Maybe he's taken shots because the guy is a complete shithead and you're a bad judge of character.

So you can't like him because THEY don't like him?

Wait I thought 3D technology was the greatest invention to prevent "tryanny", I'm confused...

Let's see examples of out of control government (this expands through multiple levels of government)

[*]Civil Asset Forfeiture
[*]unending 16 year war
[*]expansion of said war into 7+ different countries
[*]PRISM
[*]Patriot Act
[*]TSA
[*]"enhanced" interrogation
[*]extrajudicial killings of suspects by police officers
[*]Federal control over 50+% of land in over a dozen western states (including 85% of Nevada)
[*]no knock raid warrants
[*]the entire war on drugs

I'm just getting started here. Do you really want me to continue here?

Are you too fucking stupid to not know what 3D printing is vs. 3D facial recognition technology? Just asking

Again, who is deeming this out of control other than yourself?

Also, not for nothing, regardless of how in control or out of control you think the US government is I'd take it over about 99% of the prior governments where the King, or Ruler was literally thought of as a King, could have someone killed for no reason at all, there were no private property rights to speak of, etc. etc.

So if you think today's governments are to powerful and out of control either: you have no understanding of history, are stupid, or are a liar. Take your pick

The TSA? Fuck it yank the TSA and just let anyone walk on a plane with whatever.

Have security, but I think we can do without the pedophiles of the world feeling up little kids before they board a flight.

Pretty sure the POTUS can kill anyone he wants with no reason or trial. See our drone program if you are confused on this matter.

If all of these outright abuses of power are not troubling to you, then that's fine. You can continue pretending everything is fine as we drift deeper and deeper into the abyss towards an Orwellian society.

I'm pretty sure that's not the case.

The states entered the union under the terms of the constitution, if they want to leave they should follow the constitutional process.

I think we're all realizing that Ogie is a loon constantly paranoid of Big Brother. He also has never used a valet service and pulls the sim card out of his cell phone when he isn't currently using it.

Pretty sure you are wrong

https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-11-30/ ... ed-killing

Still waiting for your thoughts on the above.

I think we're all realizing that Ogie is a loon constantly paranoid of Big Brother. He also has never used a valet service and pulls the sim card out of his cell phone when he isn't currently using it.

I wonder if he "looses his shit" if the clerk ever asks for his phone/email at the store?

Whether you agree with that program or not, it's a tremendous stretch to assume that because of that program the President can legally shoot the Governor of Maine and there would be no legal repercussions whatsoever.

So your quote was the President can "kill anyone anywhere" is just more of the bullshit you are peddling around here.

Please point out where in the Constitution it is stated that no state may leave the union. Granted, most states that choose to do so would be foolish due to the benefits they gain, but once again, self determination is a human right.

If the Founders wanted to let states leave the Union, don't you think they would have put a mechanism in the constitution to allow the states to leave?

Our government has made it clear they can extradjudicially kill someone without trial. I'm pretty sure that is not legal under any standing and yes it's a slippery slope. We aren't there yet, but we are drifting towards the day where such a killing occurs in the US. Remember when Rand Paul filibustered over the drone program, he could not get a clear answer if such killings would be outlawed within US borders.

Let's see examples of out of control government (this expands through multiple levels of government)

[*]Civil Asset Forfeiture
[*]unending 16 year war
[*]expansion of said war into 7+ different countries
[*]PRISM
[*]Patriot Act
[*]TSA
[*]"enhanced" interrogation
[*]extrajudicial killings of suspects by police officers
[*]Federal control over 50+% of land in over a dozen western states (including 85% of Nevada)
[*]no knock raid warrants
[*]the entire war on drugs

I'm just getting started here. Do you really want me to continue here? It's safe to say that we no longer live in a free society

I was thinking about doing a tournament of crazy, but really didn't care enough. But Ogie would definitely have been a #1 seed.

I have a feeling that you're probably a big conspiracy theory guy. Amiright?

Conspiracy theories are the currency of the weak minded. Rather than do hard analysis, they can just rely on conspiracy theory to solve everything.

A close second to weak thinking is the "slippery slope" crowd. It's taking a concept governed by science, objects in motion will stay in motion, gravity, friction, etc. and applying it to something that is completely controlled by man. It shows a fundamental lack of distinction between the laws of science, and the laws of man.

Man can marry woman, man can marry man, slippery slope leads to the theory that man can marry 3 pigs, 4 goats, and a duck. It's just more of your bullshit, for the laws of man, we can stop wherever we want for any reason, theory, policy, goal, etc. The slippery slope is for people who don't want to have to really analyze an issue and understand it fully.

I think our founders, especially given the content of the Federalist Papers, envisioned it was possible the government they were constructing could grow too large one day. They believed that the people should have a mechanism to overthrow such a government and change the paradigm they were constructing. Federalist #46 once again believes the people armed within a state should be allowed to repel a Federal army should a Federal government grow tyrannical

Are they not both 3D technologies?

A couple things here:

1. You realize that the federalist papers don't speak for all of the founders? You understand this right? I don't think you do.
2. If they believed that the government would grow too large one day, or too controlling, this is even more support for my position that if the founders wanted the states to be able to leave the union, they would have designed something in the constitution to allow them to.
3. Again, we are back to your violent mindset in which the only way to oppose tyranny is by violence.

So we are still back to the original question, if Illinois wants to leave the Union, they should just use the processes embedded in the constitution correct? Yes or No?

All technology is 3D.

I'm not the biggest conspiracy guy as I ultimately believe our government is in many ways too incompetent to pull off the conspiracies they are accused of. You can read my comments in 9/11 and Kennedy assassination threads as I don't really buy into the conspiracy theories of either.

As for the erosion of our freedoms by the growth of government, a slippery slope is an apt analogy. The fact that electronic surveillance programs, which should require a warrant, have grown into bulk collection of data (as exposed by a true patriot, Edward Snowden) demonstrates this fact well.

Heck, even wars demonstrate this. We have gone from requiring a declaration of war (as mandated in the Constitution) to the War Powers Act where the President can start bombing a place without the consent of Congress and keep war going for months. Even when Congress doesn't vote on it, they don't have the courage to stop it.