Assault weapon bans

[FirstAscent]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

[TheButterZone]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

Or, just playing with the bloody sociopath before he is punished for his betrayal of innocent life?

[lavalampoon]

What do you think should be done about assault weapons? Do you support them or not?

Why do you ask, are you intending to take my coins? If so, I guess you'll find out if I'm an unarmed fool. 

[Rassah]

In a peacetime society, guns cause violence to stop, because criminals don't like to be shot.

Criminals who want guns depend on and need you to champion gun ownership.

Unless you are in Maryland. Then they prefer the status quo, which is that guns are banned, and they know that everyone but them is disarmed.

Nobody ever said a non unified approach is worth shit.

How much more unified can you get than "Carrying a gun? Go to jail."  Or are we back to the "gun control only works if every country in the world implements it, except it woks in Japan despite no unification?"

Japan is consistent.

So is Maryland.

So? How is that the same?

It is the same. Both places are consistent in their bans. How it is different?

Japan is a nation. Maryland is a state within a nation. Duh.

Gun legislation is on a state level, not on countrywide level. So it might as well be a country from gun control standpoint. Only difference is it's easier to get into MD from the border areas than into the island of Japan. I guess we should set up border fence everywhere and rifle through everyone's cars and baggage every time anyone crosses state lines. That should fix any problems.

My god you're an idiot. Oh, I said that before. I wonder why. Go back and read the very dialog we had, quoted right here. Look for the term "unified". Jesus fuck.

Yes, we have, and you made just as much sense before. Learn to logic.

Don't be so obtuse, if it's within your capability to not be. Round and round is your mode of argumentation, ignoring all prior points, either due to trollish behavior, or just plain stupidity.

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

Do you understand the term "uniform" within the context of this discussion?

Do you understand why more guns lead to more gun injuries and deaths?

I think it's possible that you do not.

I understand "uniform" to mean the law being applied uniformly to everyone in a specific region, without anyone being given any special privileges. I THOUGHT by "uniform" you meant the law being the same everywhere around the world, but you corrected me by telling me that's not what you meant.

I understand that you claim that more guns lead to more gun injuries and deaths, but I also understand that this claim is demonstrably false. That is why the rest of us are discussing what exactly causes violence and increase in gun deaths, such as what types of culture, while you are still clinging to the false belief that guns by their very existence cause gun injury and death. Yes, the circumstances of gun ownership in Switzerland are different than in US, but if your claim was true, just the very fact that most people own guns in Switzerland would mean the prevalence on gun injuries and deaths is really high in Switzerland. It's not. So your claim is false. Something else besides guns is contributing to gun injuries and deaths.

I believe you are talking to yourself, past everyone else, convinced you are right and everyone else is an idiot, while living completely in your own little world, outside of which everyone else considers you the idiot.

[Rassah]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

Holliday, I think you have your answer.

[FirstAscent]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

Holliday, I think you have your answer.

And so Rassah admists he's a troll, out to make other people angry. Others know it as well.

[Rassah]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

Holliday, I think you have your answer.

And so Rassah admists he's a troll, out to make other people angry. Others know it as well.

I prefer a science/math/physics/logic nerd. If you claim bs, I'll step in and say "prove it." I can't help myself 

[FirstAscent]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

Holliday, I think you have your answer.

And so Rassah admists he's a troll, out to make other people angry. Others know it as well.

I prefer a science/math/physics/logic nerd. If you claim bs, I'll step in and say "prove it." I can't help myself 

Good for you. To get to what you aspire to, you first have to comprehend the dialog which has transpired.

[Rassah]

I am absolutely sure it's because you make a completely incoherent or illogical point, pat yourself on the back about it, thinking you're awesome, and convince yourself that you have made a perfect, indefensible argument, while the rest of us are either trying to figure out what the heel your talking about, or are frantically trying to point out your logic errors, which you refuse to recognize. I mean, you absolutely *insist* that correlation = causation, that law breakers follow laws, etc.

If you understand this, why do you continue to bang your head against a brick wall? You have the patience of a saint.

My thoughts exactly with regard to attempting to carry on a discussion with Rassah. Except I don't have the patience of a saint, hence the foul mood the cat puts me in.

Holliday, I think you have your answer.

And so Rassah admists he's a troll, out to make other people angry. Others know it as well.

I prefer a science/math/physics/logic nerd. If you claim bs, I'll step in and say "prove it." I can't help myself 

Good for you. To get to what you aspire to, you first have to comprehend the dialog which has transpired.

I admit, I have suspected that one of the reasons for us not being able to figure each other out may be due to a language barrier. I'm fluent in English, Russian, Ukrainian, speak a bit of Polish, Spanish, and Italian, and have some experience with Latin, German, French, and Japanese. I don't know what your native language is, but maybe it's a problem with either you using language in a way you believe to be "complete," while in actuality leaving too much unsaid and unexplained, or it may be that I am overanalyzing your words and statements, and understand them to mean something else based on my own language context, when you mean something else.
Or it could just be that, since about 5 other people have come to the conclusion that you are a sociopath, it's really as simple as that.

[FirstAscent]

Or it could just be that, since about 5 other people have come to the conclusion that you are a sociopath, it's really as simple as that.

Funny how in personal messages with other members, the consensus is you're a troll. However, I will admit that you may also have some difficulty with English unless it's spelled out for you, seeing as how it's not your native language.

Also, about that sociopath insult. It hardly means anything, since it only originates from the fringe libertarian faction, who seem to have difficulty referring to 90 percent of the public as anything but a 'statist'.

[mdude77]

Or it could just be that, since about 5 other people have come to the conclusion that you are a sociopath, it's really as simple as that.

Funny how in personal messages with other members, the consensus is you're a troll. However, I will admit that you may also have some difficulty with English unless it's spelled out for you, seeing as how it's not your native language.

Also, about that sociopath insult. It hardly means anything, since it only originates from the fringe libertarian faction, who seem to have difficulty referring to 90 percent of the public as anything but a 'statist'.

I wouldn't refer to him as a troll.  However I do agree with them, your logic makes no sense whatsoever, as I stated earlier.

Most of the uninformed public buys the government propaganda hook line and sinker about the government being good.  It's not their fault all they know is the lies spoon fed to them.

I fail to see how ANYONE who believes in bitcoin, and hence probably sees through the lies of the government and central banking system, can believe anything the government says.  Including the "gun control" lie.

But you don't make sense to me in any way shape or form, so perhaps that shouldn't surprise me.

M

[Spendulus]

Or it could just be that, since about 5 other people have come to the conclusion that you are a sociopath, it's really as simple as that.

Funny how in personal messages with other members, the consensus is you're a troll. However, I will admit that you may also have some difficulty with English unless it's spelled out for you, seeing as how it's not your native language.

Also, about that sociopath insult. It hardly means anything, since it only originates from the fringe libertarian faction, who seem to have difficulty referring to 90 percent of the public as anything but a 'statist'.

I wouldn't refer to him as a troll.  However I do agree with them, your logic makes no sense whatsoever, as I stated earlier.

Most of the uninformed public buys the government propaganda hook line and sinker about the government being good.  It's not their fault all they know is the lies spoon fed to them.

I fail to see how ANYONE who believes in bitcoin, and hence probably sees through the lies of the government and central banking system, can believe anything the government says.  Including the "gun control" lie.

But you don't make sense to me in any way shape or form, so perhaps that shouldn't surprise me.

M

First_ascent is consistent, though.  Just as with his opinions about global warming, he advocates big-government-solutions.  Whether that means he actually believes 'government is good' is another story.  He may just think the problems are so dire no other method is possible.

In the end it's the same result, an advocacy of taking away individual liberties to make the world a better place through government control.  Given that, the polemics vis a vis gun control are understandable.

At least in this thread, I have not seen him address this fundamental belief pattern. 

[TheButterZone]

Or it could just be that, since about 5 other people have come to the conclusion that you are a sociopath, it's really as simple as that.

Funny how in personal messages with other members, the consensus is you're a troll. However, I will admit that you may also have some difficulty with English unless it's spelled out for you, seeing as how it's not your native language.

Also, about that sociopath insult. It hardly means anything, since it only originates from the fringe libertarian faction, who seem to have difficulty referring to 90 percent of the public as anything but a 'statist'.

I wouldn't refer to him as a troll.  However I do agree with them, your logic makes no sense whatsoever, as I stated earlier.

Most of the uninformed public buys the government propaganda hook line and sinker about the government being good.  It's not their fault all they know is the lies spoon fed to them.

Judging from most U.S. opinion polls, where most of the public disapproves of the government, I would NOT say 90% of the public are statists. From personal experience (friends vs ex-friends), I would say closer to 90% of the public are dissidents in some form or another, and closer to 10% are statists. And of the government itself, closer to 90% are totalitarians or sociopaths like him, and closer to 10% think they can actually cure the disease from within. It's no wonder why the election results are what they are (the greatest evil almost always wins, because it's not necessary to have a 100% evil government, as long as evil is the supermega-majority); totalitarians and sociopaths don't allow free and fair elections - if they did tomorrow, the government would soon be unrecognizable, because the dissident will of the opinion poll respondents would finally be able to manifest, without oppression and election fraud standing in the way. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

Also, knowing sociopaths, we know they cannot truly be "insulted" (unlike non-sociopaths), as they reject reality, substitute their own, and say whatever it takes to destroy their opponents, figuratively, and literally. But they most certainly can be labeled (by non-practitioners) and diagnosed (by practitioners) as such, now in the DSM as "Antisocial personality disorder"

Antisocial (Dissocial) Personality Disorder is a personality disorder characterized by a pervasive pattern of disregard for, or violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. There may be an impoverished moral sense or conscience and a history of crime, legal problems, impulsive and aggressive behavior.

[mdude77]

Judging from most U.S. opinion polls, where most of the public disapproves of the government, I would NOT say 90% of the public are statists. From personal experience (friends vs ex-friends), I would say closer to 90% of the public are dissidents in some form or another, and closer to 10% are statists. And of the government itself, closer to 90% are totalitarians or sociopaths like him, and closer to 10% think they can actually cure the disease from within. It's no wonder why the election results are what they are (the greatest evil almost always wins, because it's not necessary to have a 100% evil government, as long as evil is the supermega-majority); totalitarians and sociopaths don't allow free and fair elections - if they did tomorrow, the government would soon be unrecognizable, because the dissident will of the opinion poll respondents would finally be able to manifest, without oppression and election fraud standing in the way. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

I think is problem is most individuals think some part of the government should exist.  For example, younger folks don't support social security, but older folks do.  It's very hard to find anyone who really truly thinks 95% of the government and its perceived benefits should not exist.

M

[TheButterZone]

Judging from most U.S. opinion polls, where most of the public disapproves of the government, I would NOT say 90% of the public are statists. From personal experience (friends vs ex-friends), I would say closer to 90% of the public are dissidents in some form or another, and closer to 10% are statists. And of the government itself, closer to 90% are totalitarians or sociopaths like him, and closer to 10% think they can actually cure the disease from within. It's no wonder why the election results are what they are (the greatest evil almost always wins, because it's not necessary to have a 100% evil government, as long as evil is the supermega-majority); totalitarians and sociopaths don't allow free and fair elections - if they did tomorrow, the government would soon be unrecognizable, because the dissident will of the opinion poll respondents would finally be able to manifest, without oppression and election fraud standing in the way. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

I think is problem is most individuals think some part of the government should exist.  For example, younger folks don't support social security, but older folks do.  It's very hard to find anyone who really truly thinks 95% of the government and its perceived benefits should not exist.

M

Just because you think "the government" should exist, doesn't mean you're a statist in my book; only if you think "the government's exercise of absolute power over innocent lives is infallible, more government please". The government is so deeply totalitarian that the only way for it to be worse is finally committing genocide. At this point, any opposition to the totalitarian state's power, the desire to decrease it, is dissidence. When it finally begins genocide, patriots who oppose it will be labeled rebels, traitors, terrorists, by the government using the Newspeak dictionary.

[mdude77]

Judging from most U.S. opinion polls, where most of the public disapproves of the government, I would NOT say 90% of the public are statists. From personal experience (friends vs ex-friends), I would say closer to 90% of the public are dissidents in some form or another, and closer to 10% are statists. And of the government itself, closer to 90% are totalitarians or sociopaths like him, and closer to 10% think they can actually cure the disease from within. It's no wonder why the election results are what they are (the greatest evil almost always wins, because it's not necessary to have a 100% evil government, as long as evil is the supermega-majority); totalitarians and sociopaths don't allow free and fair elections - if they did tomorrow, the government would soon be unrecognizable, because the dissident will of the opinion poll respondents would finally be able to manifest, without oppression and election fraud standing in the way. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

I think is problem is most individuals think some part of the government should exist.  For example, younger folks don't support social security, but older folks do.  It's very hard to find anyone who really truly thinks 95% of the government and its perceived benefits should not exist.

M

Just because you think "the government" should exist, doesn't mean you're a statist in my book; only if you think "the government's exercise of absolute power over innocent lives is infallible, more government please". The government is so deeply totalitarian that the only way for it to be worse is finally committing genocide. At this point, any opposition to the totalitarian state's power, the desire to decrease it, is dissidence. When it finally begins genocide, patriots who oppose it will be labeled rebels, traitors, terrorists, by the government using the Newspeak dictionary.

I agree with you on every point.  I wasn't labeling said individuals as statists, just pointing out why the FG continues on indefinitely with permanent scope creep.

The genocide piece is somewhat held at bay as long as we retain our gun rights.  Without them, it'd be one helluva scary place.

M

[PrintMule]

Only difference you could possibly make would be to shoot some army guy in a bullet-proof vest, before they take you down using superior firepower.

[mdude77]

Only difference you could possibly make would be to shoot some army guy in a bullet-proof vest, before they take you down using superior firepower.

Look at Afghanistan for an example of how well superior firepower serves the US.

M

[PrintMule]

Only difference you could possibly make would be to shoot some army guy in a bullet-proof vest, before they take you down using superior firepower.

Look at Afghanistan for an example of how well superior firepower serves the US.

M

The genocide piece is somewhat held at bay as long as we retain our gun rights.  Without them, it'd be one helluva scary place.
M

But there's no genocide in question. If they would like to massacre everyone, they would do fine.
Also it's a foreign country. Imagine if US decided to crackdown on it's own citizens. Nowhere to hide.
And finally do your gun rights allow you to carry an rpg or some grenades, and would you strap a suicide vest on yourself and blow some tank?

[mdude77]

Only difference you could possibly make would be to shoot some army guy in a bullet-proof vest, before they take you down using superior firepower.

Look at Afghanistan for an example of how well superior firepower serves the US.

M

The genocide piece is somewhat held at bay as long as we retain our gun rights.  Without them, it'd be one helluva scary place.
M

But there's no genocide in question. If they would like to massacre everyone, they would do fine.
Also it's a foreign country. Imagine if US decided to crackdown on it's own citizens. Nowhere to hide.
And finally do your gun rights allow you to carry an rpg or some grenades, and would you strap a suicide vest on yourself and blow some tank?

Compared to the alternative, it'd be an option to consider.  I certainly wouldn't just stand around and let myself and mine be slaughtered.

M