Another Open Carry Texas success story ruins it for Washingtonians.....

[EMNofSeattle]

Are you a Holocaust denier, too?

LOL you are dense, you continue to deny actual history while accusing me of denying history? I just posted a newspaper article from the 1960s that supports the point I made, go read a book or two, in fact go talk to Sudden valley gunner if you don't believe me, he'll tell you the exact same thing. At least I think he would judging by another discussion we had several months ago

 

[Dave_pro2a]

Sheer ignorance, so you deny that segregation in the south was mandated by the state governments?

The same government that represented the will of the electorate within the state?

 

[509rifas]

The problem isn't really long gun OC (though I don't agree with it generally I do for TX since hangun OC is illegal) it's that they focus on certain stores to be a protest site.
Anywhere you make a point of getting as much attention as possible to illustrate that you can legally carry an AK47 is not going to appreciate the trouble that comes with it and revert to their business brain and politely ask not to.
It's been happening over and over again, the group of guys with ARs or AKs wears out their welcome. Private property has the right to dictate the conduct on their property.
Just OC at any random place; picking one to flock to will get you kicked out eventually.

 

[509rifas]

Oh it looks like I've completely missed what this thread is about.
Guess I'll stay up reading it all instead of going to bed.

 

[WalkingWolf]

What are you protesting when wearing shoes into a store?

 

[Freedom1Man]

What are you protesting when wearing shoes into a store?

Stinky feet.

 

[cpgrad08]

Ahh, your argument seems to endorse "Blacks only" drinking fountains.

IDK about that. If someone is a racist and wants to install whites only drinking fountain in their living room, they surely have that Right. It's private property.

If someone wants to open a private social club, where only paying members are allowed, and then install a whites only drinking fountain, they surely have that Right. It's private property.

If someone wants to open a public store, and invite the 'general public' into it, they might just lose most of their 'private property' argument for that whites only drinking fountain.

Racism is bad, m'kay. The above is just an example of your logic applied to race, instead of firearms.

OK, if a business owner wants to ban certain races from his store, he should be allowed to since it's his store. I fully disagree with the public accommodations portion of the Civil Rights Acts (which why Goldwater was against the act). If the owner financially (IE no one shopping there) that is the free market at work. I'm not for the government forcing people to service people they don't want to service. Like the Baker not wanting to make a cake for a Gay Wedding.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

See what happens when the state requires a license for voluntary exchange. It muddy's the water.

EMN has a point, a surprising one at that due to his usual government is the answer viewpoints, but of course he seems to hate the south.

As Walter Williams brought out there was a reason there were Jim Crow laws, becuase not all of the people were acting like racist bigots and were selling and exchanging with people who were not thier skin color. So it took the state to enforce a mandatory bigotry (many of the laws were borrowed from an existing practice like Lincoln's home state of Illinois). As we can see from many of the "its the law" types here who will blindly follow and believe its moral to obey something just becuase its law, it appears that it entrenched culturally a horrible wrong doing, that may have ended much further in a free market society.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

because [strike]not all of the people[/strike] the minority were not acting like racist bigots and were selling and exchanging with people who were not their skin color. So it took the majority using corrosive powers of the state to enforce a mandatory bigotry (many of the laws were borrowed from an existing practice like Lincoln's home state of Illinois).

And that ladies and gentlemen is why democracies suck.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

See what happens when the state requires a license for voluntary exchange. It muddy's the water.

Agreed, but it's the world we live in. And the Jim Crow law comparison was mainly to make EMNseattle provide us with some lulz.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

See what happens when the state requires a license for voluntary exchange. It muddy's the water.

EMN has a point, a surprising one at that due to his usual government is the answer viewpoints, but of course he seems to hate the south.

As Walter Williams brought out there was a reason there were Jim Crow laws, becuase not all of the people were acting like racist bigots and were selling and exchanging with people who were not thier skin color. So it took the state to enforce a mandatory bigotry (many of the laws were borrowed from an existing practice like Lincoln's home state of Illinois). As we can see from many of the "its the law" types here who will blindly follow and believe its moral to obey something just becuase its law, it appears that it entrenched culturally a horrible wrong doing, that may have ended much further in a free market society.

I don't believe government is always the answer, I just reject the notion it's an inherently evil institution....

I do not like the idea of the government compelling private parties to engage in business. Hence why I've said, the issue of the thread for me is not rights, since target is a private party.....

As far as segregation, I believe in modern soceity franky, any business who tried would be run out of business very quickly in 90% of the country. Certainly a segregationist philosophy would only serve as fodder for competitors at the least...

I also do not hate the south, I do not root for them in the historical discussions of the civil war, not the same thing. I also do not think we would've benefitted from having a separate slave country right to our immediate south..... Almost ironically, I think we'd be complaining about illegal immigrants from the south in a whole separate way if we allowed them to secede, slave economies have a tendency to not benefit most of everyone except an extreme upper class....

 

[sudden valley gunner]

And that ladies and gentlemen is why democracies suck.

Yep.

Agreed, but it's the world we live in. And the Jim Crow law comparison was mainly to make EMNseattle provide us with some lulz.

I don't believe government is always the answer, I just reject the notion it's an inherently evil institution....

I do not like the idea of the government compelling private parties to engage in business. Hence why I've said, the issue of the thread for me is not rights, since target is a private party.....

As far as segregation, I believe in modern soceity franky, any business who tried would be run out of business very quickly in 90% of the country. Certainly a segregationist philosophy would only serve as fodder for competitors at the least...

I also do not hate the south, I do not root for them in the historical discussions of the civil war, not the same thing. I also do not think we would've benefitted from having a separate slave country right to our immediate south..... Almost ironically, I think we'd be complaining about illegal immigrants from the south in a whole separate way if we allowed them to secede, slave economies have a tendency to not benefit most of everyone except an extreme upper class....

Your words in posts say other wise.

You definitely defend most government acts.

And it is evil. Just ask Thomas Paine.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Yep.







Your words in posts say other wise.

You definitely defend most government acts.

And it is evil. Just ask Thomas Paine.

It depends on the govt act in question, I've also been critical of government acts in the past. It is fact dependent.

Sometimes I like to take a counter position just for the sake of argument.... Especially if a thread is full of only one opinion.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

It depends on the govt act in question, I've also been critical of government acts in the past. It is fact dependent.

Sometimes I like to take a counter position just for the sake of argument.... Especially if a thread is full of only one opinion.

There is nothing wrong with playing devils advocate, as long as you actually learn something or flush out a better argument.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

I don't believe government is always the answer, I just reject the notion it's an inherently evil institution....

I do not like the idea of the government compelling private parties to engage in business. Hence why I've said, the issue of the thread for me is not rights, since target is a private party.....

As far as segregation, I believe in modern soceity franky, any business who tried would be run out of business very quickly in 90% of the country. Certainly a segregationist philosophy would only serve as fodder for competitors at the least...

I also do not hate the south, I do not root for them in the historical discussions of the civil war, not the same thing. I also do not think we would've benefitted from having a separate slave country right to our immediate south..... Almost ironically, I think we'd be complaining about illegal immigrants from the south in a whole separate way if we allowed them to secede, slave economies have a tendency to not benefit most of everyone except an extreme upper class....

Will the real Emn please stand up?!

 

[Ajetpilot]

Sometimes I like to take a counter position just for the sake of argument.... Especially if a thread is full of only one opinion.

Sounds "trollish" to me.

 

[Primus]

I don't believe government is always the answer, I just reject the notion it's an inherently evil institution....

I do not like the idea of the government compelling private parties to engage in business. Hence why I've said, the issue of the thread for me is not rights, since target is a private party.....

As far as segregation, I believe in modern soceity franky, any business who tried would be run out of business very quickly in 90% of the country. Certainly a segregationist philosophy would only serve as fodder for competitors at the least...

I also do not hate the south, I do not root for them in the historical discussions of the civil war, not the same thing. I also do not think we would've benefitted from having a separate slave country right to our immediate south..... Almost ironically, I think we'd be complaining about illegal immigrants from the south in a whole separate way if we allowed them to secede, slave economies have a tendency to not benefit most of everyone except an extreme upper class....

Well said and I agree. +1

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Freedom1Man]

There is nothing wrong with playing devils advocate, as long as you actually learn something or [strike]flush[/strike] out a better argument.

I believe that "flesh" is the word you were looking for,

 

[Dave_pro2a]

I don't believe government is always the answer, I just reject the notion it's an inherently evil institution....

Well said and I agree. +1

Ahhhh, the blind support of government by one of its agents, and one of its blind worshipers.

Premise: Government must exist in some form.
Premise: Government is inherently evil, since at its core it relies on coercive power.
Conclusion: Therefore those subjected to its power must be ever vigilant and fight against the inevitable abuses.

That's kind of the stuff America was founded on.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Sounds "trollish" to me.

Not really.....