Message from @Weez
Discord ID: 607384439403577354
if 30% of them decide to ban something, surely it's gonna have an impact
and if the ban was a good idea
then those areas are gonna see positive change
Your assuming that they would all agree to stop the monopoly
they don't have to
as I said
banning something is extremely ez
If 30% decided to ban it would have an effect sure, but the monopoly would still have substantial power
but not on their territory
I guess
so there would be room for alternatives o grow
thus we don't need a monopoly on violence, Enlightenment state to fight monopolies
so why do we need one?
I think you've got me on the economic argument however i still maintain my belief that the state or local county should have a right to violence for the simple maintenance of order
Why give so much power to a central authority? Surely that increases the likelihood of tyranny.
What checks and balances will be in place on that authority?
At least, if one local gov is tyrannical, you can move to the other pretty ez
and thus avoid the tyrannical regime, just by moving from city to city
Well that could just be stopped by elections and the second amendment
why not have both?
Why are you assuming there is a constitution?
<:hypersmugon:544638648721604608>
"and the second amendment"
Kokesh was thrashed
He needs to better develop his arguments
Skip to 30:00 for the debate
Seder rarely picks battles he can't win
smart
Did they ever confirm that it was El Paso's Manifesto?
Haven't kept up with that part yet, just been waiting for a few hours, till stuff gets confirmed tbh.
Police Chief Greg Allen mentioned the "manifesto" during a press conference, adding that the attack might have a “nexus” to hate crime. He said, however, that the police are still looking into whether the document was indeed penned by the shooter.
Did any part of the Manifesto mention Trump? That dumbass article in the Screenshot linked him to Trump because muh wall
>association
>also
