But open carrying despite the fact that agreed-upon law says no?

a *minority* of ppl who voted to impose their will over a majority of ppl

majority of ppl dont even vote

Not voting is a choice

So you're speaking out against a representative government, too.

Then whose fault is it for not participating in voting?

```if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!``` - Rush

but the whole idea is CONSENT of the governed

Apathy is consent technically

thats a weak argument because some ppl just magically give themselves the right to impose their will over others

I mean....

doesnt make it legitimate

Oh, what's that concept that goes around in SJW circles?

Where you have to ask consent every 15 seconds or some shit

Basically that, but in government form?

LOL thats retarded, dude... come on... .talk about misrepresentation

Consent is implied until stated otherwise

California checks the consent of the people every year in november.

We do?

@missdanger BINGO okay okayl... lets see here ...

okay everyone .... listen up....

"i dont consent"

now what

Well, you can feel free to move!

What you not consenting to?

Laws.

Apparently...

naw, still wrong. you hate what you dont understand

laws arent the same as colors of law

have you ever even heard of color of law?

evidently not

Oh, I have. 😆

Wait a minute, it seems like the topic is getting off tracked

you are not bound to color of law jurisdictions arbitrarily and absolutely

Well under our somewhat weird ass legal system, you are still under the jurisdiction of US domestic laws even if you dont consent. My house my rule kinda stuff

municipal codes and statutes are not the same as laws

'Traffic signs aren't laws!'

Oh god! You're a SovCit!

yeah AS IF theres no incentive to obey traffic signs

AS IF i would just run stop lights wrecklessly if not for laws ... come on man give me a break

I hope we get a new member who is a paralegalis to clear things up