Welcome to Gaia! ::

Omnileech
Christien Chalfant
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.


You can buy, own, and sell guns in Illinois.

The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15.

That's not "gun free"


Most of the guns are bought out in the Suburbs or in Indiana or Mississippi, where Gun Laws are lax. People see them to street gangs in the city, and claim they were stolen, according to police informants.

Gun trafficking in the city is big, made easy by the lax laws of neighboring states.
Reluctant Samurai
deadroosters
Reluctant Samurai
Michael Noire
Reluctant Samurai
I just don't understand why people think background checks and similar measures are "OMG DISARMING THE PEOPLE" and will inevitably lead to "OBAMA HITLER NEW WORLD ORDER TYRANNICAL POLICE STATE".


Because they will. It is a tautology. You just don't know it.


No. The slippery slope fallacy doesn't work against gay marriage and it doesn't work against this.

Even with people being required to have driver's licenses, no one has had their car seized by the government for getting too many tickets.

For the record, I'm very pro-gun. I love my guns. And no, no one can have them. But that doesn't mean that I can't think that hey, maybe background checks make sense.

Some slopes are actually slippery. For instance, the national security slope.


No, they're not.

There are cases of one thing following another, in a logical sequence governed by myriad factors. There is no such thing as a single event irrevocably leading to single outcome when so many factors contribute to any one thing happening in the first place.

To say that gun registration is the ironclad precursor to say, unlawful or tyrannical seizure is a fallacy unsupported by other facts.

If however, at one point, the American government had instituted a massive gun registration program shortly before seizing everyone's s**t, that would be a source, something to point to that says 'oh s**t, this could happen'.

Then again, I am still at a loss as to why people with guns b***h about this. I've said it before, if they make you register your guns, fine.

If they come to take them, ******** SHOOT THEM. You get to have what you've always wanted. A death in defense of freedom.

Personally, I can't ******** wait.

They really have it coming, though.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

13,000 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Tested Practitioner 250
Wendigo
Xiam
In addition, you have Poe's law, which basically means it's impossible to determine if people are actual racists, homophobes, misogynists, et al., and if they are simply pretending to be "for the lulz."
Given that, I tend to disapprove of doing things "for the lulz," myself, since the end result is roughly the same as if you were that person rather than just pretending.

Yeah, it's not really a good depiction of themselves, as far as morality is concerned.
Wendigo's avatar

Enduring Phantom

8,700 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Xiam
In addition, you have Poe's law, which basically means it's impossible to determine if people are actual racists, homophobes, misogynists, et al., and if they are simply pretending to be "for the lulz."
Given that, I tend to disapprove of doing things "for the lulz," myself, since the end result is roughly the same as if you were that person rather than just pretending.
Reluctant Samurai's avatar

Dangerous Genius

deadroosters
Reluctant Samurai
Michael Noire
Reluctant Samurai
I just don't understand why people think background checks and similar measures are "OMG DISARMING THE PEOPLE" and will inevitably lead to "OBAMA HITLER NEW WORLD ORDER TYRANNICAL POLICE STATE".


Because they will. It is a tautology. You just don't know it.


No. The slippery slope fallacy doesn't work against gay marriage and it doesn't work against this.

Even with people being required to have driver's licenses, no one has had their car seized by the government for getting too many tickets.

For the record, I'm very pro-gun. I love my guns. And no, no one can have them. But that doesn't mean that I can't think that hey, maybe background checks make sense.

Some slopes are actually slippery. For instance, the national security slope.


No, they're not.

There are cases of one thing following another, in a logical sequence governed by myriad factors. There is no such thing as a single event irrevocably leading to single outcome when so many factors contribute to any one thing happening in the first place.

To say that gun registration is the ironclad precursor to say, unlawful or tyrannical seizure is a fallacy unsupported by other facts.

If however, at one point, the American government had instituted a massive gun registration program shortly before seizing everyone's s**t, that would be a source, something to point to that says 'oh s**t, this could happen'.

Then again, I am still at a loss as to why people with guns b***h about this. I've said it before, if they make you register your guns, fine.

If they come to take them, ******** SHOOT THEM. You get to have what you've always wanted. A death in defense of freedom.

Personally, I can't ******** wait.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

13,000 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Tested Practitioner 250
Wendigo
Xiam

Wait, did you just call Anonymous a "white supremacist group"?

You do realize that anybody can be "Anonymous," right?
Including folks who take the stuff about niggers, faggots and cumdumpsters to which she refers entirely seriously, btw. That's the thing about big tents; there are no standards.

Right. But again... there's also no telling who's who.

The real issue behind "Anonymous" is that it's a filter through which even completely normal people can just be total assholes. In addition, you have Poe's law, which basically means it's impossible to determine if people are actual racists, homophobes, misogynists, et al., and if they are simply pretending to be "for the lulz."
Wendigo's avatar

Enduring Phantom

8,700 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Super Tipsy 200
Xiam

Wait, did you just call Anonymous a "white supremacist group"?

You do realize that anybody can be "Anonymous," right?
Including folks who take the stuff about niggers, faggots and cumdumpsters to which she refers entirely seriously, btw. That's the thing about big tents; there are no standards.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

13,000 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Tested Practitioner 250
GunsmithKitten
Xiam

Wait, did you just call Anonymous a "white supremacist group"?


You bet your a** I did.

Quote:
You do realize that anybody can be "Anonymous," right?


No, not anybody can. Hence why there's rules and codes of conduct.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, seriously?

It's really not just a single group. Hell, it's barely a group. I could go onto 4chan and converse with "Anonymous" all day.

Any idiot could do something horrible, do it anonymously, then call in to the police or something and calling themselves "Anonymous," and then everybody will think Anonymous did it. That's the truly terrifying thing about this.

There are no leaders, there are no "rules" or "codes of conduct." There is only the lack of a name. You can have certain people who follow rules and codes of conduct, but there is seriously no ******** membership required.

So really, it could be good or bad, depending on how people choose to use their anonymity. Like superheroes vs. supervillains. Except you can usually identify a single superhero by the costume and superpowers.
GunsmithKitten's avatar

Aged Lunatic

Xiam

Wait, did you just call Anonymous a "white supremacist group"?


You bet your a** I did.

Quote:
You do realize that anybody can be "Anonymous," right?


No, not anybody can. Hence why there's rules and codes of conduct.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

13,000 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Tested Practitioner 250
Wendigo
And Hitler didn't disarm the ******** German people, you ******** morons.

Yeah. If anything, he gave them weapons, and told them to follow him to glory and blah blah blah, that kind of thing.

Theeen he started having those people round up the cripples, gays, and non-Aryans.
GunsmithKitten
A white supremacist group doesn't like Obama. STOP THE MUTHA ******** PRESSES!

stare

Wait, did you just call Anonymous a "white supremacist group"?

You do realize that anybody can be "Anonymous," right? They just hide their name and use the tag "Anonymous," which basically means "without name."

Prior to the Scientology issue, Anonymous (from the Internet perspective) only did s**t "for the lulz." Then they got together and started being political activists because, really, Scientology is ******** loopy.

But then of course the "original Anonymous" started calling that Anonymous some kind of false Anonymous, and now we really have any number of groups of people calling themselves Anonymous, and you really can't tell the difference between one another or discern who is doing what, because they're [******** anonymous.

Holy s**t, why am I only responding to the first page?

deadroosters
Omnileech
There are other states with similar gun control policies and their metropolitan centers have less violent crime than Chicago.

Probably for unrelated reasons.

My guess? Canadians.
Omnileech
Christien Chalfant
Omnileech
Christien Chalfant
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.


You can buy, own, and sell guns in Illinois.

The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15.

That's not "gun free"


HA! Please. I know it's not free of guns. It's filthy with guns. It is called a 'Gun Free Zone' due to all of the legislation meant to restrict gun use. Almost any War Zone is safer than Chicago.
Really. It's not my personal term, I'm merely using it, just as I am with the rest of these words.


There are other states with similar gun control policies and their metropolitan centers have less violent crime than Chicago.

Probably for unrelated reasons.
Omnileech's avatar

Omnipresent Warlord

Christien Chalfant
Omnileech
Christien Chalfant
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.


You can buy, own, and sell guns in Illinois.

The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15.

That's not "gun free"


HA! Please. I know it's not free of guns. It's filthy with guns. It is called a 'Gun Free Zone' due to all of the legislation meant to restrict gun use. Almost any War Zone is safer than Chicago.
Really. It's not my personal term, I'm merely using it, just as I am with the rest of these words.


There are other states with similar gun control policies and their metropolitan centers have less violent crime than Chicago.
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,650 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Omnileech
Christien Chalfant
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.


You can buy, own, and sell guns in Illinois.

The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15.

That's not "gun free"


HA! Please. I know it's not free of guns. It's filthy with guns. It is called a 'Gun Free Zone' due to all of the legislation meant to restrict gun use. Almost any War Zone is safer than Chicago.
Really. It's not my personal term, I'm merely using it, just as I am with the rest of these words.
Omnileech's avatar

Omnipresent Warlord

Christien Chalfant
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.


You can buy, own, and sell guns in Illinois.

The city of Chicago requires registration of firearms. Residents must complete a firearm safety course, pass a background check including fingerprinting, and pay a $100 permit fee which is renewed every three years. Registration of any handgun assumes an additional one time fee of $15.

That's not "gun free"
Christien Chalfant 's avatar

Fashionable Capitalist

7,650 Points
  • Wall Street 200
  • Consumer 100
  • Profitable 100
Wendigo
Christien Chalfant
Because laws are broken. Laws say don't murder people, it happens anyways.
Wouldn't appear to be a relevant concept; most people do abide by the law when and where they can, to avoid being punished for being caught breaking it. That's the case in Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, or Soviet Russia as well as anywhere else. Moreso, even, since the punishment tends to come down harsher and more immediately, sometimes more arbitrarily.

Of course, in the case of the Weimar gun ban, the main form of disobedience wouldn't seem to be selling guns to people too young to buy them, but rather failing to surrender guns when the law said to do so. Or so I've read here and there.


You could say that, but it's all situational.
Chicago, Illinois is a "Gun Free Zone." Yet many are breaking the law and acquiring a gun. Shooting the gun. Shooting people with the gun.
Disobedience in keeping your property (guns, in this case) when the gov't says you have to hand it over is theft. So I would like to believe that most people kept their guns hidden away in some form or another so they could keep them. But I have no knowledge on this Weimar Gun Ban and so I have not looked into it at all. That's just my opinion.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games