Biden Enjoys Armed Protection While Fighting to Disarm Americans

[JonNC]

Since both are connected to Constitutional rights, the comparison is apt.

A gun may be used to kill, but the ideas expressed by freedom of speech are oftentimes the motive for that killing.

And most of the time that killing to silence speech is fine by government.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

This is not. I’ve seen little to indicate a mass arrest or incarceration of protesters in violation of their rights.
But I also defend their right to have them.

As usual, you are more concerned about people’s rights to have guns than you are about the shameful way in which that right is being abused.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[WingedHussar]

Do not be naive. Free speech has never been more than a nice-sounding idea. All powers suppress speech they find dangerous to the established order. The only question is whether or not speech opposed to your worldview is suppressed.

Hence the reason why the Left which used free speech to push obscenity into the mainstream now wants to shut down rising nationalist expression as “hate speech”.

 

[JonNC]

As usual, you are more concerned about people’s rights to have guns than you are about the shameful way in which that right is being abused.

I’m more concerned about people’s right to have rights, particularly in an era when do many of them are under attack.

When government has the guns.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[JonNC]

Do not be naive. Free speech has never been more than a nice-sounding idea.

Let me know when you’ve been hauled away for posting here.

All powers suppress speech they find dangerous to the established order. The only question is whether or not speech opposed to your worldview is suppressed

The reason for the second. Those who want to suppress the first start by suppressing the second.

Hence the reason why the Left which used free speech to push obscenity into the mainstream now wants to shut down rising nationalist expression as “hate speech”.

That’s why they attack the second.

 

[WingedHussar]

The 2nd Amendment is valuable, but if you think they want to take away your rifle before they take away your speech, you are dead wrong.

If you get too uppity or dangerous, you will be handcuffed. The more likely scenario for dissidents, is doxing by private organizations, getting fired for wrongthink, or being deplatformed. Leftists in the government do not need to seize and burn books when their buddies at Amazon can refuse to sell them and payment processors refuse to handle your money so you cannot sell them on your own. What good is your rifle then?

 

[JonNC]

The 2nd Amendment is valuable, but if you think they want to take away your rifle before they take away your speech, you are dead wrong.

Ironic turn of a phrase, but in most instances, it is the taking of guns”for your safety” that is a prerequisite. Now that doesn’t mean they work work on your other rights concurrently. If people are willing to give up their rights, they’ll take them.

If you get too uppity or dangerous, you will be handcuffed. The more likely scenario for dissidents, is doxing by private organizations, getting fired for wrongthink, or being deplatformed. Leftists in the government do not need to seize and burn books when their buddies at Amazon can refuse to sell them and payment processors refuse to handle your money so you cannot sell them on your own.

All of this is true.

What good is your rifle then?

They’ll come for them, too.

 

[WingedHussar]

So that leaves us with 2 points.

1. The libertarian/ constitutional Conservative approach to defending our culture and way of life has been a complete and utter failure as it looks to the past and operates within an inherently Leftist paradigm.
2. The only way to protect your rights is to take and utilize power.

 

[JonNC]

The libertarian/ constitutional Conservative approach to defending our culture and way of life has been a complete and utter failure as it looks to the past and operates within an inherently Leftist paradigm.

Oh, it clearly has. It has been on the losing side since Wilson. It has allowed itself to be branded as the racists, while the true racists undermine the constitution at every turn.
That said, it is hard to fight the promise of “free” government largess.

The only way to protect your rights is to take and utilize power.

And the problem with that is it is too easy to lose one’s principles when one has power. “Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

 

[WingedHussar]

Ah yes, DR3. American conservatives have been using that argument for at least 30 years and probably longer. It does not work.

Principles are propaganda before the revolution wins and afterwards, they simply serve as post factum justifications for power that has already been taken.

 

[JonNC]

Ah yes, DR3. American conservatives have been using that argument for at least 30 years and probably longer. It does not work.

You mean they haven’t been vocal enough about this truth. Intersectionality is, by definition, racism. Identity politics is, by definition, racism. The charge of “white privilege” is, by definition, racism.
Clearly not all Democrats are racist. Most are not, but neither are the overwhelming majority of Republicans, including the current occupant of the WH.

 

[Nepperhan]

The charge of “white privilege” is, by definition, racism.

That’s a leap. It sounds like Kafka.

A charge is racism? I’ve never heard that said.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

JonNC:

Even worse, only government will have guns.

…which is just fine. There are a lot of powers that only governments have, otherwise they would cease to be governments.

As usual, Leaf places total trust in government.

So you’re gonna trust the government that has no constitutional obligation to protect you.

Ok.

When chaos hits and law enforcement is nowhere to be found, what now? We have had such situations in our country. Not all that long ago either. Hope the gun control proponents made nice with their gun-owning neighbors.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

JonNC:

Even worse, only government will have guns.

…which is just fine. There are a lot of powers that only governments have, otherwise they would cease to be governments.

As usual, Leaf places total trust in government.

I place a lot more trust in government than in a band of gun-toting self-proclaimed “patriots” for whom carrying their guns is an article of faith.

When chaos hits and law enforcement is nowhere to be found, what now?

If chaos does hit, it will most likely be due to bands of the aforementioned gun-toting “patriots.”

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

The charge of “white privilege” is, by definition, racism.

That’s a leap. It sounds like Kafka.

A charge is racism? I’ve never heard that said.

I’m not willing to accuse an individual with racism without knowing them more fully. So the benefit of the doubt is someone who talks about “white privilege” may have heard it elsewhere. But, yes, the concept/accusation is racist.

 

[JonNC]

As usual, Leaf places total trust in government.

Not speaking about Leaf personally, but progressives generally do so…
Except, of course, for Trump.

“We want nationalized healthcare”
You want Trump in charge of your healthcare?
“Of course not!”
“Civilians don’t need firearms!”
You want Trump in charge of all firearms?
“Of course not!”

 

[JonNC]

I place a lot more trust in government than in a band of gun-toting self-proclaimed “patriots”

You mean like Washington and Jefferson and those guys?

for whom carrying their guns is an article of faith.

Not faith. Rights.

If chaos does hit, it will most likely be due to bands of the aforementioned gun-toting “patriots.”

Like Washington and his band of gun-toting patriots?

Do I think these protesters are equal to the founders? No.
But they are closer in spirit than those who would ban rights.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

I place a lot more trust in government than in a band of gun-toting self-proclaimed “patriots”

You mean like Washington and Jefferson and those guys?

No, the ones in this picture here:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

It is ludicrous to put them on the same level as Washington and Jefferson.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Free speech has never been more than a nice-sounding idea.

Constitutional Free Speech is only a restriction on the government’s ability to suppress expression. We’ve never had absolute free speech.

Hence the reason why the Left which used free speech to push obscenity into the mainstream now wants to shut down rising nationalist expression as “hate speech”.

What ever speech one might consider “hate speech” might not be illegal. A person may express not liking XXXX people, hating XXXX people, wishing XXXX people were dead, or saying they think XXXX people are less than human. In the USA these are constitutionally protected expressions. Now if a person calls for the killing of XXXX people then we are in different territory.

Many organizations may by their own rules consider these “hate speech” and thus not allow them within their organization. But a private organization isn’t constrained by the First Ammendment and this is not a Constitutional Free Speech violation.

 

[JonNC]

It is ludicrous to put them on the same level as Washington and Jefferson.

Do I think these protesters are equal to the founders? No.
But they are closer in spirit than those who would ban rights.

I didn’t. …