Did The Feds just admit to having a gun registry?

I oppose involuntary bondage too, but don't collate government of some type and the taxes pursuant with slavery. That would include devolving many of our pyramid scheme social programs and those that generate generational dependency, but recognizing a limited national and state government are pretty good models that require the citizenry value liberty enough to keep them in check. I think humans are predominantly communal animals that eventually recognize some people have rare qualities of vision and execution, and voluntarily look to those people when solutions evade pedestrian minds, thus always evoking a government in some form.

That's all well and good. It's the force thing I have trouble with. You know, the pay your taxes or go to jail thing. The do this or don't do this or go to jail thing. There is nothing, and I do mean nothing the government does that couldn't be done a lot more efficiently as well as cheaper by the free market. Yes, even law and national defense.

If you honestly think the megalomaniacs who claim the right to rule us are enlightened beings who have vision and execution, I'm afraid there's no need for us to converse.

I also loved your line about people "voluntarily" seeking out these folks lol
As if there is an actual choice.
 
Last edited:
That's all well and good. It's the force thing I have trouble with. You know, the pay your taxes or go to jail thing. The do this or don't do this or go to jail thing. There is nothing, and I do mean nothing the government does that couldn't be done a lot more efficiently as well as cheaper by the free market. Yes, even law and national defense.

If you honestly think the megalomaniacs who claim the right to rule us are enlightened beings who have vision and execution, I'm afraid there's no need for us to converse.

I understand and do not substantially disagree with your first statement; government is force. Unlike most if not all countries, though, we were protected the right to displace that government should the ballot box fail us.

I'm not opining the exemplary (or lack of) characteristics of any particular batch of governing representatives but stating human nature is why we've government.

Voluntary refers to the anarchists primary references of subsistence cultures to show anarchy in action. Apparently those societies are not suited for everyone given their rarity, and the progression to national/state models a voluntary process. Even now, are you saying you don't have the option of joining an Amazonian tribe or some anarchic group? You choose to stay here.
 
Last edited:
I understand and do not substantially disagree with your first statement; government is force. Unlike most if not all countries, though, we were protected the right to displace that government should the ballot box fail us.

I'm not opining the exemplary (or lack of) characteristics of any particular batch of governing representatives but stating human nature is why we've government.

You simply cannot be more/less free. Either you're free, or you're a slave. The ballot box is simply mob rule, it subjects 49% of the people to the whims of the other 51%. Good ideas DO NOT require force, nor do they require a ruling political class.

As Albert Jay Nock pointed out; "the state claims and exercises the monopoly of crime, it forbids private murder, but itself organizes murder on a colossal scale(war) It punishes private theft, but itself lays unscrupulous hands on anything it wants, whether the property of citizen or of alien."


It's always shocking when someone points out human nature as a reason for why we need government. Isn't it humans who assume control of government?
 
Last edited:
I oppose involuntary bondage too, but don't collate government of some type and the taxes pursuant with slavery. That would include devolving many of our pyramid scheme social programs and those that generate generational dependency, but recognizing a limited national and state government are pretty good models that require the citizenry value liberty enough to keep them in check. I think humans are predominantly communal animals that eventually recognize some people have rare qualities of vision and execution, and voluntarily look to those people when solutions evade pedestrian minds, thus always evoking a government in some form.

Some animals are more equal than others...
 
This from the great individualist/anarchist Lysander Spooner

But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: Your money, or your life. And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat.
The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the road side, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful.
The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a “protector,” and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to “protect” those infatuated travellers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful “sovereign,” on account of the “protection” he affords you. He does not keep “protecting” you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villanies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.
 
You simply cannot be more/less free. Either you're free, or you're a slave. The ballot box is simply mob rule, it subjects 49% of the people to the whims of the other 51%. Good ideas DO NOT require force, nor do they require a ruling political class.

As Albert Jay Nock pointed out; "the state claims and exercises the monopoly of crime, it forbids private murder, but itself organizes murder on a colossal scale(war) It punishes private theft, but itself lays unscrupulous hands on anything it wants, whether the property of citizen or of alien."


It's always shocking when someone points out human nature as a reason for why we need government. Isn't it humans who assume control of government?

But you can relocate if you don't like TX or where you live, you're not even forcibly bound to the nation in which you *choose* to live and remain.

So, of course you can be more or less free; in fact, you've chosen less freedom than your idealist absolute by eschewing someplace/group that more aligns with your ideology. You've chosen more freedom by not emigrating to North Korea. That you've chosen it is an act of your own volition, a measure of liberty.

I did not state that human nature is the reason we must have government but rather it is human nature to assemble governments. Even the subsistence cultures anarchists example had rules, elders and councils. The commune itself demands something of the individual contributing to the group's survival and security. Whether you contribute a rabbit's head for the soup, or a portion of your monied salary, government always springs from the continued association of people.

In practicality, the only real debate is about the degree of that contribution - or 'theft' - and coercion, not the absence of it.
 
Last edited:
Simple question, what distinguishes the edicts of the state from the commands of a bandit gang?

I had no chance to vote for/against the egoist band of brigands who decided my property or life was theirs, nor to change their composition at regular intervals, nor the remotest chance of judicial redress?
 
Last edited:
So how can an American protect his identity and purchase history without the cops or MSNBC knowing about it?

weirdlook.gif
G***t Guns
 

VN Store



Back
Top