Wilikon
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
 |
December 27, 2015, 07:21:32 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 27, 2015, 07:30:40 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1276
|
|
December 27, 2015, 10:31:52 PM |
|
...
Not only do I agree with the bolded above, but I imagine most of those in law enforcement would agree. Yes we have a modern problem, that mostly did not exist in the past, with the five minutes of fame atrocity killers, but they are a needle in the haystack of gun owners. Nothing, and in particular no system designed of rules, regulation and law, is perfect, and that includes firearms law and regulation. You do indeed wonder, as the Left incessantly hammers the gun control issue, whether the real goal is indeed something else entirely. Whether the goal may just be to eliminate the "tool of last resort against tyranny," even if those on the Left who do this may not even know what they do or why. Most of those on the left have no idea what is going on. They are influenced heavily by the propaganda which targets them just as anyone else. Most of them feel that they are being good people and getting karma points by supporting things which are peaceful and non-violent. I suspect that psychologically this serves to paper over and push down genuine and fully human aspects of their personalities which run counter to who they wish to be. --- You (Spendulus) seem to attempt with reasonable success to take a scientific approach to reality. You probably reject outright the suggestion that there is an observable genetic drift component to some of the recent health trends afflicting the younger population. It simply does not make sense scientifically. I propose that a 6x increase in 'active shooters' during the the term of President Obama similarly does not pass the smell test in social science terms. Coupled with such things as: - the 'modernization' of the Smith-Mundt act - the ability for legal advisers working for the executive to make amazing interpretations of law to support policy (e.g., John Yoo) - the corporate consolidation of mainstream media and the working relationships between corp/gov in this respect, - the fairly staggering observations made by independent analysts (aka, 'conspiracy theorists') - Obama's admitted focus on gun control which dates back to early in his term (prior to most of the events.) I suggest that it is perfectly possible that a lot of the 'problems' we've seen in the last few years have been state sponsored psychological operations. To me it is simply not very unthinkable, especially with an eye toward historical events in the same vein, and is at present time the most rationally coherent read of reality. In scientific terms, the hypothesis has the highest explanatory power as I read things. I do believe it most likely that we are seeing a lot of psychological operations permeating our social awareness. Beyond that, I suspect that more than a few people on the political Left believe this to be going on as well but they consider it to be a means to an end that they agree with. For my part, I believe that the likely end-point is not at all what they are expecting or will find themselves agreeing with. These people are being played as much as any other group. Perhaps more. |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 28, 2015, 04:04:29 PM |
|
...
Not only do I agree with the bolded above, but I imagine most of those in law enforcement would agree. Yes we have a modern problem, that mostly did not exist in the past, with the five minutes of fame atrocity killers, but they are a needle in the haystack of gun owners. Nothing, and in particular no system designed of rules, regulation and law, is perfect, and that includes firearms law and regulation. You do indeed wonder, as the Left incessantly hammers the gun control issue, whether the real goal is indeed something else entirely. Whether the goal may just be to eliminate the "tool of last resort against tyranny," even if those on the Left who do this may not even know what they do or why. Most of those on the left have no idea what is going on. They are influenced heavily by the propaganda which targets them just as anyone else. Most of them feel that they are being good people and getting karma points by supporting things which are peaceful and non-violent. I suspect that psychologically this serves to paper over and push down genuine and fully human aspects of their personalities which run counter to who they wish to be. --- You (Spendulus) seem to attempt with reasonable success to take a scientific approach to reality. You probably reject outright the suggestion that there is an observable genetic drift component to some of the recent health trends afflicting the younger population. It simply does not make sense scientifically. I propose that a 6x increase in 'active shooters' during the the term of President Obama similarly does not pass the smell test in social science terms. Coupled with such things as: - the 'modernization' of the Smith-Mundt act - the ability for legal advisers working for the executive to make amazing interpretations of law to support policy (e.g., John Yoo) - the corporate consolidation of mainstream media and the working relationships between corp/gov in this respect, - the fairly staggering observations made by independent analysts (aka, 'conspiracy theorists') - Obama's admitted focus on gun control which dates back to early in his term (prior to most of the events.) I suggest that it is perfectly possible that a lot of the 'problems' we've seen in the last few years have been state sponsored psychological operations. To me it is simply not very unthinkable, especially with an eye toward historical events in the same vein, and is at present time the most rationally coherent read of reality. In scientific terms, the hypothesis has the highest explanatory power as I read things. I do believe it most likely that we are seeing a lot of psychological operations permeating our social awareness. Beyond that, I suspect that more than a few people on the political Left believe this to be going on as well but they consider it to be a means to an end that they agree with. For my part, I believe that the likely end-point is not at all what they are expecting or will find themselves agreeing with. These people are being played as much as any other group. Perhaps more. I'll illustrate the extent (small, but it does exist) to which I agree with you. The example I'll use is Ferguson. After the incident, federal government and mass media worked hand in hand to whip up anti-Cop, anti-White, etc, sentiments across the country. Building completely on a lie (that a wrong occurred) they did this. By building on a complete lie they knowingly whip up cognitive dissidence in the population segments being manipulated (eg, black communities, and Leftish interest segments). The only outcome of this could be further radicalization of population segments and possible inducement of some members to engage in violent acts. In this sense, one could say that Obama with his promulgated statements and policies, has a responsiblity for the increased incidence of violence. Let me go a step further. Consider an already radicalized Muslim person, who not uncommonly reads the Left propaganda streams (such as includes the Ferguson incident and slanted views on it). It's not unreasonable that such things being pushed on the public could further radicalize persons and be a factor in their moving over the line into violent behavior. |
|
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 28, 2015, 05:40:18 PM |
|
Not bad... Not bad... I just feel like I may have to wear this while shooting it http://postimg.org/image/bqnnrr4zz/  |
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3822
Merit: 1373
|
|
December 28, 2015, 05:41:55 PM |
|
...
Not only do I agree with the bolded above, but I imagine most of those in law enforcement would agree. Yes we have a modern problem, that mostly did not exist in the past, with the five minutes of fame atrocity killers, but they are a needle in the haystack of gun owners. Nothing, and in particular no system designed of rules, regulation and law, is perfect, and that includes firearms law and regulation. You do indeed wonder, as the Left incessantly hammers the gun control issue, whether the real goal is indeed something else entirely. Whether the goal may just be to eliminate the "tool of last resort against tyranny," even if those on the Left who do this may not even know what they do or why. Most of those on the left have no idea what is going on. They are influenced heavily by the propaganda which targets them just as anyone else. Most of them feel that they are being good people and getting karma points by supporting things which are peaceful and non-violent. I suspect that psychologically this serves to paper over and push down genuine and fully human aspects of their personalities which run counter to who they wish to be. --- You (Spendulus) seem to attempt with reasonable success to take a scientific approach to reality. You probably reject outright the suggestion that there is an observable genetic drift component to some of the recent health trends afflicting the younger population. It simply does not make sense scientifically. I propose that a 6x increase in 'active shooters' during the the term of President Obama similarly does not pass the smell test in social science terms. Coupled with such things as: - the 'modernization' of the Smith-Mundt act - the ability for legal advisers working for the executive to make amazing interpretations of law to support policy (e.g., John Yoo) - the corporate consolidation of mainstream media and the working relationships between corp/gov in this respect, - the fairly staggering observations made by independent analysts (aka, 'conspiracy theorists') - Obama's admitted focus on gun control which dates back to early in his term (prior to most of the events.) I suggest that it is perfectly possible that a lot of the 'problems' we've seen in the last few years have been state sponsored psychological operations. To me it is simply not very unthinkable, especially with an eye toward historical events in the same vein, and is at present time the most rationally coherent read of reality. In scientific terms, the hypothesis has the highest explanatory power as I read things. I do believe it most likely that we are seeing a lot of psychological operations permeating our social awareness. Beyond that, I suspect that more than a few people on the political Left believe this to be going on as well but they consider it to be a means to an end that they agree with. For my part, I believe that the likely end-point is not at all what they are expecting or will find themselves agreeing with. These people are being played as much as any other group. Perhaps more. I'll illustrate the extent (small, but it does exist) to which I agree with you. The example I'll use is Ferguson. After the incident, federal government and mass media worked hand in hand to whip up anti-Cop, anti-White, etc, sentiments across the country. Building completely on a lie (that a wrong occurred) they did this. By building on a complete lie they knowingly whip up cognitive dissidence in the population segments being manipulated (eg, black communities, and Leftish interest segments). The only outcome of this could be further radicalization of population segments and possible inducement of some members to engage in violent acts. In this sense, one could say that Obama with his promulgated statements and policies, has a responsiblity for the increased incidence of violence. Let me go a step further. Consider an already radicalized Muslim person, who not uncommonly reads the Left propaganda streams (such as includes the Ferguson incident and slanted views on it). It's not unreasonable that such things being pushed on the public could further radicalize persons and be a factor in their moving over the line into violent behavior. The interesting thing about all this is, in America, the majority of people go on with their lives... rather peacefully. Consider that all the stores are open for business. You can jump in the car and drive. Look how big the prisons are, full of all kinds of unwanted people. If people become too radical, both cops and the people they pester, there's a lot more room for a lot more prisons. And the peaceful people will build the prisons if necessary, and send the radicals there if necessary.  |
|
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3010
Merit: 1031
RIP Mommy
|
|
December 29, 2015, 06:30:01 AM |
|
About your poll question
I want to vote on the gun control poll, but I don’t understand the way it’s worded. I AM TOTALLY OPPOSED TO GUN CONTROL so should I vote “yes” or “no?” I don’t know how Congress feels. It would have been better if the question was “are you against gun control?”
—Jean Monfort via Facebook
[Editor’s note: Congress has the authority to make laws regarding gun control, which is why the question was formulated that way. So if you oppose gun control, you would vote “no” in the poll.] Editor, fact-check thyself. |
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 29, 2015, 04:35:52 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilikon
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
|
|
December 29, 2015, 06:12:27 PM |
|
California Law Allowing Seizure Of Guns Without Notification, If ‘Potential For Violence’, Begins January 1, 2016… Gun-safety legislation going into effect in California next week will allow authorities to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines there’s potential for violence. Proposed in the wake of a deadly May 2014 shooting rampage by Elliot Rodger, the bill provides family members with a means of having an emergency “gun violence restraining order” imposed against a loved one if they can convince a judge that allowing that person to possess a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/29/california-gun-violence-restraining-order-law-goin/
|
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3822
Merit: 1373
|
|
December 30, 2015, 03:10:38 AM |
|
California Law Allowing Seizure Of Guns Without Notification, If ‘Potential For Violence’, Begins January 1, 2016… Gun-safety legislation going into effect in California next week will allow authorities to seize a person’s weapons for 21 days if a judge determines there’s potential for violence. Proposed in the wake of a deadly May 2014 shooting rampage by Elliot Rodger, the bill provides family members with a means of having an emergency “gun violence restraining order” imposed against a loved one if they can convince a judge that allowing that person to possess a firearm “poses an immediate and present danger of causing personal injury to himself, herself or another by having in his or her custody or control.” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/29/california-gun-violence-restraining-order-law-goin/ How are they going to take the gun away from you? Ask you to hand it over nice-like? Throw a tantrum when you don't hand it over? No. They will use gun violence to stop you from what? Carrying a gun? Folks who know what to do have the chance to make a lot of money off taxpayers if their property is stolen from them by government and cops. |
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1276
|
|
December 30, 2015, 05:30:30 AM |
|
OMFG! A guy can get decent work with shitty technique. Not this dude. I would not be proud of this weld working on the blind side of a muffler lying on my back under a car and using a torch. The result was seriously embarrassing, and especially with TIG. I had problems for a little while since I was habituated to moving the torch in and out to modulate temp from oxy-acetylene welding. When I got past that I found it fairly easy to get beautiful work on mild steel. Dirty aluminum castings, not so much. (It's amazing how most aluminum casting is like a piece of swiss cheese when one starts to melt into it with TIG.) |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
December 30, 2015, 04:01:17 PM |
|
OMFG! A guy can get decent work with shitty technique. Not this dude. I would not be proud of this weld working on the blind side of a muffler lying on my back under a car and using a torch. The result was seriously embarrassing, and especially with TIG. I had problems for a little while since I was habituated to moving the torch in and out to modulate temp from oxy-acetylene welding. When I got past that I found it fairly easy to get beautiful work on mild steel. Dirty aluminum castings, not so much. (It's amazing how most aluminum casting is like a piece of swiss cheese when one starts to melt into it with TIG.) My prized (best) TIG weld was on an aluminum AC line under a car hood that had developed a kink and leak. Cut the tube, butt joined it together, and went all the way around that (1/4 or 3/8 OD tube) with a 1/16 AL rod. Three times, then I was done. Looked ugly. Worked perfectly. But this dude, I'm not even sure he knows what he's doing with his furnace..... |
|
|
|
|
daarul50
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1034
|
|
January 01, 2016, 12:03:49 AM |
|
I think there should be some kind of test 'due diligence'
|
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3010
Merit: 1031
RIP Mommy
|
|
January 01, 2016, 12:05:37 AM |
|
I think there should be some kind of test 'due diligence'
There already are, and can stop exactly zero criminals from getting guns. |
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
daarul50
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1034
|
|
January 01, 2016, 12:34:46 AM |
|
I think there should be some kind of test 'due diligence'
There already are, and can stop exactly zero criminals from getting guns. Is it true? Where? |
|
|
|
|
BADecker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3822
Merit: 1373
|
|
January 01, 2016, 01:21:46 AM |
|
I think there should be some kind of test 'due diligence'
There already are, and can stop exactly zero criminals from getting guns. Is it true? Where? Two major places. 1. All the nations that have violent, tyrranistic, oppressive governments that control their people with guns. 2. All the crooks that the free nations can't keep from getting guns one way or another. |
|
|
|
tvbcof
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4592
Merit: 1276
|
|
January 01, 2016, 04:46:14 AM |
|
How are they going to take the gun away from you? Ask you to hand it over nice-like? Throw a tantrum when you don't hand it over? No. They will use gun violence to stop you from what? Carrying a gun? Folks who know what to do have the chance to make a lot of money off taxpayers if their property is stolen from them by government and cops. If I were commissioned to formulate a strategy here, I would do something like have the paramilitary (and/or military and/or contractors a-la Blackwater) show up at the doors of anyone who was registered and demand to see the gun. If the victim was on a Kafka-esque secret list, the gun would be confiscated. If the party could not produce the weapon, they would have to produce something like, oh, say, $10,000 in cash or be frog-marched off. Enforcement then could search the rest of the property for anything else which caught their eye (e.g., your daughter)...and take it home as a fringe benefit of the job. Civil asset forfeiture, bitch. It's fairly easy for me to think like a left-winger since I was one an embarrassingly long part of my life. Actually, I was at one point interested in a situation where gun owners needed to hold a bond to be forfeited if a gun were used irresponsibly. I think that such a bond could be obtained for very reasonable costs on the open market since irresponsible use is nearly a non-problem. These days I have no interest in anything but having these gun control slime have a high capacity clip shoved up their asses. All the way. It is increasingly clear to me that there is a deeper and darker agenda which they have. I would be kind of interested in a trade: Some ostensibly realistic thing (say, gun-show loophole if that even actually exists) for a situation where if more than, say, one percent of guns are confiscated in a 12 month time period, all gun control legislation is null and void. If these gun-grabbers resisted such a structure (and they would) it would show their true colors. |
sig spam anywhere and self-moderated threads on the pol&soc board are for losers.
|
|
|
Spendulus
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386
|
|
January 01, 2016, 05:27:09 AM |
|
How are they going to take the gun away from you? Ask you to hand it over nice-like? Throw a tantrum when you don't hand it over? No. They will use gun violence to stop you from what? Carrying a gun? Folks who know what to do have the chance to make a lot of money off taxpayers if their property is stolen from them by government and cops. If I were commissioned to formulate a strategy here, I would do something like have the paramilitary (and/or military and/or contractors a-la Blackwater) show up at the doors of anyone who was registered and demand to see the gun. If the victim was on a Kafka-esque secret list, the gun would be confiscated. If the party could not produce the weapon, they would have to produce something like, oh, say, $10,000 in cash or be frog-marched off. Enforcement then could search the rest of the property for anything else which caught their eye (e.g., your daughter)...and take it home as a fringe benefit of the job. Civil asset forfeiture, bitch. It's fairly easy for me to think like a left-winger since I was one an embarrassingly long part of my life. Actually, I was at one point interested in a situation where gun owners needed to hold a bond to be forfeited if a gun were used irresponsibly. I think that such a bond could be obtained for very reasonable costs on the open market since irresponsible use is nearly a non-problem. These days I have no interest in anything but having these gun control slime have a high capacity clip shoved up their asses. All the way. It is increasingly clear to me that there is a deeper and darker agenda which they have. I would be kind of interested in a trade: Some ostensibly realistic thing (say, gun-show loophole if that even actually exists) for a situation where if more than, say, one percent of guns are confiscated in a 12 month time period, all gun control legislation is null and void. If these gun-grabbers resisted such a structure (and they would) it would show their true colors. Another interesting aspect of "gun control" is hiding the heros, and only talking about (a) the terrorist (b) the victims. Who knows anything about the brave woman who ran at the nutcase Islamic terrorist shooter at Ft. Hood, Texas? How about the CCL guy that did the same with the Giffords shooting incident? |
|
|
|
|
|
