Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Feinstein's fascist little bill
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 656
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 12:06 am    Post subject: Feinstein's fascist little bill Reply with quote

Here it is

It will never pass the house, and I doubt she can even get enough votes from the dummycrap majority in the senate.
_________________
http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
YOU'RE NOT A LIBERAL!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I welcome any kind of gun control legislation. Shooting animals should be allowed but not shooting people. All pistols should be banned as well as any other types of weapon which have a high, sustained rate of fire. Access to shotguns or rifles used by farmers for pest control or hunters to hunt game should be carefully controlled, excluding anyone who can reasonably be thought to be a risk to others or themselves.

The US would be a much, much better place if shooting people could only become as socially unacceptable as, er, smoking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's the angle?

They know it won't pass. It's way too early to have much impact on elections. I wouldn't think it would be particularly useful to point to as a badge for their own. Ah, never mind. They have to do it to pretend like they care.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
Shooting animals should be allowed but not shooting people. [...]
The US would be a much, much better place if shooting people could only become as socially unacceptable as, er, smoking.
Shooting people is illegal AND socially unacceptable. Imagine that.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If only that were true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Killing people is obviously illegal. So I'm assuming you take exception to the other part. Are you referring to entertainment? Violence is certainly acceptable within entertainment, but killing people isn't socially acceptable. Even for a one liner, that was pretty weak. If you're actually serious (which I don't think you are), what makes you think it is legal and socially acceptable?
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I meant that owning and using guns for self-defence is legal. Also, owning guns to defend against tyranny, and to take part in armed slave patrol militias, is apparently allowed by the 2nd amendment.

So: it's legal to shoot scary people, government people, and escaped slave people.

There are large parts of the US where all three are completely socially acceptable.


Last edited by McGruff on Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:13 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Creds ...

A splintering of traditional gangs into smaller factions - known as crews or cliques - with ever-younger members desperate to prove their tough-guy credentials is fuelling a murder rate that makes swathes of Chicago more lethal than Afghanistan.

There is a strain of American culture where killing is cool, the crimemutt also knows the distinction and that they are not the average law abiding gun owner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
I meant that owning and using guns for self-defence is legal. Also, owning guns to defend against tyranny, and to take part in armed slave patrol militias, is apparently allowed by the 2nd amendment.

So: it's legal to shoot scary people, government people, and escaped slave people.

There are large parts of the US where all three are completely socially acceptable.
Thanks for clarifying. That's pretty funny. Do you really think self-defense should be illegal, and the appropriate response to tyranny is to get on the train? The slave patrol thing is hilarious, I'll give you that. On a related note, did you hear the news? Through procedural shenanigans by Pelosi & Reid, Obama just signed a law outlawing slavery.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do think you shouldn't be allowed to own guns purely for self-defence (shooting people). Farmers, hunters, etc, may have a legitimate use for weapons (shooting animals) so OK.

The problem with arming the population for self-defence is that all the benefits a gun gives to a defender are also provided to the attacker (and more since it's a weapon with a catastrophic impact and the attacker has the initiative). It's much, much better for society overall if guns are simply taken out of the equation.

And yes it can be done. Not easily, OK, but it is possible to change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sad to say, but I think a bill like that would only choke the courts there as belligerent gun owners test the law. You guys really love your guns so, as eloping is not an option (except in Ohio, probably), then the next best thing is to fight to be together :P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

18 Years Ago
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 656
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sikpuppy wrote:
Sad to say, but I think a bill like that would only choke the courts there as belligerent fascists try and prevent law abiding citizens from expressing their natural right of self defense. You guys really love your authoritarian politicians who are so hypocritical as to not only arm themselves, but have a cadre of armed security guards. Now eloping is not an option (except in Australia, probably), then the next best thing is to fight to be together :P


Fixed 8)
_________________
http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
YOU'RE NOT A LIBERAL!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

flysideways wrote:
18 Years Ago


Interesting. I love the comment about taking guns from the hands of americans and putting them in the hands mexican drug cartels. I mean you really have to suffer from major headache if you try to put the "official" narrative on top of that reality. It simply doesn't fit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big dave
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
I meant that owning and using guns for self-defence is legal. Also, owning guns to defend against tyranny, and to take part in armed slave patrol militias, is apparently allowed by the 2nd amendment.

So: it's legal to shoot scary people, government people, and escaped slave people.

There are large parts of the US where all three are completely socially acceptable.

do you think self defense should be illegal?

if the government is committing treason, and it is not policing itself, should that be illegal?

if the government is committing treason, not policing itself, and is physically attacking citizens who are not causing any harm, should it be illegal for one to defend himself? if the government said tomorrow that all whites will be committed into slavery, effective immediately, should it be illegal for people to shoot officials who come to seize people?

and what the fuck are you talking about slave patrol militias? did you not get the memo? the KKK lost. it's hard to set up a burning cross on someone's lawn when they're shooting at you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
sikpuppy wrote:
Sad to say, but I think a bill like that would only choke the courts there as belligerent fascists try and prevent law abiding citizens from expressing their natural right of self defense. You guys really love your authoritarian politicians who are so hypocritical as to not only arm themselves, but have a cadre of armed security guards. Now eloping is not an option (except in Australia, probably), then the next best thing is to fight to be together :P


Fixed 8)

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo. :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big dave wrote:
do you think self defense should be illegal?


No.

big dave wrote:
if the government is committing treason, and it is not policing itself, should that be illegal?


You mean like Nixon? A free press, rule of law, and a vote is how you deal with that. It's mere insurrectionist dogma to say that guns have any place in a modern democracy. This idea dates back to Machiavelli and the 16th century and was a response to the tyranny of feudal aristocracies. We've moved on a wee bit since then, yes? You can't fight your new feudal masters with guns.

big dave wrote:
and what the fuck are you talking about slave patrol militias?


Careful now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big dave
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

first of all, find a real source for your second amendment slavery revisionist nonsense... your source is a self described progressive radio host. http://www.theroot.com/views/2nd-amendment-passed-protect-slavery-no has a much more accurate analysis. the supreme court has blatantly said twice now that this "collective state militia" bullshit is factually poppycock. who are you going to trust... the supreme court (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf) or a self described progressive radio host?

mcgruff wrote:
big dave wrote:
do you think self defense should be illegal?
No.
big dave wrote:
if the government is committing treason, and it is not policing itself, should that be illegal?
You mean like Nixon? A free press, rule of law, and a vote is how you deal with that. It's mere insurrectionist dogma to say that guns have any place in a modern democracy. This idea dates back to Machiavelli and the 16th century and was a response to the tyranny of feudal aristocracies. We've moved on a wee bit since then, yes? You can't fight your new feudal masters with guns.

if the government is committing treason, why do you assume that it would magically decide to follow the law in an election?

if the government has men at your door saying that they just passed a new law, and you are going to be a slave based on your race, in blatant violation of the constitution, should armed self defense against the government be illegal?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 236
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually gun control was used to suppress the slaves. Slaves were not allowed to own guns, and could only possess a gun with the master's permission.

As I look back that might be a bad argument, since anti choice gun control advocates are racist, and most likely, pro slavery.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big dave wrote:
first of all, find a real source for your second amendment slavery revisionist nonsense... your source is a self described progressive radio host


Noop. Hartmann was referring to a paper by Professor Carl Bogus.

big dave wrote:
if the government is committing treason, why do you assume that it would magically decide to follow the law in an election?


It doesn't have a choice.

big dave wrote:
if the government has men at your door saying that they just passed a new law, and you are going to be a slave based on your race, in blatant violation of the constitution, should armed self defense against the government be illegal?


If giant, zombie chickens with mad eyes and sharp beaks were pounding on my door I wouldn't buy a gun: I'd call for a psycotherapist or psychiatrist and pray I get better soon.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
I do think you shouldn't be allowed [...] self-defence (shooting people).
Allllll aboaaaard!

That is just mind boggling to me, but thanks for your honesty.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 656
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why this liberal no longer believes in gun control… (and why the “Assault weapon ban” is an ideologically-driven distraction)

Quote:
As someone who has done a complete 180 from liberal firearm skeptic and supporter of gun control to now being an ardent supporter of second amendment rights (and a responsible gun owner), I feel like I am uniquely qualified to speak to those individuals whose views I used to share. I’d like to believe I’m a reasonable and objective-minded person, and I want them to read a different perspective on gun control — one that arises from personal experience and research and is not filled with the hyperbole and mis-information we see all over television.

I feel like many people, including most liberal politicians, treat gun control like most conservatives treat sex education or climate change. Their views and thus the policies they support are based entirely on ideology, with only the most cursory attempts at studying the facts. They are blinded by confirmation bias, cherry picking factual evidence to support their foregone conclusion. This is why gun owners can find it hard to even come to the table to have the “gun control” conversation; they are convinced the other side made up their collective minds long ago and are NOT interested in an honest discussion. Many times, it seems their sole focus seems to be on restricting gun rights as much as possible, regardless of whether or not it will help to prevent tragedy. Unfortunately, after the spectacle in the media I’ve seen in the past few weeks, I’d have to agree.

But let’s back up for a moment.


More in TFA, an excellent read.
_________________
http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
YOU'RE NOT A LIBERAL!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16113
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I feel like many people, including most liberal politicians, treat gun control like most conservatives treat sex education or climate change.


lol, I'll finish reading on that reference alone!
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stefan Molyneux wrote:
If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. So it’s not that you are anti-gun. You’ll need the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns. So you’re very Pro-Gun, you just believe that only the Government (which is, of course, so reliable, honest, moral and virtuous…) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.

_________________
Bastiat wrote:
“The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess it's official: libertarians don't believe in the rule of law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum