• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sarah Palin

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
manimal said:
yay for common sense trumping ideology...
Click to expand...

I don't what what you mean by this. If you think those in favor of free market capitalism don't approve of government legislating and prosecuting cases of fraud, then you don't know much about free market capitalism. When fraud exists, transactions cease to be voluntary.
 
bamacre said:
I don't what what you mean by this. If you think those in favor of free market capitalism don't approve of government legislating and prosecuting cases of fraud, then you don't know much about free market capitalism. When fraud exists, transactions cease to be voluntary.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Bowfinger said:
So then you agree with your so-called "progressives," that people can make their own decisions regarding marijuana but the government has a legitimate role in regulating fraudulent marketing. Awesome! Group hug.

😉
Click to expand...

I think you are twisting our words here. ()🙂
 
Amused said:
Really?

An advocate for personal freedom, huh?

So what if I want to carry a gun?

What if I want to buy a cheeseburger happy meal with a toy in it?

What if I want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or drive without a seatbelt?

What about medical freedom under the progressive ideal of healthcare (socialized)?

How about financial freedoms?

The fuck you advocate for personal freedoms.

About the ONLY freedoms the progressives advocate for are sexual, reproductve and maybe drugs. Anything other than that and you guys haven't seen a freedom you didn't want to limit, ban or tax.
Click to expand...

QFT. Every intrusion of government into a person's personal life, every intrusion of government as a mechanism to modify innocuous behavior, every attempt to impose rules and boundaries and some arbitrary standard of politically correct behavior removes an individual freedom.

Some can argue societal benefit all day long, but what makes them such qualified arbiters? Or, for that matter, any pandering politician or bitter bureaucrat?

This is a message that has resounded for hundreds of years in this country, but there has been a creeping abrogation of individual rights, individual liberty and individual choice. All, ostensibly, for our own good.

Some may need to have ten thousand pages of laws and regulations to guide every aspect of their life, but I don't. And I expect there are more people like me still kicking around and fewer of those who need a nanny state to live interesting and productive lives.

In case this doesn't resonate with some here, let me rephrase:

Keep your hands off my junk!
 
Last edited:
nick1985 said:
I was joking as well, maybe yours are in a wad?



Uh huh. Whats your view on the 2nd amendment, since you are a big fan of personal freedoms? What do you think of the fact that Illinois is a no-issue state for CCW, one of only 2 in the union? Or are you just a personal freedom supporter when its things you agree with?

BTW, I'm not a Palin supporter and I hope she doesn't win.
Click to expand...

Why don't you point out to us where in the 2nd amendment it refers to Concealed Carry rights?
 
PJABBER said:
QFT. Every intrusion of government into a person's personal life, every intrusion of government as a mechanism to modify innocuous behavior, every attempt to impose rules and boundaries and some arbitrary standard of politically correct behavior removes an individual freedom.

Some can argue societal benefit all day long, but what makes them such qualified arbiters? Or, for that matter, any pandering politician or bitter bureaucrat?

This is a message that has resounded for hundreds of years in this country, but there has been a creeping abrogation of individual rights, individual liberty and individual choice. All, ostensibly, for our own good.

Some may need to have ten thousand pages of laws and regulations to guide every aspect of their life, but I don't. And I expect there are more people like me still kicking around and fewer of those who need a nanny state to live interesting and productive lives.

In case this doesn't resonate with some here, let me rephrase:

Keep your hands off my junk!
Click to expand...

Just don't let your junk impose on my freedoms.

The important aspect of all those freedoms is the responsibility that is coupled with it. Don't leave that part out.

You should spend more energy getting mad at the morons who are not responsible with their freedoms. They give all the ammunition to the people who want greater regulations and impositions on our freedoms.
 
jackstar7 said:
You should spend more energy getting mad at the morons who are not responsible with their freedoms. They give all the ammunition to the people who want greater regulations and impositions on our freedoms.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. You penalize the majority, you abrogate their rights, their hopes and their dreams in the name of controlling the actions of those who cannot be controlled, just penalized.

Freedom means not having an external control. It does not mean a total lack of control, just that the control is that of the individual and not that of some arbiter. If the expression of that freedom intrudes unduly on the freedom of someone else, then address that, but do not impose a standard that only makes sense as a means of exerting arbitrary control in the vain hope of achieving some kind of arbitrary nirvana.

Consider the right to own an automatic weapon. If you are not a felon and if you live in a jurisdiction that does not proscribe them, pay your federal tax and state tax and go get yourself one. And get yourself a sound suppressor while you are at it so you don't wake up the neighbors.

They are an expensive toy, but if you are not going to commit a crime with it you should be free to burn through your savings by going full auto.

I knew someone who used to own a 90mm recoilless rifle. He lived in a wilderness area and used it primarily to avoid avalanches. In the summer we would use it to blow stuff up. I loved visiting him and his family! So far as I know, he never used it irresponsibly to take out a light armored vehicle that did not need to be taken out.

If I want to buy a kid's meal that happens to have a toy that makes my kid happy, then who are you to stop me?

It should be my choice and it should be none of your business.
 
Ahhh, good ol' anecdotes and hypotheticals.

Truly, the kings among kinds of evidence.


So, because I'm generally not the "you" in your post there, tell me how you balance security against freedom. What is the threshold for reasonable that provides the majority with their "sense" of security?
 
Last edited:
bamacre said:
"Socially progressive?" "I believe people are responsible enough to decide if they want to smoke marijuana, but I don't think people are responsible enough to decide what foods their kids should eat."
Click to expand...

It's a truly bizarre set of logical inconsistencies, isn't it? The progressive mind is a treasure trove of discoveries in abnormal psychology, just waiting to be found.
 
Bowfinger said:
This is purely a troll thread. Is it now official that shameless trolling is allowed in P&N?
Click to expand...

Are you serious? You're a smart guy Bowfinger, definitely smart enough to know that lefties troll this place constantly. Look at any thread started by techs.
 
Bowfinger said:
So then you agree with your so-called "progressives," that people can make their own decisions regarding marijuana but the government has a legitimate role in regulating fraudulent marketing. Awesome! Group hug.

😉
Click to expand...

Putting a toy into a Happy Meal isn't fraudulent marketing. It's marketing. Unless they're lying about the nutritional content of the food in the Happy Meal, there's no reason that they should be prevented from including a toy.
 
bamacre said:
I don't what what you mean by this. If you think those in favor of free market capitalism don't approve of government legislating and prosecuting cases of fraud, then you don't know much about free market capitalism. When fraud exists, transactions cease to be voluntary.
Click to expand...

But, but, but, Somalia! That's what you want! You want corporations to be allowed to chop people's hands off!
 
PJABBER said:
Consider the right to own an automatic weapon. If you are not a felon and if you live in a jurisdiction that does not proscribe them, pay your federal tax and state tax and go get yourself one. And get yourself a sound suppressor while you are at it so you don't wake up the neighbors.
Click to expand...

According to my local Class III dealer there is no place that can proscribe them because they are controlled federally, which means things like the AWB didn't have an effect whatsoever on Class III. There's a lot of people that don't seem to understand this, but when you have to send your Form 3/4 whatever to your local Sheriff, it isn't for the Sheriff's permission, it is part of a federal background check to make sure that you are not a felon. There's a Class III dealer here that has successfully sold Class III firearms in a few counties that didn't "allow" them, via the courts. The problem is that Class III dealers don't want to rock an already unsteady boat.
 
Amused said:
Really?

An advocate for personal freedom, huh?

So what if I want to carry a gun?

What if I want to buy a cheeseburger happy meal with a toy in it?

What if I want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet or drive without a seatbelt?

What about medical freedom under the progressive ideal of healthcare (socialized)?

How about financial freedoms?

The fuck you advocate for personal freedoms.

About the ONLY freedoms the progressives advocate for are sexual, reproductve and maybe drugs. Anything other than that and you guys haven't seen a freedom you didn't want to limit, ban or tax.
Click to expand...

So the difference between the "progressives" and the "COnservatives" is the freedoms they oppose?
 
BoberFett said:
Are you serious? You're a smart guy Bowfinger, definitely smart enough to know that lefties troll this place constantly. Look at any thread started by techs.
Click to expand...
I'm not suggesting there aren't many trollish threads on both sides. I haven't seen anything so blatant (at least that wasn't quickly locked) as a thread with nothing more than this, however:

Barack Obama


drives the right batshit crazy.
Click to expand...

If you can show me one, I'll concede your point. It is pure, unmitigated trolling; no content, no story, nothing of substance to discuss. (Note that his edit came later, though it only reinforces the trollish intent of the original post.)
 
BoberFett said:
Putting a toy into a Happy Meal isn't fraudulent marketing. It's marketing. Unless they're lying about the nutritional content of the food in the Happy Meal, there's no reason that they should be prevented from including a toy.
Click to expand...
Note that I expressed no opinions one way or the other about the whole SF Happy Meal absurdity (though I suppose I just did). I was making a general comment about the legitimate complaint that it's very difficult for people to make informed choices when there is an extremely successful field called Marketing designed to ensure consumers get only misinformation. It's great to sit in an ivory tower and pontificate about letting people make their own informed decisions. It really denies the reality of the world today, however.

Re. SF Happy Meals, while I think their concerns are valid and they have good intentions, it seems like an unreasonably intrusive approach to the problem. On the other hand, I can't help but think about all the recent yammering about "the Will of the People!!!!!!!!" If the voters of SF agree it's an acceptable decision, I'm not sure we outsiders have the right to challenge their will. Viva democracy!

Ultimately I don't really care. I almost never eat at McD's, people are still free to order cheeseburgers and fries if that's their choice, and there's no chance in hell such policies will ever be widely adopted outside isolated pools like SF or New York.
 
xj0hnx said:
According to my local Class III dealer there is no place that can proscribe them because they are controlled federally, which means things like the AWB didn't have an effect whatsoever on Class III. There's a lot of people that don't seem to understand this, but when you have to send your Form 3/4 whatever to your local Sheriff, it isn't for the Sheriff's permission, it is part of a federal background check to make sure that you are not a felon. There's a Class III dealer here that has successfully sold Class III firearms in a few counties that didn't "allow" them, via the courts. The problem is that Class III dealers don't want to rock an already unsteady boat.
Click to expand...

Good to know. I had plenty of opportunity to use fully automatic weapons in the Army and now that I have to buy my own ammo I just don't quite have the same interest, much less a practical purpose for having one. A sound suppressor on the other hand is a fun and practical accessory.

My wife has hinted that she wants a Thompson (!) for Christmas. With a 50 round drum magazine or two and a 100 round drum for kicks. She loves .45 caliber weapons for some reason beyond reason and already owns a KRISS, which I think is a much better toy, but wants the Thompson for the "cool" factor. I think I will just buy her another case of ammo and a green laser.
 
PJABBER said:
Good to know. I had plenty of opportunity to use fully automatic weapons in the Army and now that I have to buy my own ammo I just don't quite have the same interest, much less a practical purpose for having one. A sound suppressor on the other hand is a fun and practical accessory.

My wife has hinted that she wants a Thompson (!) for Christmas. With a 50 round drum magazine or two and a 100 round drum for kicks. She loves .45 caliber weapons for some reason beyond reason and already owns a KRISS, which I think is a much better toy, but wants the Thompson for the "cool" factor. I think I will just buy her another case of ammo and a green laser.
Click to expand...

The great thing about Class III, other than the obvious shit eating grin they bring to your face when you get to use them, is they are a good investment. The prices have remained pretty stable for the last thirty, or so, years. Collectibles such as Thompsons, Stoners, Vietnam era M16's have gone up, some tremendously. The further it gets from what? 86? the more expensive some become. I think it's outrageous that the same AK I have in auto sells for $20,000, but hey, whatever floats their boat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top