<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.gmaildefault
{mso-style-name:gmail_default;}
span.gmail-m-2473948777845621239gmaildefault
{mso-style-name:gmail-m_-2473948777845621239gmaildefault;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>John Clark via extropy-chat<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] ccp struggles<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 6:27 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>You argued against automatics, which are already (functionally) illegal. </span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…I asked this before but maybe this time you'll give me an answer, do you think the second amendment has limits or do you think making machine guns illegal is unconstitutional?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>States can do that legally, ja. The second amendment refers to what the Fed can do. Militias do not need machine guns.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Then move on to equating those with semi-autos. As soon as you get those under more rigorous control, you move right on to the next step.</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…OK let's go there, why isn't a flintlock pistol good enough for home defense? It was after all the original intent of the framers of the Constitution. And conservatives are always talking about original intent…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>On the contrary, the original intent was arming the militia. The second amendment is about the militia, not about defending homes, farms, hunting, crime, any of that. The second amendment establishes a volunteer militia, a defense force which comes into play if the military isn’t there, such as if they cannot be paid.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Do feel free to arm your home with a flintlock pistol however.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…Bolt action rifles are very reliable, they jam far less often than automatics and they're more accurate too, Marine snipers use them to this day. And lightness and ergonomics are not important in defending your home because you are unlikely to need to lug it around on a 50 mile hike…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>It is an option for you of course. The arms chosen by the militia is up to the individual members.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmaildefault><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>If you decide at what point the unorganized militia must stop upgrading their equipment, let’s set it a century in the future rather than a century in the past.</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>So we're right back to the retail sale of H-Bombs question which you refuse to answer…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>I don’t refuse to answer: anyone with those kinds of resources has the option of buying an island in international waters and going ahead with it. On US soil they would need to get the state government to buy in, which is quite unlikely. They would likely need to deal with the international courts on the island, but we are talking about hundreds of billions of dollars to get one of these in any case, so paying off international authorities with a few trillion shouldn’t be difficult.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>John are you worried someone is going to do this? Why? I am far more concerned amateurs will try to isolate Covid-19 rather than try to get a nuke.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…Spike, you're getting very silly…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Sure, as is the notion anyone has the right to dictate to an army or militia what weapons they may have. Of course the militias will have the most up to date equipment, but if you really think going into the past is the answer, the AR-15 is a 60 year old design, and the AK-47 is older than that.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>The Constitution isn’t about what the states can do, it’s about what the Federal government can do.</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…So you think the Constitution isn’t important…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>The constitution is important, and the reason we still have a unified country.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…an individual state could ignore it and abolish freedom of the press, or decree that any sort of firearm is illegal even flintlocks, or reintroduce slavery, or make their governor king, or do anything else they wanted…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>In a sense all of these things are possible. The reason it isn’t done is that people can go across state lines unimpeded. I said in a sense: a state can set its real estate taxes, corporate taxes and sales taxes at any level it wants. This is the functional equivalent of instituting communism in that state if it wants: if it controls the price of real estate, it controls business in a sense. The don’t do it because states must compete with other states. This is the beauty of our system: we have 50 competing laboratories for government. Anyone can go to the one which suits them. But Americans cannot necessarily go to any country which suits them: the other guy doesn’t want us. Unless we have money.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Some states restrict firearms to such a degree that they are already functionally illegal, such as New Jersey. In Chicago, guns are pretty much illegal, which is why they don’t have gun violence there. Sure that is an option for states and city governments. The Fed can’t do that however. Easy solution: move to Chicago. Leave your flintlock pistol behind.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…Stop being cute and have the guts to answer the question, does the second amendment demand that retail sales of H-bombs be allowed or does it not? This only requires a yes or no answer…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>OK sure. A person can own an H-bomb legally, if that person can find a seller I suppose. It is more money than any individual is likely to own ever fortunately.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…Spike, what does that have to do with me?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>John do you not read your own posts? Are you really so self unaware and to not realize how you present yourself here? You are the kind of guy that causes us to hug the constitution.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>>…<span style='font-size:14.0pt'> I said "<b>I need a particular reason to hold someone in contempt</b>". I certainly hold the current POTUS in contempt and I have a huge number of particular reasons for doing so. I'd love to state them in detail but you wouldn't like that…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>John for some time, some of us here have suspected that your posts are all part of an elaborate false-flag attack on liberals. You present yourself as one, but your arguments are so arrogant and play right into all the distasteful caricatures of the angry left, the notion you are playing false flag seems plausible and that you are a Trump supporter. You have had no leftward influence with your bitter, arrogant and often apparently unhinged screeds pretending to promote gun control and Trump hatred. Is it real?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>If you really are a gun-hating Trump-hating libertarian, your attempts at influencing others have been an epic fail.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmail-m-2473948777845621239gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>></span></i></span><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>></span></i></span><span class=gmail-m-2473948777845621239gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>The Electoral College protects us from all manner of evil.</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…I'm not buying it…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Ja, so get a constitutional amendment eliminating the EC.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><p class=MsoNormal><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>We are discussing the US Constitution, which I have always believed in, and still do. </span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…Bible Thumpers<span class=gmaildefault> believe that every word in their book is perfect in every way, do you feel the same about the </span>US Constitution<span class=gmaildefault>?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>I do not argue every word in the Constitution is perfect, nor in the bible, but that constitution has effectively protected us against people who would overthrow the government and grab power, resulting in the deaths of millions. We don’t have chaos on this continent, and we have had a civil war but nothing equivalent to the wars on the European continent. The constitution works. You have the option of forming the anti-constitution party however, and run for high office. Do let me encourage you to do that.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…The Electoral College gave us the 2 worst presidents in my lifetime…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>Ja, so start the anti-constitution party. The EC keeps state governments powerful and influential. Governors make the final call on this current shutdown, regardless of what POTUS says.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><span class=gmaildefault><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>> </span></i></span><i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>The Constitution gives you the right to vote against whoever you wish</span></i><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…And on a whim the Constitution gives some votes 66.7 times as much power as other votes…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>So move to one of those states. Wasn’t that easy?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>It wasn’t a whim either. The USA is the United STATES of America, not the United People of America. States are their own governments.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>>…I don't know either. I don't know why putting a building on top of a mountain to talk to an invisible man in the sky is constitutional but putting a telescope on a mountain is not. Well actually I do know why, it's because the Constitution specifically mentions that you're free to engage in religion but it does NOT specifically mention that you're free to engage in astronomy… John K Clark<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>We know there are those kinds of problems. John I do encourage you to run for office in the anti-constitution platform, promise to rewrite the constitution with no freedom of religion, since that is contained in the other freedom, no second amendment and you in charge.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'>spike<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:14.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></body></html>