[IronJack]

Robin Hood, in all probability, never even existed. He's a morality tale about taking from those you consider having taken from you unjustly. But Robin Hood had no more claim to the money he stole than the people who stole it to begin with. I suspect it's always dangerous to rob one person on behalf of another.

The only Tea Party I recognize is the one that featured the patriots from Boston, and their ideological heirs who want our government back. I don't include a mythical English highwayman, regardless of how you render his story.

[Vanders9]

And did that ancient Tea Party not sequester someone elses property and subsequently destroy it?

The point about the stories of both Tea Party and Robin Hood is that no one is under moral obligation to obey an unjust law. After all, neither Tea Party activist or Merry Man had any part in framing the laws that they broke. And in that case, why should other people's ideas of what is legal bind you?

Cider House rules my man - "they aint my rules. I never wrote them".