VOAT Containment Megathread of Trash People for Trash People

[Tasty]

Liberals fearing a more militarized police but thinking only police or military should be able to bear arms definitely *is* contradictory though, and ties into that argument.

Nah. No citizen or militia is going to take on the US military complex and walk away. That's not how you're going to affect change in this country, and if you think it is, feel free to start shooting up police stations and see what the consequences are. (NOTE: Tasty Meat does not condone doing this.)

I'm glad you have more peace of mind with a gun Himu but it's not even close to the solution for a surveillance state.

[Steve Contra]

You can think fascists are coming to kill you and have no hope that owning a personal firearm is going to do you any good.  It's not contradictory.

Then it's like believing in/accepting global warming but still constantly buy electronics, use cars that consume fossil energies and pretty much not recycle everything you can. Because since as an individual you can't do anything, you might as well not contribute.

I don't believe any of that is a real solution either, just as I don't believe the vast military and police state of the United States is going to care much if Himu has a gun.

[daemon]

Liberals fearing a more militarized police but thinking only police or military should be able to bear arms definitely *is* contradictory though, and ties into that argument.

Nah. No citizen or militia is going to take on the US military complex and walk away. That's not how you're going to affect change in this country, and if you think it is, feel free to start shooting up police stations and see what the consequences are. (NOTE: Tasty Meat does not condone doing this.)

I'm glad you have more peace of mind with a gun Himu but it's not even close to the solution for a surveillance state.

But if the citizens don't have guns, they can't even resist from the inside. If the military was to take over the civillian population, the civillians wouldn't be able to even pose a threat. If half the population has guns, they can expect a fight in every corner. They'd have to turn the entire US inside out for a civillian takeover to be possible. In other words, a conflict without a happy ending.

[etiolate]

Milo retreats back into being a troll to escape some stuff. On the other hand, he can debate rather well. The problem is all the debates come down to "you're a racist, defend yourself!" which is pretty easy for him to do. He also gets to play off the fact that the accusers are often poorly informed.

He's giving speeches about War on Christmas and how the left hurts blacks. You could challenge him on stuff like that, but instead it's the really low level emotional stuff they come in with.

[Tasty]

You can think fascists are coming to kill you and have no hope that owning a personal firearm is going to do you any good.  It's not contradictory.

Then it's like believing in/accepting global warming but still constantly buy electronics, use cars that consume fossil energies and pretty much not recycle everything you can. Because since as an individual you can't do anything, you might as well not contribute.

I don't believe any of that is a real solution either, just as I don't believe the vast military and police state of the United States is going to care much if Himu has a gun.

Exactly. If everyone in the US stopped "buying electronics and using fossil energies" it still wouldn't make 1/10th the dent that other solutions are. You can be against climate change and still be carbon-wasteful (most people are, in fact!) But we're making better progress than ever on climate change because we went a different route: legislation, technology, rallying, etc.

[Tasty]

Liberals fearing a more militarized police but thinking only police or military should be able to bear arms definitely *is* contradictory though, and ties into that argument.

Nah. No citizen or militia is going to take on the US military complex and walk away. That's not how you're going to affect change in this country, and if you think it is, feel free to start shooting up police stations and see what the consequences are. (NOTE: Tasty Meat does not condone doing this.)

I'm glad you have more peace of mind with a gun Himu but it's not even close to the solution for a surveillance state.

But if the citizens don't have guns, they can't even resist from the inside. If the military was to take over the civillian population, the civillians wouldn't be able to even pose a threat. If half the population has guns, they can expect a fight in every corner. They'd have to turn the entire US inside out for a civillian takeover to be possible. In other words, a conflict without a happy ending.

You're coming off like a Jade Helmer here.

[Cindi Mayweather]

Liberals fearing a more militarized police but thinking only police or military should be able to bear arms definitely *is* contradictory though, and ties into that argument.

Nah. No citizen or militia is going to take on the US military complex and walk away. That's not how you're going to affect change in this country, and if you think it is, feel free to start shooting up police stations and see what the consequences are. (NOTE: Tasty Meat does not condone doing this.)

I'm glad you have more peace of mind with a gun Himu but it's not even close to the solution for a surveillance state.

But if the citizens don't have guns, they can't even resist from the inside. If the military was to take over the civillian population, the civillians wouldn't be able to even pose a threat. If half the population has guns, they can expect a fight in every corner. They'd have to turn the entire US inside out for a civillian takeover to be possible. In other words, a conflict without a happy ending.

One of the bigger contradictions is that in the post-election haze you've got more minorities like myself buying guns to defend ourselves and then you've got liberals trying to argue against buying guns and gaining an equalizer, while at the same time arguing for our protection. They want us protected but don't want us to have a means to protect ourselves, a right that conservatives have tried to take away and limit for centuries.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who has noticed this. Will be interesting going forward and truly encapsulates how liberals are on the wrong side of the gun issue.

[Steve Contra]

Liberals fearing a more militarized police but thinking only police or military should be able to bear arms definitely *is* contradictory though, and ties into that argument.

Nah. No citizen or militia is going to take on the US military complex and walk away. That's not how you're going to affect change in this country, and if you think it is, feel free to start shooting up police stations and see what the consequences are. (NOTE: Tasty Meat does not condone doing this.)

I'm glad you have more peace of mind with a gun Himu but it's not even close to the solution for a surveillance state.

But if the citizens don't have guns, they can't even resist from the inside. If the military was to take over the civillian population, the civillians wouldn't be able to even pose a threat. If half the population has guns, they can expect a fight in every corner. They'd have to turn the entire US inside out for a civillian takeover to be possible. In other words, a conflict without a happy ending.

You're coming off like a Jade Helmer here.

Basically what people think of the second amendment

[Cindi Mayweather]

Another contradiction is how liberals value the bill of rights and amendments such as the 15th amendment or the 1st amendment which are under attack from Republicans and recently Donald Trump, but for some reason don't value and belittle the second. I read at a gun shop the other weekend "the second amendment protects all others" and it seems to have the right of it.

[etiolate]

I wonder what kind of stuff the private military contractors can get their hands on in a true fascism scenario.

[Tasty]

One of the bigger contradictions is that in the post-election haze you've got more minorities like myself buying guns to defend ourselves and then you've got liberals trying to argue against buying guns and gaining an equalizer, while at the same time arguing for our protection. They want us protected but don't want us to have a means to protect ourselves, a right that conservatives have tried to take away and limit for centuries.

I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who has noticed this. Will be interesting going forward and truly encapsulates how liberals are on the wrong side of the gun issue.

It's an ends vs. means issue. Liberalism isn't directly compatible with widespread gun availability because of the larger societal effects. I believe if there are more guns on the street, the overall effect is that we (as a society) are not safer. You're seeing contradictions where there aren't any.

Another contradiction is how liberals value the bill of rights and amendments such as the 15th amendment or the 1st amendment which are under attack from Republicans and recently Donald Trump, but for some reason don't value and belittle the second. I read at a gun shop the other weekend "the second amendment protects all others" and it seems to have the right of it.

This is asinine. The Constitution isn't divinely inspired and amendments aren't sacred. Do you see liberals defending prohibition?

[Great Rumbler]

America is plenty enough evidence that arming more people in more places isn't solving any problems, but instead just creating more.

[Cindi Mayweather]

America is plenty enough evidence that arming more people in more places isn't solving any problems, but instead just creating more.

There are over 300 million guns in America.

In a year, there are 30k gun deaths. Of those deaths, two-thirds are suicides. About 11k are homocides. Out of 300 million guns. Many of these homocides are committed with stolen or illegally acquired guns and are not licensed.

Guns create more problems how exactly? Those numbers are miniscule. If you're talking about mass shootings, guns certainly aren't the main problem. Especially since most gun owners are well trained and follow safety protocols.

[Cindi Mayweather]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

[daemon]

America is plenty enough evidence that arming more people in more places isn't solving any problems, but instead just creating more.

There are over 300 million guns in America.

In a year, there are 30k gun deaths. Of those deaths, two-thirds are suicides. About 11k are homocides. Out of 300 million guns. Many of these homocides are committed with stolen or illegally acquired guns and are not licensed.

Guns create more problems how exactly? Those numbers are miniscule. If you're talking about mass shootings, guns certainly aren't the main problem. Especially since most gun owners are well trained and follow safety protocols.

To answer Great Rumble, the paradox is that less guns give the criminals with guns a sense of superiority, but more guns per capita makes it unreasonable to try anything on a crowd, because at the end you'll have a very big statistical chance of more than one carrying a firearm. What makes a country safe from being attacked by other countries? Having high grade military stuff, and obviously the nuclear deterrant. More guns within civillians equates to the same model on a smaller scale.

And obviously I agree with you Queen on the hyperbole surrounding crimes commited with a gun.

[zomgee]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

The 1.3 million number is global, I think. Last year in the US there were 35,000 motor vehicle related fatalities.

[Cindi Mayweather]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

The 1.3 million number is global, I think. Last year in the US there were 35,000 motor vehicle related fatalities.

Yeah, you're right. It still puts at about the same amount of deaths per car. at that point, you might as well ban cars.

[zomgee]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

The 1.3 million number is global, I think. Last year in the US there were 35,000 motor vehicle related fatalities.

Yeah, you're right. It still puts at about the same amount of deaths per car. at that point, you might as well ban cars.

Honestly it *doesn't* change the impact of your initial statement. There are roughly 33,000 gun deaths in a year, and 2/3rds of them are suicide.

[Cindi Mayweather]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

The 1.3 million number is global, I think. Last year in the US there were 35,000 motor vehicle related fatalities.

Yeah, you're right. It still puts at about the same amount of deaths per car. at that point, you might as well ban cars.

Honestly it *doesn't* change the impact of your initial statement. There are roughly 33,000 gun deaths in a year, and 2/3rds of them are suicide.

Right. There are also 5.25 million driving accidents per year.

[Brehvolution]

A car isn't designed to kill or destroy as it's main function.

[FStop7]

Stanleys having a meltdown over a president being presidential.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=226718130

FAILED LEADERSHIP because Obama doesn't fly off half cocked in the way that everyone is afraid that Trump will.

[daemon]

Stanleys having a meltdown over a president being presidential.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=226718130

FAILED LEADERSHIP because Obama doesn't fly off half cocked in the way that everyone is afraid that Trump will.

It really puts things into perspective.

Then again...

[james]

By comparison, there are 255.8 million cars in America. Of that 255.8 million, 9,967 are alcohol induced related and 1.3 million people die of car accidents per year with an average of 3,287 per day. Guns have a much higher number per unit in America, and most murders don't account for even 1% of overall guns in America. Cars however represent 1.3 million of 255.8 million.

But somehow, guns cause more problems.

Liberals are full of shit regarding guns. Real talk.

The 1.3 million number is global, I think. Last year in the US there were 35,000 motor vehicle related fatalities.

Yeah, you're right. It still puts at about the same amount of deaths per car. at that point, you might as well ban cars.

Honestly it *doesn't* change the impact of your initial statement. There are roughly 33,000 gun deaths in a year, and 2/3rds of them are suicide.

Right. There are also 5.25 million driving accidents per year.

There are many, many people who work very hard to reduce the number of driving deaths.

Lets play a game:

Guess which people, conservative or liberal, generally oppose those efforts?

Hint: Think of who opposes gun safety

[james]

Stanleys having a meltdown over a president being presidential.

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=226718130

FAILED LEADERSHIP because Obama doesn't fly off half cocked in the way that everyone is afraid that Trump will.

Obama will go down in history as one of the worst leaders in the past 1,000 years.

he is literally ushering in the end of time

[Cindi Mayweather]

There are many, many people who work very hard to reduce the number of driving deaths.

Lets play a game:

Guess which people, conservative or liberal, generally oppose those efforts?

Hint: Think of who opposes gun safety

No one I can really think of. If by gun safety you mean gun laws? I don't agree. To me gun safety is education about safety. As in, how to use a gun. And how to use it safely. I'll probably go with the democratic party since it was the NRA who taught me how to safely use one in their classes and it was people at the gun range who helped me with any issues I had while shooting when I was alone. I certainly didn't see any liberal organizations teaching gun safety.

A car isn't designed to kill or destroy as it's main function.

There are cars that go nearly 300 mph.

[etiolate]

Himu would you be down with state gun licensing with lessons and a safety test to pass?

[agrajag]

Lmao a car that goes fast is not designed to kill people Himu  Those are some mighty fine mental gymnastics you are doing.

[Cindi Mayweather]

Himu would you be down with state gun licensing with lessons and a safety test to pass?

If it is inexpensive yes. This could be abused to make it harder for minorities to buy a gun by making it an expensive fee and just makes it harder for law abiding citizens from from their ability to purchase a gun.

But gun ranges already have safety courses. The NRA runs their own courses for safety. I did a five hour class on handguns. I was taught how they work, their history, how to safely use one, how to store it, how to take it apart, how to clean it, how to shoot it. This is a class required for concealed carry but liberals are anti-concealed carry despite the fact you have to go to a class such as the aforementioned to do it.

I agree with liberals on a lot, but on the gun issue I have realized they are almost universally 90% wrong on it and just as ignorant.

In my opinion America should learn to deal with guns. There are more guns in America than there are people. As such, guns aren't going anywhere. Rather than democrats hoping to ban guns which is a war they will continue to lose, they should advocate for national gun safety protocol. Children should be taught what to do if they see a gun (tell an adult, don't touch it) at a young age and how to operate one (follow the four rules) by at least 10. Otherwise, you will have a populace ignorant of guns, for which there are many in this country. The government should give free - or economically minimal - training sessions to adults.

Democrats love to point to Australia and Europe as proof of gun control, but ignore countries like Sweden and Switzerland while jacking off their healthcare systems. Hilarious, no? Those two countries have a SHIT LOAD of guns and low murder rate. Proving that the problem is not guns and also that most Democrat gun laws are full of shit and feel good efforts to make their supporters think they're doing something when they're not.

Another flaw with state stuff is that it depends on the state. A state like California full of moronic feel good gun control advocates might construe this as bad.

[Cindi Mayweather]

There are cars that go nearly 300 mph.

Are you seriously comparing fast cars with guns, tools designed to seriously hurt and kill?

Guns are designed to shoot bullets. Nothing more. A gun is no different than a hammer. You can use a hammer to hammer in a nail, but you can also bash someone's skull in with it. Guns are used for many things, and limiting it to just hurting and killing is disingenuous, so yes, I will compare fast cars that go nearly 300 mph to guns.

[Tasty]

We're seeing Himu turn into AiA before our very eyes.

[FStop7]

As someone who's gone from owning a small arsenal to being gun free and borderline anti-gun across the board I'm finding this turn to be fascinating.

[agrajag]

Lmao what is this

[Cindi Mayweather]

Lmao what is this

I remember myself and others asking why people need ar-15's before my stance changed. In hindsight, it was a dumb argument. At that point, what's the point of having a car that goes 300 mph? 300 mph is fast af and will undoubtedly result in someone's death. But you don't use that argument on the car for whatever reason. I don't see people requesting the ban of Bugatti's.

[Tasty]

Every citizen should carry a can of mustard gas with them at all times, to ensure democracy.

[Cindi Mayweather]

That was never my argument. I don't think everyone should have guns. But! If you're going to complain about fascists coming to kill you it'd make sense to have a gun!

[daemon]

There are cars that go nearly 300 mph.

Are you seriously comparing fast cars with guns, tools designed to seriously hurt and kill?

To be fair, guns are mostly a protective measure against other people carrying deadly weapons. That, along with hunting, are the two primary uses... At least when talking about a non-war arrangement. If we're to actually use a war scenario... well.



ISIS perfected the backflipping car

[Cindi Mayweather]

Guns can be used as weapons. Cars can be used as weapons. Guns can be used for recreation. Cars can be used for recreation. Guns can be used for practical means (self preservation). Cars can be used for practical means (travel).

I shot an AR-15 Pistol the other day at the range. I am now a true believer. I want one purely to shoot at paper. Fun af.

[james]

Folks, another example of why some people shouldnt be allowed to vote

[Cindi Mayweather]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

[daemon]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

I don't live in the US, but I can actually acquire a gun. The problem is i'd have trouble defending myself for using it against, let's say, someone using a knife with intent to kill me. This actually happened in the past and it didn't end well for those protecting themselves.

Shooting a .50 cal revolver is... well, you don't get it unless you do it.


I wouldn't use it for hunting because it's not my kind of draw. I'd love it on a competition level though.

[james]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

Nope, voter suppression is a tactic proven to work.

People who want guns are the most dangerous people

"Muh safety! Muh castle! I dont believe those science facts! Muh gut feeling!"

Paranoia is a mental illness. People with that kind of mental illness should be stripped of their ability to have a gun and vote.

Period.

[Atramental]

Feel free to poo-poo on me for wanting to have a gun or two but I'm just preparing for when the US turns into a Mad Max wasteland in 4 years thanks to the Trump administration and its policies. 

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Kidding.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Maybe.

[close]

[close]

[Cerveza mas fina]

better pop that cherry before all that wool be radioactive boy

[Cindi Mayweather]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

Nope, voter suppression is a tactic proven to work.

People who want guns are the most dangerous people

"Muh safety! Muh castle! I dont believe those science facts! Muh gut feeling!"

Paranoia is a mental illness. People with that kind of mental illness should be stripped of their ability to have a gun and vote.

Period.

You haven't presented any scientific facts. I'm the one who has dished the data. Wanting to arm myself to protect myself while being a black trans woman is paranoia? I deserve to not to vote?

This is exactly why the democrats lost this election. Liberal smug. Dumping all categories into neat little boxes while stressing exclusivity and entitlement. In this case, which a separate thing but unique to your case, authoritarianism as well.

[daemon]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

Nope, voter suppression is a tactic proven to work.

People who want guns are the most dangerous people

"Muh safety! Muh castle! I dont believe those science facts! Muh gut feeling!"

Paranoia is a mental illness. People with that kind of mental illness should be stripped of their ability to have a gun and vote.

Period.

Hilarious.

"voter suppression is a tactic proven to work" + "Paranoia is a mental illness. People with that kind of mental illness should be stripped of their ability to have a gun and vote"

In the same post.

[Cindi Mayweather]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

I don't live in the US, but I can actually acquire a gun. The problem is i'd have trouble defending myself for using it against, let's say, someone using a knife with intent to kill me. This actually happened in the past and it didn't end well for those protecting themselves.

Shooting a .50 cal revolver is... well, you don't get it unless you do it.


I wouldn't use it for hunting because it's not my kind of draw. I'd love it on a competition level though.

Who would use a .50 cal revolver for self defense? I bought a 9 mm semi automatic pistol. That's a gun you use at the range.

[Tasty]

I'm out before Himu starts regurgitating further trite, overused comparisons.

"Guns are like steaks and cars are like burgers."

[daemon]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

I don't live in the US, but I can actually acquire a gun. The problem is i'd have trouble defending myself for using it against, let's say, someone using a knife with intent to kill me. This actually happened in the past and it didn't end well for those protecting themselves.

Shooting a .50 cal revolver is... well, you don't get it unless you do it.


I wouldn't use it for hunting because it's not my kind of draw. I'd love it on a competition level though.

Who would use a .50 cal revolver for self defense? I bought a 9 mm semi automatic pistol. That's a gun you use at the range.

No lol i meant it like a different thing. I can't defend myself with a 9mm without facing possible jailtime, despite the proof of having someone lunging to kill me with a knife. But that's because there's a special permit for owning guns. I just mentioned the 50 cal because it feels like... you don't really understand the power output of a gun until you see something that size recoiling in such a way. That's the moment you see the raw power.

9mm are fun to shoot too, it's just more of a mechanical process because of the not so high power. I also like using bows. I like weapons that require that extra notch of difficulty when used, but for recreational purposes.

[studyguy]

Guns are for chads, real men arm themselves with deadly katanas folded over a thousand times.
You'll never see it coming.

[PigSpeakers]

I'm out before Himu starts regurgitating further trite, overused comparisons.

"Guns are like steaks and cars are like burgers."

I'm hungry now.

[Cindi Mayweather]

And your post is why democrats lost the election and will likely lose 2018 and maybe 2020.

Good luck continuing to be dismissive and ignorant towards gun owners  and see how far it gets you.

I don't live in the US, but I can actually acquire a gun. The problem is i'd have trouble defending myself for using it against, let's say, someone using a knife with intent to kill me. This actually happened in the past and it didn't end well for those protecting themselves.

Shooting a .50 cal revolver is... well, you don't get it unless you do it.


I wouldn't use it for hunting because it's not my kind of draw. I'd love it on a competition level though.

Who would use a .50 cal revolver for self defense? I bought a 9 mm semi automatic pistol. That's a gun you use at the range.

No lol i meant it like a different thing. I can't defend myself with a 9mm without facing possible jailtime, despite the proof of having someone lunging to kill me with a knife. But that's because there's a special permit for owning guns. I just mentioned the 50 cal because it feels like... you don't really understand the power output of a gun until you see something that size recoiling in such a way. That's the moment you see the raw power.

9mm are fun to shoot too, it's just more of a mechanical process because of the not so high power. I also like using bows. I like weapons that require that extra notch of difficulty when used, but for recreational purposes.

Shot a .40 the other day at the range, and on Wednesday a .45. It truly is raw power. That kind of power humbles you. What kind of police state are you living in?

I read the other day that it's illegal for women in Canada to have pepper spray for self defense. What a fucking nanny state.

I'm telling you Daemon my right own a gun and use it for self defense if someone is trying to kill me has actually made me more patriotic when I read you can't do the same in other countries. 

[Let's Cyber]

If you're going to complain about fascists coming to kill you it'd make sense to have a gun!

I'm not too worried. I'll have my super car and hammer at the ready.

[daemon]

Guns are for chads, real men arm themselves with deadly katanas folded over a thousand times.
You'll never see it coming.

(Image removed from quote.)

[railGUN]

I'm a white guy living in white cac gun country, but I don't own a gun and don't want to own a gun. Probably not gonna change.

I'm a white guy living in a white cac gun country, and I'd fucking buy a tank if I had the funds.

Not to fight the government, mind you, just to run over trees and shit.

[benjipwns]

i wonder what that guys position on guns is. probably thinks there's a fascist threat but is anti-gun. thinking about it, having distrust in government and fascists but being anti-gun is pretty illogical. Especially since one of the first things fascists take are guns away from the populace.

kame has a good number of guns IIRC.

He's brought up laws that stripped blacks of gun rights in the past multiple times to much handwringing and discomfort. I'm pretty sure Slayven and some of those others learned about like the 1968 acts and stuff because of his posts because they never mentioned them until he did a long-ish post on them with pictures and stuff.

[Stro]

Where can I get one of these 300MPH cars so I can get groceries at Walmart and be back in .04 seconds?

[daemon]

I'm telling you Daemon my right own a gun and use it for self defense if someone is trying to kill me has actually made me more patriotic when I read you can't do the same in other countries. 

In Spain you can only use it for hunting purposes/shooting range unless the "Guardia Civil" deems you're either a high security agent or a person whose life might be on permanent risk. that makes for around 0.03% of the population.

I'm not even kidding, if someone trespasses your home (and I mean the house/apartment,not just the yard), you can't do jack shit here. There was a pretty big case about a guy and his wife getting tied up and repeatedly beaten so they would give away location of the cash. I don't remember well the details, but after all the proof that he disarmed one of them and killed them, it couldn't just be ruled as autodefense. The prosecution went heavy on them. It sucks because there are some ex-military from East Europe doing some violent crimes with guns, and you can't protect yourself in a place where the cops would need more than 15 minutes at least to show up.

[benjipwns]

Hiding from things you disagree with it just aids a more divided political environment. Listen to what he says, then dismantle it. Listening to what he says doesn't mean you're giving it credibility. It's pretty clear the whole "let's close our eyes and ears" thing doesn't work. These people have been emboldened and ignoring them won't make them go away. The problem with having not letting Milo speak is that it runs on a presumption that we are right without being challenged. Of course, Breitbart and their ilk are trash, but if we truly believed in how we feel, we would debate it. Malcolm X and MLK argued for their POV's regularly on television. The idea that you can't argue with Milo makes it feel like our arguments are philosophically weak and will not stand to scrutiny. It is weakness defined.

Firing Line ended some time ago: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/william-buckley-feminism-intellectuals-firing-line-women-214301

I don't know where they would have argued on today's TV spin-challenge programs. The internet probably?

[james]

Im not arguing with a gun nut.

Its like arguing with a Trump voter.

If facts are fake news and reality is too scary for you, then you're the problem, not me.

[clothedmacuser]

Someone find the GAF thread where Himu switches her stance on guns within 200 posts.  Then she posts cool looking guns from video games and "sexy" ivory handled ones she hopes to own.