HeloDude

There is clearly a 'War Against the Deaf' when it comes to the Air Force. I'm very glad to see these proposed changes, you know, because of equality and fairness.

Freedom and liberty is being free from oppression...not from being free of having to feed and clothe yourself, fighting off predators (whether they walk on four or two legs), not from having to pay taxes on items you voluntarily purchase, etc. Being forced into labor (eg military service), and worse, at a wage you didn't agree to, is not being free. As for America being great, it was great when people valued their liberty, and that has been steadily decreasing. You don't need conscription when a 'great people' is willing to voluntarily fight for their liberty. I have read that in the early 1940's after the war had already started, the government wasn't allowing much men to enlist because the draft was going so smoothly and the government thought they could control the accessions better with a draft--which means that many of those who were drafted would have voluntarily enlisted anyways (what happened to one of my grandfathers, the other voluntarily enlisted shortly after Pear Harbor was bombed). Either way, you get what you get. By the way, is there any other job you would like to see people forced into? Medicine? Police? Teachers?

Irreverent--free people with liberty should never be forced by the government to do a certain task. But to answer your question more directly, the Wars would have turned out the way they would have turned out (not necessarily the same way they 'did' in fact turn out). If such a war is so unpopular that you cannot get enough volunteers to sign up for service, or cannot raise sufficient funds via taxes to properly incentivize enough people to volunteer (or fund the logistics for that matter), then do the American people really want to engage in the war? And if a follow up question would be something to the effect of: What if the mainland US was invaded and the volunteer military wasn't large enough to fight off the attack? My answer would be: Is the country, as it currently is, worth having/saving if enough able volunteers will not choose to voluntarily fight to save what we have? My answer to that question would be no. The people is what has made our country great...when the people become more and more 'less great' (as I believe we have been seeing for many decades), then it's no surprise that the country becomes less great. It happened to Rome.

First off, I have the same opinion on jury duty as I do when it comes to military service--it should be voluntary as the government should never be in the business of forcing people to do anything under penalty of law. This being said, after a little research, I could not find how someone could be forced into potential jury duty in the same way as conscription laws in the late 1960's. Take Minnesota, for example: Potential jurors are picked from a State database consisted of a list of registered voters and those who hold a drivers license/State ID card (see links below, and this also serves for how the federal courts in MN choose their jurors). So since you are not forced to register to vote and/or have some sort of a State ID, how can you be forced into jury duty? However, for the draft in the 1960's, all men who were citizens/legal residents between the age of 18-35 were required by law to register. Here is an example of where the difference lies. https://www.mnd.uscourts.gov/JuryInfo/juryfaq.shtml https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2012/04/23/good-question-how-do-you-get-picked-for-jury-duty/

"What in the hell's diversity?"

The income tax is theft, regardless of the 16th Amendment. The FairTax is not, and would be much better for the country.

Messed up, isn't it?

Couldn't agree more.

What's an 'electoral congress'?

Copy. I think it's all pretty awesome...fairly skeptical though to see how it turns out. I have a feeling the Appellate Court will strike it down and it will go to the SCOTUS, which ruled favorably on Heller in 2008. But I don't think this is just conceal carry vs open carry, I think it may include both. And in Vermont (among a few other States) you don't need a permit to CCW.

Update: According to Emily Miller (via Twitter), DC's Chief of Police has ordered her officers to not arrest anyone carrying a firearm who can legally carry one in any State. Now there are 30 States with open-carry witout a permit--does this mean that residents of these States can now open-carry a pistol on their hip in DC? This is getting very interesting... https://mobile.twitter.com/EmilyMiller/status/493572214558851072 https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/07/dean-weingarten/breaking-dc-police-chief-recognizes-right-to-carry-reciprocity/

Well played, sir.

Research complete: The women love it.

So we're going off what 'could' happen...got it. But if a person, dressed up looking like a police officer, knocks on your door and asks to come inside and ask you a few questions...what is the difference about a stranger wearing shorts and a T-shirt knocking on our door and asking you the same thing? He's not 'ordering you to do anything' and he's not identifying himself as Officer X from Y police department...you're just assuming he is, based off of his appearance. Same with people dressing up as a military officer. If you're legally allowed to dress up as an O-6 at an airshow and walk around asking people to do X (without identifying yourself), what is different from the scenario I provided above? Somewhat gets into the discusion of when the border patrol asks you questions at a checkpoint 50 miles into the US--you don't have to answer anything or give them permission to search your vehicle, though you can voluntarily allow them to do all day long if they only ask. If people ate stupid enough to believe everything they see (not even hear) then the joke is on them.

I'm pretty sure you're also not legally allowed to 'impersonate' (not just dress up as one) a military officer either...or am I wrong? So if you're allowed to dress up like a military officer (or NCO?) and walk around leading people to believe you are something that you are not, what's wrong with someone doing it as a police officer? You're just dressed up a certain way--people are just 'mistaking' you as something you are not, perhaps you're never calling yourself a police officer. That's why I asked where do we draw the line. It's somewhat of a philoshical discussion, as the laws are what they are.

Just to engage in the debate--does this mean someone should be able to dress up as a local police officer and knock on people's door and ask questions, tell people they can not do X on the street, etc? There's nothing illegal about a person in civilian clothes doing those things, however, dressing up as a local police officer may cause people to act a little differently, to say the least. I'm just curious where the line is drawn, if there is a line at all?

So because I don't approve of person X breaking the law when they illegally cross the border, then I must have a problem (or as you say, 'discomfort') because of the pure fact that they're from a different country? Have you worked with people from different countries? I know many of my fellow aircrew have, but since you're not aircrew I'm not sure...sorry, I digress. Well, if you haven't that's ok, but I have--and it was truly an awesome experience (every time, and I have done this on many different levels and occasions). So what's this thing about xenophobia? Do I have a fear of people coming here illegally (or legally forbthat matter) and getting on the government dole (becoming more of a taker than a maker) and contributing to the shitty situation of our welfare state? Yes, that does frighten me, because there has to eventually be a breaking point, and if there wasn't going to ever be one, then we could all go on welfare and live like kings. As I have said, end the welfare state, and I'll be all about open immigration...as long as they're documented like rest of us. So no, I dont have a fear of people from other countries, just like the other personal attributes you mentioned (race, creed, gender, sexuality) don't give me any concern either. But it's cool man...keep using your 'metaphors', they're quite enlightening. The fellow aircrew on here appreciate the non-aircrew guys (like yourself) trying to impress us.

We shoud start wearing disguises...

I say good for him, and I like to watch/DVR Stossel ('The Independents' on FBN is even better, and entertaining). I'm assuming it's cool with big blue, that or he just doesn't care anymore? I didn't agree with everything he has said (on here and other places) but I give the guy a lot of credit for standing up and taking the heat that comes with it. Most of us (whether in the military or not, and myself included) rarely take a stand on issues we feel strongly about, but he has done it, whether you agree with him on the issue/how he took it on, or not. It's easy to demonize the people that put themlseves out there, and again, that's because they're doing what the rest of us won't do. Could the guy have been less of an ass on here at times, yeah, most definitely, though I can say that about a few others on here, too. Maybe he learned a little in how to be better/more persuasive with his arguments.

Says the guy who brings the 'racism' card into the discussion...that has nothing to do with race.

I think it's because you like being around the company of pilots...don't worry about it, I was once the same way. Before I was a pilot, I looked up to and wanted to be in the company of military pilots. By the way, any pilot or flying questions you may have, just ask away!! You're welcome!!

AF Crimes has been putting out some pretty dumb shit lately...lately equates to several years.

Yeah, but you sourced foxnews, and they're racist...which now makes you and your post, racist. But seriously, I'd be cool with taking the Israeli approach on our southern border to fight the cartels. My minefield philosophy still works for me as well.

She's an idiot...watch some of her other videos.

Dogs are dangerous too...