Assault weapon bans

[mdude77]

Are there any gun rights advocates here who haven't bought into the whole libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, AnCap movement? It would lend more credibility to their stance.

Using that logic...

Are there any liberalists here who don't adore central power, and enslaving people (for their own good of course)?

M

[FirstAscent]

Are there any gun rights advocates here who haven't bought into the whole libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, AnCap movement? It would lend more credibility to their stance.

Using that logic...

Are there any liberalists here who don't adore central power, and enslaving people (for their own good of course)?

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

[Rassah]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

[FirstAscent]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

[Spendulus]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

[FirstAscent]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

[Rassah]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

I'll take that as a no then.

[FirstAscent]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

I'll take that as a no then.

I asked you three questions. Please forgive there not being a question mark on the third.

[Rassah]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

I'll take that as a no then.

I asked you three questions. Please forgive there not being a question mark on the third.

Well, personally, I think shooting criminals and taking away their guns is the only way to keep guns out of criminals' hands, since, you know, they're criminals who won't care about licensing or laws... But if you think laws and licensing works...

By the way, you should check out how awesomely well the US's war on drugs has gone. I mean, those things are totally banned, and now there are no drugs in US at all!

[Spendulus]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

No, I am asking what stands you'd like to see outside of the matter of firearms.  From the federal level.  Carbon controls?  If so, how?  Tracking of individuals 24/7?  That could be used to deduce almost all crime.  But what would you control at the federal level?  What would you do with Exxon?  With shale oil?
What kinds of vehicles should we drive?  How about a mandate on max carbon emissions per human?  How about birth control?  Max of one child?

You name it.

[FirstAscent]

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

Oh, you have some way of controlling guns that doesn't involve central power?

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

I'll take that as a no then.

I asked you three questions. Please forgive there not being a question mark on the third.

Well, personally, I think shooting criminals and taking away their guns is the only way to keep guns out of criminals' hands, since, you know, they're criminals who won't care about licensing or laws... But if you think laws and licensing works...

Please be sincere and answer the questions. Shall I accept this as what you think should be done? Also, please note that I asked three questions.

By the way, you should check out how awesomely well the US's war on drugs has gone. I mean, those things are totally banned, and now there are no drugs in US at all!

Please open up a thread on drugs if you wish to discuss drugs.

[FirstAscent]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

No, I am asking what stands you'd like to see outside of the matter of firearms.  From the federal level.  Carbon controls?  If so, how?  Tracking of individuals 24/7?  That could be used to deduce almost all crime.  But what would you control at the federal level?  What would you do with Exxon?  With shale oil?
What kinds of vehicles should we drive?  How about a mandate on max carbon emissions per human?  How about birth control?  Max of one child?

You name it.

We're discussing guns. I have some threads on the environment, if you want to wade into that territory, go find them.

[Spendulus]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

No, I am asking what stands you'd like to see outside of the matter of firearms.  From the federal level.  Carbon controls?  If so, how?  Tracking of individuals 24/7?  That could be used to deduce almost all crime.  But what would you control at the federal level?  What would you do with Exxon?  With shale oil?
What kinds of vehicles should we drive?  How about a mandate on max carbon emissions per human?  How about birth control?  Max of one child?

You name it.

We're discussing guns. I have some threads on the environment, if you want to wade into that territory, go find them.

No problem, I was just curious.  Generally, liberal controller personality types do not want to just control one item or one type of behavior.  Marx would never have thought of stopping at just say, one industry. 

[FirstAscent]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

No, I am asking what stands you'd like to see outside of the matter of firearms.  From the federal level.  Carbon controls?  If so, how?  Tracking of individuals 24/7?  That could be used to deduce almost all crime.  But what would you control at the federal level?  What would you do with Exxon?  With shale oil?
What kinds of vehicles should we drive?  How about a mandate on max carbon emissions per human?  How about birth control?  Max of one child?

You name it.

We're discussing guns. I have some threads on the environment, if you want to wade into that territory, go find them.

No problem, I was just curious.  Generally, liberal controller personality types do not want to just control one item or one type of behavior.  Often, it doesn't seem to matter what they control - as long as it's something. 

I suspect that you're one of those types who uses political ideologies to decide what you believe about scientific findings. Personally, I use scientific findings to motivate my political ideologies.

[Spendulus]

....

I noted earlier, that federal permit issuing is the only way that has any real means of keeping guns out of criminals' hands. Why don't you offer up any solution or suggestion to get guns out of criminals' hands? Or do you just not care? Do you just want the gun population to rise and rise, and with that, we'll see gun deaths rise and rise as well.

What other types of centralized Federal new laws and power do you advocate?

So far it's pretty clear that (unlike the OP) it's not "assault weapons", it's all guns.

Let's hear the whole platform.  What else would improve society and reconstruct it more to your liking?

Do you not recall your own recent comments? I see no need to explain it all again. I guess you've got some reading to do. I'll quote your recent comments for reference below:

The funniest thing of all: people don't read my posts. For if they did, they'd stop arguing against things I haven't said.

Go back and read them, and then you'll discover my position on guns. It addresses the faults of the system and factors in the most blatantly obvious statistical data.

I've read and fully understood your statist, totalitarian rants.

No, I am asking what stands you'd like to see outside of the matter of firearms.  From the federal level.  Carbon controls?  If so, how?  Tracking of individuals 24/7?  That could be used to deduce almost all crime.  But what would you control at the federal level?  What would you do with Exxon?  With shale oil?
What kinds of vehicles should we drive?  How about a mandate on max carbon emissions per human?  How about birth control?  Max of one child?

You name it.

We're discussing guns. I have some threads on the environment, if you want to wade into that territory, go find them.

No problem, I was just curious.  Generally, liberal controller personality types do not want to just control one item or one type of behavior.  Often, it doesn't seem to matter what they control - as long as it's something. 

I suspect that you're one of those types who uses political ideologies to decide what you believe about scientific findings. Personally, I use scientific findings to motivate my political ideologies.

I think it's more complex than that, but I was just trying to get an idea of what this better and more utopian world with no guns would look like - from your point of view.  Sort of trying to see the vision.  Did not mean to derail into other subjects. 

This isn't new with guns, by the way.  There's been societies with sword and spear control plans in the past.

[TheButterZone]

Wonder how many non-aggressive Japanese were murdered as a result of the katanagari.

[mdude77]

Are there any gun rights advocates here who haven't bought into the whole libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, AnCap movement? It would lend more credibility to their stance.

Using that logic...

Are there any liberalists here who don't adore central power, and enslaving people (for their own good of course)?

Spoken like a true gun lovin', libertarian government hating, conspiracy believing, complete ant-tax, aspiring AnCapper.

As for the answer to your question, I'd say yes. In fact, I'd say that there are no liberals here who adore central power or enslaving people.

It's always telling when the name calling starts.

M

[mdude77]

I suspect that you're one of those types who uses political ideologies to decide what you believe about scientific findings. Personally, I use scientific findings to motivate my political ideologies.

Your scientific findings are flawed.  Else you'd agree that ice cream should be banned, because increased ice cream sales lead to more stolen cars!  Correlation does not equal causation.

M

[hawkeye]

Imo science is used to support significant amounts of tyranny in our society.  Which quite saddens me being a huge science enthusiast.

People should not be compelled to do or not be able to do things based on whether it is a scientifically good idea or not.  eg.  just because smoking is considered bad does not mean it should be banned.  Same for healthy food, you should be allowed to eat what is scientifically proven to be bad for you if that's what you wish.  etc.

Science says guns are dangerous obviously, just as many implements are dangerous.    That doesn't give anybody the right to start deciding who gets to own them and who doesn't.  The minute you shoot someone with one is when it becomes an issue, just as you get questioned the minute you decide to impale someone with your kitchen knife but not before just because you own one.

[Spendulus]

Imo science is used to support significant amounts of tyranny in our society.  Which quite saddens me being a huge science enthusiast.

People should not be compelled to do or not be able to do things based on whether it is a scientifically good idea or not.  eg.  just because smoking is considered bad does not mean it should be banned.  Same for healthy food, you should be allowed to eat what is scientifically proven to be bad for you if that's what you wish....

But that's pretty much the progressive creed, since the early part of the 20th century, when they championed Eugenics.  Scientific, right?

The emergence and distorsion of many social sciences including psychology, sociology is based on the idea that experts should guide and control the population.

Oh, back to the grim reality of areas where guns are banned....FirstAscent's progressive utopia TODAY IN NEW YORK:

http://gothamist.com/2013/07/26/subway_stabbing_victims_suit_agains.php

But don't worry...just control the media and control what's printed, and everything will appear WONDERFUL!