one right over another (my right to yell "FIRE" in a theater over yours to safety) and how to promote their personal beliefs without pushing the citizens too far.
    Last edited by jake8267; 3/11/2010 2:43pm at .
      #102
  3. chainpunch is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Raleigh/ Durham, NC
    Posts
    562

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 2:46pm

    Business Class Supporting Member
      Style: Wing Chun

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    I dont fear government nor corperations this thread is about the second amendment you are the only one writing about how useless guns are when matched up against corperations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    My original point was that the govt is a non threat to its citizens now and as it is impossible to remove the guns that are in place, the govt is not as big a threat as people want to believe. If you want to worry about losing rights it will come as the result of corporate lobbying. You don't believe me? Go smoke a joint in front of a cop. You will be arrested fined and possibly jailed because some asshole made up a bunch of ****, passed it off as fact to politicians all in order to protect his paper industry profits from hemp. Millions of lives ruined by bullshit prohibition of pot because of a business entity lobbying to influence political policy.
    I am a Libertarian so I am all for the idea you have the right to do anything you want to yourself so long as you dont harm innocent people. I think pot should be legal and I think I have the right to not hire pot smokers; this is about as fair as one can be. Pot is illegal because more people think it should be illegal than legal. Politicians understand the weight of majority dissention so for a politician to not want to legalize marijuana its more constituency pressure rather than corporate greed. From a financial standpoint legalizing drugs is cash for honest Americans and huge tax revenue for the fed its not a commercial conspiracy its a majority moral objection and that trend could change.

    Political lobbing is first amendment right. Every person or group has the right to lobby.


    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    Also unless you have the ability to self sustain and grow all your own food, provide your own medical care, create your own power, process your own gas, you need to buy it from someone. Feel free to show me how you manage to not spend any money whatsoever and still have food shelter and clothing and I would almost certainly love to follow suit.
    People can survive, they did so before modern civilization, you just have to figure out what do you need to live, you don’t have to live with modern standards. But seriously, you don’t need to be 100% self sufficient you can offer a good or service and trade with others that have things you want and need and don’t produce or acquire easily. We do this in modern times we do something and get paid money then use the money to buy things we don’t procure ourselves. If the forces that be conspire to make every single item we want unobtainable then they would force people to not buy things. Why would any group conspire to make everything unaffordable if not to destroy the population? Companies don’t want to kill off the consumer just suck them dry and then when they realize the consumer has gone they must reinvent themselves to regain the consumers they lost.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    Actually public support of each individual section of the health bill is relatively high. It is when fearmongers use disinformation to spread lies about death panels imaginary costs to uninformed and undereducated people that it has trouble passing. Also it is the senate that passes bills and the republicans have decided that they will just say No for 4 years regardless. (More for sociocide than the armory)

    You can pass any bill you want just dont force people to buy that crap, its unconstitutional, tax them for the service that the way to do it in the US. I was in the army for 8 years; I know what socialized medicine is. I once had a fever of 102.9. The LPN told me oh, this is too bad because if my temperature was 103 I could get the day off. It’s good that I had a good report with my platoon sergeant I felt like **** regardless of what the rules told me I was.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    Lowest profit in 7 years is relative if for the past 8-9 years they were still making record profits over their previous decades. And look at wall st to see how your season ideology doesn't work. CEO's pillage their business for bonus'. How many billions and millions are paid in bonus' to the same departments that lost money and caused these massive problems. Literally lining their own pockets with the profits they should be using to stabilize their company and industry.
    Yes, my season’s analogy does work. If you don’t plan wisely you will go under. If squires eat all their food and save nothing for winter they could die, their children could die. A hard winter keeps them mindful of how they should prepare for the future when they have abundance. I love recessions, depressions, hurricanes, earthquakes all of it. Financial disasters put pay, products and fiscal plans in check. Without them we would all be making $87+ per hour like GM workers were paid. I don’t want to pay 100 for dinner out because the dishwasher makes $27 an hour. Natural disasters make you sure up your home or consider where you live. It’s also nature’s way of telling you to clean up your crap or I will make you clean it.
    Exxon obviously made so much dough that they can weather sever market depressions. How about Iran and Venezuela, do you think they can do the same even though they make more profit than Exxon? When Exxon reports massive profits don’t forget Uncle Sam makes more! Where is the outrage that the feds make extra money and don’t pass the savings to the people they are in trusted to protect. When the fed has a surplus it means they made too much why you don’t complain about that?


    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    So when AIG and the rest collapse and send the world economy into the toilet and create unemployment of up to 25% maybe more, creating massive panic the world over... The govt should let that happen because why? Also the govt does not print money. The federal reserve bank does. And why the hell not go ahead and add... Who is it that figures out and wrangles and coerces the bailouts? The CEO's. The govt doesn't want to spend trillions propping up business because NOBODY in the govt looks good doing it. They have to because of the damage that will be caused if they don't prop them up.
    The government bailing companies out is unconstitutional. The fed forced some banks to take money if they failed the government’s stress test. Even companies that did not want money had to take it if they want to operate in the US. The companies that ran on unsound practices should collapse.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    I am pretty sure this is blatantly false. The govt does not have guns just stockpiled for no reason. As pointed out if you gave ever single person in our military a gun it would be about 3% as many armed people as regular armed american citizens. So where are you getting your numbers from?.
    I will get back to you on the source, believe it is false until I show proof. BTW I said discounting the military. Another derail tidbit is the US Army has/ had more water vessels than the Navy.



    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    My cousin has worked for the IRS for years. As an auditor and is trained for undercover work. Your above statement is so blatantly false you should be ashamed. The IRS is not a fucking mob that shows up and shakes down random people. Funny I recall some backwater...I mean BLACKWATER company infringing on the rights of iraqi's... Nope it is a corporation and can't possibly do that...
    ..

    9.1.4.6 (05-30-2008) Directive No. 4 -
    1. The nature of CI's activities requires the ability to respond in a safe and timely manner 24 hours a day. Special agents are not expected to be armed at all times, but must have access to their assigned firearm when required to perform official duties.
    2. Special agents are authorized, but are not required, to carry their IRS-issued weapon when off-duty. When carrying their IRS-issued weapon off-duty, special agents are subject to all IRM provisions concerning firearms.

    1. http://www.irs.gov/irm/part9/irm_09-001-004.html
    Accountants with guns http://www.queenstribune.com/feature...nsIRSTrai.html

    Coperations due infringe on peoples rights but I was reffering to the Bill of Rights, natural or God given if you will. The original bill of rights were disgned to keep the government at bay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    Civil War retard. And extreme politicians usually just cater to their extreme base and when election time rolls around they might become more centrist to garner votes. How many politicians do you see currently in the system that YOU would think were totally extreme and nuts and YET they still get re-elected. Arms are a means to end life. That is all. They are a tool to achieve an end. When you realize that that specific end can't be related to a given entity ie Govt or business you realize the limitations of their power and what they actually represent. ..
    The civil war was not citizen against government but a breakaway. Slave states formed The Confederate States of America and fought against the Union as an army. Fighting aged males must fight for the Confederacy or face prison and or death.
    You can be extreme and still get re-elected. In Nancy Pelosi's district only a transvestite dominatrix can best her in an election of the local population. This is why we have a complex system of representation to prevent a mob majority infringing on the minority.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    Guns are a means to end life plain and simple. You defend yourself from physical danger with them and that is why we have the 2nd amendment. In the end it is to allow you to physically protect yourself from harm. When you wave a gun around just to get your way by threat of force, you are no better than the fake govt with all the weapons in the world at their disposal.

    You don’t have to end a life to effectively utilize a firearm. The knowledge of an armed victim can be discouraging. You don’t have to kill the entity you aim the weapon at for it to be effective. You can choose how to use a firearm and it’s great that the US acknowledges this right. I am certain this is something the government won’t take from us, I have no worries about this or evil corporate greed. As long as I am aloud to protect myself from any threat be it financial or physical I feel assured. I don’t root for or against government or companies. Responsibility for my actions and understanding I am the master of my fate, not any company or government. Dependency on anything is dangerous and unhealthy for man.
    Last edited by chainpunch; 3/11/2010 2:49pm at . Reason: spell
      #103
  4. jake8267 is offline

    Featherweight

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    55

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 3:17pm

    Bullshido Newbie
     Style: Not Currently Training

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by War Wheel View Post
    Just my $0.02

    In its specific form in the Bill of Rights the 2A introduces some specifics that are not essential parts of this fundamental right: That there should be no standing army distinct from the citizen's militia, and that the use of external weapons shall be permitted. The term "arms" in this context should be construed to include both firearms and traditional hand held weapons. I think no one would argue that the 2A gave permission for individual citizens to operate private naval vessels (piracy), or seige engines calssical (ballista) or of the collonial period (cannon). Arms are what men engage in individual combat with. If a weapon is more effectictive against groups, buildings, civilians, the old, the infirm, individual or group moral, than it is against an single soldier, I would argue that it is excluded from the weapons refered to in the 2A. No stinger missiles, no tanks, no flash-bang grenades (or grenades of any sort), no Anthrax, no mustard gas, no scud missiles, no gattling guns, and no high capacity fully automatic weapons. As Phrost mentioned, they are better suited to attacking groups and crowds.
    THe 2nd Amendment did and does allow for all of this. Wealthy citizens of the time did own cannon, both of the naval and land based varieties, as did various privately owned companies. Taken in full, the writings of the Framers' allow any citizen to own any weapon available to the military. The men who wrote our constitution understood that it is not the ownership of an item that should be regulated, but what one does with the item. Governments own cannon (or in todays world, tanks and planes and bombs) and a person of sufficient wealth should be able to procure them as well. If not how can one legitimately have a chance to effectively engage a gov't?

    Simply put, limiting what I can own simply because it MIGHT hurt you is a bullshit arguement that, for some reason, otherwise intelligent people feel completely justified in using against types of weapons when they know they wouldn't even think of directing at other potentially deadly pieces of property.
      #104
  5. Matt Phillips is online now
    Matt Phillips's Avatar

    NOTE TO SELF - MOAR GRAPPLE - GET A NORMAL HAIR CUT - REPEAT

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    9,696

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 3:34pm

    supporting member
     Style: Submission Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by jake8267 View Post
    THe 2nd Amendment did and does allow for all of this. Wealthy citizens of the time did own cannon, both of the naval and land based varieties, as did various privately owned companies. Taken in full, the writings of the Framers' allow any citizen to own any weapon available to the military. The men who wrote our constitution understood that it is not the ownership of an item that should be regulated, but what one does with the item. Governments own cannon (or in todays world, tanks and planes and bombs) and a person of sufficient wealth should be able to procure them as well. If not how can one legitimately have a chance to effectively engage a gov't?
    You're missing my point. I'm saying that weapons of mass distruction aren't "arms".

    Simply put, limiting what I can own simply because it MIGHT hurt you is a bullshit arguement that, for some reason, otherwise intelligent people feel completely justified in using against types of weapons when they know they wouldn't even think of directing at other potentially deadly pieces of property.
    I am opposed to private ownership of WMD, as I believe the founders would have been. I would classify very high capacity semi and full auto firearms as WMD, but not (for example) low capacity full auto weapons. FTR I am against private ownership of personal transport automobiles which are pointed at me every day and kill more Americans each year than firearms ever will.
    Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


    KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

    In De Janerio, in blackest night,
    Luta Livre flees the fight,
    Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
    Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!
      #105
  6. Matt Phillips is online now
    Matt Phillips's Avatar

    NOTE TO SELF - MOAR GRAPPLE - GET A NORMAL HAIR CUT - REPEAT

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    9,696

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 3:37pm

    supporting member
     Style: Submission Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by jake8267 View Post
    This is full of half-completed logic and ignored aspects of fact. The 2nd amendment was intended to provide citizens the tools with which to effectively protect their rights when (and this is the important part) they felt that the gov't was restricting those rights to a sufficient degree as to need armed rebellion. Obviously few Americans felt that Bush's rights violations reached a level where armed resistance was necessary (a decision reached repeatedly during multiple presidents' time in office). Thus, the 2nd amendment does not guarantee other rights in and of itself. It simply provides that citizens may choose to collect the tools needed to protect those other rights.
    YouTube- Archie Bunker: Guns vs Pushed out of Windows
    Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


    KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

    In De Janerio, in blackest night,
    Luta Livre flees the fight,
    Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
    Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!
      #106
  7. BadUglyMagic is offline
    BadUglyMagic's Avatar

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    393

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 4:07pm


     Style: slackerjitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by War Wheel View Post
    I would classify very high capacity semi and full auto firearms as WMD, .


    LOL, You are now agreeing with the Bush administration that there were WMDs in Iraq before the invasion?
      #107
  8. Hooded Justice is offline
    Hooded Justice's Avatar

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Redmond, WA
    Posts
    926

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 7:25pm


     Style: Justice/Firearms

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    I dont fear government nor corperations this thread is about the second amendment you are the only one writing about how useless guns are when matched up against corperations.
    I simply stated that I believe that the only real threat to american civil rights comes from coporations and the trend towards corporation run/influenced govt. Then I simply gave examples of how they can exert influence to affect market prices. No they won't price EVERYTHING out of range, just the things they don't want you to have. They already do it with tvs, cars etc as status symbols. Not hard to transition that to other items but again just as a "they could" not "they are" or "they will."

    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    People can survive, they did so before modern civilization, you just have to figure out what do you need to live, you donít have to live with modern standards.
    I think the idea of that is nice but the reality is that you would be a hermit living in a cave or just plane homeless. Perhaps YOU have the knowledge and skills to live off the land but the overwhelming majority of people don't. Also before modern civilization was hunting gathering and survival of the strongest. Ideal yeah until you realize that you are not nearly as strong as you think.

    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    You can pass any bill you want just dont force people to buy that crap, its unconstitutional, tax them for the service that the way to do it in the US. I was in the army for 8 years; I know what socialized medicine is.
    They are not proposing socialized medicine. Canada has that and it would be awesome. Just ask Sarah Palin she loved it apparently. Also when you join the military you give up several rights. You are now someone elses property to be used as they see fit meaning they can say 103 is bad and 102 gets back to work. Does it suck. Of course. Did you sign a contract saying they could do it. Yep. This is the single biggest reason I am glad I was too heavy when I tried to enlist. I find it interesting that so many people who love civil rights enter the military where they take them away from you more than anywhere. An amaizing sacrifice indeed. Giving up your freedom of speech to protect mine. I honestly thank you all.

    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    Exxon obviously made so much dough that they can weather sever market depressions. How about Iran and Venezuela, do you think they can do the same even though they make more profit than Exxon?
    No because they have the infrastructure of entire countries to support with those profits and exxon has only itself. You are equating the gdp of a country with that of a single company that is bound by different rules. Exxon can increase profits by shrinking company size. Countries can't downsize without it being called genocide.

    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    When Exxon reports massive profits donít forget Uncle Sam makes more! Where is the outrage that the feds make extra money and donít pass the savings to the people they are in trusted to protect. When the fed has a surplus it means they made too much why you donít complain about that?
    Don't forget the massive tax breaks that the biggest companies and richest people get. Trickle down bullshit as it were. Yes SOME extra money goes into the govt coffers but not nearly as much as should as it is offset by their tax breaks. Also again "the fed" is the bank that the united states goes to for money. The fed does not run a surplus it makes a profit by charging interest. I was by the way more than happy when Clinton was running budget surpluses and more than a little disappointed when Bush pissed them away and used reconciliation to pass his unfunded tax cuts. Violations of my rights as I see it but my weapons have no way to stop it realistically.


    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    The government bailing companies out is unconstitutional. The fed forced some banks to take money if they failed the governmentís stress test. Even companies that did not want money had to take it if they want to operate in the US. The companies that ran on unsound practices should collapse.
    I totally agree and wish that the '00-'08 administration had not started the bailouts or allowed companies to grow to sizes that require govt intervention. Clinton helped but it happened on Bush's watch. Remember Bush = Bank/Auto Bailout, Obama = Stimulus plan. 2 completely different wastes of money.

    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    I will get back to you on the source, believe it is false until I show proof. BTW I said discounting the military. Another derail tidbit is the US Army has/ had more water vessels than the Navy.
    Discounting the military what branches of the govt require firearms? CIA, FBI, NSA? Again do you think that there are more than 61 million govt employees to which could be given weapons to impose martial law? My point is that if every single person who is working for the military and government ALL sided with totalitarian martial law govt, they are still maybe 10% of the armed american populace. Or to put it another way... The 2nd amendment garuntees that the american populace will always be the best armed and worst trained military force in the world. Again, only 21 countries have more total people than we have just people with guns(again on the low estimate). I do not dispute that IRS agents are issued guns I am simply saying that your statement implied IRS gestapo style agents which is not true in the least.


    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    The civil war was not citizen against government but a breakaway. Slave states formed The Confederate States of America and fought against the Union as an army. Fighting aged males must fight for the Confederacy or face prison and or death.
    Um... Wow. I am not historian but I do believe claiming that the Civil War was not a war by some against their govt would be considered... Wrong. This thread isn't the right place but I am pretty sure that when states are fighting against an army for the right to secede from a union, that the army they are fighting against would be representative of the government they are trying to secede from.


    Quote Originally Posted by chainpunch View Post
    You donít have to end a life to effectively utilize a firearm. The knowledge of an armed victim can be discouraging. You donít have to kill the entity you aim the weapon at for it to be effective. You can choose how to use a firearm and itís great that the US acknowledges this right.
    True, you don't have to kill the entity you aim at to be effective. However if you are not willing to or able to kill that entity then you shouldn't pull the gun in the first place(you are basically carrying an empty gun and thustly an empty threat). Also that choice on how to use a firearm is not absolute. You pull the trigger on someone they better be actively trying to kill you or else you can get in a lot of trouble.

    Again I still believe the 2nd amendment is valid and has a place in society. I just believe that you need to be realistic as to its necessity or else you lose credibility in arguing for it.

    To try and horribly tie this corporation talk into the 2nd amendment talk, what is mightier, the dollar or the sword? I heard someone in a movie say "There is nothing more sure than someone who's loyalty can be bought for hard cash." Can people better protect their rights with a gun or a checkbook? I submit that your "rights" are best protected by a checkbook. Your "life" is best protected by firearms.
      #108
  9. Matt Phillips is online now
    Matt Phillips's Avatar

    NOTE TO SELF - MOAR GRAPPLE - GET A NORMAL HAIR CUT - REPEAT

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    9,696

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 7:26pm

    supporting member
     Style: Submission Grappling

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by BadUglyMagic View Post
    LOL, You are now agreeing with the Bush administration that there were WMDs in Iraq before the invasion?
    Nice.
    Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie


    KosherKickboxer has t3h r34l chi sao

    In De Janerio, in blackest night,
    Luta Livre flees the fight,
    Behold Maeda's sacred tights;
    Beware my power... Blue Lantern's light!
      #109
  10. chainpunch is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Raleigh/ Durham, NC
    Posts
    562

    Posted On:
    3/11/2010 8:38pm

    Business Class Supporting Member
      Style: Wing Chun

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooded Justice View Post
    I simply stated that I believe that the only real threat to american civil rights comes from coporations and the trend towards corporation run/influenced govt. Then I simply gave examples of how they can exert influence to affect market prices. No they won't price EVERYTHING out of range, just the things they don't want you to have. They already do it with tvs, cars etc as status symbols. Not hard to transition that to other items but again just as a "they could" not "they are" or "they will."..............
    Just so you know I dont side with Republicans nor Democrats I think they each suck in their own way. If you are a staunch cheer leader for one while bashing the other without holding your own team accountable then you sir, suck. I am not a fan of government nor companies they want our money and dependence but I dont really worry about them as I am a responsible human immune to their antics. I have to protect my interest and these entities are not trying to destroy us but they will hurt us in the process of acquiring power and money and our dependence. The companies want us to buy their crap but the government will try to make laws and enforce it with incarceration. I dont think the US will try to turn on the civilian population. We dont need the 2nd amendment for that, its the fed that needs and does worry about the 61 million of us.

    Since you asked: INS, DEA, U.S. Marshalls Service, Department of Justice. IRS, U.S. Secret Service, Customs, BATF and the Postal Inspection Service, The National Park Service, U.S. Capitol Police, the Naval CIS, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security in the State Department to name a few agencies armed many with their own SWAT.

    Hoody, the companies want you to buy their crap and people do mostly because they finance it, credit cards and other loans. Pay everything with hard earned cash out of your wallet and you too will be a fiscal conservative. The guy that takes the bus is in the same boat as the guy with the new BMW they both live paycheck to pay check. Why because they are stupid not because they are at the mercy of companies.

    Consumer goods are not over priced itís what the market will support. I dont buy crap because I think its expensive but for the people that buy and still say its expensive I think they are stupid. You dont need a big flat screen any cheap one will do. The average priced car is 25k, screw that people pay that because they finance it. I used to have a high credit score, I hope it to be ZERO one day because I dont like to be at the mercy of banks. I have a 1997 Toyota truck and a 2004 Toyota 4runner. Bought them both for cheap. I have been a cash guy since the economy tanked and I am doing much better than before. Universities, toys, electronic crap people pay because they finance it and worry about it later. This is not a business conspiracy its stupid people that have not grown up yet.

    If I pull out a gun I am ready to use it but that does not mean I am going to kill everything I aim at. Two in the chest one in the headÖ yeah if I really need to but I am prepared to mame or seriously injure a perp too.

    Your last sentence is correct itís easier to protect your rights with money. Hire a lawyer. We protect our right to bear arms in order to protect our lives and property should we need to use force.

    You seem like a smart guy quit smoking pot and you wonít be so paranoid.
      #110
Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 7891011 1213141521 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.