Post: #101

The real question is if misterstir actually believes in freedom. I think he should just go back to North Korea and so he can have all the most oppressive laws he could dream of.

Post: #102

I just did that, and don't miss Cali yet at all.

(02-09-2012 04:09 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  I know a lot of guys leaving Cali for Vegas and Denver.

May join their ranks.

Post: #103

(02-14-2012 11:54 AM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 11:44 AM)misterstir Wrote:  Where do you live in the day of charlameigne. Why can't you smoke outside? The owner should not be the one deciding because the employees have no choice in the matter and in many small towns neither do the patrons. Its a public health issue. I have to pay for when those people get sick and can't afford care or when their insurance denies them coverage.

I think we got bigger issues at play here. You are now telling us that employees are slaves and have no choice of employment?

I live in the north where it gets really cold. I can only imagine going out for a smoke (I don't smoke) at night time when it gets below freezing. How about you go outside for when you want some fresh air.

I also have a friend, that owned a bar in Georgia, who had to enforce a no smoking law that was passed. Business dropped considerably and he ended up selling.

Quote:If you want to have a cigar lounge I don't oppose it, but no alcohol should be allowed in there.

Now you are dictating what establishments can sell alcohol?

You must be great with the women. I can only imagine them swooning over you with that rebel may care attitude.

"Sorry honey, we can't cross the street here but need to cross at the legal crosswalks."

"Baby, I will have to report you to the police for throwing gum on the ground. We have littering laws and you are just too dangerous to society."

"Sorry baby, but I can't hit that hole due to the Sodomy law. I am starting to think you are a dangerous person for asking me to do bad stuff like that."

(02-14-2012 11:51 AM)el mechanico Wrote:  

No doubt about it. I can't imagine someone being that stupid.

Going outside for wanting fresh air makes no sense.  When you get lung cancer from 2n hand smoke or emphazyma or other diseases.  Claiming that bars cannot succeed in light of no smoking laws is utter rubbish because many countries ban indoor smoking yet have thriving bar scenes.  The only way banning indoor smoking would ruin your business would be if it was not the law because then the smokers would just move elsewhere ie across the street.  I live more north of you, its not going to kill you to go outside, people smoke outside in norway, it doesn't kill them




Yes I am saying certain establishments shouldn't be allowed to sell alcohol. You're acting like this doesn't already exist everywhere in the civilized world which imo is just trolling or utter lack of knowledge of the law.  I don't know of anywhere that allows you to sell alcohol without a license/permit.

Then you accuse me of being stupid,
And you think one doesn't need a license to sell alcohol.

Post: #104

(02-14-2012 12:27 PM)misterstir Wrote:  I don't know of anywhere that allows you to sell alcohol without a license/permit.

The streets of Colombia.

And guess what? People are having fun.

This misterstir guy is the biggest buzz kill I have unfortunately had contact with in my life.

I really think he had some strange medical condition.

Or like I said earlier, this has to be what the kid in school who is always crying when other kids play rough turns into as an adult.

Post: #105

Post: #106

Wow G,

I am glad I missed most of this thread. There are some serious fucking Nazis in this forum. At least mistersir got banned.

Post: #107

There are definitely a lot of trolls that are dormant for a while and then after they reach like over 100 posts they turn bad.

Post: #108

Yeah, this one was strange.

The Anti-Freedom troll.

It is amazing on a forum such as this that there would be someone in favor of rules, regulations and fines.

I mean this guy was against people being able to throw a football on the beach because someone might get hit in the head.

Unbelievable.

You would think that a fellow traveler (which I don't remember any good information from the guy) would be open to things that are sometimes dangerous and fun.

Seriously, I wonder what would happen to a guy like that that watched Running of The Bulls.

Or a 4th of July fireworks show.

Or an MMA match.

He would probably breakdown in tears.

Post: #109

(02-14-2012 03:22 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  Yeah, this one was strange.

The Anti-Freedom troll.

It is amazing on a forum such as this that there would be someone in favor of rules, regulations and fines.

I mean this guy wasn't against people being able to throw a football on the beach because someone might get hit in the head.

Unbelievable.

You would think that a fellow traveler (which I don't remember any good information from the guy) would be open to things that are sometimes dangerous and fun.

Seriously, I wonder what would happen to a guy like that that watched Running of The Bulls.

Or a 4th of July fireworks show.

Or an MMA match.

He would probably breakdown in tears.

Foaming of the mouth and 6 month coma.

Post: #110

(02-14-2012 03:24 PM)chairman Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 03:22 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  Yeah, this one was strange.

The Anti-Freedom troll.

It is amazing on a forum such as this that there would be someone in favor of rules, regulations and fines.

I mean this guy wasn't against people being able to throw a football on the beach because someone might get hit in the head.

Unbelievable.

You would think that a fellow traveler (which I don't remember any good information from the guy) would be open to things that are sometimes dangerous and fun.

Seriously, I wonder what would happen to a guy like that that watched Running of The Bulls.

Or a 4th of July fireworks show.

Or an MMA match.

He would probably breakdown in tears.

Foaming of the mouth and 6 month coma.

Lol. Some monkeys grow to love living in the zoo - it's kinda sad really. This just goes to show, that less government is always better - otherwise guys like this will seek out positions of power to try to control others.

What this thread needs is a breath of fresh air; an excellent speech from Doug Casey at Freedomfest, July 9-11th, 2009, Las Vegas, NV, USA. Part 1 of 3:





Edit, just for G, here's an excerpt of a similar speech of Doug Casey on smoking:

Post: #111

Too bad Ron Paul won't win the elections... He was the United States last hope of actually being a good place to live.

Post: #112

(02-14-2012 03:45 PM)durangotang Wrote:  Edit, just for G, here's an excerpt of a similar speech of Doug Casey on smoking:

That was good.

Never seen that. That is probably going on The G Manifesto. Great work.

I always loved this one:

Post: #113

Watching that boxing video felt like returning from the twilight zone - refreshingly normal.

Glad you liked the video G. I highly recommend that you check out all three parts of the Freedomfest speech by Doug Casey. I am sure that if this forum were around in the 1970's Doug would probably be posting on it. He wrote the book "The International Man" in 1978 which was written to show readers how to make the most of their personal freedom around the world (financially). He has travelled to something like 175 countries and lived in over twenty. Right now he runs Casey Research (centered around speculative investing) and is building a first class libertarian development in Salta province, Argentina as a modern days sort of Galt's gulch. It is called Estancia De Cafayate and if you had the dough would make a great hideaway spot.

http://www.laestanciadecafayate.com/

Gotta give credit to the G's that came before us - especially the ones that did the grunt work before the Internet.

Post: #114

Great talk from Doug Casey.

Yeah, I have read some stuff by that guy.

True G.

Post: #115

(02-14-2012 03:22 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  Yeah, this one was strange.

The Anti-Freedom troll.

It is amazing on a forum such as this that there would be someone in favor of rules, regulations and fines.

I mean this guy was against people being able to throw a football on the beach because someone might get hit in the head.

Unbelievable.

You would think that a fellow traveler (which I don't remember any good information from the guy) would be open to things that are sometimes dangerous and fun.

Seriously, I wonder what would happen to a guy like that that watched Running of The Bulls.

Or a 4th of July fireworks show.

Or an MMA match.

He would probably breakdown in tears.

mistirstir (aka Buzz Killington) is the only person on the forum I've ever put on my ignore list, and I've had him there since a few days after he joined. Can't believe it took him this long to get banned, though I knew it was an inevitability.

Post: #116

(02-17-2012 01:00 PM)Soma Wrote:  

(02-14-2012 03:22 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  Yeah, this one was strange.

The Anti-Freedom troll.

It is amazing on a forum such as this that there would be someone in favor of rules, regulations and fines.

I mean this guy was against people being able to throw a football on the beach because someone might get hit in the head.

Unbelievable.

You would think that a fellow traveler (which I don't remember any good information from the guy) would be open to things that are sometimes dangerous and fun.

Seriously, I wonder what would happen to a guy like that that watched Running of The Bulls.

Or a 4th of July fireworks show.

Or an MMA match.

He would probably breakdown in tears.

mistirstir (aka Buzz Killington) is the only person on the forum I've ever put on my ignore list, and I've had him there since a few days after he joined. Can't believe it took him this long to get banned, though I knew it was an inevitability.

Yeah, I ran across another ridiculous post by the guy:

/thread-9544-p...#pid142390

Where basically he would only swoop Rhianna if she was "served up on a platter for him"

Quote:Not saying rihanna is hot, if she offered her pussy to me on a platter, i'd only hit because it was on the platter and she is rich and the only time having unprotected sex makes sense is if it with a grossly $$$$ rich chick because thats like winning the lotto. Rihanna with lots of make up on though is by no means ugly, and anyone who can afford all the makeup grammy wining makeup artist like her can look good to.

That guy must get some really hot pop stars and actresses on the regular.

Post: #117

Correct me if I'm wrong but he claimed to be a black American guy. WTF?

Post: #118

I had dinner with some folks Friday night including a McDonald's exec. He was telling me about the Happy Meal Ban in SF. Do you know how many people spoke up on McDonald's behalf? For their right to sell something available in 49 other states? About possible loss of freedoms? Singling out a company? Spending public money on the effort during a nasty recession? Consequences of a prescriptive Nanny State? Choice?

ZERO.

So much for any sort of debate about the limits of rights or personal choice. Or the societal changes (CARS, sedentary lifestyles) that actually led to obesity issues. They don't care about debate or educating anyone. They just know whats best.

Post: #119

^This.

The thing that really stuck to me from the "Super Size Me" (free to view on Youtube!) is the fact that people need to be more responsible in their food choices. Corporations like McDonald's just want to earn money and it's no secret that eating their food on the regular won't be good for you. McDonald's is not to be blamed even with their cheap food and abundant, easy to find locations. They should be free to do this type of business as they should. And this freedom should extend to people taking responsibility for their actions. Problem is, people aren't taught well enough to be smart with food choices (or responsibility) and blame others for their poor choices. There would be less of a concern for a McDonald's Happy Meal banning if people understood the nature of freedom.

Post: #120

(02-27-2012 05:53 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  ^This.

The thing that really stuck to me from the "Super Size Me" (free to view on Youtube!) is the fact that people need to be more responsible in their food choices. Corporations like McDonald's just want to earn money and it's no secret that eating their food on the regular won't be good for you. McDonald's is not to be blamed even with their cheap food and abundant, easy to find locations. They should be free to do this type of business as they should. And this freedom should extend to people taking responsibility for their actions. Problem is, people aren't taught well enough to be smart with food choices (or responsibility) and blame others for their poor choices. There would be less of a concern for a McDonald's Happy Meal banning if people understood the nature of freedom.

http://www.fathead-movie.com/

This guy demonstrated that you could even lose weight eating at McDonald's just by avoiding fries and sugared soda. I'll bet anything that the people behind the happy meal ban are a bunch of vegan fanatics that feed their kids estrogen-laced soy products and processed crap made largely of monosaccharides just because they got it at Trader Joe's and there's a picture of an endangered animal on the label.

Post: #121

(02-27-2012 06:24 PM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  I'll bet anything that the people behind the happy meal ban are a bunch of vegan fanatics that feed their kids estrogen-laced soy products and processed crap made largely of monosaccharides just because they got it at Trader Joe's and there's a picture of an endangered animal on the label.

a.k.a Californians?

Aloha!

Post: #122

G, it's not just Califonia. The whole country is fucked.

I just saw this video in which, due to our legal system that rewards frivolous lawsuits (and zero personal responsibility), walking is apparently dangerous. Check this out:

Post: #123

(03-01-2012 06:32 PM)durangotang Wrote:  G, it's not just Califonia. The whole country is fucked.

I just saw this video in which, due to our legal system that rewards frivolous lawsuits (and zero personal responsibility), walking is apparently dangerous. Check this out:

Sheer madness.

This kinda crap is making life intolerable over the Anglo-Saxon countries, the way I see it.

Again, the only safe place that "no harm" can be done is in the couch, in front of a TV screen.

Sterilize all life, rather, all living and that is what you got.

Post: #124

Looks like there's more support for this CA Police State theory.

According to Simon Black and the US Wiretap Report 2012 released last week,

Riverside County, California is the most spied-on county in the United States

Followed by Clark County, Nevada

3,395 wiretaps were ordered, averaging 29.03 days each

The average cost of a wiretap order last year was $50,452

The highest cost was $872,841 for a Federal wiretap in the Eastern district of Washington

87.39% of these wiretap orders were connected to drug-related charges

Only 18.19% of these wiretaps actually led to a conviction

http://www.uscourts.gov/Statistics/Wiret...001e595280

________________________________________________________________________________​______

I wonder, why Riverside?

Post: #125

(07-08-2013 08:38 AM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  The average cost of a wiretap order last year was $50,452

Only 18.19% of these wiretaps actually led to a conviction

That's $277,361 per wiretap per conviction, not to mention the myriad other costs involved. Resources well spent.