Chucktshoes

I run the Georgia section of 129 pretty regularly. It isn't quite as bad as the TN portion (which was closed to TT traffic at the beginning of this year if I remember correctly), but it still isn't for the faint of heart when you got a 53' trailer attached to the tractor. I'm kinda disappointed I didn't get a chance to run it before it was closed as a truck route.

Many times the same word can hold very different meanings for different people. There have been a few ongoing threads recently (and usually are at any given time) that I think are greatly impacted by the definition of this word we hold in our heads. So with that in mind, I'll pose a few questions that come to my mind but by no means are an exhaustive list to help better understand what folks are saying when they talk about "rights". What is a "right"? Where do they come from? How do you exercise them? What are their limiting factors? Do you still possess them if prevented from exercising them? Can you have a right to a thing? Can you have a right to a service?

Those of you defending the abrogation of rights by government by claiming that rights are, or can be, granted by others make my head hurt. You do the work of those you say you oppose. While an entity may have the physical ability to prevent one from exercising their rights through violence or the threat thereof, it does not make that action legitimate. The illegitimacy of those acts of violence is what provides the justification to act in self defense. To claim that rights are granted by others grants legitimacy to their violent acts to remove those rights. TLDR: if you think government grants rights, you don't understand what a right is.

By the way, do you have any silver spray paint? The local Home Depot won't sell me any more.

I'm from Memphis. I live, I die, I live again! Witness me!

Accurate.

I'd say this is likely accurate. I won't bother with it at all. I quit watching TWD about four episodes into the first season.

'Murica!

Even if things were to go south here in the way that y'all think it will, I couldn't be bothered to leave because I don't think I would notice any functional difference. Most of what people talk about the way the country "used to be "is really nothing more than a rose colored glasses of myth and memory. Things didn't used to be any freer during the lifetime of any of y'all living, you just believed the lie more back then.

So you figured you'd just come in and tease us all a little?

I don't have much to say on the primary subject of the thread as I think that btr96, SWJewelTN and others have articulated most of my views reasonably well. I do want to address an argument that I have seen made repeatedly in this thread and elsewhere whenever the subject of interactions between the police and the public has arisen. Variations of arguments that question the standing of those critiquing cop behavior to even do so because they don't have an LE background are just plain bad argumentation. It is one thing to use your background in LE to explain why you do things a certain way. That's a valid argument, but to say that someone shouldn't question a tactic or action because they don't understand what it is like to be a cop is in no way shape or form a valid argument. It is the equivalent of feminists saying that men can't have an opinion of abortion because they lack a vagina or when SJWs say that folks can't question certain behaviors because they aren't of a particular race. It is simply a tactic to silence the other party without substantively addressing the topic actually being discussed. When you say "you need to be a ______ or you wouldn't understand what _____ go through" what you are really saying is that you can't make a strong argument to support your position would rather try to weasel out of the debate by delegitimization of your opponent.

True. Which I would do if I had a desire for an AR pistol. That is actually the second configuration for this lower. Initially it had all MOE furniture and a Trijicon Reflex optic.

Unlike KFC, it's truly finger lickin' good.

No. Just an early pic in the build process. I have a complete pic somewhere, just wasn't handy at the moment. Edited to add:

Another vote of confidence for the MI SS rail. I have a 15 inch on mine and I love it .

And what does the interest work out to on a debt whose principle you will never pay off?

The death penalty is nothing more than state-sponsored murder and even when I really want to, I cannot morally be OK with condoning that.

Their economic collapse was already well under way before Reagan got into office. Reagan didn't have great policy so much as great timing. It was eaten away by the cancer from with that will always destroy centrally planned economies. It didn't matter who was in office here, the die had been cast and the course could not be turned away from the inevitable. Stay tuned here because R or D, we will see a replay of the end of the USSR. With every passing year central planners and bureaucrats take more and more control of the economy regardless of the party currently in control. Doesn't matter who is elected, the cancer has taken hold and is going to eventually kill its host.

Games of brinkmanship only work when you are playing with rational actors. As far as Gorby and the USSR in the 80's, that had way more to do with their collapsing economy than anything ol' Ronnie Raygun did.

I thought I was on #teamwatchtheworldburn, But bravo! You really want to set nuclear fire to the whole thing.

Ya'll are correct. The clip was from Top Secret.

Give it a six pack. That usually works to change minds. Just sayin'.

You with the facts. Always with the facts. Y u no go wit narrative?