Why are they hiding the manifesto?

Doc Dutch said:
I confess to taking a decadent joy out of harassing hypocrites by throwing their own reasoning in their faces. No doubt there are lots of people on both sides of the aisle who will agree with me. :thup:

Sorry. I'll try to do better. :)
Click to expand...

Is that your Passive-Aggressive way of calling me a hypocrite? I've seen you do better, if so. :rofl2:

You're horribly butthurt or triggered or both, by the word "lots," yet you frequently lump all Democrats -- and often, all Republicans, too -- into one homogenized stew, while clamoring that you be seen as an individual.

We all exaggerate and use hyperbole from time to time. All that does though is shut down thought and trigger some emotional response, and then debate is over. It appears that gun regulation is a hill you're fine with dying on, so to speak.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Is that your Passive-Aggressive way of calling me a hypocrite? I've seen you do better, if so. :rofl2:

You're horribly butthurt or triggered or both, by the word "lots," yet you frequently lump all Democrats -- and often, all Republicans, too -- into one homogenized stew, while clamoring that you be seen as an individual.

We all exaggerate and use hyperbole from time to time. All that does though is shut down thought and trigger some emotional response, and then debate is over. It appears that gun regulation is a hill you're fine with dying on, so to speak.
Click to expand...

I was having fun with Nordberg then both you and Phan jumped in. Interesting.

BTW, I'm a big fan of the philosophy, "If you ain't havin' fun, you're doing it wrong". :)

I'm fine with gun control for nutjobs and criminals. I'm against turning honest, law-abiding Americans into criminals because some authoritarians are skeered.
 
Doc Dutch said:
I was having fun with Nordberg then both you and Phan jumped in. Interesting.

BTW, I'm a big fan of the philosophy, "If you ain't havin' fun, you're doing it wrong". :)

I'm fine with gun control for nutjobs and criminals. I'm against turning honest, law-abiding Americans into criminals because some authoritarians are skeered.
Click to expand...

I think we are all against that, at least us sane people. Banning the sale of military-style assault weapons doesn't mean that those in existence will be confiscated. It just means no more. Notice how nearly every one of these mass murderers purchased their WMDs recently. Tougher background checks, mandatory reporting of mental issues like we do with suspected child abuse, and banning the sale of ARs would help a lot.

Tell us why we still need to take our shoes off in TSA lines because of one idiot with a shoe bomb -- but any whackjob with the agenda and the bucks is free to buy weapons and then murder us with them.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
I think we are all against that, at least us sane people. Banning the sale of military-style assault weapons doesn't mean that those in existence will be confiscated. It just means no more.

Notice how nearly every one of these mass murderers purchased their WMDs recently. Tougher background checks, mandatory reporting of mental issues like we do with suspected child abuse, and banning the sale of ARs would help a lot.

Tell us why we still need to take our shoes off in TSA lines because of one idiot with a shoe bomb -- but any whackjob with the agenda and the bucks is free to buy weapons and then murder us with them.
Click to expand...
First "military-style assault weapons" is redundant. "Assault weapons" is a fabricated legal term for scary-looking military-appearance semi-automatic rifles. The fabricated term itself means "military-style". Agreed on banning sales which is why every time a Democratic President starts yammering about banning guns, gun sales go up. Wanna guess how many "military-style" rifles I have? LOL

I also noticed they all telegraphed their wackiness but no one gave a shit until they actually committed mass murder.

You want TSA to monitor every business or public office?
 
Doc Dutch said:
What I do know is that the path to freedom isn't found by banning stuff. It didn't work with the 18th Amendment. It's not working with the 50 year War on Drugs and it won't work by stripping away gun rights any more than banning abortion will fix our social ills.

Do you believe an authoritarian government dictating what rights people are allowed will end well?
Click to expand...

I believe that we didn't have several mass shootings a week back during the Clinton ban on assault arms. Heck, we didn't really have any. Columbine was actually a shock to the system. Something unheard of. Now you expect it and that's pathetic for any country. So, yes, banning can be a good result. We already saw a brighter America once before from it.
 
Gondwanaland said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
And how does this change the FACT of all the victims in the last 25 years of assault weapons formerly banned? Their surviving families really don't give a damn about your chart.

And AGAIN, how is NOT having these particular weapons "punishing" YOU, as you have a plethora of weapons to choose from (always did before, during and after the 1994 AWB)?
Click to expand...



Well first, those numbers would include during the AWB, and before it, you stupid cunt. Second, there is zero evidence that the AWB had any effect on gun deaths. Third, one of the columbine shooters literally used a fucking gun that was fucking banned by your fucking precious AWB you snot-nosed twat.
Click to expand...

:palm: The devil is in the details, as they say. The ban was 1994 to 2004. During that time (check the chart) mass shootings did drop. https://theconversation.com/did-the...shootings-heres-what-the-data-tells-us-184430

Here's what's been going on with the AR-15 (not including most recent incidents) https://www.npr.org/2023/05/10/1175065043/mass-shootings-america-ar-15-rifle

So you can throw the usual gun monkey hissy fit all you want....but your blather does not bare under closer scrutiny. Carry on.
 
Jade Dragon said:
I believe that we didn't have several mass shootings a week back during the Clinton ban on assault arms. Heck, we didn't really have any. Columbine was actually a shock to the system. Something unheard of. Now you expect it and that's pathetic for any country. So, yes, banning can be a good result. We already saw a brighter America once before from it.
Click to expand...
Sure. Oppression and an all-powerful government dictating to people how to live, what to think and what to do is good for the children. What could go wrong? LOL
 
Doc Dutch said:
Sure. Oppression and an all-powerful government dictating to people how to live, what to think and what to do is good for the children. What could go wrong? LOL
Click to expand...

The government my ass, we're talking about the people's will. Those guns were banned and the government didn't change. It's laughable to think the Government will become tyrannical over something like that. It's already been done and proven
 
Doc Dutch said:
Originally Posted by Jade Dragon View Post
I believe that we didn't have several mass shootings a week back during the Clinton ban on assault arms. Heck, we didn't really have any. Columbine was actually a shock to the system. Something unheard of. Now you expect it and that's pathetic for any country. So, yes, banning can be a good result. We already saw a brighter America once before from it.
Click to expand...

Sure. Oppression and an all-powerful government dictating to people how to live, what to think and what to do is good for the children. What could go wrong? LOL
Click to expand...

My, but you are over-exaggerating a bit there, Dutch. The 1994 - 2004 AWB didn't result in subsequent federal laws or proposals dictating how people think or how to live. You still have protections against child abuse, bad education or unsafe toys & such (when institutions are properly funded for such). And like it or not, mass shootings did drop some during the AWB....now they're up, with the AR-15 (style) giving a robust showing.

Nothing to laugh at, Dutch. Just as the surviving victims/victim's families in the last 2 decades.
 
Jade Dragon said:
The government my ass, we're talking about the people's will. Those guns were banned and the government didn't change. It's laughable to think the Government will become tyrannical over something like that. It's already been done and proven
Click to expand...
You may want to reread history.

However, you're free to advocate stripping Americans of their rights out of fear they might use them. The fact you can't connect the dots of an increasingly authoritarian Democratic Party to an increasingly authoritarian Republican Party resulting in overturning Roe v. Wade is sad. It's the political equivalent of Newton's Third Law of Motion.

When has an authoritarian government ever ended well for the citizens? Sure, you and I may not live to see the final result, but where is an authoritarian US going to end up another 30 years from now?
 
Taichiliberal said:
My, but you are over-exaggerating a bit there, Dutch. The 1994 - 2004 AWB didn't result in subsequent federal laws or proposals dictating how people think or how to live. You still have protections against child abuse, bad education or unsafe toys & such (when institutions are properly funded for such). And like it or not, mass shootings did drop some during the AWB....now they're up, with the AR-15 (style) giving a robust showing.

Nothing to laugh at, Dutch. Just as the surviving victims/victim's families in the last 2 decades.
Click to expand...
Soooo....you're happy with the way our government is going. I'm not. IMO, it's a dysfunctional disaster and I blame both sides for pushing for it.

No doubt you're happy to just point fingers and keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
 
Doc Dutch said:
You may want to reread history.

However, you're free to advocate stripping Americans of their rights out of fear they might use them. The fact you can't connect the dots of an increasingly authoritarian Democratic Party to an increasingly authoritarian Republican Party resulting in overturning Roe v. Wade is sad. It's the political equivalent of Newton's Third Law of Motion.

When has an authoritarian government ever ended well for the citizens? Sure, you and I may not live to see the final result, but where is an authoritarian US going to end up another 30 years from now?
Click to expand...

There is no authoritarian government in it. One of the government's main jobs is to represent the will of the people and enforcing the will of the people is not authoritarian governance it's simply governance. If you put it to a vote you'd see. Most people want something done. The government already enforces bans on a lot of things and somehow it's only tyranny when it involves guns. Should people be allowed to by other mass killing methods? How about Anthrax? How about we just start selling bombs?
 
Jade Dragon said:
There is no authoritarian government in it. One of the government's main jobs is to represent the will of the people and enforcing the will of the people is not authoritarian governance it's simply governance. If you put it to a vote you'd see. Most people want something done. The government already enforces bans on a lot of things and somehow it's only tyranny when it involves guns. Should people be allowed to by other mass killing methods? How about Anthrax? How about we just start selling bombs?
Click to expand...

Dutch is a gun junkie
 
Jade Dragon said:
There is no authoritarian government in it. One of the government's main jobs is to represent the will of the people and enforcing the will of the people is not authoritarian governance it's simply governance. If you put it to a vote you'd see.

Most people want something done. The government already enforces bans on a lot of things and somehow it's only tyranny when it involves guns. Should people be allowed to by other mass killing methods? How about Anthrax? How about we just start selling bombs?
Click to expand...

It's a stepping stone. Can't you see the progression of where we were 30 years ago and where we are now regarding personal freedom? Can't you see that overturning Roe v. Wade is simply the flip-side of the coin of what you are pushing?

So do I. I don't want nutjobs with guns. How many times have these wackadoodles telegraphed their intentions and nothing was done? Your solution is to strip all Americans of their rights because of what they might do. I support identifying those in need and helping them before they hurt themselves or others.
 
volsrock said:
Remember the Covenant school shooting in Nashville?

You are not supposed to. It is supposed to fade quietly into the background because, well, the facts are inconvenient to the Narrative

Immediately after the horrific events we learned that there was a “manifesto” left behind by the shooter making it abundantly clear why she committed the act. In her last message to a friend, she also indicated that she left behind writings about why she committed evil acts.

So far that manifesto has been withheld from public scrutiny. The powers that be don’t want you to see it.

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2023/05/05/why-are-they-hiding-the-manifesto-n548600

I suspect the words are horrifically demonic, and encourage the killing of Christians.

Now if it was encouraging the killing of blacks or muslims ....it would be posted on CNN
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Jade Dragon said:
The problem with vocal 2nd amendment types is they keep conflating what people want to do with assault weapons with all guns. It's an NRA-voiced conspiracy that simply doesn't exist even in fringe lunacy. Assault weapons should only be in the military and certain police hands. They all should need to be licensed and trained with them.
Click to expand...

I agree. We don't let people get behind the wheel of a big rig w/o training, licensing, and insurance. Why would we allow some moron with a credit card to buy a weapon capable of killing a dozen people in a few seconds, without the same precautions?
 
Manfred Mason said:
Because of the NRA and Republicans !
Click to expand...
People don’t need computers. They don’t need full access to the Internet. In fact, many people, especially the wackos and other nutjobs, shouldn’t even be allowed on the Internet.

People should have to pay a $500 annual licensing fee to access the Internet along with passing a knowledge test and mental exam. This applies to all social media.

Let’s not forget that all the mass murdering wackos posted on the Internet and were often radicalized on the Internet. Help save lives by restricting Internet access to sane, intelligent, educated and middle-class or higher people.

People who need jobs can go to their public library where their online activities will be monitored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top