Happy Gun Appreciation Day! Anti-Gun Control rallies attract 1000's - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284633]no your culture is just stupid in so many respects, which is a shame because it's an amazing country[/QUOTE] Unless you can accurately provide evidence as to us being retarded plebs, then you can go fuck yourself you queen-fapping cunt. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284674]nah your culture is dumb and the reason I don't understand it is because it's too dumb for me to understand[/QUOTE] Good. stay on your island, Redcoat.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284675]this is fallacious. many americans have been protesting and standing up about shit like the tsa, ndaa, and other infringing activities for years.[/QUOTE] k I retract that statement, I hope they get them changed, this I hope passes right through

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284674]nah your culture is dumb and the reason I don't understand it is because it's too dumb for me to understand[/QUOTE] we could honestly say the exact same thing. i mean your country doesn't even have free speech which is laughable to me.

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284643]because you shouldn't have instruments of death readily available unless there's a tangible, provable need for them and there just isn't[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284643]LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU[/Quote]

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284674]nah your culture is dumb and the reason I don't understand it is because it's too dumb for me to understand[/QUOTE] Stop posting, you are not making yourself look smart by attacking an entire peoples' way of life.

I feel like this is turning into a UK vs USA dick measuring contest, akin to one you would find in the comments section of Youtube. Case and point [QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284674]nah your culture is dumb and the reason I don't understand it is because it's too dumb for me to understand[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284696]we could honestly say the exact same thing. i mean your country doesn't even have free speech which is laughable to me.[/QUOTE] and those accents, and the teeth OH GOD THE TEETH D; [editline]19th January 2013[/editline] [sp]jokes[/sp]

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284675]this is fallacious. many americans have been protesting and standing up about shit like the tsa, ndaa, and other infringing activities for years.[/QUOTE] I'm sure they have, they're hardly as vocal however And that's what makes me sort of doubt this entire "sceptical of government" thing you americans got going No disrespect at all to you or any american, but do you honestly think the government going 1984 on your asses is going to happen through such an obvious move as a ban on guns Nope, if it happens, it's going to happen through the gradual introduction of freedom-imposing laws. And so far not much has been done to stop it. So how exaclty is keeping your guns going to help when you're willingly submitting yourselves without much protest anyhow? Again, I don't mean to offend anyone, I know there's alot of emotion running in this thread. But this is just surprising me greatly and always will.

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39284780]I'm sure they have, they're hardly as vocal however And that's what makes me sort of doubt this entire "sceptical of government" thing you americans got going[/quote] sure they are. how "vocal" they are isn't the same as how reported on they are. media outlets are banking in on the gun controversy right now and reporting heavily on all things related to guns. [quote]No disrespect at all to you or any american, but do you honestly think the government going 1984 on your asses is going to happen through such an obvious move as a ban on guns Nope, if it happens, it's going to happen through the gradual introduction of freedom-imposing laws. And so far not much has been done to stop it. So how exaclty is keeping your guns going to help when you're willingly submitting yourselves without much protest anyhow? Again, I don't mean to offend anyone, I know there's alot of emotion running in this thread. But this is just surprising me greatly and always will.[/QUOTE] well the idea is that taking guns away(among other things) is a form of gradualism that will lead to totalitarianism. the idea is that you need to stand up for your rights otherwise government [i]will[/i] slowly strip them away. do i subscribe to this idea? hardly, but there is certainly quite a bit of merit amidst the hysterics.

[QUOTE=Lanopo;39284723]Stop posting, you are not making yourself look smart by attacking an entire peoples' way of life.[/QUOTE] i;m attacking certain parts of it which are dumb

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284836]i;m attacking certain parts of it which are dumb[/QUOTE] No you aren't, you're insulting it as a whole. Seriously, stop posting.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284827]well the idea is that taking guns away(among other things) is a form of gradualism that will lead to totalitarianism. the idea is that you need to stand up for your rights otherwise government [i]will[/i] slowly strip them away.[/QUOTE] Isn't this the slippery slope fallacy?

[QUOTE=OogalaBoogal;39284903]Isn't this the slippery slope fallacy?[/QUOTE] not really. slippery slope is the idea that if you let one thing go through/pass, then you open the doors for other(generally more extreme) things to go through/pass. the idea with this is that there is an ideology of control and gradualism, that government naturally wants to impose control of a populace when it is allowed to do so. that doesn't imply or state that any one action simply opens the door for other actions. gradualism is a real thing btw. [editline]20th January 2013[/editline] although there is a fine line between saying "i don't want government to take my guns away because that is a violation of my rights as a human/american" and "i dont want government to take my guns away because if they do then government will be able to take all my rights away", which is closer to a slippery slope argument.

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284836]i;m attacking certain parts of it which are dumb[/QUOTE] Could you actually provide a listing as to whats 'Bad'. That would help.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284827]sure they are. how "vocal" they are isn't the same as how reported on they are. media outlets are banking in on the gun controversy right now and reporting heavily on all things related to guns.[/quote] Alright, obviously I don't watch US media/news but if these laws are treated as ongoing issues then that's great. That sort of information rarely reaches outside the borders though. [quote]well the idea is that taking guns away(among other things) is a form of gradualism that will lead to totalitarianism. the idea is that you need to stand up for your rights otherwise government [i]will[/i] slowly strip them away. do i subscribe to this idea? hardly, but there is certainly quite a bit of merit amidst the hysterics.[/QUOTE] I understand the premise but I would argue that a ban on guns is more like a kick in the groin than a gradual step, given your cultural heritage an all I guess what I'm trying to say is that all the energy and passion poured into defending your right to bear arms would also do well protesting the countless number of laws imposed upon you (and others outside the borders) in the name of counter-terrorism and whatnot

[QUOTE=demoguy08;39284979] I guess what I'm trying to say is that all the energy and passion poured into defending your right to bear arms would also do well protesting the countless number of laws imposed upon you (and others outside the borders) in the name of counter-terrorism and whatnot[/QUOTE] many of us are and are very vocal about it. just because it doesn't always make headlines doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;39284836]i;m attacking certain parts of it which are dumb[/QUOTE] Why are you attacking anything? How are you being productive?

The problem is, is that President Obama said he wouldn't sign the NDAA or sign anything that reinstates the Patriot Act, but he did. He keeps lying and taking away freedoms but people vote for him. He lied and people believed him. So the people that voted for him have to suffer the consoquences along side the people who didn't vote for him, and then we get people telling us to shut up and sit down, and to let Obama do what ever he wants because he's President. And anyone who tries to call him out on it is called a conspiracy theorist, or a racist, or a political extremest, or a right-winger, ect. ect.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39285065]The problem is, is that President Obama said he wouldn't sign the NDAA or sign anything that reinstates the Patriot Act, but he did. He keeps lying and taking away freedoms but people voted for the man. He lied and people believed him. So the people that voted for him have to suffer the consoquences along side the people who didn't vote for him, and then we get people telling us to shut up and sit down, and to let Obama do what ever he wants because he's President and people voted for him.[/QUOTE] there wasnt really a viable alternative to obama in any election unfortunately.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39285076]there wasnt really a viable alternative to obama in any election unfortunately.[/QUOTE] I agree and disagree... My views personaly, I would have voted for a can of orange juice over Barack Obama. I didn't like Romney. I liked his economic policies, but his entire campaign was devoted to trashing Obama rather than offering a solution.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39285116]I agree and disagree... My views personaly, I would have voted for a can of orange juice over Barack Obama. I didn't like Romney. I liked his economic policies, but his entire campaign was devoted to trashing Obama rather than offering a solution.[/QUOTE] What economic policies? I had a really hard time researching them.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39285065]The problem is, is that President Obama said he wouldn't sign the NDAA or sign anything that reinstates the Patriot Act, but he did. He keeps lying and taking away freedoms but people vote for him.[/QUOTE] Was there any viable presidential candidate (i.e. that made it to the general election) that would not have done these things?

[QUOTE=Megafan;39285152]Was there any viable presidential candidate (i.e. that made it to the general election) that would not have done these things?[/QUOTE] I personally liked Herman Cain more than Romney, even after all those women came forward. It is a shame he didn't make it. But to answer your question: no. But my logic was this: I'd rather vote for someone who is possibly a liar (Romney) rather than a proven liar (Obama).

Also, with regard to things the administration had to say about the NDAA, Obama issued a statement pertaining to that as well: [url]http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=98513&st=&st1=#axzz1iE5qy7a3[/url] Assuming that we don't automatically assume that they're lying by default, the NDAA doesn't grant any new executive authority, and was signed because it provided funding to many sectors of the military and Dept. of Defense, and because the margin by which it was passed would have allowed a Congressional override of a veto.

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39285173]I personally liked Herman Cain more than Romney, even after all those women came forward. It is a shame he didn't make it. But to answer your question: no. But my logic was this: I'd rather vote for someone who is possibly a liar (Romney) rather than a proven liar (Obama).[/QUOTE] you're being stupid. i'm generally on your side, but the amount you trash anyone on the left is just fucking useless and stupid and a waste of your time and effort and doesn't even get you anywhere because it's wrong.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39284696]we could honestly say the exact same thing. i mean your country doesn't even have free speech which is laughable to me.[/QUOTE] i don't understand this post are you making a serious point that the UK doesn't have free speech or what i'm so confused like, if we're making serious points here, the US has free speech 'zones', and at one point sent everyone who was japanese to prison for being japanese

[QUOTE=UziXxX;39285116]I agree and disagree... My views personaly, I would have voted for a can of orange juice over Barack Obama. I didn't like Romney. I liked his economic policies, but his entire campaign was devoted to trashing Obama rather than offering a solution.[/QUOTE] his economic policies really weren't that divergent from obama's. there were two really corporatist politicians who play ball for the wealthy. the difference is that obama seemed to be playing towards a demographic that was more open to gay rights and women's issues, which made him a bit preferable. [QUOTE=UziXxX;39285173]I personally liked Herman Cain more than Romney, even after all those women came forward. It is a shame he didn't make it. But to answer your question: no. But my logic was this: I'd rather vote for someone who is possibly a liar (Romney) rather than a proven liar (Obama).[/QUOTE] romney was a proven liar as well. or at least fairly shifty, which is to be expected from a conservative politician who was in power in a fairly liberal state. and herman cain was pretty much a parody of the gop, i don't see how anyone could actually like him in a non-humorous sense.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39285269]romney was a proven liar as well. or at least fairly shifty, which is to be expected from a conservative politician who was in power in a fairly liberal state.[/QUOTE] Eh, in my opinion Romney was hardly conservative. Republican, sure, but not conservative.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;39285258]i don't understand this post are you making a serious point that the UK doesn't have free speech or what i'm so confused like, if we're making serious points here, the US has free speech 'zones', and at one point sent everyone who was japanese to prison for being japanese[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_by_country#United_Kingdom[/url] "restrictions...glorifying terrorism,[83][84] collection or possession of information likely to be of use to a terrorist,[85][86] treason including imagining the death of the monarch,[87] sedition,[87] obscenity, indecency including corruption of public morals and outraging public decency," that is hardly free speech. and yea, the usa did have japanese concentration camps. the usa is hardly a bastion of freedom in the world, i'm just saying our free speech guarantees are imho much greater than that of the uk.