<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:33 AM spike jones via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>The second amendment is about the militia, not about defending homes, farms, hunting, crime, any of that.</i></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">Then the second amendment isn't about much. The only real militias are the National Guard and the Navy militia, the others are just a gaggle of white supremacist nut jobs marching around and pretending to be soldiers. And just because some jerkwater politician writes a law that says every male between 17 and 45 is a member of a militia does not make that a reality, most males between 17 and 45 have never even heard of a militia much less think they're in one.</font></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><span style="font-size:14pt"> </span><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">>…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?<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>States can do that legally, ja. </i></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><font size="4">So does that mean the Constitution is NOT the law of the land and states are free to ignore it, or does it mean the word "arms" in the second amendment is not a synonym for "anything that can kill lots of people"?</font><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>The second amendment refers to what the Fed can do. Militias do not need machine guns.</i></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><font size="4">Why not? The US Army needs machine guns and has them, if militias don't and are on the same side then they can't help the army much, and if they're on different sides the professional army could push militias out of the way pretty easily.</font><br><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u></span></p></div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:14pt"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">>> </span>So we're right back to the retail sale of H-Bombs question which you refuse to answer…</span></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>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.<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"> </span>On US soil they would need to get the state government to buy in</i><span style="font-size:14pt">,<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></span></p></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><font size="4">So before the Second Amendment can go into effect a state must put their seal of approval on it? Does that work for the First Amendment too, would it be OK with the Constitution if California put anyone in jail who said something unflattering about their Democratic governor? If so then the Bill of Rights isn't worth much.</font><br><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">></span> 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,</i></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">If the nuclear industry were starting from zero that would be true but it isn't. And the beauty of the Teller–Ulam H-Bomb design and the reason the number of thermonuclear warheads increased enormously in the late 1950's and early 60's is it allowed you to make multi megaton weapons very cheaply, you only needed a small amount of relatively expensive Plutonium and and a even smaller amount of Tritium, most of the bomb is made of cheap U238, deuterium, and Lithium. And these days Plutonium is cheaper than it has ever been because commercial power reactors crank out the stuff by the ton as a byproduct of operation. I imagine you could make a 10 megaton bomb for about a million dollars, less if you started mass producing the damn things. And because of this it's not just megatons that are cheap, megadeath is dirt cheap too, just pennies per death. But if H-Bombs are "arms" and we follow the Constitution I guess that's the way we have to go.</font></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span><i>John are you worried someone is going to do this? </i></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font size="4" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">I'm worried that somebody is crazy enough to think retail sales of H-Bombs is not a crazy idea because his belief system is inflexible and remains static regardless of what new information is received.</font></font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u></span></p><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:14pt">><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">></span>…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…<br></span></blockquote><span style="font-size:14pt"> </span><br><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>In a sense all of these things are possible. </i></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Then the Constitution is a joke, and a joke in very poor taste. </font>But <font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">retail sales of H-bombs is an even worse joke and there is something fundamentally wrong with any </font><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">political </font><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">philosophy that rates it as a good idea.</font></font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>This is the beauty of our system: we have 50 competing laboratories for government. </i></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font size="4" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></font><font size="4">But there were ethical concerns so limits were placed on how human laboratory specimens could be treated. The first 3 words of the Constitution are "We the people" not "We the states", and it claims to grant those people certain unalienable Rights. If it can't do that then the Constitution is a fraud.</font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u></span></p></div><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:14pt">><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">></span> 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…</span></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>OK sure. A person can own an H-bomb legally, </i></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">Wow! If </font>your<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> political philosophy leads you to this point then it's time to reassess your </font><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">political philosophy.</span></font></div></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><i><u></u></i></p><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>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,</i></p></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">No, I present myself as a small l libertarian, not to be confused with a very silly American political party with a similar sounding name. I'm probably the most libertarian member of this list, I say that because I seem to be the one most upset that the most ferociously anti-libertarian president in American history is now leading the nation. But as much as I love libertarianism I fully admit I love the scientific method even more.</font></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>your bitter, arrogant and often apparently unhinged screeds</p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">If I'm being unhinged I don't see why that would offend you, after all your Commander In Chief has done unhinged things every single day for the last three and a half years and that doesn't seem to bother you one bit; the latest example is defunding the World Health Organization in the middle of the largest global pandemic seen in a century. Idiocy of that colossal magnitude would have once been the talk of the land, but it's so common now it's hardly worth mentioning. Stupidity and monumental incompetence is the new normal. </font></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:14pt"></span>></span> <i>your attempts at influencing others have been an epic fail.</i></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style=""><font size="4" style=""><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">I say what I think, that's the only skill I have and I know it doesn't work very well. Politicians are more successful </font>because<font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"> they never say what they think, they say what people want to hear, but I don't have that skill.</font></font></div><div><br></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex" class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:14pt">><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">> </span>…And on a whim the Constitution gives some votes 66.7 times as much power as other votes…</span></blockquote></blockquote><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal"><i><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">></span>So move to one of those states. </i></p></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">Why should I have to move because of a idiotic whim that makes no sense? And besides if California and Wyoming swapped populations you'd end up in the exact same ridiculous situation. And why on earth should that even be necessary, why should some citizens be given more rights than others to begin with? What is the <span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif">rationale </span>for believing a Wyoming voter is 66.7 times wiser than a California voter? </font></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">John K Clark</font></div><div lang="EN-US"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u></p></div></div></div>
</div></div>