U
upant
Guest
remember the LA rooftop defenders. some do
because what is yours is mine.
- Status
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
I remember seeing a clip of the news footage. The Korean-Americans were bravely defending their stores, using those high-capacity semiautomatic rifles that the Left is so terrified of.
On a more meta level, the same people who preach anti-white creed of privilege, want to increase the number of non-whites in my country, openly rejoice over the shrinking number of whites, and disarm us. I get the feeling that will not have a happy ending.
On a more meta level, the same people who preach anti-white creed of privilege, want to increase the number of non-whites in my country, openly rejoice over the shrinking number of whites, and disarm us. I get the feeling that will not have a happy ending.
Last edited:
E
Ender
Guest
So long as we focus on the tools we will insufficiently focus on what is really wrong. Look at this incident:
7 Prince George's County elementary students cut wrists at school, officials say
Seven students at an elementary school in Prince George’s County cut their wrists at school using blades from pencil sharpeners, according to officials.
And what was the immediate, inevitable, and entirely useless response?
“Officials announced a ban on pencil sharpeners at the school.…”
Doesn’t it occur to anyone that there is something seriously wrong when elementary kids act this way all together at a single school that cannot be addressed by banning pencil sharpeners?
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I don’t need to look at any particular incident. Folks can weaponize trucks, clothes irons and socks with rocks in them.
The point is that that harder you make it for someone to commit lethal violence, the less lethal violence there will be. Period.
Now would the best solution be loving and caring for everyone in a way where they fully self-actualize in a supportive environment?
Sure.
The problem is that’s just not a real solution. It doesn’t actually “have legs”.
My idea does. So while it doesn’t achieve the ultimate aim completely, it achieves a substantial portion of it.
In the adult, eyes-open world, we call that a “real solution”.
Last edited:
U
upant
Guest
no, it is called suppression of freedom
it is a feel-good legislation unless all semi-autos are banned and when that is achieved the tool of choice will be changed.
E
Ender
Guest
This is certainly the thinking behind the ban on pencil sharpeners.
The only choices you present are between doing something and doing nothing. In such a dilemma doing anything even if it is virtually ineffective would still seem the better choice. I disagree that these are the only options, and it is precisely this mindset that causes the real problem not to be addressed. Essentially you have disallowed the existence of an underlying problem that can be remediated. And so long as this is the prevailing perspective nothing whatever will be done to search for - let alone alleviate - the real problem.
At best it is a suspension of disbelief; at worst it is a refusal to look under a rock for fear of what one might find.
Last edited:
F
FrDavid96
Guest
That’s easy.Hey Pup7, being you’re former military, you’re familiar with close air support. How do I obtain one of these?
Fill out a form DD-1149. Cross out the words “pizza oven” and insert the words “machine gun.” You’ll have one in about 2 weeks.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Welcome to the concept of “law” and the concept of “order”.Vonsalza:
no, it is called suppression of freedom
The tool will be something less deadly and will discourage lethal use because it’ll be that much harder to carry out.
That’s called a “win”, folks.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
I’m looking for a solution that has an impact on the problem and can actually be implemented.
With respect, they best you’ve offered so far is well wishing.
High school kids that post “Well… Like… People should just love each other, ya? twirls hair” provide a similarly profound and specific solution…
You must be young.
There is no utopia. It is not achievable. I tell you this as gently as I can.
The story of the bitter, self-destructive outcast as as old as tribalism. It almost certainly predates our species.
What we must do is limit the destructive capacity of this individual when they do inevitably emerge.
To help you understand, “gun grabbers” want to limit the proliferation of arms for the same reason most of the countries on this planet work together to limit the proliferation of nuclear arms;
The more available they are, the more likely it is that some total moron might actually use one someday…
The less common these things are, the less you’ll see them used in crime. This posit survives any attempt at dismissal or rebuttal because it is obviously true.
Last edited:
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
You seem to be overestimating the rule of law and underestimating the power of order.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Merely asserting that -by definition- freedom must yield to these two things in order for them to exist.
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
Both belong to the people.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
T
TheOldColonel
Guest
Of the people, by the people and for the people, under the people, next to the people, over the people, behind the people, before the people, among the people. Indeed. Government everywhere.
Last edited:
E
Ender
Guest
Do you honestly believe you can implement a policy to confiscate hundreds of thousands of weapons without inciting an intensely violent response? We have very different perspectives on what policies can or can not be implemented.
More accurately, I have offered no specific proposal at all. I have done nothing more than point to the inadequacies of one particular approach.
This reminds me of the solution the mice came up with to avoid the cat: put a bell on him so they could hear him approach, which all sounded great until someone asked who would bell the cat. There is a perspective on this proposal you perhaps haven’t sufficiently considered. From an opinion piece entitled: 7 Forces Driving America Toward Civil War…
7) Gun Grabbing: Liberals have fallen in love with the idea of ignoring the 2nd Amendment and confiscating all firearms. The logistics of doing this in a nation with hundreds of millions of guns (many of which are off the books) when many police departments and tens of millions of Americans would not cooperate is seldom discussed. Another thing that seldom seems brought up is that large numbers of conservatives would see this as a prelude to the government’s use of force against the citizenry… Confiscating guns is a dangerous and stupid idea that could in and of itself end our republic if a serious attempt were ever made to implement it.
Does it sound extreme? Yes. Is there any realistic possibility of it happening? Yeah, I would think so.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
It stinks that it’s by The People and not just us, doesn’t it?
V
Vonsalza
Guest
For probably the 100th time (with no exaggeration), who says you have to start rounding them up?
If time and chance is slowly claiming my S&W 6906, time and chance will certainly claim the plastic pieces of %^$& that’s dominated the gun market for 20 years.
Just decree that there can’t be any new ones. It won’t take long before the black market COMPLETELY prices out the common thug.
For crying out loud, where were these dramatic standoffs with the British and Aussie bans? You know there’s actual history on this…
Almost comically, you’ve kept saying that it doesn’t solve the problem without actually stating what you think the problem is.
I’ll pass on the hand-waving a fear mongering…
The fact that it broad-brushes everyone with differing nuances of disagreement as “liberals” pretty well correctly labels it as ideological spew.
Of course, I"m not surprised.
Most with your view truly are more than happy making sure rationality doesn’t over-ride emotional ideology.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
False, the UK heavily restricts firearm and their murder rate has remained consistent.
S
starshiptrooper
Guest
The 1920’s called. They want their laughably ineffective anti-freedom policies back.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
- Status