Gun Control

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by Throatpunch, Jul 25, 2016.

  1. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dogmeat

    Nov 22, 2009
    See you guys are comparing US and Venezuela, well countries like Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, etc. also have high homicide figures and gun violence figures. So, yea. And Brazil. Etc.

    US is actively trying to destabilize and overthrow the leftist governments of Latin America. It's like the times of United Fruit Company never ended.

  2. SilverStarApple/Epsilon7

    SilverStarApple/Epsilon7 Still Mildly Glowing

    Oct 27, 2017
    Lol, you're doing it again! Dismissively dismissing my points instead of arguing against them.

    Also, this lie again:

    "Venezuela isn't Liberalism, it's socialism!"

    Liberalism is Socialism. They're the same thing. They want the same thing. They say the same lies. Liberals pretend to believe in human rights, but you're here trying to argue that we should restrict our gun rights just in case this makes criminals more inclined to follow laws.

    It's incredibly dishonest for you to pretend socialist ideas can't be criticized for the socialist shitholes they create just because you call yourself a non-socialist while arguing for them.

    This might sound strange, but sometimes I wish people like you told the truth. If America really was to blame for Latin America being unable to rule itself, if America really was destabilizing them, then America would also have the balls to try and destabilize and overthrow middle-eastern shithole countries instead of protecting those islamist shitholes from rival islamic sects who want to conquer it for themselves.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 3, 2020
  3. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite Board Cop oTO

    Aug 16, 2010
    Only one is comparing the US to Venezuela and other Southern American states.
    Funny enough, the Nazis did roll back some of the firearm legislations from the Weimar Republic to its former imperial state, and made it a lot easier for Party members to acquire rifles. Of course, the Weimar gun laws were used to disarm political dissidents and Jews, so the whole "fight against tyranny with your guns" thing is a bit of a mixed bag. You have to recognize it as a tyranny first, and the common german folks (i.e. those not of an undesirable minority) did not see the Nazi regime as enough of a tyranny to rise up against it. Private gun ownership was particularly encouraged so that the civilians could provide support to the army in case of invasion, and have the entire population fight against invaders. This principle was later used in the Volkssturm units, basically militias of too old and too young men otherwise not fit for military service, equipped with cheap weapons (if at all) and told to die for the Führer. Their efficiency was questionable to say the least.
    Here's the thing. If you want civilians to fight an organized army (i.e. the Volkssturm, or to rise up against their own tyrannical government), you need those civilians to be fanatics. Otherwise they will not have the morale and strength to stand any chance against an opponent that is vastly better equipped and trained than them.
    Does anyone really think that enough american citizens will have the will and strength to go full Viet Cong to have any real effect? Not to mention that the Viet Cong didn't bring their own equipment, they were trained and equipped like the military organization they were.
    Private gun ownership doesn't really help you defend yourself against government tyranny. Widespread gun ownership probably just makes normal law enforcement more trigger-happy since the cops have to expect that everybody has a gun in their glovebox, and so the safest option is to shoot first if the situation is tense.

    Note that this doesn't say anything about the validity of gun ownership for home- and self-defense, sport, or hunting, or whatever you want. It's just about the probable effectiveness of private citizens owning and using their own guns in the case of an insurrection or uprising against its own government, which I think is questionable at best. The reality might be different depending on the actual circumstances, of course.

    @SilverStarApple/Epsilon7 Please try not to double post and edit your posts instead.
    @everyone: Can we all calm down and be more civilized again? This doesn't need to be a discussion about the differences between "liberal" and "socialist" or whatever the hell is going on again.
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  4. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    We talking about a prolonged insurgency or an actual fighting force because people seem to forget the Viet Cong got goddamn obliterated in the Tet Offensive, as in wiped out and never ever recovered. Now at the same NATO has been fighting actual cave people in the mountains for the last 20 years because those cave people know not to get into a fist fight with a modern army.

    As for the will to do such a thing. You'd be surprised. Do I expect to see a bunch of San Francisco Sodomites ambushing patrols among the redwoods of the northwest? No, not that many but a few probably. Maybe since after a century of warfare and millions dead, Europeans have gotten over warfare and just don't think they can muster the belief to get behind something that big or the fact the countless US bases dotting the continent have stopped them giving into their base desire to kill the shit out of each other, but Americans have never had a problem believing in things, so I have no problem seeing a bunch of Billy Bobs ambushing a patrol of Federales/ Foreign Soldiers/Amazon-Facebook Clone Troopers in the corn fields of the midwest.
  5. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite Board Cop oTO

    Aug 16, 2010
    Oh, I can see them doing that once or twice, but I also see them getting massacred in retaliation very, very quickly, and losing the will to continue after that. Getting fucked up like that will quickly break the morale of even the billybobbiest Cletuses.
    But yeah, maybe it's because the effects of WWII are still more fresh around here with the people in charge often having grown up in the immediate times afterwards, so warfare is seen as less heroic around here. Hard to imagine that people would actually fight like that, because we know they didn't do that here. The partisan life is short unless people are real fanatics.
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  6. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    Sure on paper it looks like they should have mudhole stomped into them. On paper the Soviets should have have taken the Mujaheddin to the cleaners. On Paper NATO should have been done with the Taliban in 3 months. What is on paper doesn't mean all that much when you get boots on the ground. The British wrote the book on how to deal guerrillas over a century ago but in today climate nobody wants to go that route because the payment in political capital to pull it off would leave them bankrupt. You need to be either Comically Evil or in location that people give absolutely zero shits about to pull it off.
    This is America we are talking about, son. 2 words for ya, Snake Handlers

    These crazy bastards go to church and molest snakes because they think Jesus will protect them.

    Now I am not talking about if this will be successful or not, but I do think it could happen.
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2020
  7. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite Board Cop oTO

    Aug 16, 2010
    I don't doubt it would happen, just that it would last longer than a week or two encounters :D
  8. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    I disagree. America is stupid big with the 3rd largest population on the planet. That is a lot of room and a lot of people. Every time somebody leaves the safety of their base they have to worry of somebody getting popped off by a sniper on the wal-mart or some Tannerite IED hidden in the drive thru at Wendy's only to have the assailants slink away into the maze of the suburban houses or the vast woodlands. just think of the logistical nightmare that would be to just try and patrol the ocean of corn and wheat that is the midwest.
    But for me to make an educated guess on how long this would last, I'd need somebody to give this hypothetical force an origin.
  9. MutantScalper

    MutantScalper Dogmeat

    Nov 22, 2009
    Me: "There might be a civil war in US in the near future"
    Yanks: "Naah, very unlikely"

    Also me: "You guys should have actual gun laws that you actually enforce"

  10. Atomic Postman

    Atomic Postman Vault Archives Overseer

    Mar 16, 2013
    Honest to God I don't think you could write a character that projects as comically and as frequently as you do. Even for satire it would come off as too stupid. I'm not joking. Just to be clear because you've repeatedly proven yourself to be dull in the mind and you probably don't understand what I just said. You are accusing me of dismissal when you've, yet again, ignored and ran away from my arguments because you can't counter them. Please try again.

    You can only think this way if you are an actual teenager or you've got problems with the brain. I assume the former because you're a "libertarian" who apparently knows jack-shit about the history of his own ideology, but being a Brony would suggest the latter. Choices, choices. Allow me to explain:

    Liberalism originates with the enlightenment era, with some very smart old-timey people like John Locke developing it is an ideology. Broadly, it represents freedom of the individual, free markets, capitalism, democracy, secularism, limited government and individual rights. The "Founding Fathers" of the United States and the American Revolution were driven by liberalism and inspired the Whig Party that championed it in British parliament. The US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the amendments which you are a very big fan of: it is all liberal.

    Modern day liberals branch off, but outside of America where for whatever reason "Liberal" has become synonymous with left wing even though there are plenty of right-wing liberal beliefs (Like libertarianism) liberalism is generally treated as entirely distinctly from socialism. For instance, I have been in the UK for the last few years and there are three major parties: The Conservatives, Labour (socialist) and Liberal Democrats (Liberal).

    Liberalism and socialism aren't the same thing, and no matter how hard you want to try we are not pivoting away to a different argument for you to run away to. Get back on topic and counter my arguments, first.

    I'm guessing you don't actually know what dishonest means in a political context. I imagine you've been called it and decided to give it a spin. I can and I will criticize failing socialist policies and I will advocate against the adoption of socialist policies in either of my home countries. Because I am not a socialist and none of my arguments have been either.

    I realize you're a peabrain so it is really hard to seperate different ideas and not just have everything bad be the same thing, but please do try.
  11. Malpais Dominus

    Malpais Dominus First time out of the vault

    Jun 1, 2020
    Noted red book carrying socialists like John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and Adam Smith. :facepalm:

    Argue whether or not without (the undeniable) US intervention in South American politics they would have problems all you want but you have to be a real brainlet to act like US foreign policy hasn't greatly affected politics south of the border.

  12. SilverStarApple/Epsilon7

    SilverStarApple/Epsilon7 Still Mildly Glowing

    Oct 27, 2017
    Oh, brother! Not this shite again.

    Once upon a time, Liberalism fought for Liberty. Then it stopped caring about Liberty one day, and decided to exclusively care about power instead. It turned evil, like you did one day, hence why you're defending Socialism and spitting on the people it killed.

    Liberalism is dead, because it is just Communism/Socialism/Fascism/Leftism (call it what you like) with a cheap mask on. Libertarianism cares about Liberty, Liberals want to destroy liberty.
  13. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite Board Cop oTO

    Aug 16, 2010
    What I find endlessly fascinating is that Americans managed to completely reverse the meaning of "liberalism" in their dictionary. Here in Europe, those who call themselves "liberals" are usually more oriented on the center/conservative side and stand for classical liberalism, maximum personal and economic freedom. Probably what you'd call libertarianism for some reason. The american "liberalism" (increased government control and less actual freedom, so the opposite of what the word would imply) is what the social democrats mostly stand for.
    Anyway, for the hundreth time, this isn't a thread about discussing politics directly.
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 1
  14. SilverStarApple/Epsilon7

    SilverStarApple/Epsilon7 Still Mildly Glowing

    Oct 27, 2017
    Are you sure that's true for Europe? It can't be true for the countries ravaged by rapefugees imported by, coddled by, and funded by Liberals. You saw how they cheered when political candidate famous for exposing muslim pedophiles Tommy Robinson got arrested for protecting his daughter from an islamic rapist. You saw how they cheered when he got imprisoned for journalism in an islam-dominated prison. You saw how they cheered that other time he got arrested, when he tried to become a legitimate politician to change things from within the system.

    Also, why shouldn't politics be "Directly discussed" here? Yes, the old "Fuck you lefty" vs "Fuck you righty" talk just goes in circles. And we've certainly seen enough "fuck you right-winger" talk from the leftists in this thread. But the utter failure of leftism is a relevant topic of discussion in any topic leftists want to involve themselves in. Leftists hate freedom, lie constantly, and love crime when it's done to anyone but them. They're like fascists but worse because at least Hitler believed in something, marxists aka modern liberals aka leftists believe in nothing but their own desire to be terrible people. Every thing Liberals are wrong on, and every wrong thing they want to do, is a black mark against them as people. In the modern era, Liberalism/Leftism/Socialism/NationalSocialism/Communism is more of a mental disorder than any sort of real coherent form of beliefs and values. An Anarcho-Primitivist's views on gun control are more valid than someone solely defined by their desire to seize power for the sake of abusing it for as long as possible, no matter the cost.
  15. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign ⛧卐⛧ Staff Member Moderator [REDACTED]

    Apr 1, 2005
    I just want to thank Hassknecht for helping to keep NMA mostly free of heavy handed moderation that stifles discussion about important issues that are impacting our users lives. If he says to keep outside political nonsense to another thread then you should do it to keep this thread running smoothly. I'm considering making a catchall /pol thread to rattle on about the things that you are touching on here if you like.

    Although that spergatory thread might work for that.
  16. Aurelius Of Phoenix

    Aurelius Of Phoenix Psued.

    Mar 9, 2018


    I wonder... nah there's no connection.

    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 4, 2020
  17. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign ⛧卐⛧ Staff Member Moderator [REDACTED]

    Apr 1, 2005
    As good a reason as any to own a firearm. You can't rely on the police to protect you from everything. I own my guns to protect against any enemy. Mostly that includes lots of snakes but you never know.
  18. TheGM

    TheGM The voice of reason

    Aug 19, 2008
    To think pretending to be traumatized because you watched Roots one time.

    Fucking Americans, everytime :roll:
    Then people will call you a nut cake with a small penis for being prepared but some how owning a fire extinguisher doesn't have the same connotations with it.
  19. TorontoReign

    TorontoReign ⛧卐⛧ Staff Member Moderator [REDACTED]

    Apr 1, 2005
    Until those people have had to fight off crack heads in their front lawn they will never understand. They might as well live on another planet because they are out of touch. Ask someone that lives in Detroit if they think they should be able to own a firearm to defend themselves. The US is a big place and I think some people have lost perspective on how different each state really is. What works in Tex-ass might not work in Nevada. That doesn't mean Tex-ass is shit (haha), but it might not be for everyone.
  20. Hassknecht

    Hassknecht For hate's sake. Staff Member Admin Orderite Board Cop oTO

    Aug 16, 2010
    Yes, it's true. It seems like you didn't understand what I was saying. The american usage of the word "liberal" is different than the european usage. The same concepts and behaviours exist here, they're just not called "liberalism", but are mostly found under the banner of the social democrats. It was an observation of semantics.
    Because, as you just demonstrated once more, you are apparently physically incapable of making concise arguments about literally anything without going into meandering political manifestos about your pet topic, i.e. lurrals. Yeah, others also tend to shitpost, but they at least have the capability of actually making a point.
    Before you came back and sperged up this thread, it was mostly going fine. And the rest of the dumbfucks are just as incapable of not reacting to your wall-posting in kind, so there's really no point in this thread when it will just be "REEEEEEEE THE LURRALS" and responses of "Well ackchually" and "REEEEEEE THE MASS SHOOTERS".
    Gun control can be discussed in a rational sense.
    But not by you chucklefucks, it seems.
    • [Rad] [Rad] x 5