Why Are Lefties Against Guns, Secure Borders, etc?

[pockybot]

I don't get my fellow liberals. They talk about violent crimes happening to women, yet seem to not be too keen on the right to own firearms. I was actually surprised to see Obama and Biden really run with proposed new gun bans in the works, or at least looking at it.
Shouldnt it be liberals who are for gun rights?

And then, forget the war on invisible phantom jihadists. Ranchers with cameras have shown video evidence of countless ak-47 armed drug smugglers flood into the border states, criss crossing back and forth hawking their poison. Why the heck wouldnt liberals support having an undeniably strong border? It's nigh time.

And then this virulent hatred of anyone who warns of communism/totalitarian socialism.
Im a lifelong liberal and I KNOW communism is bad. Even if its not mass murderers like Mao, Stalin, etc. its a total controlled nanny state that goes against the individual.

Liberals support Obama blowing up Muslims to smithereens with drones, which to me is not very liberal. But then they dont support things that just make sense.

[Sen Natsu]

Why is the right trumping up "DEY GUNNA TAKE ARE GANZ" and pushing the buzzword 'gun grabbers", while ignoring that (as far as I know) the only thing people are pushing for is psych evaluations for purchases and keeping military arms in military?

Also speaking of buzzwords, I might as well get us started.
Liberals gun grabbers obongo drums alex jones OWS liberals 1776 deport deport deport hurrrr

[Disa Uniflora]

Because, between the massive border protection wall, the armed guards roaming every school and eventually -if you follow the logic- anywhere else gun violence can happen, and the rigourously maintained super-database of what we're speciously and broadly referring to as the mentally ill, the world you propose looks a lot like a police state, but you're so ******** stupid that you can't even see it. You retards get so caught up in freaking out over one issue or another that in the frenzy you can't see that you're making your country an utter shithole in your efforts to drive in the other direction, because massive databases of citizens and armed posses patrolling around children can only look sensible to people who are already so terrified that the lunacy of their own proposals simply fail to register.

1. The logic of gun control advocates is not to set the groundwork for tyranny but based on a different view of how to get to a safer world, and though I actually don't think gun control will ever work in America, I do think a world without guns is definitely the superior to a world where everyone has guns. In the world of Gun Controlia, people feel safe because they believe that there are less people out there who are capable of harming them. In the world of Gun-in-every-home-ia, people feel safer because they believe they can defend themselves against the horrible world armed criminals lurking behind every corner. In both people presumably feel safe, but Gun Controlia is conceptually superior because there is an overall lesser object of fear and because in a world governed by laws, an armed populace prepared to defend itself is a hornet's nest of criminal charges just waiting to happen as a result of unjustifiable use of force. You can argue all you want against that view of Gun Controlia too but I'm not going to bother with that because I live in it, and it's plainly superior. Gun control advocates are not Nazis or Communists and they don't want you to be raped or murdered. They want to emulate societies elsewhere that they perceive to be safer and happier than yours. Their goals are ultimately positive ones, just as I'm sure many staunch advocates of the 2nd amendment are pure in their motives as well. Stop with the bullshit.

2. Maybe they think violent crime against women wouldn't happen so much or be so easy if the perpetrators were less likely to be armed with guns. You know, having a gun in your home doesn't help you against spousal abuse, right? Unless you're advocating concealed carry 24/7, so that if your husband so much as twitches the wrong way you can pull a glock out from under your apron and put two bullets in him? People who think guns make people safer live in this fantasy world where they're all action heroes and can take down anyone who gets the drop on them and nobody ever does anything irresponsible with said guns.

2. I support ending the War on Drugs in part because I think it'll hit drug cartels harder than the Mexican army ever could and because it's actually profitable, while sinking enormous amounts of money down that gigantic ******** pit AND building a massive border wall at the same time in any world, especially this one where your country can't ******** afford it, is an enormously stupid idea. I also support thoroughly reforming your immigration policy, another thing that's smarter than gigantic ******** walls.

3. Hey, Liberal here. I don't support blowing Muslims to smithereens, with drones or without.

Anyways, that's all I've got to say.

[Testament of Death]

pockybot

I don't get my fellow liberals. They talk about violent crimes happening to women, yet seem to not be too keen on the right to own firearms. I was actually surprised to see Obama and Biden really run with proposed new gun bans in the works, or at least looking at it.
Shouldnt it be liberals who are for gun rights?

And then, forget the war on invisible phantom jihadists. Ranchers with cameras have shown video evidence of countless ak-47 armed drug smugglers flood into the border states, criss crossing back and forth hawking their poison. Why the heck wouldnt liberals support having an undeniably strong border? It's nigh time.

And then this virulent hatred of anyone who warns of communism/totalitarian socialism.
Im a lifelong liberal and I KNOW communism is bad. Even if its not mass murderers like Mao, Stalin, etc. its a total controlled nanny state that goes against the individual.

Liberals support Obama blowing up Muslims to smithereens with drones, which to me is not very liberal. But then they dont support things that just make sense.

You like conspiracy theories, right?
Think of it like this. Obama and others actually want us to have guns and support the Second Amendment. But they think that the populous has gotten too complacent and lazy in fighting for their own rights. So they start banning things left and right, start taking away freedoms. And it stirs up a hornet's nest that is willing to fight for their rights.

That's what I would do. I'd remind people just what they have to loose. Maybe then they'd enjoy it more instead of take it for granted.

[Lychee Bae]

Testament of Death

pockybot

I don't get my fellow liberals. They talk about violent crimes happening to women, yet seem to not be too keen on the right to own firearms. I was actually surprised to see Obama and Biden really run with proposed new gun bans in the works, or at least looking at it.
Shouldnt it be liberals who are for gun rights?

And then, forget the war on invisible phantom jihadists. Ranchers with cameras have shown video evidence of countless ak-47 armed drug smugglers flood into the border states, criss crossing back and forth hawking their poison. Why the heck wouldnt liberals support having an undeniably strong border? It's nigh time.

And then this virulent hatred of anyone who warns of communism/totalitarian socialism.
Im a lifelong liberal and I KNOW communism is bad. Even if its not mass murderers like Mao, Stalin, etc. its a total controlled nanny state that goes against the individual.

Liberals support Obama blowing up Muslims to smithereens with drones, which to me is not very liberal. But then they dont support things that just make sense.

You like conspiracy theories, right?
Think of it like this. Obama and others actually want us to have guns and support the Second Amendment. But they think that the populous has gotten too complacent and lazy in fighting for their own rights. So they start banning things left and right, start taking away freedoms. And it stirs up a hornet's nest that is willing to fight for their rights.

That's what I would do. I'd remind people just what they have to loose. Maybe then they'd enjoy it more instead of take it for granted.

I disagree with that theory. He has too many loyal followers to question him. imo.
Even if that theory was true it wouldn't make people realize the importance of the 2nd amendment.

[Wendigo]

I'm against "secure borders" because the people who say that just don't want Mexicans to immigrate, and don't have the balls to just say so and argue that on its own merits, because they know they'd lose.

[lmasdlkjasdoiajusdlknm]

Disa Uniflora

Because, between the massive border protection wall, the armed guards roaming every school and eventually -if you follow the logic- anywhere else gun violence can happen, and the rigourously maintained super-database of what we're speciously and broadly referring to as the mentally ill, the world you propose looks a lot like a police state, but you're so ******** stupid that you can't even see it. You retards get so caught up in freaking out over one issue or another that in the frenzy you can't see that you're making your country an utter shithole in your efforts to drive in the other direction, because massive databases of citizens and armed posses patrolling around children can only look sensible to people who are already so terrified that the lunacy of their own proposals simply fail to register.

1. The logic of gun control advocates is not to set the groundwork for tyranny but based on a different view of how to get to a safer world, and though I actually don't think gun control will ever work in America, I do think a world without guns is definitely the superior to a world where everyone has guns. In the world of Gun Controlia, people feel safe because they believe that there are less people out there who are capable of harming them. In the world of Gun-in-every-home-ia, people feel safer because they believe they can defend themselves against the horrible world armed criminals lurking behind every corner. In both people presumably feel safe, but Gun Controlia is conceptually superior because there is an overall lesser object of fear and because in a world governed by laws, an armed populace prepared to defend itself is a hornet's nest of criminal charges just waiting to happen as a result of unjustifiable use of force. You can argue all you want against that view of Gun Controlia too but I'm not going to bother with that because I live in it, and it's plainly superior. Gun control advocates are not Nazis or Communists and they don't want you to be raped or murdered. They want to emulate societies elsewhere that they perceive to be safer and happier than yours. Their goals are ultimately positive ones, just as I'm sure many staunch advocates of the 2nd amendment are pure in their motives as well. Stop with the bullshit.

2. Maybe they think violent crime against women wouldn't happen so much or be so easy if the perpetrators were less likely to be armed with guns. You know, having a gun in your home doesn't help you against spousal abuse, right? Unless you're advocating concealed carry 24/7, so that if your husband so much as twitches the wrong way you can pull a glock out from under your apron and put two bullets in him? People who think guns make people safer live in this fantasy world where they're all action heroes and can take down anyone who gets the drop on them and nobody ever does anything irresponsible with said guns.

2. I support ending the War on Drugs in part because I think it'll hit drug cartels harder than the Mexican army ever could and because it's actually profitable, while sinking enormous amounts of money down that gigantic ******** pit AND building a massive border wall at the same time in any world, especially this one where your country can't ******** afford it, is an enormously stupid idea. I also support thoroughly reforming your immigration policy, another thing that's smarter than gigantic ******** walls.

3. Hey, Liberal here. I don't support blowing Muslims to smithereens, with drones or without.

Anyways, that's all I've got to say.

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

[Ban]

A lot of local economies depend on migrant labor, and "secure borders" is just a shortsighted attempt to stem that migrant labor. What might require security, the whole drug thing you pointed out, would be more easily and cheaply solved by domestic solutions, such as a better drug policy and maybe not supplying Mexican cartels with 90% of the guns that they use. The black market for handguns, and semi-auto rifles easily convertible into fully-automatic weapons is fueled by U.S. manufacturing and gun stores.

[Disa Uniflora]

AnarchoPhiliac

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

You're here, aintcha? cool

[lmasdlkjasdoiajusdlknm]

Disa Uniflora

AnarchoPhiliac

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

You're here, aintcha? cool

We can begin by mocking America's rate of death by violence per 100k people?

http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CPOP/DBASSE_080393#violence

[Bortelex]

AnarchoPhiliac

Disa Uniflora

AnarchoPhiliac

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

You're here, aintcha? cool

We can begin by mocking America's rate of death by violence per 100k people?

http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CPOP/DBASSE_080393#violence

Your source works to undermine your attempt. Even though America has the highest deaths by violence, it has fewer deaths from self-inflicted injuries. It is deaths from self-inflicted injuries that makes up the bulk of deaths from intentional injuries. Japan has the lowest deaths by violence but more then makes up for it with the highest death from self-inflicted injuries. Putting Japan at the highest deaths by intentional injuries.

Also remember that the number of deaths by intentional injuries are only about a fifteenth of total deaths. If you were to argue that their cause makes them more preventable and therefore more important to address, then preventing deaths from self-inflicted injuries would save more lives world wide then only focusing on deaths from violence in America.

[lmasdlkjasdoiajusdlknm]

Bortelex

AnarchoPhiliac

Disa Uniflora

AnarchoPhiliac

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

You're here, aintcha? cool

We can begin by mocking America's rate of death by violence per 100k people?

http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CPOP/DBASSE_080393#violence

Your source works to undermine your attempt. Even though America has the highest deaths by violence, it has fewer deaths from self-inflicted injuries. It is deaths from self-inflicted injuries that makes up the bulk of deaths from intentional injuries. Japan has the lowest deaths by violence but more then makes up for it with the highest death from self-inflicted injuries. Putting Japan at the highest deaths by intentional injuries.

Also remember that the number of deaths by intentional injuries are only about a fifteenth of total deaths. If you were to argue that their cause makes them more preventable and therefore more important to address, then preventing deaths from self-inflicted injuries would save more lives world wide then only focusing on deaths from violence in America.

I don't see how people in Japan killing themselves has anything to do with death by violence in America. The two are different beasts. One being self-inflicted and the other being inflicted upon others, ridding them of their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Also, assuming that there has to be some correlation between the two is nuts. Less violent deaths does not mean more people killing themselves. If it were the case, then the two charts would largely be the direct inverse of one another.

As you can see, Finland was second place for most violent deaths per 100k as well as most self-inflicted deaths per 100k people. There were no spots being switched. They didn't go from second place to second last, nor did Spain vice versa. However, I bet you didn't see that, did you? You just saw America and Japan, thought "AMERICA ******** YEAH" instead of enrolling in even an introductory statistics course, and typed the textual equivalent of explosive diarrhea onto your screen before pressing "Submit".

Basically, you're wrong.

Don't be stupid with me again.

[GunsmithKitten]

Disa Uniflora

People who think guns make people safer live in this fantasy world where they're all action heroes and can take down anyone who gets the drop on them and nobody ever does anything irresponsible with said guns.

As much as i have zero respect for people who think that having a firearm does make them an action hero, tell me, when you consider that the police in this country can legally sit by and watch me get raped and murdered while not doing a thing, and even if they did, would take over an hour to respond to a call for aid, how much safer am I when another line of defense is taken from me?

[Bortelex]

AnarchoPhiliac

Bortelex

AnarchoPhiliac

Disa Uniflora

AnarchoPhiliac

You say the things I want to so I don't have to say the things I want to heart

Can we now derail this thread into a Canadian circlejerk?

You're here, aintcha? cool

We can begin by mocking America's rate of death by violence per 100k people?

http://sites.nationalacademies.org/DBASSE/CPOP/DBASSE_080393#violence

Your source works to undermine your attempt. Even though America has the highest deaths by violence, it has fewer deaths from self-inflicted injuries. It is deaths from self-inflicted injuries that makes up the bulk of deaths from intentional injuries. Japan has the lowest deaths by violence but more then makes up for it with the highest death from self-inflicted injuries. Putting Japan at the highest deaths by intentional injuries.

Also remember that the number of deaths by intentional injuries are only about a fifteenth of total deaths. If you were to argue that their cause makes them more preventable and therefore more important to address, then preventing deaths from self-inflicted injuries would save more lives world wide then only focusing on deaths from violence in America.

I don't see how people in Japan killing themselves has anything to do with death by violence in America. The two are different beasts. One being self-inflicted and the other being inflicted upon others, ridding them of their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Also, assuming that there has to be some correlation between the two is nuts. Less violent deaths does not mean more people killing themselves. If it were the case, then the two charts would largely be the direct inverse of one another.

As you can see, Finland was second place for most violent deaths per 100k as well as most self-inflicted deaths per 100k people. There were no spots being switched. They didn't go from second place to second last, nor did Spain vice versa. However, I bet you didn't see that, did you? You just saw America and Japan, thought "AMERICA ******** YEAH" instead of enrolling in even an introductory statistics course, and typed the textual equivalent of explosive diarrhea onto your screen before pressing "Submit".

Basically, you're wrong.

Don't be stupid with me again.

Actually my assessment was right, in fact more lives would be saved in America if we focus on preventing self-inflicted death rather then preventing death by violence, but you probably don't care about that. We should probably focus on both. Or since America is so far behind on violence it can focus on that and the other nations that have come much closer to solving it can focus on self-inflicted death.

I never said there was a correlation, I didn't say that America had the fewest self inflicted deaths. My statement was self-inflicted deaths are a greater portion of the deaths then deaths by violence. Therefore eliminating self-inflicted deaths would have a greater impact on the total number of deaths.

Let me put this into math for you:
17 - 10 = 7 17 - 7 = 10 7 < 10 therefore subtracting 10 makes the end result smaller.

You brought up correlation from nowhere and then talked about how ridiculous that idea is. Aside from your accusations that I am somehow at fault for the topic you brought up. I agree with you and am glad that you talked it down so well on your own.

Perhaps I should have chosen Finland for my example instead of Japan. The same point for me would have been made and you would have been able to understand me correctly. My pick of Japan was to illustrate that even if you are the best in many categories you still have weaker points. And to say that in the outlook of all intentional deaths, deaths I consider completely preventable, Japan is still higher despite having the lowest amount of deaths by violence. 20 > 17 so Japan still has more deaths that can be prevented.

Also I looked at every part of chart before responding. I saw places where America was much better then other countries. I saw other places where it was the worst in the list. I saw that in the overall chart America was last as well. I'm not saying America is perfect just that it isn't horrible either.

Your whole point of bringing up the chart was to say look how horrible America is. I looked at the charts and thought "hmmm, that's noteworthy but what is the bigger picture."

[Wendigo]

pockybot

And then this virulent hatred of anyone who warns of communism/totalitarian socialism.

Also, just for the record, and because this thread looks like a gem so far...

You know who also did that? Adolf Hitler. It's true! This here is from his acceptance speech:

Quote:

All about us the warning signs of this collapse are apparent. Communism with its method of madness is making a powerful and insidious attack upon our dismayed and shattered nation. It seeks to poison and disrupt in order to hurl us into an epoch of chaos.... This negative, destroying spirit spared nothing of all that is highest and most valuable. Beginning with the family, it has undermined the very foundations of morality and faith and scoffs at culture and business, nation and Fatherland, justice and honor. Fourteen years of Marxism have ruined Germany; one year of bolshevism would destroy her. The richest and fairest territories of the world would be turned into a smoking heap of ruins. Even the sufferings of the last decade and a half could not be compared to the misery of a Europe in the heart of which the red flag of destruction had been hoisted. The thousands of wounded, the hundreds of dead which this inner strife has already cost Germany should be a warning of the storm which would come....

In those hours when our hearts were troubled about the life and the future of the German nation, the aged leader of the World War appealed to us. He called to those of us in nationalist parties and leagues to struggle under him once more, in unity and loyalty, for the salvation of the German nation. This time the front lines are at home. The venerable Reichsprasident has allied himself with us in this noble endeavor. And as leaders of the nation and the national Government we vow to God, to our conscience, and to our people that we will faithfully and resolutely fulfill the task conferred upon us.

Fun times, ain't it?