Then they realized they would just steal them anyway.
Printable View
Then they realized they would just steal them anyway.
Hey Yoshi,
Your wife getting in on my music video act?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luo40WjBKWI
It was written as an idealistic way to allow free Americans to defend their liberty. Whether that's futile or not in today's market of modern weapons is an irrelevant argument. The whole stance anti-gun stance is all about the symbol and not the substance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
That being said I do support background checks and concealment laws and rules.
You know what else I can't do? Buy beer after 9, or without a massive mark-up on it. It's the same with other liquor, too. The RCMP making decisions purely for theatre instead of human empowerment and all sorts of things. Oh and I've personally seen students sent home for wearing South Park t-shirts. Not offensive ones, mind you, just South Park t-shirts.Quote:
This post needs a bald eagle crying to really bring the cartoonish point home. You don't even live here, so no, it's not a price you're paying. Canada's gun violence is extremely minimal.
And yes, I live in Canada where many of these laws are in place. That makes me more able to identify with horrible nanny-state laws than you if anything.
None of that here. And oh yea, there's that whole massive drug war that puts people in prison for deciding what they want to put in their own bodies. Land of the free because I can own a bazillion instruments of death.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
So because that's working out so great for you why not just go ahead and keep doing it to other taboo things people fear?
I am not for any law that criminalizes citizens for this kind of thing. If prohibition was proven to be anything but really poor and an antiquated way of dealing problematic things I might be more open to it. And despite guns being a "conservative" view I believe in social programs like healthcare, organized unions (somewhat—large unions become a control state in themselves quickly) and education deeply, too. Because I think the government should serve the people (with its money and its laws) and not the other way around.
I feel the need to say this for whatever idiocy about anarchy Error was on about in his post.
If you think this country's current approach to firearms is alright, that's fine. Framing it in the language of freedom and liberty is just garbage propaganda.
How so? If protecting people from being criminalized for smoking weed and drugs is a liberating act that enabled freedom (and more $$$ for social empowerment) why wouldn't that logic also apply to guns?Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
Because "freedom" is a loaded term.
You have seen kids get sent home for a South Park shirt, we have plenty of that too, and we've also institutionalized the petty bureaucracy of school administrators through the legal system. Who's worse?
A lot of libertarians would say that the US was the "most free" in the late 1800s, meanwhile a lot of states were institutionalizing Jim Crow. Freedom for white people, I guess.
Take a look at this: http://www.freeexistence.org/freedom.shtml
You can weight countries according to various freedom indices compiled by different sources (all of which have an agenda, keep in mind). If you just go ahead and put all as "Crucial" the US is rated about the same as Canada. We just kill a lot more people with our freedom arsenals. What about those dead peoples' freedoms?
You can say that we should just be all the freedoms, I guess that's the standard libertarian approach, which is nice, but the world doesn't work that way. I'd prefer to talk about reality, not Ron Paul's beautiful little mind.
Freedom of religion... Mississippi style
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/2...stian-lecture/