Yes, you should be able to manufacture explosives in your own home.
And yes, you should be allowed to do anything you want online.
Your terms are acceptable. I'm saying this without a hint of irony.
As long as you aren't doing anything that directly and physically affects the person, property, or enterprise that is owned by someone else without their informed and voluntarily given consent, whatever you do should be considered perfectly legal.
No harm no foul. Non-aggression principle and all that.
Let the consequences be the judge for vices, let the law be the judge for crimes, and let the state be prevented from confusing the two.
So you realize that the federal government agrees with you? It is currently 100% legal under federal law to manufacture high explosives for your own personal use on your own personal property. Some of the states have infringed on this right with state laws, but most have not... It only become a crime when you try to transport those explosives on a public road or if you try to sell them to a third party.
Mix up some C4 and blow up stumps in your back yard? 100% legal under federal law.
[ - ] allahead 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 15:28:10 ago (+1/-0)
If you expound the Roe v Wade argument it would imply that anything you do by yourself that you can keep secret would be legal, which is retarded in this case since there is a baby involved. I'm all for abortion btw, the country would have disintegrated by now without it.
The Supreme Court does what they want, they argue around the Constitution all the time. The Interstate Commerce Clause interpretation is the most egregious overstep that comes to mind. They took the diametrically opposite position that the founders intended and used it to allow the Feds to do impose all sorts of intra-state restrictions on States. That one really needs to be overturned.
[ - ] x0x7 [op] 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 19:51:28 ago (+1/-0)
But people find out about abortion all the time, but it's considered private after the fact. I think manufacturing explosives should be private even if they do find out.
Basically Roe v Wade argues you can't have probable cause after you have probable cause. Cool, now do explosives and almost all other laws. The murderous action of abortion shouldn't get this unique no PC after PC treatment and nothing else.
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 4 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 13:57:51 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Bonlio1
[ - ] Bonlio1 4 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 14:18:27 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 14:27:28 ago (+3/-2)
[ + ] Weredawg
[ - ] Weredawg 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 15:06:04 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] diggernicks
[ - ] diggernicks 0 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 15:14:28 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] HeavyBrain
[ - ] HeavyBrain 0 points 3 yearsMay 5, 2022 04:58:32 ago (+0/-0)
Like "Racial justice and equality bill, all POC get free abortions, no you can not identify as one if you are white"
[ + ] Paradoxical003
[ - ] Paradoxical003 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 19:38:38 ago (+1/-0)
And yes, you should be allowed to do anything you want online.
Your terms are acceptable. I'm saying this without a hint of irony.
As long as you aren't doing anything that directly and physically affects the person, property, or enterprise that is owned by someone else without their informed and voluntarily given consent, whatever you do should be considered perfectly legal.
No harm no foul. Non-aggression principle and all that.
Let the consequences be the judge for vices, let the law be the judge for crimes, and let the state be prevented from confusing the two.
[ + ] Glowbright
[ - ] Glowbright 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 15:47:06 ago (+1/-0)
Mix up some C4 and blow up stumps in your back yard? 100% legal under federal law.
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 18:32:53 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 [op] 0 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 19:46:29 ago (+0/-0)
If it was consistent with Roe v Wade me experimenting with C4 would be 100% legal under state law, which I'm pretty sure it isn't in my state.
[ + ] allahead
[ - ] allahead 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 15:28:10 ago (+1/-0)
The Supreme Court does what they want, they argue around the Constitution all the time. The Interstate Commerce Clause interpretation is the most egregious overstep that comes to mind. They took the diametrically opposite position that the founders intended and used it to allow the Feds to do impose all sorts of intra-state restrictions on States. That one really needs to be overturned.
[ + ] BlowjaySimpson
[ - ] BlowjaySimpson 0 points 3 yearsMay 5, 2022 00:49:09 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] RMGoetbbels
[ - ] RMGoetbbels 0 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 19:12:19 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Prairie
[ - ] Prairie 0 points 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 18:40:05 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 [op] 1 point 3 yearsMay 4, 2022 19:51:28 ago (+1/-0)
Basically Roe v Wade argues you can't have probable cause after you have probable cause. Cool, now do explosives and almost all other laws. The murderous action of abortion shouldn't get this unique no PC after PC treatment and nothing else.