more free
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Sander_Marechal Jul 18, 2006 1:37 AM EDT |
Quoting:Is it possible that Europe could become more "free" than the U.S.? Looking from the other end of the pond I feel it already is, ever since 9/11 (and possibly before). Lately I've even be wondering if perhaps Europe should repay the '40-'45 debt to the American people and go to the USA to liberate it's people from it's government. US gun nuts are always claiming that they should have the right to carry arms to defend or rebel against a wrong government. Well, rebel already! |
| dcparris Jul 18, 2006 4:59 AM EDT |
>Well, rebel already! Don't tempt me. |
| jdixon Jul 18, 2006 5:13 AM EDT |
> Well, rebel already! Revolutions tend to kill a lot of people. Please forgive us if we seek more peaceful means first. |
| Rascalson Jul 18, 2006 6:01 AM EDT |
Yes peaceful means first but for certain there are several million americans "keeping their powder dry". "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 6:16 AM EDT |
Why Rascalson, Do you mean to imply that the millions of Americans exercising their rights might not be nuts to do so? Goodness!! How did your brain escape the washing station? |
| tuxchick2 Jul 18, 2006 7:43 AM EDT |
Oh come on, give the 2nd Amendment a rest already. There are nine others in the Bill of Rights, all of which are more important and more effective for keeping our liberties. Do you really believe that a disorganized, untrained armed citizenry has a ghost of a chance against US military forces? Let's see, a gaggle of random folks armed with hunting rifles, handguns, and perhaps some surplus military ordnance against a real army with big missiles, tanks, big guns, and well-trained, disciplined troops...hmmm. Nope, all that citizen "militia" does is give a despot an excuse to turn loose the real troops. Much more important is the weight of law. That's why modern wannabe despots expend so many resources buying favorable laws. An educated citizenry that won't let themselves be pushed around is what makes it all work, and unfortunately we seem to be losing that. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 8:02 AM EDT |
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Very true, but remember that using those arms in rebellion 'isn't a right'. The Declaration of Independence (which supports the right to rebel) was very quickly relegated to a 'Historical Document', nothing else... Now why would that be. |
| dcparris Jul 18, 2006 8:10 AM EDT |
> Let's see, a gaggle of random folks armed with hunting rifles, handguns, and perhaps some surplus military ordnance against a real army with big missiles, tanks, big guns, and well-trained, disciplined troops...hmmm. Aside from the fact that those random folks armed with hunting rifles is how we won the Revolution, and is the very reason the Soviets would have had to nuke us into oblivion, there is history itself. Colonel Robert E. Lee was in charge of the Marines who arrested John Brown (preacher, freedom fighter) at Harper's Ferry: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/b... Imagine how many former service people could participate in such an exercise today? Then imagine a motivated underclass - they will discipline themselves quickly. There are additional factors as well. It would turn pretty ugly pretty quick. Yeah, the peaceful option looks best. I'm not sure I really want to see another Civil War. DRM isn't as critical as enslavement, torture, military brutality against our own citizens, etc. Still, don't put me past such thoughts if I feel it's truly necessary. Now come the wiretaps. I'll say "hi" to GWB for everyone! :-) |
| SFN Jul 18, 2006 8:36 AM EDT |
Quoting:Then imagine a motivated underclass - they will discipline themselves quickly. Provided, of course, that the motivation is a slot on Fox's latest reality show "Militia: Montana" and a shot at hosting next year's "Militia: Guam". |
| dcparris Jul 18, 2006 9:11 AM EDT |
> Provided, of course, that the motivation is a slot on Fox's latest reality show "Militia: Montana" and a shot at hosting next year's "Militia: Guam". :-D |
| grouch Jul 18, 2006 9:36 AM EDT |
tuxchick2: >"Do you really believe that a disorganized, untrained armed citizenry has a ghost of a chance against US military forces?" The big difference is that US military forces are made up of the friends, family and neighbors of that gaggle of citizen militia. If it came down to the point that a sufficient number of US citizens felt the only way to preserve the Constitution, and particularly, the Bill of Rights, was to take up arms against the federal government, I suspect that same feeling would, by then, permeate US military forces. Thankfully, there is still much opportunity for Jefferson's mini-revolutions (elections) to avoid armed rebellion. We need to work on that "educated citizenry that won't let themselves be pushed around", which you point out as so important. There is a big danger that faith and confidence in voting and elections has been eroded to the point where the mini-revolutions do not relieve the pressure. It is vital, IMO, that voters be able to test and verify that their votes have been properly recorded and counted. You can't do that with electronic voting machines so closed that they don't even leave a trace of tampering. (BTW, organizations like the EFF do good work in this area.) http://www.eff.org |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 9:49 AM EDT |
Rev, TC, et al -- What's funny in this discussion, is that we seem to have forgotten the power of non-violence and the impotence of extreme power. Gandhi drove the Brits out of England without guns. Boris Yeltsin was the straw that broke the USSR's back when he stared down a tank in Moscow. All of the Soviet military power couldn't control Afghanistan, and the US army hasn't exactly squelched the combination of foreign invaders and local thugs making life terrible in Iraq. It's like the MAD stalemate of the Cold War -- sure we had nuclear weapons. What good did it do us? We couldn't use them without destroying life as we knew it. A well-trained, well-armed American army facing a bunch of (surprisingly well) armed civilians in a showdown for the soul of a nation? On paper, it's a rout, but, on paper, all those soldiers follow orders to shoot their neighbors, friends, and families. |
| jdixon Jul 18, 2006 10:02 AM EDT |
Dino: > On paper, it's a rout, but, on paper, all those soldiers follow orders to shoot their neighbors, friends, and families. Which is one of the potential drawbacks of a volunteer/career military. It tends to decrease the effectiveness of having a civilian military. > [numerous examples of successful non-violence] One phrase, Tiananmen Square. Without a military who will refuse to take orders, peaceful revolt may not be effective. |
| SFN Jul 18, 2006 10:10 AM EDT |
Quoting:What's funny in this discussion, is that we seem to have forgotten the power of non-violence and the impotence of extreme power. Oh and the TOS. We seem to have forgotten about that too. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 10:19 AM EDT |
> I'm not sure I really want to see another Civil War I'm pretty sure I don't. The last one still reverberates nearly 150 years later. I saw the Guard fire on the students at Kent State. Military backing for the citizenry or no, there would be soldiers that would follow orders to put down any revolution no matter how justified. Messy indeed.. "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." ~Voltaire |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 10:33 AM EDT |
>One phrase, Tiananmen Square. Without a military who will refuse to take orders, peaceful revolt may not be effective. Absolutely. Non-violence relies on the self-perception of the oppressor. Oppressors who consider themselves to be civilized (and, who, of course, in other contexts actually ARE civilized) are vulnerable to noble acts. Even our all-volunteer army is close enough to ordinary folk to keep me from being too worried -- though every rule has exceptions. The Kent State situation is a kind of perverse reversal. Those were National Guard troops, not that well trained, and too easily rattled. And -- let's not forget: they were the exception, not the rule. Quite a few of us (myself included) would not be walking around if Kent State were the norm. As it is, the worst I ever had to deal with was tear gas, though a few big guys with riot batons got a little too close for my comfort. Good thing I was speedy back then. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 10:41 AM EDT |
> As it is, the worst I ever had to deal with was tear gas, though a few big guys with riot batons got a little too close for my comfort. Good thing I was speedy back then. By then I'd learned enough to give it some distance :D. |
| sbergman27 Jul 18, 2006 10:45 AM EDT |
Quoting:Oh and the TOS. We seem to have forgotten about that too. True. Not to trivialize the idea of civil war, but I imagine a few parallels could be drawn from this essay: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 18, 2006 11:57 AM EDT |
If I may,
Non-violence relies on the self-perception of the oppressor. Oppressors who consider themselves to be civilized (and, who, of course, in other contexts actually ARE civilized) are vulnerable to noble acts. That is the confusion most people have between "pacifist" and "non-violent". Ghandi was a soldier, fought for England, carried a rifle, etc. He was not a "pacifist". What he did was hook into the perception that the British have of their own civility, and played the media like a concert pianist. Tienamin Square is not an isolated incident, nor does it even come close to the violence of Ruby Ridge ID, and Mt. Carmel, TX. The protesters in Beijing were allowed to protest, then several days before they were rolled over the Chinese government told them that was enough it was time to go. The protesters were given lots of warning and ample opportunity to just walk away. The government in America, in comparison, surrounds their targets before any warming is given. Indeed the history of the US is that it's the winners who write the history books. Speaking of which, anyone who is reading this far would be well served to read _Unintended Consequences_ by John Ross. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888118040/ref=/102-2... _Unintended Consequences_, or at least an equivalent in materials, is a book I consider a primer before anyone can discuss either the 2nd Amendment or "gun nuts" with anything better than ignorance. If someone wants to believe that I am insulting them by saying this, so be it. Would you want to talk about the Constitution of Declaration of Independence with someone who had never read them? If you don't like firearms, and by the "there are 9 other entries in the Bill Of Rights that are more important" comment above I expect there are a few folks here who might say that about themselves, try http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2006/tle376-20060716-07.html I'm not just a Gun Nut. I'm a Free Speach Nut, I'm a Jury Nut, I'm a Separation Of Powers Nut. Really, I'm a Liberty Nut. The only reason "guns" stand out is because they've been so demonized in the public schools and press that the issue stands out far more than it deserves. Just say "guns" and everything else is pushed aside as if nothing else exists. The history of armed revolt in the US (Whiskey and Shay's Rebellion), or even unarmed revolt (see Bonus March and that little attempt at peaceful secession by several states c. 1861), is not pretty. The US Fed.Gov reacts to any challenge to its assumed authority with quick and lethal force. That's why I agree that a citizen army would be useless against the full might of the US military, if the citizens were stupid enough to stand in the open. The rules of Rodgers Rangers rings true to this very day: Don't just stand there, hide behind a tree or rock. What the lawful ownership of private arms does is not facilitate civil war. There have been uncountable civil wars in countries where (like NYC and Northern Ireland) private ownership of weapons is completely illegal. The words of Machiavelli come to mind: "But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you." and... "For among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised, and this is one of those ignominies against which a prince ought to guard himself, as is shown later on. Because there is nothing proportionate between the armed and the unarmed; and it is not reasonable that he who is armed should yield obedience willingly to him who is unarmed, or that the unarmed man should be secure among armed servants." Now how does this relate to OpenSource? Goodness, you want access to the Source Code? To do what, CHANGE IT???? You could hurt yourself doing that! Much better to leave it to experts, to know that the binaries you run are produced by professionals. After all, we hire police, right? And if you want to get to the source code, you can always join the Military and Police, ahem, I mean Microsoft or IBM. I've said more than once that if the shooting part of this revolution came, I would have a feeling of relief, that the waiting was over. But I've come to realize that this is because the legalistic web of control over everyone, including me, has made me realize that it is only a matter of time before there is a knock at my door in the middle of the night. I've been too vocal, too harsh, for too long and too publicly. And about those "other 9 more important Rights", which ones have not been actively violated or legislated out of existence? None of them. They're gone. I humbly suggest that nay-saying one persons defense of the 2nd, just because you think the 1st or 5th is "more important", is missing the entire point of having them at all. The reason for their piecemeal mooting has been specifically because of people treating one as more inviolate than another, "divide and conquer", and there has never been a large enough group to object loudly enough against the demise of each one in turn. Can it be that the public school and mass media brainwashing has been so effective in separating us from each other, regardless of our shared love of Liberty, merely because we each enjoy aspects of that Liberty differently, that now we won't even come to each others aid as that Liberty is taken away? Sadly, that answer has been proven to be "yes". |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 12:38 PM EDT |
> I've said more than once that if the shooting part of this revolution came, I would have a feeling of relief, that the waiting was over. But I've come to realize that this is because the legalistic web of control over everyone, including me, has made me realize that it is only a matter of time before there is a knock at my door in the middle of the night. I've been too vocal, too harsh, for too long and too publicly. As long as it's just vocal, it's likely that they'll leave you alone. Far better for them to be able to point and say 'see, over there, another nut case'. On the other hand, they'll keep an eye on you, and that can always change. |
| SFN Jul 18, 2006 12:44 PM EDT |
Quoting:Far better for them to be able to point and say 'see, over there, another nut case'. Not just that, they'll tack on "and we let HIM talk - we MUST be free". You're their buddy. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 18, 2006 12:57 PM EDT |
You're their buddy. Oh puke! Might as well kill myself! |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 1:07 PM EDT |
> Oh puke! Might as well kill myself! Noo... Don't do that. Then they can peg you as a 'suicidal' nut :D... |
| jdixon Jul 18, 2006 1:47 PM EDT |
Bob_Robertson: > it is only a matter of time before there is a knock at my door in the middle of the night. Yes, but it probably won't be for any of the reasons you expect. Government power will simply expand until one day one of your normal activities will be one that they try to control, and you'll probably never even know it until they come for you. And it's not just you. The way things are going, anyone as free spoken as the posters on this site tend to be will be eventually become a target, at least in the US. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 18, 2006 2:00 PM EDT |
but it probably won't be for any of the reasons you expect. Exactly. That is what I meant. I don't expect anything I do to change, what will change is the law and the politicians so that something I have always done becomes one day a reason for them to attack. When a peaceful if "strange" christian group can be surrounded and killed en masse, men, women and children, on nationwide television, and have the attackers be given bonuses and promotions, then none of us are safe. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 2:42 PM EDT |
> none of us are safe Waco is really muddied, but Ruby Ridge is an absolutely clear example of Government manipulation, lies, overreaction, escalation, and complete lack of control. Even the Senate and the Courts agree with that one. The government says they cleaned up their act, but, then Waco, and another claim to have corrected things. With a state of 'pseudo-war' having been declaired by our 'representatives' almost anyone can now be declaired a terriorist, and any action terriorism. Strange times when I fear my Government far more than any Terrorist... |
| Sander_Marechal Jul 18, 2006 3:07 PM EDT |
Quoting:Strange times when I fear my Government far more than any Terrorist... The scary part is that it it should come as far as the UN liberating the US people from a totalitarian goverment in a couple of decades, that US conservative christian raptionists will probabely see that as the apocalypse, with the "evil" UN forces, the antichrist, seven years of tribulation and everything on it. Okay, I really should shut up before I bring up every inflammatory topic but OpenGL vs DirectX in this thread :-) |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 3:12 PM EDT |
> UN liberating the US people from a totalitarian goverment Sorry, I don't see the UN liberating anyone either. |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 4:12 PM EDT |
>Sorry, I don't see the UN liberating anyone either. Not counting the liberating effects on lifestyles that all those Saddam dollars had. Seriously, though, the UN is really very good at standing on the sideline during a genocide and then clucking when all the worst is over. It's a tough job. Somebody's got to do it, right? |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 4:41 PM EDT |
> clucking when all the worst is over If it were the US, they'd be screaming with laughter... |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 5:19 PM EDT |
jimf - >If it were the US, they'd be screaming with laughter... I don't remember a whole lot of laughter. In fact, seems to me that the US officials were using the "genocide" word with regard to Rwanda long before the UN discovered it in their dictionary. For that matter, in case you've forgotten, we were part of the Balkans intervention that the UN condemned as illegal -- only to hop on the bandwagon when the heavy lifting was done. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 5:33 PM EDT |
Naw dino, ya missed it. in the case of the UN liberating the US people from a totalitarian goverment, they'd stand on the sideline, then, laugh like hell as we went up in flames. |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 5:48 PM EDT |
Jimf - Whoops!! Sorry. Misunderstood your post. |
| grouch Jul 18, 2006 6:25 PM EDT |
I think it is safe to say that all of us who have participated in this thread have severely bent the TOS to do so. |
| jdixon Jul 18, 2006 6:40 PM EDT |
> have severely bent the TOS... Broken into tiny bits, more like it. However, at least one legitimate aspect of the conversation could be brought up. Namely, do the attitudes inherent in being a proponent of Free software make you more of a target in totalitarian regimes, and what can be done about it? In a more general sense, what influence does Free software have on governments, and vice versa? I think such a thread could be held on topic for the site and kept within the TOS, though it might be difficult. In fact, I suspect a good masters level thesis could be written on the subject. |
| dinotrac Jul 18, 2006 6:41 PM EDT |
grouch - >I think it is safe to say that all of us who have participated in this thread have severely bent the TOS to do so. And isn't that a lovely thing? We managed to go where the talk took us without calling each other Nazis/Commies/traitors/morons/twinkiephobes or bunches of other horrible names. Except for you, of course, who we know to be a grouch. Maybe -- just maybe -- the TOS can sometimes function like a broken tail light often does for the police. A citable reason to step in when something doesn't seem right in order to preserve the greater good. |
| grouch Jul 18, 2006 7:55 PM EDT |
dinotrac: You made my point for me, in spite of being hopelessly fossilized. Even with all the talk of guns, revolutions and highly controversial, U.S.-centric, politically charged events, nobody resorted to ad hominem attacks (except you and I in these two latest comments) or threatened retaliation. It's really quite amazing and even "a lovely thing" to see. I still wouldn't want to see Democrat/Republican/Anarchist/Libertarian mudslinging, though. It's easy for such discussions to slip into that. Moderating online discussions requires some person making a judgement call about when participants cross some invisible line, heading toward a verbal brawl instead of a discussion. |
| jimf Jul 18, 2006 8:06 PM EDT |
I'll end my comments with a quote I think we'll all agree on: " It is the duty of the Patriot to protect his country from his government. " Thomas Paine |
| salparadise Jul 18, 2006 11:51 PM EDT |
Quoting:Ghandi drove the Brits out of England. Eh? You sure about that? I think there's a few tens of millions of us still here. I mean, I know immigration has reached the extent where in some places in England it more or less is India to all intents and purposes, but there's still some of us here. |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 1:37 AM EDT |
sal - Nitpicker. |
| salparadise Jul 19, 2006 1:42 AM EDT |
rofl From a nation of... |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 2:02 AM EDT |
sal - I must profess my ignorance -- no big deal given my vast experience at demonstrating it -- I miss the "From a nation of" reference. Re Brits in India... Well shucks. It only makes sense, though. We still haven't managed to drive them all out of the US, either. I'm beginning to think they're going to stay. |
| grouch Jul 19, 2006 7:04 AM EDT |
Never give up, dinotrac! I keep my shotgun by the door; just tell me where the invaders are hanging out and where our jumping-off point is! |
| tuxchick2 Jul 19, 2006 7:20 AM EDT |
I'm hearing this whole conversation in the voices of "King of the Hill" characters. Especially Dale Gribble. |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 7:23 AM EDT |
grouch - Good to hear! Those Brits are pretty tough, so a warm-up exercise is in the works. Not only will it get rid of a group of folks with no demonstrable redeeming qualities, but it revives memories of a great and successful project of our recent past. We call it "The Liberate Manhatten Project". More news later. PS - I know I don't have to tell you to keep all of this strictly secret. |
| dcparris Jul 19, 2006 8:36 AM EDT |
> I'm hearing this whole conversation in the voices of "King of the Hill" characters. Especially Dale Gribble. I think I'm gonna groan! |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 8:41 AM EDT |
Psst, Rev.... Just between you and me, I'd avoid Manhatten.... Come to think of it, that's a good idea anyway. I hear a beer goes north of 5 bucks! |
| grouch Jul 19, 2006 9:49 AM EDT |
dinotrac: >"a group of folks with no demonstrable redeeming qualities" Well, they did give us Joe Cocker and Marty Feldman. |
| dcparris Jul 19, 2006 11:28 AM EDT |
> I hear a beer goes north of 5 bucks! I heard that over by grouch's place... There's an old hollow tree, just a little way from me Where you lay down a dollar or two If you hush up your mug, then they'll give you a jug Of that good old mountain dew ;-) |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 19, 2006 11:42 AM EDT |
"I hear a beer goes north of 5 bucks!" You've never been to Tokyo! NYC is freaking CHEAP in comparison. I think the only political "group" who would not appreciate F/OSS would be die-hard corporatists, Big Business / Government "partnership" types. As Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) states, by voting consistently smaller-government, he aligns himself with the most radical of Republicans and the most radical of Democrats. I'm not sure about the rest of the world, unfortunately. There has been a polarization (as seen in Mexico right now) and a coming together in the various political factions I read about. All parties in power, regardless of their professed alignments, seem to be all for more and more control. Having Microsoft be an American corporation helps because anyone politically supporting F/OSS can do so from a nationalistic standpoint. "Stop sending our (yen, yuan, sheckles, drachma, pounds(sic), etc) to a American company!" Gun owning and F/OSS? Self ownership and self reliance. Bleeding-heart liberal and F/OSS? Belief in the value of the individual over those damned mega-corporations. Protectionist and F/OSS? Local programmers. Libertarians? F/OSS is entirely voluntary. Tax resisters? No Microsoft Tax. Tin-hat conspiracy theorists? F/OSS can compiled from source. I'm still trying to figure out what voice my post might have in KotH. Maybe Boomhauer... I honestly think the mess in India can be directly ascribed to the fact that India was granted "independence", they didn't take it. Ok, Dale Gribble. Got it. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 19, 2006 11:45 AM EDT |
DC, I'm in North Carolina. I have seen, once, a jug of good old mountain dew, but have otherwise been unable to get my hands on any. I'm a slave to the Alcohol Control Board. |
| dcparris Jul 19, 2006 12:04 PM EDT |
> DC, I'm in North Carolina. I have seen, once, a jug of good old mountain dew, but have otherwise been unable to get my hands on any. I'm a slave to the Alcohol Control Board. Sorry to hear that. ;-) Kidding of course. With the State trooper and City Police couple living right across the street from me, I'm afraid I ain't much use myself. :-D When I lived up home, we had a friend who was running his still in his house (using the chimney) - in July, with the local boy sitting down the way on the corner. Guess he wasn't paying attention - or might have already got his jug filled. |
| jdixon Jul 19, 2006 12:57 PM EDT |
> I have seen, once, a jug of good old mountain dew, but have otherwise been unable to get my hands on any. http://www.mountainmoonshine.com/pages/258265/index.htm They don't seem to let you mail order, unfortunately. If anyone one wants some, I may be able to get it for you. |
| grouch Jul 19, 2006 1:02 PM EDT |
The revenuers allow you to make up to 200 gallons of distilled spirits per year, for personal use. If you make more, you're assumed to be in it for commercial purposes and you have to do that tax thing or the jail thing. |
| jdixon Jul 19, 2006 1:09 PM EDT |
> The revenuers allow you to make up to 200 gallons of distilled spirits per year, for personal use. If you make more, you're assumed to be in it for commercial purposes and you have to do that tax thing or the jail thing. That's my understanding also, but the various states also have regulations covering alcohol, which may be more restrictive than the federal ones. So check your state laws before assuming you can make your own. |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 1:58 PM EDT |
>So check your state laws before assuming you can make your own. If you make no assumptions,however, it should be OK -- especially if you sample as you go. Non-Editorial aside, a few months later: No. 80652963: Hey guard, what's with this #@?!# moron in the next cell? He's always grinning like some kind of #!^&??!# little *&%@#! Guard: Hey, ain't nothin' we can do about 9 (he is on a first name basis with the prisoner in the next cell). It's the squeezin's, I tell ya. It's the squeezin's. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 19, 2006 2:25 PM EDT |
200 gallons for PERSONAL use?? Like what, bathing in it? Never waking up? Stripping paint? Keeping the entire family on the brink of cirrhosis? sheeesh |
| jimf Jul 19, 2006 2:38 PM EDT |
Heck, you can run your car on it tuxchick :) |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 19, 2006 2:48 PM EDT |
NononoNONONONONO! It's 200 gallons of WINE or BEER for personal consumption. Distilling *AT*ALL* is verboten without a license from the Fed.Gov. Period, absolutely. Even leaving a barrel of apple cider outside in winter to freeze the water and tapping it for the alcohol is consider FREEZE DISTILLING too, and is prosecuted worse than murder. Seriously, Do Not Distill! Even for yourself! Check the law first, I'm not joking. I checked into all the rules when I was making my own mead (fermenting honey). |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 2:52 PM EDT |
>I checked into all the rules when I was making my own mead (fermenting honey). You can call me D, or you can call me P, but ya doesn't have to call me honey. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 19, 2006 3:16 PM EDT |
Only outlaws will have mead. |
| dinotrac Jul 19, 2006 3:27 PM EDT |
>Only outlaws will have mead. Which they'll need because of the in-laws. |
| dcparris Jul 19, 2006 3:54 PM EDT |
> 200 gallons for PERSONAL use?? Like what, bathing in it? Never waking up? Stripping paint? Keeping the entire family on the brink of cirrhosis? sheeesh It's purely for medicinal purposes. ;-) Well, o.k., it doubles as an explosive when you start feudin' with them Hatfields. I like the Moonshine distillery - will have to make a run to Morgantown next time I'm up to visit Pa. He lives just about 1.5 or 2 hours South of there. Dino: >Which they'll need because of the in-laws. Especially if you're the in-law. ;-) |
| jimf Jul 19, 2006 4:04 PM EDT |
> is prosecuted worse than murder Yep, that's our Gov, for sure.... |
| grouch Jul 19, 2006 5:00 PM EDT |
Bob_Robertson: I had to check up on that. The bloat of regulation is absolutely amazing. Check out just "Part 19--DISTILLED SPIRITS PLANTS", "[Revised as of April 1, 1997]": http://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/info/faq/subpages/27cfrpart019.ht... As the FAQ at http://www.ttb.gov/alcohol/info/faq/genalcohol.htm says, "There are numerous requirements that must be met that make it impractical to produce spirits for personal or beverage use." What's the country coming to? |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 20, 2006 3:33 PM EDT |
"What's the country coming to?" Now you get why I'm an anarcho-capitalist. I have been shown nothing, absolutely nothing, that a government can do that private efforts by interested individuals does not do as well, and as far as I can tell always better. http://www.mises.org/ |
| grouch Jul 20, 2006 3:39 PM EDT |
I thought at first that the revision date meant that the feds had developed a sense of humor, but it seems they consider a 'still to be a major environmental hazard. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!