• jmdrake's Avatar
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 10:01 AM
    That's the way you do things. It's not the way I do them. Again, no hunters were shot on our property. And considering the race ratio where we live that was most likely smart of us. And also considering that we later needed these same trespassing hunters when we had a house fire, as they made up the volunteer fire department, not shooting them was also smart of us. Had they had a 9 year old with them, gun or no gun, if he wasn't actively shooting I me I wouldn't have shot him. That doesn't mean I don't support property rights. If you can understand that great. If you can't...well that's fine too.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:44 AM
    I think reasonable people can disagree about the wall. Ron and I are against it. You two and others are for it. I think there is a line where nativist sentiment turns violent and dangerous and that line should be called out. I don't think the people who cross that line are evil, just misguided by their own logic. Back to the wall. Do you understand why Ron is against it? It's not going to be "impersonal and inert" like the Great Wall Of China. It will be manned by human and electronic surveillance. It will split in half land owned by American citizens. (That's already happened). It won't stop the flow of illicit drugs coming through without inspection on NAFTA trucks. (Unless Trump changed that in his new NAFTA deal which everyone on both sides of the argument says is the same as the old NAFTA deal). And in a SHTF scenario, it can be used to box us in. Trump already added face scanning cameras at airports in the name of fighting illegal immigration. The very policies that you believe will protect your liberty can be used to take it away.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:32 AM
    Not to condemn it. To clarify it. For some extrajudicial killing of illegal border crossers isn't murder because "they broke a law." Since angelatc wants the context, here it is. So. Again, I don't believe in shooting unarmed children. Period. In their own house. Crossing my property. Crossing the border. I didn't kill adult hunters who were trespassing, I sure as hell ain't gonna shoot some kid. If that means I don't support personal property, okay. How extremely liberal of me. /sarcasm.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:21 AM
    Hmmm....I just looked that up. Sadly it looks like they are holding up the legislation because they want to include reparations for black people for the disproportionate effect of the drug war. https://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2018/09/black_leader_legalizing_weed_should_come_with_repa.html So...rather than stop the harm as soon as possible....use this as an opportunity to demand money. Yeah...makes sense. /sarc
    19 replies | 102 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:18 AM
    Is this in flight groper named Bill Clinton?
    2 replies | 33 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:15 AM
    Portugal decriminalized drugs but you can still get arrested in Portugal for drug trafficking. See: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/05/portugals-radical-drugs-policy-is-working-why-hasnt-the-world-copied-it
    19 replies | 102 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:14 AM
    *sigh* You're fighting the wrong battle and beating the wrong dead horse and trying to flag down a ship that's already long sailed. The government already regulates marijuana. It's "regulation" is that it is illegal. The federal government "regulation" of drugs is based on a bad twisting of interstate commerce clause. The constitution had to be amended to prohibit alcohol and the same should have happened with drugs but didn't because of FDR, Wickard v Filburn and the new deal. Wickard v Filburn was quoted in the 2005 upholding federal prosecution of medical marijuana even in a state where it was legal. (See: https://www.cannalawblog.com/gonzales-v-raich-545-u-s-1-2005/) Legalization / decriminalization / whatever may be done represents a reduction in regulation, not the creation of it. Your argument would be akin to saying Trump shouldn't roll back EPA regulations on CO2 because...that means accepting more government regulation on CO2.
    19 replies | 102 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:05 AM
    If the shoe doesn't fit don't wear it. It's that simple.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 09:02 AM
    Except: A) A RPF member approved the killing in the name of border security because "they broke a law." B) Other members approved the idea of the killing as long as it happened on the border itself. C) The killers who did it, did it in the name of border security. D) If we were really talking about "invaders" (Red Dawn scenario), then it would be appropriate to break into the invaders homes and kill them. Now. You apparently don't approve of A or B. Fine. You don't. The shoe doesn't fit. Quit trying to wear it.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:57 AM
    It's not a strawman poll. Again, you apparently lack the intelligence to know what a strawman is. Golly. Maybe you shouldn't have assumed that a thread that wasn't about you somehow is. Then...you're a grown woman have have the full right to act retarded.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:56 AM
    That support what? Being against extra judicial killing? That's "squirrely leftist?" Ummm....okay. And for the record the reason Ron Paul said mass deportation is not practical is because it would require a police state. You understand that right? He's not saying "Oh it's just too expensive." Similarly he sees police state ramifications in border walls. Some of us aren't willing to sacrifice essential liberty for the illusion of security. I didn't say anything against deportations. The "strawman" is the one you are building. Border security is fine. But there has to be a limit. Mine is extrajudicial killing. Since you say you are for due process I will assume you are against extra judicial killing as well.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:52 AM
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Influenza again.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:52 AM
    If you support due process then you are not on the same side as the RPF members I was addressing who claimed that if you don't support extrajudicial killing of people crossing the border then you don't support property rights. So...what the hell are you babbling about? The shoe doesn't fit. Quit trying to wear it.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:49 AM
    My poll came straight from conversations with people on this forum which means it is not a strawman. In fact.....I don't think you even know what a strawman is. For the record, a strawman is an argument that nobody has made. People here have made the argument that if you don't support private militias killing unarmed illegal immigrants then you don't support property rights. It is the closed border side that created the strawman. This poll exposes it. If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:48 AM
    LOL. So quoting RP is "clutching pearls?" Really? You're just being obtuse and dishonest which is okay. I've seen you get that way on other issues. Ron Paul didn't say "We should do mass deportation but just make sure there is due process." And shooting an unarmed person crossing the border is not due process. I didn't call you out and say that you supported that because I have not seen any place that you do. So....why do you have your panties in a knot? Why defend an indefensible position that you didn't take?
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:44 AM
    The reality is you didn't answer the poll and now you are fabricating reality claiming that Influenza was trying to make you choose sides.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:43 AM
    Ron Paul 2015. On Trump's plan to round up and deport 15 million people: Ron Paul: How practical do you think this would be to round up 15 million people without any consideration for due process? McAdams: You’d essentially need a police state because you’d practically have to be going to go door to door almost, because they don’t keep track of these people. Ron Paul: I think it’s impossible.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:42 AM
    Ron Paul 2015. On Trump's plan to round up and deport 15 million people: Ron Paul: How practical do you think this would be to round up 15 million people without any consideration for due process? McAdams: You’d essentially need a police state because you’d practically have to be going to go door to door almost, because they don’t keep track of these people. Ron Paul: I think it’s impossible.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:41 AM
    In other words you are afraid to actually answer the poll. Got it.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:40 AM
    Correction. Your signature has part of Ron Paul's position in it. Leaving out the other part and pretending he didn't say it is dishonest on your part.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:39 AM
    Ummm....I support marijuana legalization but I would suggest you try being sober before posting. The people inside the house returning fire (the illegal immigrants) didn't moot the self defense point as they (not the vigilantes) had the right to self defense. The point that I was making to the nativist "if you don't support militias killing illegal immigrants you don't support property rights" position is that defending your property doesn't give you the right to kill someone just because they don't get off it fast enough. If they threaten you with physical harm then it is self defense. Understand now? Also what do you think of Ron Paul's "no border wall and no mass deportation" closed border position? I support it.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:33 AM
    It's a simple poll. You can vote your conscience or you can choose not to vote. And I will note that in your mind various border militias = organized crime. The motivation for the poll came from the dishonesty of the closed border nativists. Because I wasn't going to sign off on "Well should private citizens be able to shoot to kill to defend the border" argument I was falsely accused of not supporting property rights. But again, I have not generalized. I separated the "You can kill the 9 year old girl only when she is actively crossing the border" and "you can kill the 9 year old girl anytime" options. Edit: And for the record, I believe closed border and open border is being mis-used on the forum by you and others. Ron Paul is not for open borders. angelatc said so. And yet Ron Paul is on record being against the border wall and mass deportation.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:29 AM
    Who was not a saboteur? The battle cry of the revolution was "no taxation without representation" and when it was all over George Washington sent in the military to collect taxes from whiskey farmers who didn't want to pay taxes for a frontier army to fight the Indians when they didn't ask for that to happen.
    35 replies | 1174 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    19 replies | 102 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:14 AM
    Actually it is shocking that the leave was unpaid. Where is the FOP? Blue lives matter and deserve blue light specials!
    3 replies | 126 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:12 AM
    Thank you for the update. I will chalk that up to one of the things Obama did that I actually agreed with. I am still curious as to if she was ever put in a female prison but I guess if she was in solitary confinement that doesn't matter anyway.
    16 replies | 243 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:10 AM
    Well Mexican food can give you gas and flatulence is flammable so.....
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 08:09 AM
    Hello AF. I'm not sure why it would make you care less. But if so that's your prerogative. This wasn't aimed at you because I haven't see you make the "Well can't the vigilantes kill the immgrants?" argument I saw others make. I don't see how someone can care about a puppy killed by cops but "care less" about children killed by vigilantes. Taking a stand against murder does not = open borders. For the record I think Trump's move this week of cutting off aid to Guatemala and Honduras for not doing more to stop the "human caravan" makes sense. As you know, I actually give Trump credit for when he does things that actually make sense and criticize him for where he is wrong. And while Trump has not taken the "It's okay to kill unarmed 9 year olds" position when it comes to immigration (different for terror raids in Yemen), I oppose the position of those who do. Murder is where I draw the line. Whether you do or don't it's on you. Again, we ddin't shoot the U.S. born, red blooded American white hunters that came on our land. We had guns because they had guns. We just asked them to leave. It ain't that hard.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
  • jmdrake's Avatar
    Today, 07:59 AM
    Exactly! And the people who did the robbery felt they were justified in doing so because the people being robbed were in the country illegally. It's a distinction without a difference. Certainly if parents knew their children were not safe from extrajudicial killing if they came to the U.S. illegally, even after crossing the border and establishing a home, that might deter some. But also, angelatc ignored everything I said about defending my own family property. I suppose I could shoot the hunters. They are armed after all. I would if one raised a gun at me. But why do it if they are not? How exactly does that win friends and influence people? By the same token, I don't believe shooting unarmed helpless people (9 year old girls) even if they are actively climbing a border wall (or more likely being pulled over it) in any way makes sense. But again, people can disagree. Hence the poll.
    60 replies | 242 view(s)
More Activity

2 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Please help! I'm counting on RPF! http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=251175
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 2 of 2
About Krugerrand

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
4,757
Posts Per Day
1.27
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
2
Most Recent Message
06-23-2012 05:52 PM
General Information
Last Activity
05-14-2018 08:10 PM
Join Date
08-04-2008
Referrals
0

5 Friends

  1. bobbyw24 bobbyw24 is offline

    Banned

    bobbyw24
  2. Eryxis Eryxis is offline

    Member

    Eryxis
  3. jmdrake jmdrake is online now

    Member

    jmdrake
  4. Reason Reason is offline

    Member

    Reason
  5. Voluntary Man Voluntary Man is offline

    Member

    Voluntary Man
Showing Friends 1 to 5 of 5
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...