roger hijack. Want me to try to split and move to UWOA?

Is it time to repeat the jungle boots thread? LOL

On the social contract issue, you're still bound by it under several different theories of consent. :D

On the choice/violence issue, you're right. But the availability of other remedies changes the equation considerably. The power of the State is at everyone's disposal, and that is a very significant thing.

Nah. I think we're almost done anyway, aren't we?

Doesn't look like it to me:
:munchin

You just want to show off those superMatrix powers. LOL

OK, you've defined the issues, but the ball is still in your court, I think. Or do you want me to explain? :lifter

I am only bound by those elements I choose to allow to bind me. If the state wishes to enforce implied consent on my part, oh for example claiming that there is implied consent because I choose to be a US citizen, then at the end of the day, I could drive the issue to the point that they have to use force in order to gain my compliance. In which case they have proven my point. The only way they can ultimately win is to apply more force than I have available to me.

You are correct. Are we done now? :)

I successfully split it and you surrender on the very next post?
LOL -well, as long as I win....

You didn't win, we agreed. We both won. ;)

Oh not no but HELL NO!:D

You were in 7th Group. See, I'm right.

I win!

No.

LOL - Well, I feel a refresher coming on,:D

you are both pretty. :eek:

I agree with NDD. The state, and implied consent, are tools of the man.

But of course, my mandatory compliance is implied!

Blargh.

Found this elsewhere, posted by someone named "Sneaky SF Dude:"