Guns and Strippers thread! Best ever!
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="590414" data-time="1466560687">
<div>
<p><br>
Closest thing to pure capitalism we have. Amazing.<br><br>
Love that onion article</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>What???? No, it isn't. </p> -
Just as an observation; I'm always amused how much non Americans care about how much Americans care about guns.
-
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/'>http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>This reminds me of a fat person who wants to lose weight but keeps eating junk food 24/7.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Yes, you are reading it right folks, the US senate has voted AGAINST restrictions on selling automatic assault rifles/weapons to suspected terrorists.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="590462" data-time="1466567472"><p>What???? No, it isn't.</p></blockquote>
"an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."<br><br>
What is more capitalist than the private owners controlling the government? -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="590479" data-time="1466569320">
<div>
<p><a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/'>http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/20/politics/senate-gun-votes-congress/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p>This reminds me of a fat person who wants to lose weight but keeps eating junk food 24/7.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Yes, you are reading it right folks, the US senate has voted AGAINST restrictions on selling automatic assault rifles/weapons to suspected terrorists.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Woah, woah, woah hold up.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Democrats and many Republicans want to prevent people on the No-Fly List from being able to purchase to a gun. The No Fly List is a massive assault on civil liberties. People who are put on the list aren't even notified that they are on it and getting off the list is almost impossible. There is absolutely no due process there.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Chris Murphy's proposal for universal background checks seemed like common sense legislation to me.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590492" data-time="1466573332">
<div>
<p>Woah, woah, woah hold up.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The Democrats and many Republicans want to prevent people on the No-Fly List from being able to purchase to a gun. The No Fly List is a massive assault on civil liberties. People who are put on the list aren't even notified that they are on it and getting off the list is almost impossible. There is absolutely no due process there.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Chris Murphy's proposal for universal background checks seemed like common sense legislation to me.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>There were 2 parts to it. 1. Restrict people on these lists from buying guns, 2. Make it easier for people to get off them.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>On the back of a massacre of 50+ people, certain sections of govt were trying to change certain laws, specifically addressing the main negative around that law, to reduce the risk of this happening again. It failed. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>As of right now, Omar Marteen's brother, may walk into any gun shop in American and buy an assault rifle, legally, showing legitimate documents.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I try to be more objective in my middle age, but no matter how I look at it - this situation is beyond FUBAR.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="590490" data-time="1466572841">
<div>
<p>"an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."<br><br>
What is more capitalist than the private owners controlling the government?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>What are you talking about. Are you somehow implying corruption and lobbying are a capitalist invention.... err ok.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Show me a form of govt that doesnt have lobbying and corruption form individuals to those in power. You wont. That should tell you something.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="590503" data-time="1466575819">
<div>
<p>No. Capitalism is a system, not a sentient being. It can't, by definition, invent anything.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Nice dancing on the pin.</p>
<p>But it doesnt make your initial assertion any less ludicrous.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Show me a form of govt that doesnt have lobbying and corruption from individuals to those in power. You wont. That should tell you something.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p>You seem to have a real disdain for capitalism. Kinda weird considering it has given you the lifestyle you and your family enjoy.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="canefan" data-cid="590430" data-time="1466562113"><p>
How about that pink AR-15 for the woman in your life that has everything. If that isn't love I don't know what is<br><br><img src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/mgm-content/sites/armslist/uploads/posts/2014/07/29/3330543_03_pink_spikes_tactical_ar_15_cus_640.jpg" alt="3330543_03_pink_spikes_tactical_ar_15_cu"></p></blockquote>
<br>
Your other article called ar15s Lego for grown ups but they are really Barbies for men. The guys that own them accessorise the hell out of them , there's an endless supply of upgrades and Bolton crap for them. There's s few kiwis doing the same thing here, basic rifle to start with is not cheap and you could easily lose $3000-$4000 in one when you're finished with it. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="590495" data-time="1466574587">
<div>
<p>There were 2 parts to it. 1. Restrict people on these lists from buying guns, 2. Make it easier for people to get off them.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>On the back of a massacre of 50+ people, certain sections of govt were trying to change certain laws, specifically addressing the main negative around that law, to reduce the risk of this happening again. It failed. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>As of right now, Omar Marteen's brother, may walk into any gun shop in American and buy an assault rifle, legally, showing legitimate documents.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I try to be more objective in my middle age, but no matter how I look at it - this situation is beyond FUBAR.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I may not be aware of the particulars here but what crime has Omar Marteen's brother committed?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>How were they making it easier to get off the No Fly List?</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="590507" data-time="1466577193"><p><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);"><span style="font-family:helvetica;">Show me a form of govt that doesnt have lobbying and corruption from individuals to those in power. You wont. That should tell you something.</span></span></p></blockquote>
<br>- I wasn't talking about government, or corruption - you brought those up. So shove your pin up your deliberately argumentative arse.<br><br>
- I wasn't even criticising capitalism. You just decided I was, then carried on like abrasive fluffybunny.<br><br>
- There aren't many forms of government that don't practice some form of capitalism. :think: Maybe under Sharia Law where are certain restrictions on what we know as capitalism (loan interest, etc).<br><br>
- If you are too thick - or deliberately obtuse - to draw a very firm line between buying senators and profits for gun manufacturers in the US, which also kills thousands of people a year (gun violence being the core topic of this discussion), then I can see why you carry on like such a wally when people are dismissive of your opinion; you're just not smart enough to notice.<br><br><br>
Effectively, up until the point where you decided to pick a fight, there wasn't even an argument in this thread.<br><br><br>
Remember that before you go - yet again - to delete post(s) in a thread in which you're involved: <strong>you</strong> decided to make this an argument, not me.<br><br><br><br><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="590507" data-time="1466577193"><p>
You seem to have a real disdain for capitalism. Kinda weird considering it has given you the lifestyle you and your family enjoy.</p></blockquote>
<br>
I've stated before we need healthy, aspirational markets balanced with welfare and the needs of those with limited access to resources. Definitely don't support "free wealth for everyone" if that is what you're implying.<br><br>
You appear to be a classic neoliberal. Which is a bit shocking, because you're quite dismissive of governments who provide socialist-style interventions ensuring your safety, health, and education systems. <br><br>
You say you're not one of course, but you blather on like Ayn Rand's fucking love child most of the time here.<br><br>
Edited to remove references to oral sex.
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590515" data-time="1466579013">
<div>
<p>I may not be aware of the particulars here but what crime has Omar Marteen's brother committed?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>How were they making it easier to get off the No Fly List?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>The same crimes committed by Omar Marteen before he went on his rampage.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="NTA" data-cid="590521" data-time="1466581621">
<div>
<p><br><br>
Remember that before you go - yet again - to delete post(s) in a thread in which you're involved:<br><br><br><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>So this happens to you too eh?</p> -
Ffs , just saw this<br>
<a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11661462'>http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11661462</a><br><br>
David Tipple did time in jail in the us for arms trafficking . -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="590523" data-time="1466582532">
<div>
<p>The same crimes committed by Omar Marteen before he went on his rampage.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>So nothing. Basically you support family members of criminals being stripped of their constitutional rights? Shit. You support the government punishing people for having beliefs the government finds incorrect? Not to mention that this sort of law would stop a lot of Muslims from buying guns and would be seen as racist.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590536" data-time="1466586504">
<div>
<p>So nothing. Basically you support family members of criminals being stripped of their constitutional rights? Shit. You support the government punishing people for having beliefs the government finds incorrect? Not to mention that this sort of law would stop a lot of Muslims from buying guns and would be seen as racist.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Actually no, I support nobody being able to walk into a gun shop and being able to buy an assault rifle. I don't believe anybody has a constitutional right to buy an assault rifle. Nobody NEEDS an assault rifle. Sure, people may want them, but nobody NEEDS them.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Don't bring racism, govt beliefs bullshit into it - I've never mentioned that, you've thrown this out there trying to steer this conversation that way, and nobody is making that point.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Regardless of whatever crap you are trying to make me say, a guy who had been investigated for suspected links to terrorism, a guy who had domestically abused his partner, walked into a shop and bought an assault rifle. That's just fucked.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And the fact that the law, and you hydro11, think that if Omar Marteen's brother walks into a gun shop today and says "Hi I'm Omar Marteen's brother, here's all my ID to prove it, I'd like to buy 10 assault rifles and 1,000 rounds of ammunition", then that's just fine and dandy too.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>FUBAR.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="hydro11" data-cid="590536" data-time="1466586504">
<div>
<p>So nothing. Basically you support family members of criminals being stripped of their constitutional rights? Shit. You support the government punishing people for having beliefs the government finds incorrect? Not to mention that this sort of law would stop a lot of Muslims from buying guns and would be seen as racist.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Poop, I though he was being ironic. So I liked.... but yes... the way that proposed law was structured it made it incredibly easy to to ban certain groups.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Thats the way it starts. Hopefully. It can only get more entertaining from here.</p> -
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="MajorRage" data-cid="590537" data-time="1466587413">
<div>
<p>Actually no, I support nobody being able to walk into a gun shop and being able to buy an assault rifle. I don't believe anybody has a constitutional right to buy an assault rifle. Nobody NEEDS an assault rifle. Sure, people may want them, but nobody NEEDS them.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Don't bring racism, govt beliefs bullshit into it - I've never mentioned that, you've thrown this out there trying to steer this conversation that way, and nobody is making that point.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Regardless of whatever crap you are trying to make me say, a guy who had been investigated for suspected links to terrorism, a guy who had domestically abused his partner, walked into a shop and bought an assault rifle. That's just fucked.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And the fact that the law, and you hydro11, think that if Omar Marteen's brother walks into a gun shop today and says "Hi I'm Omar Marteen's brother, here's all my ID to prove it, I'd like to buy 10 assault rifles and 1,000 rounds of ammunition", then that's just fine and dandy too.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>FUBAR.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Okay, let's go through it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Point 1: You support an assault weapons ban. That is okay. However, none of the four pieces of legislation voted down by the senate included a ban on assault weapons so I don't see how that is relevant to the discussion. I'm not opposed to an assault weapons ban in principle. I should not that the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was not regarded as successful by most non-partisan groups. Legislation that was successful (like the Australian gun buyback) was compulsory and would therefore be unconstitutional in the United States. I don't think anyone thinks that individuals should be able to keep a stock of grenades so I think we will acknowledge that people's right to own weapons as limitations. I don't in principle oppose that limitation including the ban of assault weapons. However, I understand it can be difficult to define these terms in laws. For instance, if you banned all semi automatic weapons you would ban most guns (this is what I have read, I do not claim to be an expert on makes and models of guns).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Point 2: These things are implied by the law you support. You support a law which allows the government to suspend the constitutional rights of its citizens. You support this process occurring through secretive list which people can be placed on for having committed no crimes. This is a list which individuals are not notified that they are on and have limited ways of getting off. You have claimed that one of the pieces of legislation makes it easier to get off the list, yet you have ignored my question as to how the legislation enabled that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Given that you support all of the above what is to stop a government determining that other groups (say Conservatives) are more likely to commit acts of gun violence? What is to stop the government just adding people to the list who annoy them? If the list has no oversight then what is to stop the government from doing this? It's necessary to mention this because this is an obvious consequence of the law you support. I suppose the question is: how would you create a system of government oversight that would stop the government adding random people it didn't like to the list?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>As for profiling, it speaks for itself. How would you feel if you were an Arab, had committed no crimes and were stripped of a constitutional right? Of course, these people will assume the law is racist.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Point 3: I'm not trying to get you to say anything. I'm just telling you what affect your policies would have.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Do you believe that people who are convicted of domestic abuse should not be able to buy guns? If someone like Tony Veitch wanted to go hunting with his mates, I wouldn't see a problem with that. This individual had been suspected of having links to terrorism but there was no evidence so nothing happened. You specifically mention that he shouldn't have been able to go and buy an assault weapon but I don't believe that distinction is important here. If he had bought a pistol, a lot of people still would have died. I'm not sure if you are saying that people suspected of terrorism shouldn't be able to buy assault weapons or shouldn't be able to buy guns at all.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Point 4: Well, now you are putting words into my mouth. Again, none of this legislation was about assault weapon bans so I don't know why you keep bringing that up. I have never said I oppose an assault weapons ban but I have shown skepticism over whether or not it would work. I do think it is highly messed up for someone to have their constitutional rights affected by what members of their family do.</p>