Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.



--

Richard Lamb

On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

i

Ignoramus27168 wrote:
On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

i

No argument with that...

Actually, for a more readable, and a more realistic story,
I'd recommend "Defiance" (IIRC was named "Vandenburg" in first print)
by Oliver Lange.

This story is on a similar vein as The Movie Red Dawn but was written earlier.
It's well crafted and interesting.



--

Richard Lamb

On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Ignoramus27168 wrote:
On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

i

No argument with that...

Actually, for a more readable, and a more realistic story,
I'd recommend "Defiance" (IIRC was named "Vandenburg" in first print)
by Oliver Lange.

This story is on a similar vein as The Movie Red Dawn but was written earlier.
It's well crafted and interesting.

I bought that one, thanks

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:20:54 -0500, Ignoramus27168
wrote:

On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

You missed the whole point of the book, dude. Go back and read it to
the end this time, eh?

On 8/10/2010 6:52 PM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:20:54 -0500, Ignoramus27168
wrote:

On 2010-08-10, wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

You missed the whole point of the book, dude. Go back and read it to
the end this time, eh?


No, the point is the book is not that great. The thing is a fantasy.
It's completely not believable and it winds up being like a comic book,
just not anywhere near a realistic book. If you find a point in that
you're reading one into it.

Hawke

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:20:54 -0500, Ignoramus27168
wrote:

On 2010-08-10, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


The book is extremely boring. I read it 10 years ago and did not even
finish. The author has a fascination with gun parts so 2/3 of the book
is about gun parts.

You missed the whole point of the book, dude. Go back and read it to
the end this time, eh?

If you liked that, you'll love his other book:

http://www.amazon.com/Puppy-Preschoo...tt_at_ep_dpt_2

It's for more mature audiences than _Unintended Consequences_, but the idea
is the same.

--
Ed Huntress

cavelamb on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

Even if there was a "formal declaration" and an Official
Organization, it will still be called "murder." So what?

Does "murder" become acceptable because a guy is wearing an
official uniform, belongs to an Official Organization, and possibly
even draws a paycheck for such belonging? No.

But the real question to contemplate: if the government is not
constrained by the law, why should I be? Aside from the disparate
levels of force available?

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich
"We are today in the most literal sense a lawless society, for our law
has ceased to be law and become instead its opposite -- mere force at the
disposal of whoever is at the controls." Charles A. Reich, _Peters Quotations_, (c) 1977.

pyotr filipivich wrote:
cavelamb on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

Even if there was a "formal declaration" and an Official
Organization, it will still be called "murder." So what?

Does "murder" become acceptable because a guy is wearing an
official uniform, belongs to an Official Organization, and possibly
even draws a paycheck for such belonging? No.

But the real question to contemplate: if the government is not
constrained by the law, why should I be? Aside from the disparate
levels of force available?

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich


I take your point, pytor, but yes, among nations, the formal declaration
is very important.

Change the scale of your thinking for a moment.

Instead of people, think nations.
Does a sovereign nation have the right to defend itself or not?

Your last point, however, is exactly the thesis of this book.
His argument is that BECAUSE of the difference in force, resources, etc
that can be brought to bear by the government, individual people should
rise up and kill government officials that had wronged them personally.
(At least that is what HAPPENED in the story)

Which now begs these questions...

Does the government have the right to defend it's members from the population?

Does the population have the right to defend themselves from the government?

Is there a limit to how far we can go?

If so, where is that limit?

I believe that the limits we impose on our personal behavior are normally
quite well marked.

But crowds are not people, and have no conscience.

And neither are governments.

--

Richard Lamb

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:47:37 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

pyotr filipivich wrote:
cavelamb on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

Even if there was a "formal declaration" and an Official
Organization, it will still be called "murder." So what?

Does "murder" become acceptable because a guy is wearing an
official uniform, belongs to an Official Organization, and possibly
even draws a paycheck for such belonging? No.

But the real question to contemplate: if the government is not
constrained by the law, why should I be? Aside from the disparate
levels of force available?

tschus
pyotr

--
pyotr filipivich


I take your point, pytor, but yes, among nations, the formal declaration
is very important.

So the US has engaged in widespread muder by being involved in

1. Vietnam conflict
2. Granada Conflict
3. Mogadesu Conflict
4. Baltic Conflict
5. Yugoslavic Conflict
6. Iraq Conflict
7. Afghanistan Conflict

None of those actions involved a formal Declaration of War.

Is that your claim?


Change the scale of your thinking for a moment.

Instead of people, think nations.
Does a sovereign nation have the right to defend itself or not?

Your last point, however, is exactly the thesis of this book.
His argument is that BECAUSE of the difference in force, resources, etc
that can be brought to bear by the government, individual people should
rise up and kill government officials that had wronged them personally.
(At least that is what HAPPENED in the story)

Which now begs these questions...

Does the government have the right to defend it's members from the population?

Does the population have the right to defend themselves from the government?

Is there a limit to how far we can go?

If so, where is that limit?

I believe that the limits we impose on our personal behavior are normally
quite well marked.

But crowds are not people, and have no conscience.

And neither are governments.

Hence the deaths of the guilty.

Sometimes, one simply has to raise the Black Flag, and start cutting
throats.

Gunner



"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

cavelamb on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:47:37 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:
cavelamb on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

Even if there was a "formal declaration" and an Official
Organization, it will still be called "murder." So what?

Does "murder" become acceptable because a guy is wearing an
official uniform, belongs to an Official Organization, and possibly
even draws a paycheck for such belonging? No.

But the real question to contemplate: if the government is not
constrained by the law, why should I be? Aside from the disparate
levels of force available?


I take your point, pytor, but yes, among nations, the formal declaration
is very important.

Change the scale of your thinking for a moment.

Instead of people, think nations.
Does a sovereign nation have the right to defend itself or not?

Does a state - yes. Does a people (the "nation") - also yes.

Your last point, however, is exactly the thesis of this book.
His argument is that BECAUSE of the difference in force, resources, etc
that can be brought to bear by the government, individual people should
rise up and kill government officials that had wronged them personally.
(At least that is what HAPPENED in the story)

Which now begs these questions...

Does the government have the right to defend it's members from the population?

Any organism includes self-defense as a fundamental.

Does the population have the right to defend themselves from the government?

Of course. But where non-violent change is not allowed, then
recourse to violent change is necessary.

Is there a limit to how far we can go?

If so, where is that limit?

By me, it is a personal question. I'm opposed to the use of
tactical nuclear weapons, persistent poison gases or artillery inside
city limits. I can understand those who would kill a tyrants entire
family, which doesn't mean I necessity approve. (I am not a "kill them
all, let the toasty one sort out his own" sort of person.)
And it depends where you find yourself. If there is no
alternative, then there is no problem. The alternative to "Victory or
death" is "maximum success or a reasonable alternative."

I believe that the limits we impose on our personal behavior are normally
quite well marked.

But crowds are not people, and have no conscience.

And neither are governments.

There is a saying that the IQ of a crowd is the average IQ of the
crowd divided by the number in the crowd.

OTOH, the problem I have with Unintended Consequences is that it
is too optimistic. Or mayhaps the book ends too soon. Certainly
Henry Bowman's "war" is over. From here on, he will fight no more.
But ... what about others? Those opposed to the DEA (as the Vail
anecdotes relate), are they included? There isn;'t a TLA which hasn't
****ed someone off for what they considered capricious reasons. All
Henry Bowman did was provide a catalyst for the use of political
murder as a means of seeking redress of grievances. The precedent is
now established (in that world) where killing government workers is
accepted.
That is what concerns me, about the book, or a Great Cull.
--
pyotr filipivich
Friends help you move, good friends help you move bodies. Really good
friends remove bodies, bloodstains and hot cars, then collect the IDs,
weapons and useful stuff." _After the Dragon's Egg_, the unbegun novel.

pyotr filipivich wrote:

OTOH, the problem I have with Unintended Consequences is that it
is too optimistic. Or mayhaps the book ends too soon. Certainly
Henry Bowman's "war" is over. From here on, he will fight no more.
But ... what about others? Those opposed to the DEA (as the Vail
anecdotes relate), are they included? There isn;'t a TLA which hasn't
****ed someone off for what they considered capricious reasons. All
Henry Bowman did was provide a catalyst for the use of political
murder as a means of seeking redress of grievances. The precedent is
now established (in that world) where killing government workers is
accepted.
That is what concerns me, about the book, or a Great Cull.

In this world, our government authorizes the killing of U.S. citizens,
without trial.

"...the U.S. government has created a “hit list” of Americans abroad
marked for murder."

http://pubrecord.org/nation/6905/gov...s-secret-list/

So how far are we from Henry Bowman's world?

RBnDFW on Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:59:17 -0500 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
pyotr filipivich wrote:

OTOH, the problem I have with Unintended Consequences is that it
is too optimistic. Or mayhaps the book ends too soon. Certainly
Henry Bowman's "war" is over. From here on, he will fight no more.
But ... what about others? Those opposed to the DEA (as the Vail
anecdotes relate), are they included? There isn;'t a TLA which hasn't
****ed someone off for what they considered capricious reasons. All
Henry Bowman did was provide a catalyst for the use of political
murder as a means of seeking redress of grievances. The precedent is
now established (in that world) where killing government workers is
accepted.
That is what concerns me, about the book, or a Great Cull.

In this world, our government authorizes the killing of U.S. citizens,
without trial.

"...the U.S. government has created a “hit list” of Americans abroad
marked for murder."

http://pubrecord.org/nation/6905/gov...s-secret-list/

So how far are we from Henry Bowman's world?

1) Hobbes wrote that in a "state of nature" life was brutish,
nasty and short. How is this different than life "in a state of war"?
War lets you do things which would be crimes otherwise: kill people
and take what stuff of theirs you do not break.

2) It is said that "anarchy" is the state of there being no
government. But is a situation where one cannot depend on the actions
of the government any less of an "anarchy" of a society "without
structure". If the rule of law is subject to exceptions based on
race, creed, or connections, then what restricts the in.
Or to put it another way, if Government employees consider
themselves unrestrained by the law, why should I consider myself so
constrained?

--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Aug 10, 12:02*pm, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

--

Richard Lamb

I'm guessing that this is not the book you are referring to?

http://www.google.com/products/catal...d=0CGkQ8wIwCw#

Pretty good read, lots of examples of things going wrong, missed the
references to the gun parts though.

Cross-Slide wrote:
On Aug 10, 12:02 pm, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

--

Richard Lamb

I'm guessing that this is not the book you are referring to?

http://www.google.com/products/catal...d=0CGkQ8wIwCw#

Pretty good read, lots of examples of things going wrong, missed the
references to the gun parts though.

Uh, no

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uninten...es_%28novel%29

Cross-Slide wrote:
On Aug 10, 12:02 pm, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

--

Richard Lamb

I'm guessing that this is not the book you are referring to?

http://www.google.com/products/catal...d=0CGkQ8wIwCw#

Pretty good read, lots of examples of things going wrong, missed the
references to the gun parts though.

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--

Richard Lamb

cavelamb wrote:

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--

What the heck. Did that book go out of print? Damn, glad I bought a copy when it was
cheap. The dust jacket on mine had a suggested price of 28.95 .

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:40 -0400, Wes
wrote:

cavelamb wrote:

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--

What the heck. Did that book go out of print? Damn, glad I bought a copy when it was
cheap. The dust jacket on mine had a suggested price of 28.95 .

Wes

Now $225.00 WOW.

Sorry no way I'm buying that.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

On 2010-08-11, Randy wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:40 -0400, Wes
wrote:

cavelamb wrote:

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--

What the heck. Did that book go out of print? Damn, glad I bought a copy when it was
cheap. The dust jacket on mine had a suggested price of 28.95 .

Wes

Now $225.00 WOW.

Sorry no way I'm buying that.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

If I still have mine, I would love to sell it and I can definitely
settle for less than that!

Randy wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:40 -0400, Wes
wrote:

cavelamb wrote:

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--
What the heck. Did that book go out of print? Damn, glad I bought a copy when it was
cheap. The dust jacket on mine had a suggested price of 28.95 .

Wes

Now $225.00 WOW.

Sorry no way I'm buying that.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.

Catch, Randy

--

Richard Lamb

On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 10:42:03 -0500, Randy wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:53:40 -0400, Wes
wrote:

cavelamb wrote:

Hum, no, that's not the one...

this one has a much more interesting cover...
http://www.google.com/products/catal...CAcQ8wIwADgA#p

--

What the heck. Did that book go out of print? Damn, glad I bought a copy when it was
cheap. The dust jacket on mine had a suggested price of 28.95 .

Wes

Now $225.00 WOW.

Sorry no way I'm buying that.

Thank You,
Randy

Remove 333 from email address to reply.


Need a copy to read on your computer? They are readily available all
over the internet. About a 3.5meg download.

I sent 3 hard cover copies to the middle east, and got them all back,
signed and dated by the various readers, then resent them back to the ME
about 8 times. Ive lost track of them in the last couple years. I have
MY copy on the shelf of course and it doesnt go anywhere. But the book
itself is downloadble all across the Net.

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:26:02 -0700 (PDT), Cross-Slide
wrote:

On Aug 10, 12:02*pm, cavelamb wrote:
Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

--

Richard Lamb

I'm guessing that this is not the book you are referring to?


Actually...no..its this one....

http://www.amazon.com/Unintended-Con.../dp/1888118040



"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

cavelamb wrote:

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

I'm not endorsing the 'great cull' but war crimes and treason are generally committed by
the losers.

Wes

Wes on Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:49:15 -0400
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
cavelamb wrote:

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.

I'm not endorsing the 'great cull' but war crimes and treason are generally committed by
the losers.

"War Crimes, like Heresy, is the actions of the losing side."
--
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


Yes. And?

Did you notice the final result were exactly as intended?

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


Yes. And?

Did you notice the final result were exactly as intended?

Gunner


It is fiction, gunner.

ANYTHING can happen there.

On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 04:14:09 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:02:16 -0500, cavelamb
wrote:

Gunner,

I finished it last night and can see why you might get a hard on for it.

The Great Cull in action!

But, bear with for a moment...
Without organization - such as a militia -
and without a formal declaration -

it's just murder.


Yes. And?

Did you notice the final result were exactly as intended?

Gunner


It is fiction, gunner.

ANYTHING can happen there.

Really? Im sorry you are so ignorant of political and social..and
yes...military realities.

Shrug

Gunner


"A conservative who doesn't believe? in God simply doesn't pray;
a godless liberal wants no one to pray. A conservative who doesn't
like guns doesn't buy one; a liberal gun-hater wants to disarm us all.
A gay conservative has sex his own way; a gay liberal requires us all
to watch and accept his perversion and have it taught to children.
A conservative who is offended by a radio show changes the station;
an offended liberal wants it banned, prosecuted and persecuted."
Bobby XD9