Why, My U.S. Democrat Friends, Do You Hate Guns? - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Modern liberalism. Civil rights and liberties, State responsibility to the people (welfare).
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14553107
Of course, unlike Red and his ilk (fortunately small in number) I do not believe that I am the most important organism in the world. I believe that there are situations in which I will (sadly but willingly) sacrifice my life, not to mention my liberty for the greater good of the world of people about whom I care. Once you get your head around this it is just plain stupid not to accept that as a group we can make this necessary less often by constraining dangerous behavior in others. My authority to do this comes from my intelligence and my ability to reason through a problem. Sadly ancaps and libertards rarely have this intelligence or ability. As we can clearly see.
#14553214
you're a communist; some would say the ultimate collectivist. collectivism is antithetical to individualism that i espouse. you can't have it both ways rancid. you, like the rest, are contradicting yourself.

Actually, local collectivism is the best way to achieve the most individualism at our current level of development.
Anti-aggression should be the basis of developing a peaceful world.
I see your arguments, in this thread, as needing to be combined rather than one being right and the other wrong.
This always becomes obvious when one side starts dismissing the other side with insults rather than arguments. They recognize the validity of the other, but refuse to admit it.
#14554134
I'm sorry but I find most Libertarians to be liars. They say they don't support the State, but their initiation of force concept is dependant on the concept of property and the property that they seem to think is legitimate is the ownership that is defined by the state.

Libertarians love the property that has been accumulated through the state over hundreds or even thousands of years. As I have argued Libertarianism is a form of parasitic moral degeneracy, that seeks to take the fruits of the State when its suits them but never pay their share of the costs of the State. Every farm, every factory, every oil well, ever mine, every office, owes its existence to the state.
#14554227
I'm sorry but I find most Libertarians to be liars.

If you are replying to my post, it should be clear I am not a libertarian. I clearly stated I support local collective ownership. I would not object to local autonomous communities choosing another form of government, however. You can support local autonomy without supporting private or government ownership.
#14554289
Rich wrote:I'm sorry but I find most Libertarians to be liars. They say they don't support the State, but their initiation of force concept is dependant on the concept of property and the property that they seem to think is legitimate is the ownership that is defined by the state.

Libertarians love the property that has been accumulated through the state over hundreds or even thousands of years. As I have argued Libertarianism is a form of parasitic moral degeneracy, that seeks to take the fruits of the State when its suits them but never pay their share of the costs of the State. Every farm, every factory, every oil well, ever mine, every office, owes its existence to the state.


I don't think they are liars but I have never met a smart one.
#14554945
Oh, my god. You people remind me of nothing so much as Monty Python's "Argument Clinic" skit. If anyone is unfamiliar with this, a copy of the script can be found here: http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/sketch.htm.

Argue on...

I love Monty Python, but I fail to see the relevance to our discussion. Our conversation is not total nonsense. We mix our nonsense with solid reasoning. We dismiss one and hopefully attune to the other. We are simply human and few of us claim otherwise except for our detractors.
#14557025
Commenting on the issue of guns - I don't see how one hates guns in a country that legally and constitutionally allows its citizens to purchase guns without any special requirements. I could never buy a gun in my country unless I'm in the military, police, etc, or live in an area so dangerous that I really need protection. Even if I need a gun it can take 6 months to get a license and I'll be subjected to all kinds of tests to check if I'm crazy or not. So please - Stop saying American liberals hate guns... If anything, some liberals (according to American politics and its spectrum) go to far when it comes to regulation but mostly the "anti-gun" is merely a display of wisdom and prudence on behalf of American pseudo-conservatives who want virtually no regulation. And don't bring me the argument that it's for protecting yourself from the government - If you trust your government so much that you need to own guns as a precaution against oppression, you might as well have no government. As for self-defence, I'm perfectly ok with reasonably permissive gun laws (even in Europe) for people to defend themselves, it sounds acceptable, at least at first glance. Some months ago there was a spree of robberies perpetuated by 14-18 years old kids in my town, it was outrageous and it caused massive protests... Since the Law is clearly on the innocent citizen's side, anyone who defends himself against a minor will probably be prosecuted for the correspondent crime (hadn't there been the priori aggression).
#14557367
One Degree wrote:Actually, collectivism is the best way to achieve the most individualism at our current level of development.

I only removed one word and fix'd this for you so damn hard that I Mötley Crüed it. I might as well jump.

Really though the individual can only attain context through others. Individualism removed from community is more hollow than a paper tube. It is hatred, of humanity, that liberalism masquerades as "individualism".
#14571585
you're a communist; some would say the ultimate collectivist. collectivism is antithetical to individualism that i espouse. you can't have it both ways rancid. you, like the rest, are contradicting yourself.


Not unless one chooses to enter a collectivist society voluntarily
#14736711
What I wonder is why conservatives here in America believe the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump when it comes to gun control. Those 2 would have everyone believe the Democrats want to confiscate all weapons, even single shot shotguns used for hunting rabbits. Truly, the conservatives have made "the slippery slope fallacy" work for them. They've convinced people to vote against their own interests out of fear that any gun control is total gun control.

Wait until they abolish public schools and replace them with for-profit and church schools. Then, everyone's mind will have no capacity for critical thought. It truly is immorality in the name of religion.
#14736721
Prepper wrote:What I wonder is why conservatives here in America believe the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump when it comes to gun control. Those 2 would have everyone believe the Democrats want to confiscate all weapons, even single shot shotguns used for hunting rabbits. Truly, the conservatives have made "the slippery slope fallacy" work for them. They've convinced people to vote against their own interests out of fear that any gun control is total gun control.


The Democrats are not going to outlaw guns, only some assault weapons and magazines, and only new sales...the old ones will be grandfathered and no one will take anyone's legally obtained arms away...

Likewise, Trump likes immigrants (he keeps marrying them) and will not deport anyone legally in the US but only those who are here illegally (just like Obama is doing right now)...

Politicians (and the media) purposely distort positions in order to manipulate the people and get the money...
#14736892
Alive again, this thread? Good.

Here is something people never consider. Never.

Real gun control from the first amendment speaks to the ability of states to maintain militias. It enjoins the federal government from banning firearms so that the primacy of the military power of the states (in 19th century America) is assured. This keeps the power to enjoin the power of the federal government in the hands of the people through their state governments. Even going so far as to conclude that this carefully enshrined power is individual (rather than in the hands of a "well ordered militia" which is a state organization) still declares in itself the purpose of the rule in the first place.

So what justification is there for the private ownership of an assault weapon....a weapon that is virtually useless in home defense and hunting? It has to be that some people even today wish for 'the people' to possess the military power to challenge the power of the central government. Right? Other than some notion that these weapons are fun to shoot, that has to be the deal.

Now as a retired soldier I have run into a zillion of these GI-wannabees. They really think that when some President Liberal goes after the guns they will be able to rise up and change the government. They picture their fat asses heading for the hills and fighting off the First Battalion of the First Cavalry in some kind of insurgency. Insurgencies can work. We have seen them all over the world. But all over the world is not here.

There are two million highly trained individuals in the US military. Highly trained. Heavily armed. The best equipment in the world. Superb intelligence capability. Even more inactive reserves to call upon. They are dispersed throughout the country on defensible military bases. They have 8300 tanks, an enormous air force and much more in reserve. There are another 1.2 million law enforcement officers and 120,000 federal officers. Exactly who is it that these dimwits with their store-bought AR-15 think they can suppress?

Now. Read the chart. There is another problem these chicken-hawks face. They would have to have the support of all gun owners in their cause. This is highly problematic. If they don't they face the other folks with guns who do not want them screwing around with the government.

Poll: 52% of Americans favor an assault weapons ban. Many of these gun owners themselves. These fools not only have to take on and defeat the most powerful military in the world they have to do it from bases in largely hostile territory. They can sure fuck things up with a terrorist campaign but they will be quickly enough suppressed.

So they are dumb-shits. Just dumb shits. If their G-3 in the hall closet (God I loved that German masterpiece back in the day) makes them feel potent then I really don't care. They are harmless enough. They can buy their camouflage fatigues and go play in the woods. Paintball is harmless and really poor training by the way. But you see here is the thing.

If I were to put my uniform back on I would not fear these pituitary cases. Not a bit. I would fear the lone gunman with a pistol and a car. I would fear the lone gunman with a 22-250 and a scope. Those are the real dangers to the military. But in the end they would be put down by their neighbors. And I find that fact actually pretty funny.

So in the end this conservative gun owner does not really give a rats ass what these folks do. I do so wish that I did not have to see untrained guys my age toting pistols at Walmart. I always give them one piece of advice. I recommend that they file the front sight off of their pistols. That way it won't hurt so much when someone shoves it up their ass.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

You are a supporter of the genocide against the P[…]

@skinster well, you've been accusing Israel of t[…]

Before he was elected he had a charity that he wo[…]

Candace Owens

... Too bad it's not as powerful as it once was. […]