<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: We&#8217;re 26!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/</link>
	<description>Where There's Snow, There's Firepower</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sebastian</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/#comment-26884</link>
		<dc:creator>Sebastian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=4199#comment-26884</guid>
		<description>I agree with that Purdie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with that Purdie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prudie</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/#comment-26882</link>
		<dc:creator>Prudie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=4199#comment-26882</guid>
		<description>It's an interesting list. But I'm not completely happy with what they consider freedom. I mean, they considered the "cool" libertarian issues of freedom, things like pot, guns, gambling and prostitution. Taxation wasn't a consideration in the ranking. (Not that guns aren't important, they are. I'd just like to see them consider taxation and fiscal regulations in the ranking.)

This kind of thing ticks me off mildly because it plays into the often heard criticism that libetarians are only interested in pot and prostitution. It's one way of dismissing libertarian ideals as nothing more than the ideals of frat boys looking for a place to get high legally.

And by "libertarian" I mean "fiscal conservative/social liberal" not "Libertarian Party member."

Atlanta is #9, mostly because of the sex trade industry where we're #2. But don't think to come to Atlanta for the prostitution; they're only around when the the Georgia Legislature is in session. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s an interesting list. But I&#8217;m not completely happy with what they consider freedom. I mean, they considered the &#8220;cool&#8221; libertarian issues of freedom, things like pot, guns, gambling and prostitution. Taxation wasn&#8217;t a consideration in the ranking. (Not that guns aren&#8217;t important, they are. I&#8217;d just like to see them consider taxation and fiscal regulations in the ranking.)</p>
<p>This kind of thing ticks me off mildly because it plays into the often heard criticism that libetarians are only interested in pot and prostitution. It&#8217;s one way of dismissing libertarian ideals as nothing more than the ideals of frat boys looking for a place to get high legally.</p>
<p>And by &#8220;libertarian&#8221; I mean &#8220;fiscal conservative/social liberal&#8221; not &#8220;Libertarian Party member.&#8221;</p>
<p>Atlanta is #9, mostly because of the sex trade industry where we&#8217;re #2. But don&#8217;t think to come to Atlanta for the prostitution; they&#8217;re only around when the the Georgia Legislature is in session. :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ahab</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/#comment-26862</link>
		<dc:creator>Ahab</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 14:13:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=4199#comment-26862</guid>
		<description>Indianapolis is 24!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indianapolis is 24!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dustin</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/#comment-26852</link>
		<dc:creator>Dustin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 07:23:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=4199#comment-26852</guid>
		<description>Not bad, but Phoenix was ranked 14th place.  Neener Neener Neener ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not bad, but Phoenix was ranked 14th place.  Neener Neener Neener ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Xrlq</title>
		<link>http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2008/07/23/were-26/#comment-26789</link>
		<dc:creator>Xrlq</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 01:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=4199#comment-26789</guid>
		<description>I don't trust those figures as far as I can throw them.  Note that while the Texas cities are tied on gun rights (as they should be due to preemption), the California cities are &lt;i&gt;not.&lt;/i&gt;  Odder still, all are ranked below NYC, despite the fact that California doesn't require a license to own a gun, while NYC requires a permit that's harder to get than a license to &lt;i&gt;carry&lt;/i&gt; in most states (including NC - note that Charlotte and NYC are virtually tied).  Meanwhile, Chicago bans handguns outright, and even post-&lt;i&gt;Heller,&lt;/i&gt; DC comes damned close to doing the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t trust those figures as far as I can throw them.  Note that while the Texas cities are tied on gun rights (as they should be due to preemption), the California cities are <i>not.</i>  Odder still, all are ranked below NYC, despite the fact that California doesn&#8217;t require a license to own a gun, while NYC requires a permit that&#8217;s harder to get than a license to <i>carry</i> in most states (including NC - note that Charlotte and NYC are virtually tied).  Meanwhile, Chicago bans handguns outright, and even post-<i>Heller,</i> DC comes damned close to doing the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
