Comments on: This just in http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:02:09 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: nk http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/comment-page-1/#comment-163644 nk Mon, 29 Jan 2007 03:46:09 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/#comment-163644 <a href="http://xrlq.com/2007/01/27/your-brain-on-drug-wars/#comment-123016" rel="nofollow"><strong>I agree with beerslurpy.</strong></a> On the so-called "war on drugs" at least. On the GWOT, I am keeping my cynicism on a short leash. I agree with beerslurpy. On the so-called “war on drugs” at least. On the GWOT, I am keeping my cynicism on a short leash.

]]> By: say what? http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/comment-page-1/#comment-163627 say what? Sun, 28 Jan 2007 19:43:23 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/#comment-163627 If a government can invade countries, start wars, torture inmates without trials, eliminate Constitutional restrictions to gather information -- all in the NAME of the War on Terrorist. Shouldn't citizens be able to do a little more then "just say no" when confronted with an actual terrorists? HOLLOW-POINT TO THE SKULL seems like a good enough answer. Of course that would require our young daughters to be armed with AK's when going to McDonalds and some adults allowed into our school's while armed, (such as how Israel stopped school attackers in their tracks). Just because our government doesn't ALLOW us to do those things, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done or that the "looneytarians" solution wouldn't work if some of those chains were removed. And we would certainly stand a better chance then being left defenseless, which our government is pushing us towards VERY HEAVILY, (and worse is yet to come). We are being dished out with an INCREASE in restrictions, plus even more goons on the federal payroll keeping us safe from water bottles at the TSA. And this numbnuts calls libertarians looney??? If a government can invade countries, start wars, torture inmates without trials, eliminate Constitutional restrictions to gather information — all in the NAME of the War on Terrorist. Shouldn’t citizens be able to do a little more then “just say no” when confronted with an actual terrorists?

HOLLOW-POINT TO THE SKULL seems like a good enough answer. Of course that would require our young daughters to be armed with AK’s when going to McDonalds and some adults allowed into our school’s while armed, (such as how Israel stopped school attackers in their tracks).

Just because our government doesn’t ALLOW us to do those things, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done or that the “looneytarians” solution wouldn’t work if some of those chains were removed. And we would certainly stand a better chance then being left defenseless, which our government is pushing us towards VERY HEAVILY, (and worse is yet to come). We are being dished out with an INCREASE in restrictions, plus even more goons on the federal payroll keeping us safe from water bottles at the TSA.

And this numbnuts calls libertarians looney???

]]> By: beerslurpy http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/comment-page-1/#comment-163625 beerslurpy Sun, 28 Jan 2007 18:59:08 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/01/28/this_just_in-6/#comment-163625 Problem is that the war on terror isnt calculated to stop terror any more than the war on drugs is calculated to stop drug trafficking or use. They are both expensive exercises in security theater that fund the buildup of the police state. Problem is that the war on terror isnt calculated to stop terror any more than the war on drugs is calculated to stop drug trafficking or use. They are both expensive exercises in security theater that fund the buildup of the police state.

]]>