[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1439351713783.jpg (145 KB, 865x639)
145 KB
145 KB JPG
>the Chaotic Good insurgents fighting the Lawful Good empire over gun control and taxes
Could it happen?
>>
>>60807983
so US revolution?
>>
it's called the American Revolution
>>
File: IMG_2591.gif (1.79 MB, 313x176)
1.79 MB
1.79 MB GIF
>>60808057
>Revolution
>LG Empire
>British Empire is the LG Empire

Begone eternal Anglo, Freedom is not negotiable
>>
>>60808079
>bringing glorious civilization to savages
>not LG
>>
>>60807983
Why? Gun Control is a universal Good thing.
>>
File: KoTHFinger.jpg (16 KB, 480x360)
16 KB
16 KB JPG
>>60808057
>American Revolution
You mean french destabilizing it's enemy's colonies with traitorous smugglers
You amerifags are such retards
>>
>>60808126
It's a Lawful thing, not a Good thing
>>
File: surely you jest.jpg (262 KB, 768x1024)
262 KB
262 KB JPG
>>60808136
>irrelevent, unwashed foreigner voicing his inaudible opinion
You eurotrash are...actually, i dont know. I've never considered your value before and i will continue to ignore your meaninglessness into the future.
>>
File: 1517545699612.png (6 KB, 211x239)
6 KB
6 KB PNG
>>60808156
>It's a Lawful thing, not a Good thing
>>
>>60808126
>putting all the power of legal violence into the hands of the state
It's a lawful thing only.
>>
File: stalin progress.jpg (9 KB, 275x183)
9 KB
9 KB JPG
>>60808126
Good prole, turn in those guns.
>>
>>60808136
>the american revolution
>not started by time traveling neo-jacobins from 2302 to bring about their own creation

Typical smooth brained redditor
>>
>>60808126
it really isn't

>>60808173
>putting innocents at risk am gud action
>>
>>60808126
One could argue that stripping the right to effective self defense isnt a good thing anon.
>>
>>60808156
>>60808173
>>60808188
>>60808190
>preventing totally preventable deaths is totally not good

>>60808183
>putting the power of legal violence where it can be affected by checks and balances instead of supplying every unstable bumfuck with lethal weapons
it's a good thing
>>
>>60808171
>It's another episode of "Americans can't into bantz"
>>
>>60808136
>>60808171
>>
>>60807983
>Not CN insurgents and NE empire
I thought we were shooting for realism here?
>>
>>60808258
To be fair, it's hard for americans to think and breathe at the same time, so we understand.
>>
>>60808220
>not being able to effectively defend yourself with your fists or a small blade
You only have yourself to blame.
>>
>>60808171
>>60808258
And that's why your country will collapse in the next fifty years.
>>
>>60808285
>not being able to effectively defend yourself with your fists or a small blade

You do realize that women, the elderly and disabled people exist right? You can't play the macho card as an argument when guns are the best way for the weak to defend themselves against overwhelming force, dumb overweight boomer.
>>
>>60808294
are you a european?
and if you are, are you being ironic?
>>
File: 1529587035313.jpg (122 KB, 960x960)
122 KB
122 KB JPG
>>60808126
No it's not
>>
>>60808246
yeah and they should bin those knives while they're at it, can't have loonies running around with nasty bladed weapons like kitchen shears
>>
>>60808294
Lol eurotrash.
>>
>>60808306
>what is pepper spray
>what is a tazer
why is it that brainlets like yourself think only lethal defences exist?
Also if you are elderly/disabled to such a degree that you cannot stab a man with a knife you shouldn't be going anywhere without an able helper, because you are liable to seriously injure yourself by going down to buy groceries.
>>
>>60808294
As a fellow European I'll be straight with you. We're not exactly in a better position than the burgers. Also if they collapse, we're pretty fucked too
>>
>>60808246
>preventing totally preventable deaths is totally not good
Something something freedom before safety, don't deserve either if you opt for the latter
>>
>>60807983
I feel like neither side would resort to violence if they were both Good. There'd be a lot of angry talking, but neither would want to cause to undue harm to the other. If you have an actual insurgency in this scenario, something has gone very wrong.
>>
>>60808103
They are Lawful, no doubt, but more Lawful Evil imo, failing that, the Bong Empire was Chaotic Expansionist-Capitalist
>>
If the "Lawful Good" rulers hadn't imported a bunch of orcs at the behest of a friendly minority group of long... eared intellectuals, there wouldn't be a violence problem to begin with.
>>
>>60808343
yeah, on account of all those mass school stabbings that happen every month in Europe
>>
>>60808381
>implying its not the dwarves who are at fault
>>
>>60808386
*every week
>>
>>60808355
>what is pepper spray
>what is a tazer
>knife
Incredibly short ranged and not even remotely guaranteed to work. Using close range self defense weapons puts people in a very precarious spot because it's incredibly easy to deal with for an assailant. If an assailant is close enough to a weak woman or senior for something like a tazer or knife to work, there's a good chance they're fucked.
I've shrugged off a taser and I'm a complete lanklet.
>>
>>60808356
We are a bit better. First of all our population isn't armed, so violent riots are less likely. Second of all, Russia seems to be using more subtle methods to fuck us up than last time so probably no wars for a while (although we should definitely keep an eye on the fuckers).
>>
>>60808386
We Europeans prefer throwing acid in each others faces or trucks of peace.
>>
>>60808126
>>60808246
>putting the power of legal violence where it can be affected by checks and balances instead of supplying every unstable bumfuck with lethal weapon
I honestly don't believe I have to explain this but what if the state is a dictatorial genocidal tyranny?
>>
>>60808136
If French did it, why didn't it end up in a dictatorship?
>>
Chaotic Evil vs Lawful Evil
>>
>>60808365
>any fuckface could be carrying a gun
>safety
>>
File: eyeroll.gif (2.09 MB, 480x270)
2.09 MB
2.09 MB GIF
>>60808381
>>
>>60808420
If the USA collapses tomorrow, we wouldn't last much longer, m8.
We're just slowly collapsing right now, the US'll follow soon after us. rip the West, you had a good run.
>>
>>60808420
We fuck the Russians too, my guy. It's needed for the wonderful world of political intercourse.
Also if somethings goes so wrong that Americans have pitched gun fights across the country, then their society is basically done at that point (with or without the violence).
>>
>>60808355
Rapid escalation of the situation. Just like a game of poker the goal is to ether A: have the better hand (control of the situation) or B: raise the stakes so high that the other guy folds. (Scare them off)

Most criminals are not ready to die to accomplish their goals and by raising the stakes so high that its a game of life and death they opt not to play. And if they are willing to play you've guaranteed yourself a good hand and are not completely helpless.

This is the exact same reason firearms are popular among both criminal and police forces. Ether you put yourself on equal footing or leave yourself at the mercy of others.
>>
>>60808429
If the army and police are playing along you're fucked either way, and if they're not your state's in for a change of government.
>>
Oh look, another /pol/ thread
Just what /tg/ needed
>>
>>60808294
>said the country who's entire economy is based on ours
l m a o
m
a
o
>>
>>60808429
The it's not lawful good, obviously.
Also I'm sorry that you have to learn this from me, but a genocidal tyranny is appealing to a lot a people, so if it is legal to carry weapons in such a society instigating a violent revolution is only going to increase the civilian casualties compared to doing the same in a genocidal tyranny with strict gun laws.
>>
Doesn't the American gun control/freedom debate hinge on this particular perceived axiom:
'The greater a corporate body, the more corruptible and abusive it can/will become'

If people accept this idea, then being able to retire the greatest power bloc in their society, if needs be, will be very important to them. Thus the need for private weapon systems.
If one rejects the above notion, then they'd be more content to allow the government a monopoly on potential violence, because they do not see an inevitability of abuse from above. These people might want to limit gun usage because they see no need for arms with a secure, non-tyrannical state.

Am I wrong with this view?
>>
>>60808470
lmao. So people just need to accept and keel over and die? Not very good as you put it.
>If the army and police are playing along you're fucked either way
historically false
>>
>>60807983 (OP)
I want to pet that shark
>>
>>60808446
Ehh, I think "hope" is maybe more accurate some European countries will be able to not go total shit in my lifetime. My kids will probably have to learn Chinese or some shit tho.
>>
>>60808496
>The it's not lawful good, obviously.
But you said gun control is ALWAYS ABSOLUTELY GOOD WITH NO EXCEPTIONS
>so if it is legal to carry weapons in such a society instigating a violent revolution is only going to increase the civilian casualties compared to doing the same in a genocidal tyranny with strict gun laws.
This is your brain on utilitarianism. The amount of casualties in of itself has nothing to do with how good it is.
>compared to doing the same in a genocidal tyranny with strict gun laws.
which is also impossible
>>
>>60808457
I agree with you, but just as in poker, you can bluff too. And by bluff I mean run screaming at your assailant with a knife with the full intention of gutting them like a fish in a house invasion scenario consider stripping naked and stroking your dick to an erection for maximum effect. And if they flee, you start to fucking start to sprint in the opposite direction. Also be smart, and cheat the deck, i.e. if you go out late/into dangerous areas bring more people (preferably big and strong/intimidating looking ones).
>>
>>60808627
Inshallah, you are right my friend, women should only walk with a chaperone.

Great idea with the erection, reminds me of all those EPIC screencaps on reddit with florida man. Very epic post, my good sir.
>>
>>60808627
Bluff can be called. It's better to be able to actually carry on on your threat. It's even better to shoot first and don't give invader chance to do anything.
>>
>>60808500
It's absolutely hilarious that the same people who propose strict gun control and "more state in everything" are also big haters on corporations. So one big group of people can grow up to be abusive and non-considerate to people, but state can't?
>>
>>60808557
>But you said gun control is ALWAYS ABSOLUTELY GOOD WITH NO EXCEPTIONS
Gun control is lawful good. Genocide and tyranny are not. Evil empires can still have laws that are good.
>This is your brain on utilitarianism. The amount of casualties in of itself has nothing to do with how good it is.
Killing people is evil.
Preventing people from being killed is good.
Simple as that.
>which is also impossible
But that's not true. For example despite heavy gun control laws Hungarians managed to instigate a violent revolt against the Soviets in 1956, which although didn't manage to overthrow them (mainly because the Soviet union was about ten times the size of Hungary), they did manage to get a slightly less tyrannical form of government which lead directly to people becoming nostalgic about the later part of the socialist era and also raking up a lot of national debt, both of which are directly related to the country rapidly becoming a shithole post 2000
>>
>>60808386
Anders says hello.
>>
>>60808658
Oh, you can carry out your threat and stab the motherfucker no problem.

>>60808649
Thank you :^)
Also if you are walking around a dangerous area alone, you are a fucking idiot and deserve everything that's gonna happen to you. Regardless of gender.
>>
>>60808695
>Killing people is evil
>Preventing people from being killed is good

the absolute state of europoors and their grade school level philosophy
>>
File: 1515428574419.png (220 KB, 872x886)
220 KB
220 KB PNG
>>
>>60808734
Please tell me about your advanced morality, oh Enlightened One.
>>
>>60807983
>they want guns
>they call themselves "good"
hah, delusional idiots
>>
>>60808695
>Gun control is lawful good.

How? More gun control doesn't necessarily mean less killing. Gun control stripped of all pretension is a restriction on freedom, and restricting freedom cannot be good.
>>
>>60808811
freedom is a Chaotic value, not Good
>>
>>60808744
>/pol/ screenshot
i hope this is ironic
>>
>>60808823
Nope, freedom can be perfectly lawful as well.
>>
>>60808853
It's correct though.
>>
File: Jan_Matejko,_Stańczyk.jpg (629 KB, 2500x1870)
629 KB
629 KB JPG
>>60807983
No, because any government pushing heavy taxation and gun control is at best Lawful Evil.
>>
>>60808811
>More gun control doesn't necessarily mean less killing.
Hypothetically it doesn't, but in practice it sure does.
>Gun control stripped of all pretension is a restriction on freedom, and restricting freedom cannot be good.
I think you are mixing the lawful/chaotic axis with the lawful/evil axis.
Also taking away the freedom to do evil is literally the basis of a good society, so your argument is inherently meaningless.
>>
>>60808859
not really
freedom's ultimate form is anarchy, hence its Chaotic
Law's ultimate goal is perfect order where nothing can move an inch from the script, which is complete opposite of freedom

the only freedom Law offers is an illusion of freedom - i.e. the "I CHOOSE to serve" fallacy

obviously Lawful countries can have freedoms, since they ain't extremely Lawful, but freedom itself is Chaotic by default
>>
File: 1529906590585.jpg (100 KB, 987x640)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
>>60808886
>Hypothetically it doesn't, but in practice it sure does.
Source?
>Also taking away the freedom to do evil is literally the basis of a good society, so your argument is inherently meaningless.
By disarming the victims and enabling the criminals, well done, you sure are doing good there
>>
>>60808886
>Hypothetically it doesn't, but in practice it sure does

Not at all. Switzerland has very little gun control, but a very small amount of gun crime. Britain is more violent despite the fact we have no guns and anti-knife campaigns.

>Also taking away the freedom to do evil is literally the basis of a good society

Evil impinges on the freedom of others. So good actually protects freedom. Anarachy is not true freedom when it is used as a cover for the strongest to force themselves on the weak.

>>60808911
No, nothing requires law be static or rote. Law is not opposite freedom, but can be used to protect freedom. Just as chaos can be used to enforce tyranny.
>>
File: 1467928317001.jpg (87 KB, 677x950)
87 KB
87 KB JPG
>>60808136
Hahaha yeah, we got them good, dirty britbongs. The colonials still ain't in on it
>>
>>60808886
>Also taking away the freedom to do evil
You don't take away freedom to do evil, mong. Criminals will always have weapons, because they are fucking criminals, they will steal and contraband them. All you do is take away ability of ordinary citizen to protect himself.
>>
>>60808926
>Source?
Should I just list everything that says that the US has by far the most homicides per capita out of the first world countries?

>By disarming the victims and enabling the criminals, well done, you sure are doing good there
First of all, you are not 'enabling' criminals. By criminalizing carrying guns, you have a chance to arrest criminals before they do any violent crimes. Second of all disproportionate retribution (killing a guy for trying to rob you) is not a good act, even if it can be lawful.
>>
>>60808188
>Gun control is gommunist
/k/ ... go fuck yourself.
>>
>>60808445
Just ignore him, he'll grow out of it eventually.
>>
>>60808870
>pol
>correct
bait or simple stupidity?
>>
>>60809021
homicides in America include suicide; mass shootings including some kid hitting two people with a bb gun. Gun murders are quite low in america, not including the countless prevented murders due to self defense
>First of all, you are not 'enabling' criminals. By criminalizing carrying guns, you have a chance to arrest criminals before they do any violent crimes. Second of all disproportionate retribution (killing a guy for trying to rob you) is not a good act, even if it can be lawful.
Criminals do not give a fuck about whether it is legal or not to own a firearm, by not letting everyone own a firearm you actively helping criminals.
>>
>>60809059
Where was it wrong in that example?
>>
>>60809059
did you even read it?
>>
>>60807983
Yes. Good doesn't necessarily get along with itself, any more than evil does.

With both sides being Good, you can expect the war to be conducted along fairly civil lines. Prisoners will be taken and treated as well as the circumstances allow. Prisoner exchanges will be common. Civilians will not be deliberately targeted. The rules of war, whatever they are in this setting, will be followed. And the war will be put on hold for major cultural or religious celebrations, and such truces will be followed exactingly by both sides.
>>
>>60809059
>haha/ pol/tards amiright xD
You're trying too hard, Reddit.
>>
>>60809059
Not political, but why can't a single post from /pol/ be correct? You seem a little deranged, Anon
>>
>>60808945
>Not at all. Switzerland has very little gun control, but a very small amount of gun crime. Britain is more violent despite the fact we have no guns and anti-knife campaigns.
Dude, Switzerland doesn't allow you to have weapons without military training and requires you to store your weapons in a safe and unloaded at all times. They even have surprise inspections for this.
That's all the gun control.

>Evil impinges on the freedom of others.
No, that's lawful. I know you swallowed the Freedom=Good meme from your Founding Fathers like the good little sheep you are, but the truth is the two things have very little to do with each other. Also
>Law is not opposite freedom, but can be used to protect freedom
How can you protect something by literally taking it away?

>You don't take away freedom to do evil, mong.
I meant that on a more philosophical level. Like you take away the right to murder people whenever you want for the good of society.

>Criminals will always have weapons, because they are fucking criminals, they will steal and contraband them. All you do is take away ability of ordinary citizen to protect himself.
If you don't see how by criminalizing weapons you can catch criminals before they commit violent crime, and how that decreases crime, I can't do anything for you.
>>
>>60808136
Yeah...the Revolution started in 1775, the French didn't get involved in any meaningful war until 1778. And the French had nothing to do with the lead-up to the war and the root causes of it, unless you mean to suggest that they lost the French and Indian War on purpose.

I'm not denying that the French played a huge, vital role in the Revolution - I'm just rejecting your assertion that they in any real way caused it.
>>
>>60808945
>Evil impinges on the freedom of others

Gun ownership increased under Nazi Germany, and the Nazis actually made it easier for the average, non-Jewish German to own guns.

Just sayin'.
>>
>>60809026
It is when the peoples currently advocating gun control are commies. Ideologically no system of government that claims to put power in the hands of the people would ever deny gun rights in the same breath but the extremists of today don't quite care about that.
>>
>>60808744
Given a sufficient existential threat to the existence of the government, I see no reason why the government would hesitate to use extensive military and paramilitary force to, indeed, kill lots of people. See: the freikorps. Note also while many of these insurgencies are putting around, they are rarely successful. Further, if insurgencies do get off the ground and start establishing effective control over territory such that they begin to have identifiable and physical centers of gravity, the application of conventional military force to those centers of gravity becomes tremendously effective. See: ISiS, such that, while it had a very successful start, is in its dying gasps as an entity with effective control over territory. Such insurgencies can indeed then return to a situation where they putz around and take potshots at the security authority every so often, but that hardly seems to be something you would want or could call a success.
>>
>>60809150
>How can you protect something by literally taking it away?

Not him, but I suppose under the argument of "too much of anything can be bad". 100% freedom (or 0% law) is not desirable since that's anarchy, and anarchy, while not innately evil, certainly allows those of evil inclination to more easily commit and get away with whatever they want, there being no laws to hold them in check.

Conversely, 100% law is obviously not desirable. While still not innately evil, the utter control it places on life prevents people from living free lives, and of course a 100% lawful society can relatively easily be taken over by a person of evil intent, who can then use the laws to cement and protect his position.

So therefore, the most "good" is created by being somewhere between 0% and 100% law. Exactly where, I don't know; I imagine it depends upon the inclinations of the individual person and the needs of the time.
>>
>>60809177
The Australians did, and somehow they haven't become Brazil (the movie) or 1984.
>>
>>60808470
>If the army and police are playing along you're fucked either way
Except you're not if you've got guns. 10 fucking percent is all you need in active revolt to overthrow a country. And when every door has a gun behind it, no officer can enforce the police state banning assembly and materials.
>>
>>60808126
>and that's a good thing
back to /v/ with you
>>
>>60808470
Unless of course, the gun restrictions extends to them as well as they should for the sake of fairness.
>>
>>60809171
Yeah, Nazis weren't evil. Good job.
>>
>>60809212
Gun control has solved nothing in australia, The crime rate has been decreasing at the same rate before and after the commies did the gun grab. All it resulted in is the police feeling like they have the right be cunts and fuck with the livelihoods of farmers
>>
Why don't our janitors or mods do anything about off-topic threads? Fuck off to /pol/, if you want to debate about gun control
>>
>>60809192
Because the moment the government of the United States of America begins rolling down the avenue with tanks and drone striking their own centers is the moment all other first world countries with even the pretense of freedom declare war on it. If their were 50 waco's happening a day then US government has become tyrannical and any and all foreign armies would be liberators fighting evil.
>>60809212
The australians have also had almost no difference in their crime rates and is even a mostly homogeneous country were it should work.
>>
>>60809192
The Freikorps, presuming you mean the ones around after 1918, were paramilitary units that were not under the government's control. In fact the existence of the Freikorps was a massive existential threat to the Weimar Republic but not something they could do anything about because several of the Freikorps outnumbered the regular military. Several times the Weimar Republic had to bow to the demands of large Freikorps as a result (though none of the Freikorps ever had any armor or artillery, so the regular military probably could have won if it had actually pushed against the Freikorps, but the Army - basically a state within a state at this point - quietly supported the Freikrops and pressued the civilian government to give in to them).

Several Freikorps even tried to overthrow the government in the Kapp Putsch in 1920; their attempt was halted not by the military, but by civilians going on strike and denying the Freikorps many services and making daily life so problematic that the coup was called off.
>>
>>60809150
>Dude, Switzerland doesn't allow you to have weapons without

Yet they do allow you to own and carry weapons, and all you need is a permit. That's not anywhere close to "all the gun control." The didn't even have a central gun registry until the EU forced them.

>No, that's lawful. I know you swallowed the Freedom=Good meme from your Founding Fathers like the good little sheep you are, but the truth is the two things have very little to do with each other.

They have everything to do with each other. If freedom was not considered good, then prison would not be seen as punishment.

>How can you protect something by literally taking it away?

Law doesn't need to remove freedom, law can protect freedom. Just because you can't rape, enslave or murder at will doesn't mean freedom isn't being protected, it is the freedom of those you would rape, enslave or murder that is being protected.

>>60809171
Right, but the Nazis did impinge on the freedoms of the Jews and others. All things considered the Nazis probably weren't that evil for the Germans who were allowed to arm themselves.
>>
>>60809192
Nigga, as soon as the US starts bombing it's own population, you're gonna have global agencies taking action against it. Russia already stated support for that hypothetical Texas succession years back.
>>
>>60809250
Welcome to /tg/ newfag.
>>
>>60809072
>>60809079
>>60809100
you need to go back
>>
>>60808136
>Destabilize
>Separate the Commonwealth in such a way that it's able to devote a single country to nothing but military and cultural output while allowing a technicality that allows it to trade with itself
You should be thanking us. The US is basically your old military with its own country to supply itself while you can focus your taxes on feeding immigrants and making knife-angels. Amerimutts were your enemies for about thirty years before falling back in line with your interests.
>>
>>60809284
But this is 4chan, so surely you need to return to reddit.
>>
>>60809284
>this kills the sòyboy
Just stop posting any time m8. You look like a retard.
>>
>>60809068
This is a dumb argument because guns used in crime in the US tend to be obtained legally, are from straw sales of guns that were first obtained legally, or otherwise obtained from legal purchaser; in other words, most guns used in crime begin as legally owned guns. It's not like there is a glut of correupt military officials or illegal arms dealers surreptitiously making illegal sales, as in US arms shipments to, say, Mexico. Certainly, for effective gun control to work in a nation that has many many guns already lying around, you may then need an extensive buyback or confiscatory program, or at least a standardized registry that is shared across jurisdictions and states.
>>
>>60809283
I know this site can perform strict moderation when they need to (see. /v/ after they banned dubs), we need it across all boards.
>>
>>60809248 >>60809267
>The crime rate has been decreasing at the same rate before

I won't speak as to crime in general, but Australian crime statistics certainly show a drop-off in gun homicides:

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/gun-control-australia-updated/
>>
So many newfags in this thread
>>
>>60808627
Congrats, you've invalidated your claim to self defense by acting aggressively. Enjoy prison.
>>
>>60809295
>projecting
>>60809297
oh so they de-censored your new buzzword
still, you need to go back
>>
>>60809322
Yeah sure mate really looks it's working
>>
>>60809276
>Yet they do allow you to own and carry weapons

You know what? If America required all gun owners to go through two years of military training; required them to store their guns unloaded and in a locked safe; and required their owners to submit to random inspections of their house to confirm the above without being notified beforehand and with refusal to allow the inspector on your property being grounds for revoking your gun license and confiscating your guns; then I, as a staunch centrist-liberal, would be ALL ABOARD with this.

Like, I would campaign in the streets, I would print out fliers, I would write my Congressman, I would appear at rallies, everything.

>it is the freedom of those you would rape, enslave or murder that is being protected.

At the cost of your freedom to rape, enslave, or murder.
>>
>>60809331
>Won't even read a 4chan post
>Thinks he belongs here
>>
>>60809322
https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi359
A. homicide rates as a whole have barely changed. Who gives a shit if people aren't killing people with guns anymore when they're still killing people with knives? Police can't fucking fight that since police still have the same old limitations as before. They can't be omniscient and omnipresent. They can't stop crime before it happens.
B. You ignore the ever more important total violent crime rate.
>>
>>60809375
>implying i'm not familiar with that nonsense
that stupid image-pasta is posted every time gun control is mentioned and is as stupid as it was for the first time
the only variance is whether it gets "BASED JAP" replies or not
>>
>>60809276
>Yet they do allow you to own and carry weapons, and all you need is a permit
That you get after compulsory military training and psychological examination. How's that not gun control?

>If freedom was not considered good, then prison would not be seen as punishment.
That's because prison is not a punishment. It's removing the dangerous elements from society for the good of society until they have learned to not be shitheads.
But if you want to go at it from a more philosophical point if freedom is considered a good thing, but is not capital G Good. Just because taking away chocolate is considered a punishment, it doesn't mean that chocolate is inherently morally superior to the absence of chocolate.

>Just because you can't rape, enslave or murder at will doesn't mean freedom isn't being protected,
yes it does
>it is the freedom of those you would rape, enslave or murder that is being protected.
and yet you robbed them from their freedom to rape, enslave or murder as well. You seem t be under the illusion that the icky parts of freedom are somehow less integral to the concept than the more noble parts.
>>
>>60809235
The UK did exactly that, and not only does the police on average have nothing more sophisticated than a club, the military has been downsized to the point of near-irrelevance, especially their army.

And they still have a higher crime rate than Belgum.
>>
>>60809420
How about what is fucking wrong with it? Maybe actually arguing a point rather than going
>LOLPOL
Would get you actual responses.
Who would think, giving an actual fucking response and argument might actually get you one.
>>
>>60809327
If that somehow doesn't apply to me shooting the guy as well, then your legal system is even more of a compete shitshow than I previously thought.
>>
>>60809451
maybe if you posted actual arguments instead of /pol/ meme
>>
>>60809457
What is wrong with the image since that IS the point of argument.
>>
File: ishygddt.jpg (23 KB, 600x600)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
>>60807983
>nations being any other alignment than lawful neutral
>>
>>60809470
I meant actual argument, not some retarded copy-pasta
try thinking on your own instead of spamming le ebin screenshots
>>60809491
you mean "states"
>>
File: spooky.jpg (17 KB, 390x310)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>60809491
Sure is spooky in here.
>>
>>60809491
I would argue that they can slide into Lawful Evil as well.
>>
>>60809503
Holy shit you actual cunt.
Fine then, i'll transliterate since you can't open images on your shite phone
POLICE STATE NEED POLICE
TANKS AND DRONES CANNOT ENFORCE CURFEWS AND BANS
POLICE ARE OUTNUMBERED BY CIVILIANS
IF CIVILIAN ALSO HAVE SAME GEAR AS POLICE WHILE OUTNUMBERING THEM
GET THIS
POLICE DON'T HAVE POWER
IF POLICE IN POLICE STATE DON'T HAVE POWER
GET THIS
THE STATE HAS NO POWER.
>>
>>60809503
why is it retarded?
and if it supports his opinion whats the problem with it?
you sure seem intent on fighting the picture instead of the content of the picture
>>
>>60808355
You do know that Great Britain did away with damn near most of the legal gun ownership and they STILL have violent crime, right? The lack of guns didn't really stop that, it just made it easier for criminals to do what they do while also getting violent with their victims because now they don't have a way to easily defend themselves, and now the same arguments used against guns are being used on knives because of the increased attacks with knives. Turns out in jolly old England you have a right to life, but not the right to defend it.
>>
>>60809539
>gets asked for actual arguments
>repeats copy-pasta from the image

anyway, pre-war Nazi Germany was highly militarised society with millions of armed and trained men outnumbering police/secret police
guess what, it still turned into dictatorship very quickly
no, armed populace doesn't prevent tyranny
>>
File: Gun.jpg (1.97 MB, 3008x2000)
1.97 MB
1.97 MB JPG
>/k/ thread
Help me out. Which kinds of guns were available before revolvers?
This is important to making a setting with guns.
>>
>>60809596
single shot pistols?
muzzle loaders
>>
>>60809585
Tell me, did those millions mount major efforts to stop the nazi party or did they roll over and let others who would help their effort get taken for gun owners were not communists.
>>
>>60809267
Other nations didn't intervene when the US regularly deployed military force against striking workers in the 19th and first half of the 20th century, nor when MacArthur and Patton rode down poor WWI vets making up the Bonus Army, nor when they interned mainland Japanese-Americans in internment camps, to use modern examples. I find it hard to believe that other nations would intervene at all, and if they did that it would be to restore anything but the status quo ante.

>>60809272
The government called on the freikorps to destroy the revolutionaries of 1918-1919. Then, significantly, they also used the very freikorps they had just ousted in the aftermath of the Kapp Putsch to bloodily suppress the striking workers and Ruhr uprising that the government had called upon to defeat the Kapp Putsch. Indeed, the government and the freikorps colluded with one another. It's how we got Nazis.
>>
>>60809621
Man, its almost like there were wars going on in Europe and there weren't a dozen different mediums for communicating with citizens of different countries across the globe instantly letting them know the human element immediately rather than seeing a couple lines in the paper.
>>
>>60809611
what? can you rephrase the question

germans didn't stop the dictatorship because they were convinced they were in control instead of the top of the party
proving you can ruthlessly dictate your armed populace if they believe they're not pawns
>>
>>60809611
Not that poster, and not making a point on gun control: yeah, the leftists tried. They were betrayed by the liberals and the conservatives were allied with the Nazis from the start.
>>
>>60809596
muzzle loaders like flintlocks and wheellocks and whatever percussion-cap-locks are called
CAPLOCKS?
>>
>>60809568
And yet it works everywhere else in Europe. I mean we can't help the fact that the brits are subhuman.
>>
>>60808126
Yes, the communist regime that practiced dragonic gun control in my country (so that people couldn't overthrow them) sure was good, you fucking piece of shit.
>>
>>60809456
An argument to self defense requires you to demonstrate that you were I fear of your life. Charging someone with a knife indicates you obviously didn't fear for your life, because you elected to put yourself in greater danger instead. Pulling a gun puts you in no greater danger than you were before.

There's also the part where a knife fight almost always ends in both people dying, so defending yourself with a knife is completely useless.
>>
File: usma0084.jpg (158 KB, 700x466)
158 KB
158 KB JPG
>>60809655
>>60809658
So they let themselves get fooled and divided by rhetoric. They let themselves get disarmed with nary a fight and then the police state was finalized.
>>
>>60809701
communists also drank water, i guess drinking water is evil now
>>
>>60809701
See
>>60808695
>>
>>60809652
Okay. In France '61 the French government massacred Algerian independence demonstrators and de Gaulle planned on calling the Foreign Legion out on the '68 demonstrators, for some other examples. No one intervened there. The British government militarily occupied North Ireland for decades and no one did anything.
>>
>>60809585
>guess what, it still turned into dictatorship very quickly
And at the time it had widespread public support.
>>
>>60809720
>Food analogy
>>
>>60808258
You literally can't stop going on about us.

I've been on /int/.
>>
>>60809711
No, the left put up a fight. Everyone else shot them because they preferred fascism and genocide to leftists gaining any power
>>
>>60809711
no, they were armed pretty much the whole time
they didn't overthrow dictatorship not because they couldn't but because they didn't want to, as it fed them fantasies of racial superiority
>>
>>60809177
What the shit are you on about? I am most certainly an extremist, and I most certainly do not want gun control.
>>
>>60809736
just because communists did thing A doesn't make A evil
communists were/are evil because they do evil things, not the other way around
>>
>>60808171
You...tried, I guess.
>>
>>60809754
>Communists are evil
Ah yes, I forgot that my gf is an evil witch out for my very heart. And my dad sure was one terrible human being when he was a young adult, before he saw the light and became a socdem.
>>
>>60809701
>it's another butthurt ex-blocfaggot who unironically bought into his own country's propaganda
We'd be a lot better off if the Commies had successfully killed you all off.
>>
>>60809754
That faggot said it was universally good, which means that he condones every dictatorship in the world that instituted gun control (which is all of them).
>>
>>60809792
I mean every nation in the history of the world has had some form of weapon control.
>>
File: ANCAP.jpg (86 KB, 640x793)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
>>60808050
>>60808057
>>60808079
>>60808103
>>
>>60808050
>>60808057
>Americans
>CG
Nice manifest destiny you got going on there.
>>
>>60809792
>Having high literacy rates is universally good
>>Don't you know the gommunists promoted universal literacy??? Why are you condoning the gommunists????
>>
>>60809774
>it's a western commie
ew
>>60809792
no? evil entities can still can do things that are good in vacuum and such entities are still evil

if you say creating infrastructure in impoverished areas is good, you don't condone evil regimes who create infrastructure
>>
>>60809281
That's fine, america outfunds and outweighs every other military combined on the planet by a significant margin.
>>
>We're CG! And so are my slaves!
Burgers...Burgers make me sick
>>
>>60809707
>Pulling a gun puts you in no greater danger than you were before.
Only if your assailant was very hesitant in the first place, in which case they would probably back out from a knife fight as well.

>There's also the part where a knife fight almost always ends in both people dying, so defending yourself with a knife is completely useless.
Read >>60808457
Your goal is not to murder your assailant, but to scare them away. Sadly the best way to do that is to actually try to murder them. The world is fucked up, news at 11.
>>
>>60809728
So was twitter secretly invented in the 60s and I was not aware? Pictures of murdered women and children popping up in the feeds in of millions of peoples around the globe creates a lot of grumbling that politicians would likely not happening.
>>60809745
Then they didn't put up a fucking fight. One party opposing something is not the population fighting against it. And if the population is dumb enough to get fooled by rhetoric saying they should give up their rights then you cannot stop that. Which is why discussions like this, as fucking retarded as they are, are important. If people don't learn the value of their rights and don't understand that their government must always be under close watch then they'll walk right into a 'shower' themselves.
>>
>rightists of any kind considering themselves CG
lol
>>
>>60809821
The point is that it requires a fit of monumental retardation to unironically believe that people who believe in some form of a huge group of political ideologies must be evil.
>>
>>60809825
Just eat other kinds of sandwiches then.
>>
>>60809834
>would likely not happening
not like*
>>
>>60809788
But if we were all killed, who would've been left for them to bleed dry like leeches?

No, instead they just killed all intelligentsia, artists, nobility and people with initiative and ensured the slow death of the country while they could also live rich off the back of the people.
>>
>>60809834
I mean, you had TV. Twitter isn't magic. People grumble about things all the time and the state just doesn't care given a significant enough existential threat. It 's like you think people didn't know the Troubles were happening, and wouldn't unless they were told so in 280 characters or less.
>>
>>60809839
by "communists" i meant people at position of power in communist countries, not deluded westerners believing in outdated retarded ideologies
>>
>>60809834
Are you fucking retarded? Newspapers and the radio were absolutely everywhere. What is this shit about social media? Do you think we didn't ravenously consume feel-good (and feel-bad) news media before then? Christ, we had huge public outlash about the Brits in the Boer war...over a century ago.
>>60809851
No, they didn't. The nobility ran away, because they were rich and could do such a thing. The intelligentsia were treated about the same as normal, right up until Stalin did his ubermensch thing and took control of the nation. Then he did what any good but paranoid dictator would do, which is remove all threats to himself.
>people with initiative
lmao Stalinism was absolutely great for people with initiative. If you had the initiative to implicate your superiors you could get a free promotion, among other things. Read some diaries and shit from the time period -- everyone was clamouring to get ahead, even if it came with risks of the gulag.
>>
>>60809818
You can't use literacy to shoot the people who came to arrest you because you made a joke about the dictator.
>>
I don't really get gun control.
What will you do if you have to fight a cougar today? Or a bear? They are our close neighbors, and visit on the daily.
Even the deer can kill you with their extremely sharp hooves. And the males won't balk to charge you.
I can only assume gun control advocates are either
A. not in regions with dangerous animals
or
B. Super beings hoping to cull all humans not able to fight animals hand to hand

I'm not sure which
>>
>>60809834
What was the Ruhr uprising?
>>
>>60809875
>The nobility ran away, because they were rich and could do such a thing. The intelligentsia were treated about the same as normal

>unironically believing almost century old commie propaganda
>>
>>60809888
>hurrrr I think gun control = nobody has guns
every country you can think of that supposedly has strict gun control allows people weapons in that situation
>>
>>60809901
Then you're not really controlling guns, are you?
All you're doing is adding a layer of beurocracy to line somebodies' pockets.
>>
>>60809895
Yeah how dare I study history
Stalin made a fuckload of changes to pretty much everything. One of those was clamping down on art and humanities and all that other intelligentsia tosh, and HARD. There's a reason he killed a fucktonne of people, and it's because people weren't happy with him.
>>
>>60809875
>Let me tell you about your country

We weren't under Stalinism, and after ww2, over 1 million people were either killed or deported by communists, or they sent to die working (And that's in addition to the losses we suffered during the war). Villages were razed to build coal factories and medieval churches were destroyed because religion is bad.

>Uhh actually you don't know that it's just your modern propaganda

You have no idea what propaganda goes on in my country. Our current government is literally filled with people from the communist party.
>>
>>60809913
>some people can have guns, because they need them
>others cannot, because they do not
>this is not gun control
>>
>>60809888
>A. not in regions with dangerous animals
They probably live in metropolitan areas like NYC or LA. Heck. I live just a bit north of DFW and we have coyotes that come into the neighborhood every now and then. We're not even that close to the city limit.
>>
>>60809916
>parroting commie propaganda is studying history

commies were killing intelligentsia even before Stalin
>>
>>60809922
if someone needs guns, and thus can have guns, that means they can give guns to other people.
Unless you are willing to say this guy who needs guns doesn't get any more guns because he lost his gun, which makes you a monster who leaves a poor forgetful woodsman to be eaten by a bear.

And thus, the requisite amount of wiggle room that must be included in the system to allow for human error can be exploited incredibly easy to allow everybody to have guns, even ones not supposed to be having guns.
>>
>>60809921
Yes, anon. I'm sorry to be the one to reveal this to you, but you are not suddenly an expert on your nation's history just because you were born there.

Communism, in general, has only ever been Bolshevik-like (for a number of reasons), and of that most were Stalinist ("Marxist-Leninist").

I'm talking about the propaganda that says they were totes the best commies around.
>>60809948
Commies were killing intelligentsia at the same rate any regime would kill intelligentsia in the middle of a war. See: the Whites.
>>
>>60809814
>Americans
>Good
>>
>>60809949
Anon, I don't know what you're trying to prove here. Strict gun control exists in many parts of the world, and these all allow some people guns. You can still control them, despite your retarded loopholes. Like, there's documentation and shit.
>>
>>60809949
>which makes you a monster who leaves a poor forgetful woodsman to be eaten by a bear
Or just someone who thinks people shouldn't be allowed to have dangerous tools if they don't know how to use them.
>>
File: 17t7wu3lneaq6jpg.jpg (22 KB, 320x485)
22 KB
22 KB JPG
>>60809888
I mean must live in close proximity to dangerous wildlife I suggest investing in something like pic related.
If we are talking seriously, I think nobody in the thread is arguing that nobody should have guns, but that they need to be heavily regulated. So to answer your question, you should probably get police/military/park ranger training and a full psychological examination to get a permit, otherwise move to a safer area.
>>
people from ex-commie countries really are the worst.
>>
>>60808945
>Anarachy is not true freedom
Okay lol.
>>
>>60809980
so... a monster who would leave a poor forgetful woodsman to be eaten by a bear.
These are synonyms you are saying comrade.

>>60809973
I think gun control is a mostly voluntary thing. If those people wanted to spread the guns in a co-ordinated, there's not really much the government could do to stop it.
I mean, they wouldn't even know about it until the first crime was committed if it was done over time.
>>
>>60808945
>Evil impinges on the freedom of others
sure
>So good actually protects freedom
no

the good king is still a king. he has peasants.
>>
>>60810002
Are you against suspending licenses for people who drink and drive?
>>
>>60809985
>Crazies shouldn't live out in the woods, and should live in safer areas
That sounds like an incredibly poor idea for everyone involved.
Every party here would be happier with the woods crazies in the woods.
>>
>>60810002
You have an absolutely bumfuck retarded underestimation of bureaucracy, but yeah, sure, go ahead. Do it. It'll be funny, seeing you on the news.
>>
>>60810013
do... people need their car to fight off some kind of mechanized superbeast that will kill them if they continue living where they are but don't have a car?

Travel is usually a lot less directly threatening than wild animals. Gives people more time to shore up problems.
>>
>>60809959
the thing is, home-grown commies from my country were pretty harmless self-appointed workers' representatives
the second russians crossed the borders, massacres and purges began, even domestic commies weren't safe

almost as if the whole "revolution" was just re-branding of typical russian conquest
>>
>>60810031
>geopolitical powers acting geopolitically
Yeah woah who'd have thunk it
Humans gonna human
>>
>>60810022
I mean, it's not exactly uncommon for places with gun control to have lucrative black markets in... guns.
>>
>>60810045
Source.
>>
File: 1477912054548.gif (1.69 MB, 423x234)
1.69 MB
1.69 MB GIF
>>60809959
Really? Are you seriously telling me I don't know anything about my country but somehow you do?

I've known people who lived through those events. Who were born before world war 2 started. Both my grandfathers fought in ww2 and saw the communist regime begin and end. My history professor in high school spoke about how his father was taken away in the 50's because he got drunk at the tavern and said that the americans would come and liberate us. We've had the soviets bleed bleed us dry of resources and factories and had them install a regime that literally documented which people they killed, documents that we now have access to. Our people were not allowed to leave the country unless they were given special permission by the government, and only in the government's interests.

But no, apparently I don't know what I'm talking about, even though there's still people alive who experienced those things and there's information readily available about it.
>>
>>60810030
>>60810013
Also, are you advocating taking the license away from someone if they lost their car?
Or had their car stolen?
This metaphor is weird.
>>
>>60810030
No, but people generally need cars a lot more than they do guns, and yet we tend to be okay with regulating access to the ability to drive if someone demonstrates that they cannot do so.

And are you kidding? Car accidents are way, way, way more common than wild animal attacks.
>>
When did we decide to become like /pol/? What happened to us?
>>
>>60810053
Just look at the states. People are allatime coming in from more controlled areas to less controlled ones to purchase guns.

And they've got to go a lot further than you need to in euro land to get to gunland.
>>
>>60810016
I mean if they want to live in the woods they should not cry about getting killed by animals. If they want to live in the woods and not get killed by animals, they should get intense training in gun use and safety. And the actually psychologically unstable ones should get medical help.
>>
>>60810074
You didn't actually respond to the comment in question in any way.
>>
>>60810097
>the world SHOULD work properly!
If shoulds were horses we'd all be swimming in grain.
The fact of the matter is, what you are proposing is either
A. moving the crazies into town
or
B. telling the crazies they can't have guns

which will either result in crazy murders in town, or crazies either dying and generating loads of bad press or becoming criminal crazies.
>>
>>60810042
i get it
now tell that to self-described "communists" in countries west of Iron Curtain who still claim "commies dindu nuffin"
>>
>>60810071
>I've known people who lived through those events
And there it is. You people never learn, do you? You can't just rely on the national equivalent of a circle-jerk. You've got to study these things academically. Try it. You're gonna be in for a shock when you realise that in the end, people just acted like people.
There's no stupid narratives to history, anon. There's no big bad guy coming in and stomping all over the little folk. Everything's hugely intricate and complex, to the point that this thing you call communism was, like, one reviled part of communism that got big and then got co-opted by another dude who just wanted to create a superpower, with him as the leader. And even that's completely wrong, because it's so oversimplified.
>>60810119
I do. And they are indeed retarded, and they too need to study some damn history before they launch into assertions that their boy Stalin did nothing wrong and the kulaks were all to blame and he was just trying to keep the peace and...
>>
>>60808355
>what is a tazer
A thing that doesn't always work.
>Also if you are elderly/disabled to such a degree that you cannot stab a man with a knife you shouldn't be going anywhere without an able helper, because you are liable to seriously injure yourself by going down to buy groceries.
Dude, what? There is a massive gap in disability between "can't stab a guy fast enough" and "can't buy groceries", not to mention the fact that you're denying a large group of people agency here.
>>
>>60810100
You say people need guns, I say people need access to the legal ability to drive. You can't see that we can still regulate access to things that people "need" for the purposes of general safety even if it harms the people who are denied it.
>>
>>60809814
>Nice manifest destiny you got going on there.
it sure is! savages have it coming
>>
>>60810145
>A thing that doesn't always work.
Unlike guns, which always work.
>>
>>60810150
But your metaphor didn't make one ounce of sense.
For it to work accurately, you'd have to take away someone's license if he misplaced his car, or if he got his car stolen.
>>
>>60810117
Look, if we look at it objectively the only way to unfuck the US right now is to nuke it, but I'm not suggesting that.

Also you leave out
C. Take guns away from crazies and let them be eaten by wildlife
Which is obviously the superior alternative.
>>
>>60810145
>>60810152
Me and my friends burnt out a couple hundred bucks worth of tazers and pepper spray just having fights with 'em.
It was great fun, but neither really stops you if you want to keep going real bad.
Pepper spray, I gotta say, is worse. Tasers you get over and feel sorta tired, but pepper spray lingers.
>>
>>60810170
that's covered under B.
You'd never get people to vote in "let all the crazies get eaten". The closest you could get is trying to draw attention away from the crazies getting eaten, which is a very unsure political gambit.

Not to mention the vital role crazies play in modern ecology.
>>
>>60808886
>Hypothetically it doesn't, but in practice it sure does.
The US demographic that commits the least crime (even less than the police) is people who legally own guns. By banning guns you simply ensure that only criminals have access to them, not people who'd use them for defense. Look up Stephen Willeford as an example.
>>
>>60810134
>I do.
ok, i don't agree with you but i certainly respect you
>>
>>60810162
Ì didn't say "car", I said license. If you misuse your license, it is suspended. If you misuse your gun (and, for guns, losing it without a damn good reason is misusing it), your permit is suspended.
>>
>>60810134
Hold on, is this just another form of "That wasn't true Communism"? Cause it sounds like your entire argument is that what happened to that guy and his entire country wasn't really Communism because if it was they wouldn't have initiated purges and stifled peoples rights and ability to leave and so many other horrible things cause Communism hasn't lead to anything other than mass death and a lot of failure yet people like you STILL insist that it hasn't been tried yet. When will it be "properly" tried? When it doesn't decide that a certain portion of the population needs to die for entirely arbitrary reasons?
>>
>>60810236
yes. and you suggest taking away the license if someone loses their gun/car, because you called that misuse.

This is why I say your metaphor and policy comparisons make no sense.
>>
>>60810238
Probably around the same time capitalism properly gets tried.
So far, it always leads to genocide and collapse of nations.
We haven't really figured out how to make any system work right yet.
>>
>>60810238
Auguste Pinochet demonstrates that free market capitalism leads to dictatorship.
>>
>>60808285
Effectively limiting self defense to the young and strong. Found the LE poster.
>>
>>60810271
I keep saying that gun control is actually a ploy to cull weak humans.
>>
>>60810253
Losing a car is not misuse. You lose it you lose it, it does no one any harm. You lose a gun and then anyone can pick it up and use it, which is dangerous, therefore misuse.
>>
File: 1493510571155.png (80 KB, 272x199)
80 KB
80 KB PNG
>>60810134
>What people say doesn't conform to what I think, therefore they're wrong

Doesn't change the fact that we have documents of purges that the commies themselves wrote, and documents of every person who was taken away by the secret police. Or that we have pre-war maps and knowledge of villages that disappeared during communism. Or movies of beautiful pre-war architecture being destroyed by communists and replaced with ugly brutalist commieblocs (No, those buildings were not destroyed during the war. They were there well into the 70's), all while the dictator and the fat cats who got rich by spying on their neighbors were touting the virtues of Socialism. But you're gonna say those are forgeries, aren't you?
>>
>>60809828
If someone is trying to rob you there's nothing wrong with killing them, unless you're some post Christian slave who thinks killing is always wrong
>>
>>60810238
>Hold on, is this just another form of "That wasn't true Communism"?
It's the academically accepted form of "listen here you little shit, everything should be examined for what it is, not for what it's been called at the time and later on". Bolshevism was certainly derived from Marxism, which is by any person's standards a form of Communism. So I would call it Communist, yes. I would also recognise that it's a tiny splinter of the huge ideological beast that is Communism.

For God's sake, anon, commies fighting commies used to be a huge meme. You know in Life of Brian, when the revolutionary Jews keep fighting each other? That's what it's riffing off of.

It's...really amazing how much you're assuming of me. It's like you WANT to fight some internet argument with a communist. Sorry, anon, but I'm not one of those.

Look: if a country had a communist regime, it's a pretty certain bet it was Bolshevik or derived from Bolshevism. This is for a few reasons:
1. Bolshevism used organised violence to reach power, which is generally an effective move.
2. When they took over Russia, a fucktonne of other Communists decided turning to Bolshevism would be the winning move. It worked, and they got into power. Although this was not least because of...
3. The Russian Bolsheviks funded the fuck out of other Bolshevik-like organisations, and actively opposed all other socialists, preventing them from reaching power.

Please note I'm using "Bolshevik" to really mean Leninist and Marxist-Leninist.

So, certainly, a form of Communism has been tried. Again and again and again. It's arguable that it's the only form of Communism that could be tried, given it uses violence so liberally, but that's a whole other argument.
>>
>>60810284
Fuck off, brutalism is aesthetic as fuck.
>>
>>60810145
There is a massive gap in disability between "can't stab a guy fast enough" and "can't buy groceries",
There really isn't. With a little training you can get pretty good at carving people up. No guarantee that you will survive, but if you attack somebody - either with or without a gun - you are giving up your right to complain about getting killed anyway.

not to mention the fact that you're denying a large group of people agency here.
I mean if those people value their agency more than their health there's nothing I can do to dissuade them, but then they kind of lose the right to complain if bad things happen to them, just like those who do extreme sports. I mean it's still tragic, but if you could have avoided it, it's partially your fault.
>>
>>60809875
The kulaks were murdered immediately after the revolution. Lenin was no hero, and millions of soviets were guaranteed to starve
>>
>>60810253
Or say someone research dangerous viruses but one day I lose a vial and then somebody gets its and causes epidemic. You say, no no no, this is not misuse, they are not responsible for what happens after they lose it, and really just losing it is no big deal so they should still research dangerous viruses.
>>
>>60810347
>The kulaks were murdered immediately after the revolution
Absolutely fucking retarded, collectivisation of farming is what killed them.

Soviets starved because of the war. Literally both sides used the exact same policies in that war, whether commie or capitalist. In fact, it's the commies who started to move away from requisitioning and into muh NEP.
>>
>>60810002
All laws are mostly voluntary. If everyone stopped paying tax the government couldn't do shit, but if only a few don't they can kidnap or kill them
>>
>>60810402
>If everyone stopped paying tax the government couldn't do shit
I'll take "what is the military for" for 500
>>
File: IMG_2125.jpg (129 KB, 1395x809)
129 KB
129 KB JPG
>>60810053
Sweden.
Those grenades don't grow out of the ground.
>>
>>60810318
maybe if it's intentional aesthetic choice and it fits the environment
but certainly not if the only reason for picking it was it that masses needed cheap and quickly built blocks of flats, and the material used was of poor quality
>>
>>60810418
These people think they can take on the military and win.
>>
>>60810429
>>60810418
the military is a group of citizens that work for the government
they are not mindless automatons with no families or personal beliefs
>>
>>60810442
Yes. And when the military no longer wants to fight for the state, you get a successful revolution. But only then.
>>
>>60810264
That was because of the attempted communist coup.
>>
>>60808136
>destabilizes your atlantic profits
Heh, nothing personnel
>>
>>60810459
based
>>
>>60810205
>The US demographic that commits the least crime (even less than the police) is people who legally own guns. [...] Look up Stephen Willeford as an example.
>The shooter legally owned the gun that he used to kill 26 people.
Like pottery.

Seriously tho, criminals aren't magic. If you restrict access to guns, you'll have less criminals with guns. And they can even be caught BEFORE they shoot up a church on account of possessing an illegal firearm.
>>
>>60810303
I apologize for any rudeness on my part, but yes someone telling me that any historical attempt at Communism wasn't real Communism has been an argument I've actually heard in person so I incorrectly assumed that's where your argument was leading. Thank you for the other information however, that helps give some context to your point now that I have a better understanding of your position. I still don't necessarily agree that we should continue to expand on Communism as anything more than a thought experiment though, and would prefer we left it as a particularly bloody period in human history.
>>
>>60810303
When your ideology is based on resentment all the the well intentioned people will be killed off, and they always were.
>>
>>60810271
Gotta keep natural selection going, yo.
>>
>>60810459
>overthrows a democratic government in a coup
actually, the elected government are coupists
>>
>>60810402
>>60810418
United States and her dollar have such reputation that even if all citizens stop paying taxes, the government and its instruments of violence would be still able to be sustain themselves
>>
>>60810449
if the populace is equipped with guns then you could have a successful revolution regardless of the military so long as the military isn't actively engaging in genocide
>>
>>60810429
I dunno anon, I once read an ad in a comicbook where hillbillies took on Thor and the asgardians with their bare hands and won. But then got distracted by snacks and gave up.
>>
>>60810501
Real communism hasn't been tried but I reckon it can't be tried due to human nature.
>>
File: cjfjoifuuaeca8i2.jpg (63 KB, 501x504)
63 KB
63 KB JPG
>>60810299
>My wallet is literally more important than a human being.
>>
>>60810554
It's not about the wallet, it's about letting someone take the wallet.
>>
File: IMG_0524.png (10 KB, 404x511)
10 KB
10 KB PNG
>>60810393
>In November 1918, at a meeting of delegates of the committees of poor peasants, Lenin announced a new policy to eliminate the kulaks: "If the kulaks remain untouched, if we don't defeat the freeloaders, the czar and the capitalist will inevitably return".[6] In July 1918, the committees of poor peasants were created, which played an important role in the struggle against the kulaks, led the process of redistribution of confiscated lands and inventory, food surpluses from the kulaks.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization
>>
>>60810492
>>The shooter legally owned the gun that he used to kill 26 people
>hurrdurr this one guy did the thing that means I ignore statistics right
Criminals give no shits about buying things illegally or stealing them. If you restrict access to guns you'll get more criminals buying guns illegally creating a greater market for black market guns. And if they can't afford to get in that game then they just start doing attacks with knives.
>>
>>60810418
Yeah the Greek military is running around holding people up for cash?
>>
>>60810570
Based phoneposter.

Anyway, I know full well that nobody in power liked the kulaks once the second revolution had done its thing. But that's quite different from "the kulaks were all murdered in 1918".
>>
>>60807983
This thread is garbage, but that prompt is basically the plot of the first two-thirds of Tales of Vesperia.
>Some bum, his dog and his bourgie girlfriend decide that laws are bullshit, so they quit society and join an anarcho-capitalist enclave with their new friends.
>>
>>60810554
>my right to self defense is more important than the life of the person attacking me
seems right
>>
>>60810546
"""real""" communism absolutely has been tried and has succeeded on the small scale
it's just impossible to make work on the large scale
>>
>>60810514
Allende was arming communist gangs. Read the congress' plead for the military to depose him, the reasons are pretty clear.

And despite being a nazi boogie man Pinochet's body count was a third ye size of Castro in a country three times the size.
>>
>>60810590
Lenin had them killed and robbed. It hadn't kicked into full swing, but it was still going on
>>
>>60810580
Look, I'm just pointing it out that if your chosen example supports my side of the argument, you might reconsider it.

Also source on the statistic?
>>
>>60810609
ancaps are 100% LE tho
>>
>>60808057
>good
>>
>>60808246
What stops the state if it decides to become evil?
>>
>>60810613
You are not defending yourself, since if you hand over the money, you won't get hurt. The best way to defend yourself is to give up your hard earned jewgold.

>>60810565
>It's about my feefees
That's even worse.
>>
>>60810688
Anon, the state doesn't just decide to become evil. It's a long and very visible process, and if you don't stop it/get out while you can, it's your fault.
It has already begun in the US.
>>
>>60810700
>since if you hand over the money, you won't get hurt
you've never been mugged have you
and I'd definitely put a bullet in someone trying to rob me just to make an example of them for any other would-be robbers
>>
File: 1531344722462.gif (26 KB, 376x474)
26 KB
26 KB GIF
>>60807983

> tfw I own nineteen firearms and counting, and there's not a damned thing any limp-wristed pozzed commie on God's green earth can do about it

It's a good feel.
>>
>>60810648
https://ucr.fbi.gov/
Last study done on relationship of legal guns involved in crime was a decade ago, to my knowledge, and was found that about 10% of gun crimes were done by individuals who had legally obtained their guns since the majority of criminals had disqualifying conditions like previous criminal records, immigration status, or mental state. And mass shootings are, and will be for the foreseeable future, statistical anomalies, no matter how much gun grabbers want to tout around bodies of dead children.
>>
>>60810742
>you've never been mugged have you
Actually I have.

>I'd definitely put a bullet in someone trying to rob me just to make an example of them for any other would-be robbers
Then be a man, and do it with a knife.
>>
>>60810622
>believing the Congress that literally called on the violent overthrow of the government when they say they feared a violent overthrow of the government
>whataboutism
I stabbed those guys in the back because they were definitely about to stab me. Also I only stabbed four people while somebody else stabbed five, so that makes me so good person and I should be praised for me restraint.
>>
>>60808853
I was an armyfag in Iraq. It is absolutely true.
>>
>>60810785
too bad you didn't get IEDed.
>>
>>60809585
... with an election.

And now you know the rest of the story.
>>
>>60808744
And that's how you end up with so many people getting shot by the police, because they constantly have to go around being paranoid that anyone making a sudden move might be pulling a gun on them.
>>
>>60810700
>since if you hand over the money, you won't get hurt
one, I dont know that
two, I will not hand over my property to someone who is unlawfully and unjustly trying to take it away

to be in a position where they can take my property they must be threatening me, if they are threatening me they pose me danger, if they pose me danger due to unlawful and unjust actions I am fully justified in killing them

>my feefees
no, the principle of it

to allow someone to take someone elses property in an unlawful and unjust manner is immoral, to defend ones property against those who would take it IS moral
>>
>>60810760
>and do it with a knife.
Thanks for killing all the females, elderly, and other infirm who wanted representation and safety.
>>
>>60810760
>be a man
you're assuming that I am a man, that only men would ever be mugged, and that only physically able men should be able to defend themselves
>>
>>60810760
>Then be a man, and do it with a knife.
a gun is more effective, therefore a gun is what you should use

self defense is not some great test of skill or display of ones strength at arms, it is the act of ensuring ones own safety- it should be done with the most effective tools available, because the goal is to prove ones capability of killing the assailant and not how skilled a fighter one is
>>
>>60807983
>Gun Control
>Lawful Good
>>
>>60810830
>>60810831
Read the thread, I have already answered this.
>>
>>60807983
Post more of that fucking shark
>>
>>60810847
The most effective method is still handing over your money when asked.
>>
>>60810830
I've been to /k/, nothing gets them angrier than women with guns.
>>
>>60810821
let me kill Wall Street bankers and investors then
>>
>>60810884
it isn't, and you're naive if you believe so
>>
>>60810899

Do you have any statistics there?
>>
>>60810492
Are machine shops magic? I can make a single shot firearm with a trip to the hardware store. Given just a dremel a vice, hammer and some other basic tools you could make an AK- 47 in your garage.
>>
>>60810785
ok, if you think US is at failed-arab-state level, then I get why you need a gun
>>
>>60810865
No you haven't. Until just now you've said nothing about females but evidently your stance is might makes right and that females must have an escort at all times since otherwise you would be saying that a woman should have nothing on her since she would deserve to get it taken off her since she's weaker than her assailant.
>>60810887
That's good but how is /k/'s opinion relevant in any way to the current discussion of people deserving the right to defend themselves and their property even if they're weaker than their attacker?
>>
>>60810884
the most effective method of ensuring that someone doesent hurt you is a bullet to the head anon

dead people hurt no-one
>>
>>60810758

>Last study done on relationship of legal guns involved in crime was a decade ago, to my knowledge

that sounds about right. The Dickie Amendment.was heavily supported by the NRA and has meant that federal studies of gun violence are more or less non-existent.
>>
>>60810492
>If you restrict access to guns, you'll have less criminals with guns
no, because criminals are already breaking the law- why would they follow gun regulations

banning guns will do as much as the prohibition did to stop alcohol
>>
>>60808079
it's like this - At The Time, Britain was LG.
And then, America was all like, "hey - no religious favoritism, self defense, not having the police raid your house or soldiers live there"
and America Became LG, while britain slipped to LN.
>>
>>60810943
Come and say that to my skeletal face and see what happens.
>>
Don't mind me, just dumping something relevant to OP
>>
>>60810979
nigger you got BTFO at kids card games
>>
>>60807983
I never understand people who REEE at the mere thought of gun control. You have to be willfully blind to not agree with some level controlling weapons. Should a private citizen be able to own a fully armed tank, a drone, a nuke? It's an insane risk that doesn't make any sense to have. So what's the cutoff? Should the average joe on the street have the power to kill dozens of people in a minute?


I'm all for people having a handgun or a hunting rifle if they're an adult who went under a background check, but the argument that you should be able to own anything seems really flawed.

> The government should give us all the potential to be incredibly violent because one day they might be incredibly violent.
>>
>>60810887
>I've been to /k/, nothing gets them angrier than women with guns (who use them wrong)

Ftfy

K loves girls with guns as long as they're doing it right.
>>
>>60810936
>anon thinks that a woman cannot fuck someone up with a knife
Why didn't you just say you had no idea what you were talking about?
>>
>>60810990
>sharktits
its been a while
>>
>>60811028
Yes because woman with knife definitely overpowers man or men with knife.
>>
>>60811028
Dude i've seen a woman fuck a man up just with harsh language - actual implements are overkill for most women.
>>
>>60808246
>preventing totally preventable deaths is totally not good

300,000 firearm defenses annually
>>
>>60810915
And I'm sure you can mix up the primer, powder, and catridges yourself too
>>
>>60811039
You shut your fookin mouf. If any furry deserves tits its sharks since they give birth to live fucking young.
>>
>>60811047
Pretty handily actually. A decent number of people in the U.S. recycle their brass and load their own ammo. If I couldn't then i could still argue it's easier to smuggle bullets on the black market and if that weren't acceptable to you then I also know how to make rudimentary black powder. The U.S. is so large and armed an actual gun control plan would be VERY hard to implement. The U.S. has close to as many guns as people last I checked. Granted that doesn't mean everyone has one but you do encounter a herd immunity effect. Since a criminal doesn't know who is armed they're gambling when they mug somebody.
>>
>>60811202
lmao buying the components and putting them together doesn't count
>>
>>60810953
Are you misinterpreting this on purpose? Gun control makes it harder for people to turn to crime, since they either need to do some legwork or be fine with the notion of using knifes and similar weapons.
Also existing criminals can be arrested for illegal possession of firearms before they actually commit crimes with them.
>>
>>60811202
gonna be a crime wave with handgonnes
>>
>>60811042
Overpower? Probably not. Mortally wound? More than likely.
>>
>>60811247
Does having a bunch already on hand count? How about the other things I mentioned? I realize I'm not the majority or anything but if it became illegal to own these things I'd be a criminal and if I'm in for a penny...
>>
>>60811046
How many of those were after the person has already killed someone? How many of those were actual cases of mortal peril and nit just someone not wanting to hand over their jewgold?
>>
>>60811376
confiscation easy
>>
>>60811376
Yes, I mean you would have to turn it in and you won't be able to buy more. And I'm not sure homemade weapons with homemade rounds are safe enough to be used on a large scale by criminals.
>>
>>60811397
And they're going to know I have these because? Are we going full "1984" here? How far are you willing to go to find all the crazies in Montana?
>>
>>60807983
yeah, the only difference it would be less war crimes, and when a war crime happen it would have consequences for the offender
>>
>>
>>60811497
This shark has a dick doesn't it?
>>
>>60811458
Wait, so the police knocking on your door and searching your house once (unless someone reports that you are hiding illegal ammo) is "full 1984"?
>>
>>60811378
>criminals will always tell the truth about letting you go after you give them your money

Good thing murder and robbery are illegal, so there's no need to make a law against murdering or robbing with a gun
>>
>>60811378
A lot of them were sexual assaults, but I suppose every woman is morally obligated to get a knife and become an expert in Krav Maga instead of just paying some money to even the playing field between her and Tyrone.

Who are you to say 'you shouldn't have defended yourself from that criminal' to any of those people?
>>
>>60811613
It's pretty up there given a lack of "probable cause" it also seems like a huge waste of human resources. I assume you would be sending these police to every home in america? That's a lot of man hours. They won't be respectful of people's things. That's a lot of complaints. What happens if I hide my stuff? It does sound pretty Orwellian.

Not speaking to myself here but I think a lot of people would actually draw the line right there. A lot of people would probably militarize upon hearing that the govt. was invading houses like that.

The feasibility of gun control is seeming as questionable to me at this point as the ethics of it
>>
File: Brady Campaign.jpg (36 KB, 480x270)
36 KB
36 KB JPG
>>60811682
>>
>>60811743
Criminals aren't people, therefore killing them isn't murder.
>>
>>60811767
History on that meme
/K/ made it to troll the brady campaign.
They bought into it and caught huge flak for it.
>>
>>60811743
>gun control will reduce crime goys
>just let the criminals do what they want
>>
>>60811682
>A lot of them were sexual assaults, but I suppose every woman is morally obligated to get a knife and become an expert in Krav Maga instead of just paying some money to even the playing field between her and Tyrone.
Yes? I mean I did train with a knife, because I am skinny faggot, and criminals are usually much bigger and more muscular then I am. And if your assailants aren't sure they can win, they won't attack you, so you are always going to be in a disadvantage no matter your gender.
Also this whole "I have money, why do I have to work for things I value" attitude is the worst bullshit to ever grace this planet.

>Who are you to say 'you shouldn't have defended yourself from that criminal' to any of those people?
But anon, I'm telling them to defend themselves. By looking out for themselves and by training themselves.
>>
>>60811809
>The police doesn't do shit
I mean the fact that they don't in the US isn't an argument against gun control, it's an argument for the reorganization of the police force.
>>
>>60811885
Look at London. That aside, the police can't be private bodyguards for everyone all the time. Far more effective is the deterrent of a criminal walking into a store to rob it and having no way of knowing who in there also has a gun.

With gun control, a criminal can be very confident that nobody has a gun, which makes things very easy if he already broke the law to get his own gun.

But again, how does a law against owning a gun prevent armed robbery more than a law against armed robbery, normal robbery, and killing people during a robbery?
>>
>>60811839
Not everyone has the free time to take an MMA class. Spending money is translating time they spent working into something that will consume less of their time in regards to being an expert fighter.
>>
>>60811885
>police reform

Okay, how about this: we introduce a special type of undercover officer, and hire a lot more of them and make sure they're armed to deal with criminals. They won't be investigating, just being on standby undercover in various locations to make sure there's someone who can try to stop a dangerous crime in progress. We could even have it be a purely voluntary system with a degree of anonymity, so people can do it for free and,not have to be worried about them or their family being targetted because they're an officer with a gun. And therr will be more strict oversight for them if a shooting does occur, and they'll have to more definitively prove their actions were defensive.

Would that work for you?
>>
>>60812099
If something is really important for you, you'll make time for it. If you don't care about your personal safety that much, you don't get to whine about the risks.
>>
>>60812228
There's no cheating when it comes to life and death. And using a gun is taking it far more seriously than,someone who expexts the elderly to teleport behind an armed criminal and unsheathe their katana
>>
>>60812062
>Far more effective is the deterrent of a criminal walking into a store to rob it and having no way of knowing who in there also has a gun.
If the threat of legal action after robbing the store didn't deter him, the fact that people may have guns inside won't either.

>which makes things very easy if he already broke the law to get his own gun.
Except for the part where he has to actually hide the gun if he doesn't want to get arrested.

>But again, how does a law against owning a gun prevent armed robbery more than a law against armed robbery, normal robbery, and killing people during a robbery?
By way of getting the guy arrested for the possession of illegal firearms before he enters the shop.
>>
>>60812228
>lives don't matter
>technology is bad
>only the strong should survive
>fight with honor

So Gun control is Chaotic Evil Orc logic?
>>
>>60812287
>There's no cheating when it comes to life and death. And using a gun is taking it far more seriously than,someone who expexts the elderly to teleport behind an armed criminal and unsheathe their katana
How about not going to places where you might get attacked, hm?
>>
>>60812329
>lives don't matter
Except it literally is the opposite, you fucker. You sacrifice some of your own personal safety for the safety of others.
>technology is bad
not technology, just technology that makes killing other people laughably easy.
>only the strong should survive
Or you could be smart enough to avoid dangerous areas.
>fight with honor
honor has nothing to do with it. rip their ballsack off with your teeth for all I care.
Also
>fight with honor
>CE orc logic
choose one.
>>
>>60812392
*not all technology
>>
>>60812291
>If the threat of legal action after robbing the store didn't deter him, the fact that people may have guns inside won't either.

By that logic, the threat of legal action from killing everyone in the store won't detee him either, so better to put him down before he hurts someone

>but they can arredt him if they find it before

They can also arrest anyone hiding one in case the police don't find the guy before he breaks into their home.

Why not just cut out the middle man and write a law that says 'its illegal to do bad things' and lock up all the criminals that way?
>>
>>60808355
You do understand that both pepper spray and tazers do jack shit against a lot of determined attackers?

People in good shape or with body-mass tend to be able to tank Tazers and pepper spray can be tanked by anyone for enough of time to actually knife you or shoot you with their illegal guns.

Also, both of those tend to be banned on pro gun control countries and knife fights always end with one guy in hospital and the other in morgue.
>>
>>60812407
>By that logic, the threat of legal action from killing everyone in the store won't detee him either, so better to put him down before he hurts someone
???

>Why not just cut out the middle man and write a law that says 'its illegal to do bad things' and lock up all the criminals that way?
But that's literally how law and law enforcement works, anon.
>>
>>60808420
You mean the non-muslim population isn't armed?
>>
>>60812341
>>60812392
>just avoid dangerous areas

Maybe we should take a look at the demographics of those areas with higher chances of violent crime,and see if we can find a pattern? Then police can target the most dangerous criminal elements more directly without needing to infringe on everyone at once.

After all, if half this crime is only taking place in 10% of the areas, then focusing on those should be the priority.
>>
>>60808695
Stripping people from the means of fighting against evil is not good. Especially when it does nothing to disarm the evil ones in your society.
>>
>>60812456
Well they need to defend themselves against all the Islamophobes out there armed with harsh words and rhetoric. That's why they need all the knives and acid, for peace!
>>
>>60812435
If your attacker is so determined to kill you then you won't have much chance to shoot him either, unless you are the fastest draw in the West.
>knife fights always end with one guy in hospital and the other in morgue.
which is why most would-be attackers seriously reconsider if you pull a knife on them and look like you might fuck them up.
>>
>>60809059
you're a retard
>>
>>60812451
>???

Like you said, if he doesn't care about jail, he has no reason to stop at robbery, so customers have no reason to cooperate with him

>that's how the law works already

It's hilarious that you think that, but it also explains why you're so willing to blindly trust that the government knows right and wrong
>>
>>60808886
It doesn't though. Overall murder rates remain pretty much unaffected when guns get taken away.

Nations that don't kill with guns kill with poison, knives and other shit.
>>
>>60812472
And how would that stop Edgelord McFuckface from buying an automatic and shooting up a school/church?
>>
>>60808126
It's lawful evil
Stripping away a person's rights is always evil but doing it for what you have convinced yourself is for the common good is lawful.
>>
>>60812451
>'its illegal to do bad things'
>that's literally how law and law enforcement works
>owning a gun has is not illegal
>therefore it is not a bad thing

That settles that then
>>
>>60809585
And? It's not as if Hitler made a conscious effort to make the lives of Germans more difficult.

Rather, all he needed to do was to prove himself superior to the Communists who fucked Germany after their revolt, which wasn't hard.
People would easily remember it as "Well it's still better than Communism."
>>
>>60812530
>if he doesn't care about jail, he has no reason to stop at robbery, so customers have no reason to cooperate with him
Anon, criminals don't go for maximizing their bounty like in One Piece. Our hypothetical guy is robbing the store because he needs money. He's stopping at robbery, because that's what he wants.

>It's hilarious that you think that, but it also explains why you're so willing to blindly trust that the government knows right and wrong
And yet you do nothing as Trump fucks up your country. Look man, if you really didn't trust your government, you would have already shot up the White House (that's a plural you by the way), so spare me that tired crap.
>>
>>60812572
>a dozen people died this one time
>meanwhile many more die from handguns every single day
>and more still defend themselves using guns

You can't save everyone
>>
>>60809596
Breech loading rifles
Percussion cap muskets
and before that flintlocks
>>
>>60812644
Well, sometimes societal and technological progress means that the definition of "bad" is shifted, and law is slow to catch up. Just like how slavery was abolished, and women eventually got the right to vote.
>>
>>60812676
>but he just wants money

Because the people there can read minds and know that?

>but Drumpft!!!
>peace with north korea
>lowing the labor supply by getting rid of illegals, thereby increasing the demand and therefore pay for legal workers
>not paying extra to be Europe's military which they don't want or need

Calling someone an evil racist Nazi doesn't mean anything anymore
>>
>>60812681
>there are more deaths prevented by guns than the number of deaths caused by them
This seems to be a core argument of yours. Got any source for it, or are you just talking out of your ass?
>>
>>60812714
Women have had the right to vote for nearly a century in America. Is it still to early to say if this is an unequivocal good thing?
>>
>>60812714
And Sam Colt made them equal
>>
>>60812745
50,000 - 300,000 defensive uses each year, compared to an average of 13,000 gun homicides. Feel free to check the FBI's crime statistics and the CDC's measures on defensive firearm usage
>>
>>60812739
I mean if he walks into a store and doesn't immediately start shooting it up, it's a safe bet that he doesn't want to kill everyone. But I guess subtle societal clues like that escape your autistic ass.

>peace with north korea
I weren't aware that you were at war.
>lowing the labor supply by getting rid of illegals, thereby increasing the demand and therefore pay for legal workers
if you think that's how it works, then you are really naive. They are just going to replace the illegal immigarnts with legal immigrants, who are willing to work for the same amount, so the pay will be the same.
>not paying extra to be Europe's military which they don't want or need
Did he decrease military founding? No, he just imposed tariffs, driving the price of steel and shit up, causing production costs to go up, causing consumer prices to go up, which fucks you.
>>
>>60812507
Yea you're a fucking retard. I'd rather give my wallet than risk a knife fight with a druggie as It's less of a risk to my life and costs less than the medical fees.

Seriously, it's relying on the assumption that the guy thinks you will initiate a knife fight which majority wouldn't have the balls to do.

Also a gun DOES defend you against a determined attacker with a knife whilst Tazer and Pepper spray do you jack shit against an undetermined guy with a gun.
>>
>>60808744
>americans still believe they will oppose the tyranical government.
>americans still believe the tyranical government will be an external threat.
>americans still believe that resisting won't involve hiding from your neighboors.
>americans still believe tyranical governments are hated by their people.

I hope the fire-bombings will be better teachers than european history ever was. Maybe this time it will stick.
>>
>>60812826
>I weren't aware that you were at war.
Technically they were. The Korean war never ended until recently, just had a prolonged ceasefire. Of course the news was quick to spin it from Trump being on the brink of nuclear war to being hitler for sitting down for diplomacy with a dictator.

>if you think that's how it works
That is how it works, because it's basic supply and demand. Less people means that a business can't fire someone and hire someone cheaper as easily, and that goes regardless of legal status. Illegals nust make,it worse by working for below minimum wage

>No, he just imposed tariffs,

Right. The tariffs that everyone else is allowed to have on us, but if we do it it's bad.
>>
>>60812519
you need to go back
>>
>>60812661
how it disproves my point that armed populace doesn't stop tyranny?
>>
>>60812676
Trump is an upgrade over his predecessors.
If you wanted to shoot up the white house, the time to do it would have been when Obama started drone striking US citizens.

Besides it's not the White House that should be the target since Presidents tend to have short terms, it's the Congress who passes the harmful legislation that won't expire.

Presidents are ultimately expendable.
>>
>>60809451
Well, it ignores the fact that insurgencies and occupations are completely different matters, than rxistential threads are things that don't zap the willingness of the participants as fast as far away conflicts, and that while the "tanks and helicopters" part is true, it completely misses the point of the argument which is "government stomps on noisy troublemaker".

Because the government is also the people. And if the government is tyrannical, cletus over there with the howitzer has a 50/50 chance of being your resistance companion, or your impromptu executioner.
>>
>>60810174
I fucking love science!
>>
>>60812813
According to the FBI the figures are approx. 13000 gun homicides and about 300 justified gun homicides. Seems like you are off by about three orders of magnitude on one of those figures, Anon.
>>
>>60812979
Firearm defenses aren't always shooting the person. The CDC includes things such as scaring the person off or keeping them in place until the police can arrive to make an arrest
>>
>>60811448
How in the hell would you ever know? I’ve got thousands of rounds bought years ago. I could easily supply a company of riflemen with a basic combat load.

My grandchildren will still have ammo.
>>
>>60812857
>I'd rather give my wallet than risk a knife fight with a druggie as It's less of a risk to my life and costs less than the medical fees.
I have advocated handing over your wallet (or jewgold as I have taken to calling it) as a first reaction to being robbed in this very thread, glad that we agree. What I am talking about here is if the attacker wants to kill you, or would like to do something to you that you consider worse (for example rape, YMMV).

>Seriously, it's relying on the assumption that the guy thinks you will initiate a knife fight which majority wouldn't have the balls to do.
Well, yes, I'm advocating you grow some balls.

>Also a gun DOES defend you against a determined attacker with a knife whilst Tazer and Pepper spray do you jack shit against an undetermined guy with a gun.
While the first part is true, I imagine having your eyes peppersprayed would throw off your aim somewhat. I mean I'm not an expert but I don't think you are very likely to be mugged at a range where you can't get close enough to your attacker while pretending to search your bag or something.
>>
>>60812930
Why would you stop a dictator when the alternative it replaced was so much worse?
Sure, they were tyrannical in their purging of undesirables, but at the same time the Communists had earned the ire of the people.

The Government might be oppressive towards freedom of speech, religion and thought, but it had a common goal and enemy with the German people and that alone dissuaded the need for a violent revolt.

Especially since being a rebel would brand you a communist. Germany saw great growth and increase in prosperity under Hitler. Few would risk returning to old days with revolt, especially since Germany used to be a monarchy anyhow and concept of anarchism was reviled by many conservatives.
>>
>>60813110
somewhere a black man is planning a family with his young white wife
>>
>>60813129
Yes, domestic abuse is a serious issue
>>
>>60812914
No, I mean the US and North Korea. If you are talking about the peace between North and South Korea, then China had at least as big if not a bigger effect on that than Trump.

>That is how it works, because it's basic supply and demand. Less people means that a business can't fire someone and hire someone cheaper as easily, and that goes regardless of legal status. Illegals nust make,it worse by working for below minimum wage
It is supply and demand, but the supply will still be way larger than the demand if illegal immigration ceases completely. You don't get "less people", because you are basically recruiting from the global job market anyway.

>The tariffs that everyone else is allowed to have on us, but if we do it it's bad.
It's not that you cannot have them, it's that you are fucking your own economy with them.
>>
>>60813095
>Grow some balls and get yourself maimed in a knife fight instead of using a gun.
Meaningless bravado.

Also, yea getting pepper sprayed would throw your aim off once it exceeds your pain treshold, but you still can empty a magazinr before the spraying person runs away.
>>
>>60813110
>Why would you stop a dictator when the alternative it replaced was so much worse?
are you implying weimar government was worse than nazis?
>The Government might be oppressive towards freedom of speech, religion and thought, but it had a common goal and enemy with the German people and that alone dissuaded the need for a violent revolt.
>Germany saw great growth and increase in prosperity under Hitler.
Literal Nazi propaganda.
>>
>>60813038
And you can't do that with a knife?
>>
File: rainbow_1437634c.jpg (57 KB, 460x288)
57 KB
57 KB JPG
>>60813149
It is, but not with these guys
>>
Pol is invading us. We must do something.

Then again I'm fairly new here, so what do I know over the new ways? Perhaps it is better this way. Perhaps we can make things worth remembering as we discuss politics, instead of worldbuild or skim on the realms of d for a while.

Have fun, I have other pages to lurk in. Maybe co is better this time of the year?
>>
>>60813155
>but the supply will still be way larger than the demand if illegal immigration ceases completely

It's a step in the right direction. Hopefully it will allow for a more open conversation on just how we should handle all immigration to improve living conditions
>>
>>60813197
Dude the thread is autosaging for about a hundred posts now, we did what we could and removed it as soon as we could.
>>
>>60813155
Illegals work below minimum wage. Getting rid of illegals either increases employment or makes the competition in the market more fair.

Logic of relying Illegal Immigrants is idiotic in the first place. If you're only willing to pay a pittance for people to produce your goods, why don't you just bring back imperialism and form sweatshop colonies?
>>
>>60813204
>Hopefully it will allow for a more open conversation on just how we should handle all immigration to improve living conditions
That's very naive of you.
>>
>>60813173
Surprisingly, people are more afraid of guns and are easier to scare or subdue with them. Trying to hold someone at knifepoint isn't as reliable as gunpoint, and pumping a shotgun from behind a door is more effective than telling them you have a knife.

If knives are such a supreme weapon, maybe we should bannthose instead of guns?
>>
>>60813245
Believe me plenty of legals would be willing to work below minimum wage as well, if they didn't have a choice. And a lot of people don't.
>>
>>60813246
Yes. For some reason a lot of people have the silly idea that we can shove a billion extra people into the borders of the US and pay them 15$ an hour and that will be morally right and have no downsides.

Hopefully reality will sink in sooner rather than later
>>
>>60813256
I mean nobody argues that guns aren't more effective. But are they that much more effective as to offset the damage they cause?
>>
>>60813245
Changing their legal status such that they fall under the Fair Labor Standards would do that too.
>>
>>60808246
>putting the power of legal violence where it can be affected by checks and balances
You realize that putting guns in the hands of civilians IS the checks and balances right? There's nothing stopping the military from taking over otherwise.
>>
>>60813172
German standards of living improved while Hitler was ruling Germany.
This much is a fact.
Germany conquered much territory under Hitler's rule.
This much is a fact.
German standards of living and public order were shit under Weimar.
This much is a fact.

It doesn't take much to spin that into a positive image you retard. Like if Trump banned all guns, but conquered the solar system for America, people who like winning would still put up with him despite disagreements.

Especially if there's a sense of shared destiny.
>>
>>60813295
I mean it will have downsides, but if it is morally right is still up in the air. The question is can the US take those downsides, without flipping over financially. If it does, then accepting those immigrants isn't morally right.
>>
>>60813314
Yes, because while this may be hard to swallow, 13,000 really isn't that many people. There's 300,000,000 people in this country.

A lot of those homicides are also involves in things such as gang violence. Personally, I don't think trying to lower that number is worth risking the safety of all the people who legally use guns to protect themselves in larger numbers still. Especially when the alternative is making physical fitness and combat training requirements to the fundamental right of self defense and life.

If innocenr life is worth protecting, then people should be allowed to protect it.
>>
>>60813347
Genocide and ruinous war are pretty big negatives.
>>
>>60813322
It is very ineffective in that regard. Also the rest of the world is not being taken over by the military also, so I guess it's neither effective nor indispensable.
>>
>>60813347
>German standards of living improved while Hitler was ruling Germany.
I guess Russian soldiers raping your women is the pinnacle of living standards, eh?
>Germany conquered much territory under Hitler's rule.
It also lost it pretty quickly.
>German standards of living and public order were shit under Weimar.
Not as shit as thy were after the cities got bombed. Again.
>>
>>60813422
>It is very ineffective in that regard.

A civil war in the US would basically mean the death of it as a world power. Thus, it is an effecrive deterrent. And no, bombing everything doesn't win a war. It didnt work in Vietnam. It didnt work in the Middle East. It won't work when your non-robot soldiers go AWOL to protect their family and there are more guns than people.

I'm not saying we'd win. I'm saying that whoever ordered it loses.
>>
>>60813370
>Yes, because while this may be hard to swallow, 13,000 really isn't that many people. There's 300,000,000 people in this country.
And yet it is still more per capita than other first world countries.
>Especially when the alternative is making physical fitness and combat training requirements to the fundamental right of self defense and life.
>I'm a little piece of shit who doesn't want to work out to literally save my life
ok.
>If innocenr life is worth protecting, then people should be allowed to protect it.
You are allowed to protect it. With your two hands and feet. You are not allowed to be a lazy shit about protecting it.
>>
>>60813474
>A civil war in the US would basically mean the death of it as a world power.
You know this is the exact reason it is not working as checks and balances. Because if your government is literally one step better than living in a literal wartorn hellscape, you won't do shit against it for the fear of turning the country into one.
>>
>>60813508
>And yet it is still more per capita than other first world countries.

And it'll probably stay that way until we can do something about the 10% of the population that's doubling the crime rate. Other First world countries don't have to deal with that

>y-you're lazy

Free speech doesnt become less of a right just because it's easier to shitpost on the internet than yell in the town square.
>>
>>60813592
>Free speech doesnt become less of a right just because it's easier to shitpost on the internet than yell in the town square.
Conversely banning you from shitposting on the internet is not taking away your right to free speech. You can still yell on the town square.
>>
>>60813689
Also conversely, it'd be pretty shitty to ban everyone everywhere from posting online while telling them to stop being lazy.
>>
>>60813746
I don't think anyone is arguing that everyone needs to be banned from doing shit everywhere. But the internet would probably be a better place if you had to have actual qualifications to post. (I wanted to write journalist qualifications, but those are a joke, so there you go.)
>>
>>60813828
In an ideal world maybe, but that leads to a great deal of potential abuse depending on who decides who's qualified. It'd be pretty easy for someone to decide that only people who agree with them are qualified
>>
>>60813904
I mean you could either get an independent assemby to do it, or you could get multiple alternative ways, but have each of those be reasonably on the same level. Hell maybe even go full Switzerland and have everybody who is not physically of mentally incapable go through the education. The thing is to put the idea into everyone's head that you should only post to help your fellow man.
>>
>>60814041
Mandatory school courses and education would be good, but I still don't think it should be a requirement. Again, it would be possible to make any sort of examine so esoteric that nobody can pass.

The purpose behind schooling would be better served to teach them responsibility, rather than test to see if they should be allowed basic rights
>>
File: 1531399202138.png (804 KB, 1280x1150)
804 KB
804 KB PNG
>>60808246
>preventing totally preventable deaths is totally not good
Fun fact, not a single country has actually had their homicide rate reduced as a result of gun control. Britain tried it, they failed, Australia tried it, they also failed, even America tried it and we failed.
>>
>>60814156
Not a test or an exam, an education.
>>
>>60814474
Source? (Especially the last one.)
>>
>>60814528
The last one you kinda have to do on a state to state, hell, maybe even on a city to city level cause each state has their own laws regarding gun ownership. Chicago has some pretty damn strict gun laws but it has not changed the amount of violent crime in the city one iota, and guns are still found in the hands of many of the inner city gangs essentially making the laws a failure.




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.