2nd Amendment Discussion

  • @jak Your “closer to 2/3” figure is quite correct. Even the New York Times had to acknowledge that: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html

  • If you don’t believe the “progressive left” want to take your guns, think again. They want to stop school marksmanship programs even if it’s just air rifles or archery to prevent spreading the “gun culture”. Archery? Now what in the world does archery have to do with this so-called “gun culture”? See this: http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/11/new-york-linda-rosenthal-shooting-sports-spreads-gun-culture/

  • Boothe my man, I have to somewhat disagree with the Dems being consistent over time. Have they been consistently evil over time? Sure. The Repubs have been consistently milquetoast-evil over the same time period. Both of them more from successful exploitation of the political ecosystem than principled adherence to some kind of demonic DNA.

    It is easy to see a consistency and say, “ah! it’s been the same thing all along.” How easy is it to create a multi-generational conspiracy? It’s a bit like the Federal Reserve Bank. It couldn’t have been designed in order to enslave the world into debt over a hundred and fifty years. The people who started it did not care about their great-great-great grandchildren ruling the world. They just set something into motion that affected the next ten years, they were replaced by people who had their eyes on the subsequent ten years, and so on. The systems inhabit niches and attempt to expand them. The consistency is more due to a relatively-stable social energy dynamic over the observed time period. Institutional memory, not constitutional memory.

    All in all, if the Democrats of today were suddenly replaced with the Democrats of a hundred years ago, I’d probably vote for them – but they’d have to bring their own spittoons.

  • @ransom If I came across as thinking that the Democ-Rats were consistent over a long time-line, let me clarify. We have actually seen the D and R sides of this WWE style staged political cage fight flip sides. It was, arguably, the Democ-Rats that wanted to keep slavery intact and the Rethuglicans that wanted to free the slaves (not really, but it was good PR to keep the French and English out of the war). There is credible historical evidence that Lincoln supported socialism and especially National Socialism. There’s no doubt that “Honest Abe” was a Henry Clay whig. Here’s what that means: https://mises.org/library/henry-clay-national-socialist

  • @boothe don’t forget teddy the og progressive

  • @boothe Huh, Henry Clay. Sounds like a scoundrel.

    This is what I hate about history. The only truly effective way to understand history is to completely understand all 200+ billion humans who have ever lived. Anything less is a low-fidelity approximation.

    The Mises article on Clay was interesting, but it said he backed a sort of national socialism. Their article on Natsoc (https://mises.org/library/national-socialism) covered new ground for me. I don’t really see how Clay was any sort of Natsockist though. Let alone that Natsoc hadn’t been formally defined until the 1900s (though anyone can hold the beliefs before the theory is laid out), the article makes Clay seems more like a manic plutocrat than a principled Natsockdrawer.

    Anyway, screw Lincoln. I don’t see why it’s so important to like him. That’s the trouble with fame; legacy becomes a tool to use rather than something actually left behind.

    @Iattacku Yeah, the Tedster. I do kind of like him though, if only because he actually dove into the chaos he created instead of standing back and turning other men’s blood into money. I don’t agree with his beliefs but at least he seemed sincere for the most part.

    It’s funny. He is generally a hero to the left but if he came forward in time and opened his mouth they would all pass out from psychic anguish. That’s probably true about a lot of the people I admire as well.

  • @ransom yea i im the same as you. I like him as a person and all the cool stuff he did but i dont agree with all his political beliefs. And you are right unlike most modern politicians Teddy wasn’t a pussy.

  • @ransom and true about the history thing. Humans and human society is rarely black and white and there are motivations upon motivations in any movement, group, etc.

  • @iattacku said in 2nd Amendment Discussion:

    @ransom and true about the history thing. Humans and human society is rarely black and white and there are motivations upon motivations in any movement, group, etc.

    Yeah. There is so much going on that people can draw out pretty much whatever narrative suits their purpose, consciously or not.

  • @ransom One thing that I do to filter the noise is to read what the historical figure said and wrote. As in the case of Lincoln, you can read his words and draw your own conclusions. Something I have learned over the years is this: When a man tells you who he is, believe him.

  • @boothe Heh, to a point.

    On the one hand you have Jesus. On the other, Nero. Both claimed to be God.

    I don’t know that Jesus had any stringed instrument experience though.

  • @ransom Maybe you took my statement “When a man tells you who he is, believe him.” a bit too literally, LOL. In Yeshua’s (Jesus) case, He claimed to be the son of man. I would refer you to Mark 10:18 “And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.” Nero on the other hand…

  • @boothe that is another good topic for the religion forum. The vast majority of Christians believes that Jesus is God but from reading the gospels anytime someone compares Jesus to God he is quick to point out that God is greater than him . He also pointed out that only the father knows when the second coming will happen not him

  • @iattacku Yes, I know. The truth doesn’t seem to sell very well with the masses or the hierarchy when it comes to religion or politics. I’ve met pacifist “Christians” over the years that sound like left wing liberals when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. They fail to understand that carrying a sword (Luke 22:36) or its modern equivalent, the defensive handgun, promotes peace and order in the community. When you are a hard target you are less likely to be attacked or robbed. In the event that it happens anyway you are more likely to survive and even thwart the act of aggression.

    When the criminal element has reason to believe they will be injured or killed there is less likelihood they will commit the crime to begin with. Heinlein’s admonition (which is certainly an over-simplification) that “An armed society is a polite society” has a certain amount of timeless truth in it. Those who would forcibly take that which does not belong to them tend to think twice before attacking those who are or may credibly be armed. Those who do it anyway end up being run off, held for the police or shot by armed citizens over 2.5 million times a year in the United States. Gee, I wonder why the “progressive left” strives so hard to keep that data buried?

  • Aurora: AR-15
    Orlando: AR-15
    Parkland: AR-15
    Las Vegas: AR-15
    Sandy Hook: AR-15
    Umpqua CC: AR-15
    Waffle House: AR-15
    Texas Church: AR-15
    San Bernardino: AR-15
    Santa Fe High School: AR-15

  • the number of school shootings that have happened since the year 2000 around the world:

    ENGLAND: 0
    GREECE: 1
    SPAIN: 1
    INDIA: 1
    RUSSIA: 1
    CHINA: 3
    MEXICO: 4
    CANADA: 5
    GERMANY: 5
    USA: 213

  • @jammyjaybird more people still die from hand guns and bare hands than ar 15s

  • @iattacku murder is sadly a part of human life – BUT we can at least make it hard for lunatics to murder large groups of strangers. AR-15s have no place in civilian life.

  • @jammyjaybird You are, of course, cherry picking and oversimplifying statistics to fit your narrative. Based on death and injury statistics, get back to us once you ban cell phones: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/03/gun_control_nope_teenagers_need_cell_phone_control.html

    This isn’t England, Australia, Mexico (we’ll get back to Mexico) or Europe. How about France? France is listed by gunpolicy.org as a restrictive nation for private gun ownership (Source: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/france). Neighboring Belgium is also a restrictive nation (Source: http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/belgium). In 2015 alone there were more mass shooting casualties in France there than there were in the United States during the entire time Obama was in office (Source: https://crimeresearch.org/2017/02/france-suffered-more-casualties-murders-and-injuries-from-mass-public-shootings-in-2015-than-the-us-has-suffered-during-obamas-entire-presidency-508-to-424-2/). Where did many of the guns come from? Belgium. And they weren’t semi-auto “assault weapons” (which is a made up term by the media to sound scary). No, the perpetrators used fully automatic assault rifles. Which were illegal. There was no one armed that could immediately respond. Not even the police. That’s gun control in action for you. Compare that with the man who stopped the church shooting in Sutherland Springs, TX with an AR-15: https://www.truthrevolt.org/news/reminder-former-nra-instructor-armed-ar-15-stopped-tx-church-shooting

    So let’s look at Europe’s statistics versus the United States: https://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/ If you like foreign countries’ gun control policies then move to a foreign country. Otherwise you will have to tolerate our Second Amendment and our so-called “gun culture” because despite all the left wing histrionics to the contrary, we are not giving up our guns. Fun fact: the NRA has now topped six million members! Keep up the good work recruiting Emma Gonzalez, David Hogg and every other leftist out there!

Log in to reply

Looks like your connection to A Kings Castle was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.