Diversity is not a Virtue: Don't play the SJW game

[Shrieking Banshee]

That said, there are some gun laws that I consider reasonable - like waiting periods, universal background checks, blocking access based on convicted crimes like domestic violence, required gun registration, and funding research into gun violence.

While there can be back and forth about the debate about such laws, I dislike laws the most that are made in bad faith. By the kind of people that just want to get all guns banned completely so they try to ban them piecemeal.

[Ghostmaker]

That said, there are some gun laws that I consider reasonable - like waiting periods, universal background checks, blocking access based on convicted crimes like domestic violence, required gun registration, and funding research into gun violence.

It never ends there and it never will, which is why most gun owners nowadays have no interest in compromise or 'reasonable' gun laws. We've seen how it goes, particularly in England; the 'slippery slope' isn't a fallacy if you can prove it occurs.

I wonder if you'd accept some of these restrictions on your First Amendment rights.

Waiting periods are garbage.

Universal background checks? We already have them. Form 4473. Don't blame me if your cocksucking DAs won't prosecute for 4473 falsification.

Blocking access based on crimes? We have that too. Wonder why those charges never get pressed? Ask your local cocksucker of a DA.

Gun registration? Fuck you, statist.

Funding research into gun violence? We did that already and they buried the results because lo and behold, guns don't cause violent crime. Color me shocked.

[Brad]

Gun registration...didn't another country implement that before they confiscated all the guns and started gassing people?

[Shrieking Banshee]

Gun registration...didn't another country implement that before they confiscated all the guns and started gassing people?

While true, its kinda a disingenuous argument to make in a way in the same vein as:
'Drinking water huh? Didn't another countries leader drink water before-'

A much more fair argument is to simply argue for the necessity of firearms as a public defense from the government (or otherwise).

[Brad]

While true, its kinda a disingenuous argument to make in a way in the same vein as:
'Drinking water huh? Didn't another countries leader drink water before-'

A much more fair argument is to simply argue for the necessity of firearms as a public defense from the government (or otherwise).

It's really not disingenuous, though. The sorts of people who push for gun registration are the ones who don't like you owning one in the first place.

[Shrieking Banshee]

It's really not disingenuous, though. The sorts of people who push for gun registration are the ones who don't like you owning one in the first place.

Yes, but they are not necessarily NAZIS because of their (in my opinion misplaced) beliefs.

[Ghostmaker]

It's really not disingenuous, though. The sorts of people who push for gun registration are the ones who don't like you owning one in the first place.

Yes, but they are not necessarily NAZIS because of their (in my opinion misplaced) beliefs.

No, but they ARE statists and authoritarians, the kind of people you don't want in power.

[Brad]

Yes, but they are not necessarily NAZIS because of their (in my opinion misplaced) beliefs.

Yeah I know, but I just thought it was funny because of all the HITLER DRANK WATER TRUMP DRINKS WATER TRUMP IS LITERALLY HITLER bullshit all over the place when this is a specific example that is actually appropriate.

[Shrieking Banshee]

No, but they ARE statists and authoritarians, the kind of people you don't want in power.

Not necessarily. Many just don't think the logic through. They see or hear something bad and want to do something about it on gut instinct.

[tenbones]

So please restate this logic?

Why should you have the ability to keep me from owning a firearm, when it's my right to defend myself?

What does it matter if my weapon is automatic or semi-automatic? What difference does it make if it's "suppressed" or not? I am not going around breaking laws with it.

And if you can enforce this ability to keep me from practicing my rights, logically, you can enforce this ability to keep me from practicing any of my other rights.

Which is more important - your ability to deny me my rights, or my ability to engage in my rights?

[SHARK]

No, but they ARE statists and authoritarians, the kind of people you don't want in power.

Not necessarily. Many just don't think the logic through. They see or hear something bad and want to do something about it on gut instinct.

Greetings!

Fair enough, I'll grant. However, these are the same kind of mindless, ignorant sheep that are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own Liberty--and yours as well--so that they can "feel more secure". Few of these people have any real understanding of American Liberty, as founded and set forth by our Founding Fathers.

Inherently, within maximum freedom and strong restraints on an ever-hungry, powerful federal government, there are a whole host of margins of error, of danger, offense, accidents, and risk--no one is entitled to absolute security, absolute safety, and so on, as America prioritizes Liberty above safety and security. Maximum Liberty is *assumed* into the people, with the Constitution setting forth NOT what you and I can or cannot do, so much as it aims at setting forth what the government cannot do. Just like the 2nd Amendment makes it clear that you can own a whole armoury of weapons, warehouses of ammunition--and you need justify or explain, or beg permission from no one, no group, nor any power or authority. YOU are assumed innocent, righteous, and equal to attending to your own affairs and purposes, as a free man and citizen. YOUR rights to own firearms are ONLY abrogated when you have been condemned by a felony.

I've heard many say, "Well, what about crazy psychopaths and murderers?"

They must be punished appropriately and swiftly by the government or legal authorities. Because someone, somewhere, may choose to violate a law--does not make it just so that some government power can restrict YOUR Liberty and authority.

It's a subtle differentiation on rights, but it maximizes Liberty, independence, and authority to the common citizen, not making everyone into cowering sheep always seeking permission and begging approval from the government or groups of timid, fearful citizens alike.

Many people really do not understand the scope of our founding Liberty and how much freedom and responsibility is placed in the hands of the individual citizen. So many, many people are willing to make you into a helpless slave and perpetual victim so that they do not have to take responsibility for their own lives, their own security, and their own communities.

The weak, mindless sheep so eager to kneel to the government--or the criminal--really frustrates me.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

[Ghostmaker]

No, but they ARE statists and authoritarians, the kind of people you don't want in power.

Not necessarily. Many just don't think the logic through. They see or hear something bad and want to do something about it on gut instinct.

And that's how you GET statists and authoritarians and Nazis in power.

People screaming 'Do something!' without contemplating the consequences.

[Gagarth]

30:40
https://www.whatwouldthesmartpartydo.com/

[Shrieking Banshee]

Fair enough, I'll grant. However, these are the same kind of mindless, ignorant sheep that are perfectly willing to sacrifice their own Liberty--and yours as well--so that they can "feel more secure". Few of these people have any real understanding of American Liberty, as founded and set forth by our Founding Fathers.

Most people process information on gut instinct. That's just the nature of reality. That doesn't mean I hate them for it. Because in general, they will end up suffering the consequences (or their children). Even the people that were the rebels in the USA revolution and the like where mostly following instinct and what sounded cool from the people in charge. To hate the everyman is to hate 99.9999999% of all humanity at its highest and lowest point.

It's the authoritarian 'Educated' class that I save my loathing for.

People screaming 'Do something!' without contemplating the consequences.

But that's most people =p. However, I don't think that makes most people nazis. People, in general, don't like thinking things through.

[Ghostmaker]

But that's most people =p. However, I don't think that makes most people nazis. People, in general, don't like thinking things through.

I didn't say that's what makes most people nazis.

I said that's how you get statists/authoritarians/nazis in power.