Split on Gun Control from Planned Parenthood Attacked thread

[untermensche]

I don't know about anybody else but Obama came over and took my gun yesterday.

The Feds are cracking down, not just talking.

Moderator notice of split from here

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

I don't know about anybody else but Obama came over and took my gun yesterday.

The Feds are cracking down, not just talking.

It is quite well known among those who desire greater liberty that the push for more gun control laws doesn't include confiscating existing firearms, but instead to impede the purchase, sale, transfer, gifting, or home manufacture of firearms. Who do you think you are fooling by saying those who desire greater liberty are fearing confiscation?

 

[SimpleDon]

I don't know about anybody else but Obama came over and took my gun yesterday.

The Feds are cracking down, not just talking.

It is quite well known among those who desire greater liberty that the push for more gun control laws doesn't include confiscating existing firearms, but instead to impede the purchase, sale, transfer, gifting, or home manufacture of firearms. Who do you think you are fooling by saying those who desire greater liberty are fearing confiscation?

http://www.truthandaction.org/internal-doj-memo-confirms-obamas-plan-gun-confiscation/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/oct/5/editorial-obama-aims-for-confiscation-of-private-a/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...s-beyond-mere-gun-control-hints-confiscation/

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/trump-hears-obama-wants-to-take-guns/

http://mrconservative.com/2014/01/31501-obamas-gun-confiscation-begins/

 

[SimpleDon]

I don't know about anybody else but Obama came over and took my gun yesterday.

The Feds are cracking down, not just talking.

It is quite well known among those who desire greater liberty that the push for more gun control laws doesn't include confiscating existing firearms, but instead to impede the purchase, sale, transfer, gifting, or home manufacture of firearms. Who do you think you are fooling by saying those who desire greater liberty are fearing confiscation?

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20151009/president-obama-shows-his-true-gun-control-agenda

http://toprightnews.com/alert-obama...ional-gun-confiscation-after-oregon-shooting/

http://bearingarms.com/obama-wishes-for-gun-confiscation-and-with-it-a-second-civil-war/

http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/10/i...er-calling-for-gun-confiscation-in-my-county/

http://www.rense.com/general88/gunfree.htm

http://www.cleveland.com/obrien/index.ssf/2015/10/obama_and_clinton_lead_the_lef.html

 

[untermensche]

I don't know about anybody else but Obama came over and took my gun yesterday.

The Feds are cracking down, not just talking.

It is quite well known among those who desire greater liberty that the push for more gun control laws doesn't include confiscating existing firearms, but instead to impede the purchase, sale, transfer, gifting, or home manufacture of firearms. Who do you think you are fooling by saying those who desire greater liberty are fearing confiscation?

Liberty?

You mean the liberty of the most easily frightened to endanger everyone because there are guns all over the place?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

It is quite well known among those who desire greater liberty that the push for more gun control laws doesn't include confiscating existing firearms, but instead to impede the purchase, sale, transfer, gifting, or home manufacture of firearms. Who do you think you are fooling by saying those who desire greater liberty are fearing confiscation?

Liberty?

You mean the liberty of the most easily frightened to endanger everyone because there are guns all over the place?

No, the most easily frightened are those who support a policy of disarmament rooted in racism.

Yes. The reason the two parties both make an exception on guns, and hold positions contrary to the whole rest of their platform, is because gun control has its roots in keeping guns out of the hands of colored people. So the Republicans, who only care about economics and like to restrict civil liberty, are against gun restriction, while the Democrats, who say they are all over civil rights, are for gun restriction.

Gun control - the area of both platforms where the parties make exceptions. It only makes sense when you realize that the policy is racist.

 

[untermensche]

Liberty?

You mean the liberty of the most easily frightened to endanger everyone because there are guns all over the place?

No, the most easily frightened are those who support a policy of disarmament rooted in racism.

The racists are the ones with the guns. The easily frightened children clinging to them. That is the roots of both racism and gun nuttery.

The inability to deal rationally with exaggerated fears.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

No, the most easily frightened are those who support a policy of disarmament rooted in racism.

The racists are the ones with the guns. The easily frightened children clinging to them. That is the roots of both racism and gun nuttery.

The inability to deal rationally with exaggerated fears.

Since the root of gun control is to keep "those people" from having guns, your statement makes no sense. A study of history would tell you why your party tells you why you support gun control. Your party has been the part of gun control ever since the emancipation proclamation, and that is why your party tells you that you are in favor of gun control.

 

[crazyfingers]

The racists are the ones with the guns. The easily frightened children clinging to them. That is the roots of both racism and gun nuttery.

The inability to deal rationally with exaggerated fears.

Your party has been the part of gun control ever since the emancipation proclamation,

Any credibility lost by that statement. Only someone oblivious to history does not know that the parties flipped places in the 20th century. The Repuglicans are now the party of racism.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Your party has been the part of gun control ever since the emancipation proclamation,

Any credibility lost by that statement. Only someone oblivious to history does not know that the parties flipped places in the 20th century. The Repuglicans are now the party of racism.

And yet the Republican Party never adopted the very racist policy of "gun control". Isn't it strange that if the parties flipped then that very racist policy wasn't adopted during the flip?

Oh, and contrary to the way you quoted me, I do not end my sentences with commas.

 

[crazyfingers]

Any credibility lost by that statement. Only someone oblivious to history does not know that the parties flipped places in the 20th century. The Repuglicans are now the party of racism.

And yet the Republican Party never adopted the very racist policy of "gun control". Isn't it strange that if the parties flipped then that very racist policy wasn't adopted during the flip?

Oh, and contrary to the way you quoted me, I do not end my sentences with commas.

Utterly twisted that you't try to connect sensible gun controls as racist? How would banning asault rifles be racist? How would banning large clips of ammo be racist? Your nonsense holds no water at all.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

And yet the Republican Party never adopted the very racist policy of "gun control". Isn't it strange that if the parties flipped then that very racist policy wasn't adopted during the flip?

Oh, and contrary to the way you quoted me, I do not end my sentences with commas.

Utterly twisted that you't try to connect sensible gun controls as racist? How would banning asault rifles be racist? How would banning large clips of ammo be racist? Your nonsense holds no water at all.

If you want to keep "those people" from having guns, you advocate gun control. It is not a hard concept to understand, it is an easy connection to make, unless you desperately want to not understand and not make the connection. Those radical kooks at the Brady campaign certainly don't want to hear that news.

I suppose it would make people feel uncomfortable to know that the dirty secret is out that insensible gun control is a racist policy.

 

[crazyfingers]

Utterly twisted that you't try to connect sensible gun controls as racist? How would banning asault rifles be racist? How would banning large clips of ammo be racist? Your nonsense holds no water at all.

If you want to keep "those people" from having guns, you advocate gun control. It is not a hard concept to understand, it is an easy connection to make, unless you desperately want to not understand and not make the connection. Those radical kooks at the Brady campaign certainly don't want to hear that news.

I suppose it would make people feel uncomfortable to know that the dirty secret is out that insensible gun control is a racist policy.

I would have to say that you have not in any way connected how sensible gun control is racist and so your blatherings appear to be just that. Blatherings and baseless assertions.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If you want to keep "those people" from having guns, you advocate gun control. It is not a hard concept to understand, it is an easy connection to make, unless you desperately want to not understand and not make the connection. Those radical kooks at the Brady campaign certainly don't want to hear that news.

I suppose it would make people feel uncomfortable to know that the dirty secret is out that insensible gun control is a racist policy.

I would have to say that you have not in any way connected how insensible gun control is racist and so your blatherings appear to be just that. Blatherings and baseless assertions.

FIFY.

The gun control advocated by such racial extremist organizations such as the Brady Campaign are racist.

Sensible non-racist gun control is advocated by the Libertarian Party.

 

[crazyfingers]

I would have to say that you have not in any way connected how insensible gun control is racist and so your blatherings appear to be just that. Blatherings and baseless assertions.

FIFY.

Sensible gun control isn't racist. The gun control advocated by such racial extremist organizations such as the Brady Campaign are racist.

Sensible gun control is advocated by the Libertarian Party.

I have no interest in the Brady campaign. Generally Democrats argue for sensible gun controls. Making sure that people convicted of criminal violance can't have a gun. Making sure that high capacity guns are not sold, assault wepons are illegal. And most of all fighting against a culture of fear and hate that the Republican party feeds on for votes that is causing this insane desire among some to be armed to the teeth and shoot at the drop of a hat.

Gun insanity is a core value of the Republican party as well as the unafiliated right wing.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

No, Democrats do not argue for sensible gun controls. Democrats argue for extremist racist gun controls, Libertarians argue for sen sensible non-racist gun control. The Democrat position on gun control hasn't changed since the Emancipation Proclamation. Making sure "those people" can't have a gun is a core Democratic value.

Racist gun insanity is a core value of the Democratic party as well as the unaffiliated left wing. To get sensible opinions on gun control you need to check out the Libertarian Party.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

By the way, part of my response is directed at you wrongly inserting the word "sensible" into your description of Democratic Party gun control proposals over and over. Those who disagree with such extremist racist rhetoric as the gun control proposals of the Democratic Party don't think that their proposals are sensible. Trying to sneak in the value judgement into the premise is something I am on the watch for and won't let pass without comment.

So go ahead and call racist extremist proposals "sensible", I'll just point out that you are saying that extremist racism is in your mind sensible.

 

[crazyfingers]

I would have to say that you have not in any way connected how insensible gun control is racist and so your blatherings appear to be just that. Blatherings and baseless assertions.

FIFY.

The gun control advocated by such racial extremist organizations such as the Brady Campaign are racist.

Sensible non-racist gun control is advocated by the Libertarian Party.

I couldn't give two fucks for the Libertarian Party. When I was in high school in the 1970's I almost brainwashed myself reading a lot of Ayn Rand and Nathanial Brandon. I even joined the Libertarian Party and as a college freshman I even voted for Ed Clark.

Back then the LP was clearly more secular than it is today. Today go a search on school prayer and zero results. Search Establishment Clause and no results but I see that the LP agrees that Hobby Lobby should be able to impose it's religious beliefs onto its employees.

Long ago I realized that the LP stands for letting people with the money impose their will on those with less. It get some things right but it gets a lot terribly wrong. Uncontrolled greed is not the way to crate a just society.

Libertarianism, just like Communism, leads to despotism, but one goes east and one goes west and they reach the same place in the end. It doesn't matter that in one case the despots are the Party leaders and in the other it's the capitalist kingpins. Same place in the end.

 

[crazyfingers]

No, Democrats do not argue for sensible gun controls. Democrats argue for extremist racist gun controls, Libertarians argue for sen sensible non-racist gun control. The Democrat position on gun control hasn't changed since the Emancipation Proclamation. Making sure "those people" can't have a gun is a core Democratic value.

Racist gun insanity is a core value of the Democratic party as well as the unaffiliated left wing. To get sensible opinions on gun control you need to check out the Libertarian Party.

You really need to drop this bullshit that those posters in any way represent the Democratic party or Democrats in general. You just make yourself look like a fool.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

FIFY.

The gun control advocated by such racial extremist organizations such as the Brady Campaign are racist.

Sensible non-racist gun control is advocated by the Libertarian Party.

I couldn't give two fucks for the Libertarian Party. When I was in high school in the 1970's I almost brainwashed myself reading a lot of Ayn Rand and Nathanial Brandon. I even joined the Libertarian Party and as a college freshman I even voted for Ed Clark.

Cool story bro.

Back then the LP was clearly more secular than it is today. Today go a seach on school prayer and zero results. Seach Establishment Clause and no results but I see that the LP agrees that Hobby Lobby should be able to inpose it's religious beliefs onto its employess.

I don't see how it could be possible to be any more secular than the LP is. But you want to believe what you want, so you used phrase after phrase after phrase until you found one that wasn't quoted exactly and used the absence of that exact quote to "prove" your point about how the LP is somehow religious.

So. Prayer in public schools. "We oppose the existence of public schools." Hm. So it is unlikely we'd have a clause about what would happen INSIDE those public schools. Cool "proof".

Long ago I realized that the LP stands for letting people with the money impose their will on those with less.

Further evidence that saying you even joined was nothing more than a cool story.

It is obvious that finding out that gun control is horribly racist has upset you.