|
SedanChair posted:You're absolutely correct. Just like mentally diseased individuals can find meth dealers now. Because that's how every meth addict starts up - they find the dealer and THEN they get hooked. Its not like someone offered them stuff, they got hooked, and then got pointed in the direction of a dealer. And addiction to Meth or cocaine or heroin doesn't degrade your mental faculties in any way.
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 00:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:24 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:You think preppers wouldn't buy homemade guns on the black market? I know I would. I don't think Lanza had the black market connections to just go get an arsenal on a whim, no. If he could conjure weapons out of the ether with his criminal mastermind powers, he could have gotten himself an unlicensed tommygun. He went with whatever was easily available which, because of our retarded gun laws, were completely unsecured firearms. Might as well just repeal the restrictions on ammonium nitrate enacted after the OKC bombing if the all-encompassing black market can magic anything to anyone at anytime  VVVVVV In Nancy's case, the stricter the gun laws, the more likely her life would have been saved 
VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 00:19
|
|
|
I thought we were talking about Nancy. She was paranoid and would have done whatever it took.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
If you are that paranoid about stockpiling your arsenal, then you're also gonna keep that poo poo under lock and key if it becomes as illegal as gently caress, not displayed proudly. Meaning her son wouldn't have been able to just take the guns and kill 20 kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Guess what - they are as if not more restricted! You should probably educate yourself, here is a nice reference guide from the ATF that should help you get on track to becoming better informed. How much of this applies to the average person? How often do you have to go get your gun proficiency license renewed or registered with the state or brought in for inspection because those were the type comparisons he was making.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:I once did the numbers on this. If the US did treat guns like drugs, which would assume smugglers would as well and treat it in a weight-to-profit ratio that same as they would hard narcotics, a Chinese-made assault rifle would end up costing a "bad guy" about $236,000. Who What Now posted:Both of those facts would drive the price of illegal guns way UP, though. Because you can't sell them piecemeal, and you can only sell to each customer once rather than getting them addicted and selling to them indefinitely. Making illegal guns cost a great deal more than he thought, and pushing them even farther out of the reach of mass shooters. Even small pistols and old rifles would be prohibitively expensive by this thinking. Case study number one. The Daily Telegraph posted:Backyard arms trader Angelos Koots admitted making up to 100 of the perfectly constructed MAC 10 machine guns - more commonly seen in war zones and believed to have been used in Sydney gang shootings - at his Seven Hills house. Some site where you can shop for fully automatic guns under stringent regulations that I found in like two minutes of google posted:The bikers paid 15,000 dollars for their fully automatic weapons, which is way less than the $236,000 quoted, and actually sort of comparable to market rates for similar weapons in the United States. More than the Uzi there, but less than the HK models, and these biker guys didn't even have to jump through a bunch of ATF hoops and fees and forms. Also important to remember, this is Australia, and that probably effects black market pricing there. socialsecurity posted:How much of this applies to the average person? How often do you have to go get your gun proficiency license renewed or registered with the state or brought in for inspection because those were the type comparisons he was making. Well to make it comparable, you'd have to say 'to the average gun owner' but then you'd have to go further because the majority of gun owners do not use their guns in the same way the average car owner uses their car - driving/carrying it around in public. So really the only basis for comparison is applicable those with a concealed carry permit, and there we start getting into the vagaries of state and municipality laws which can vary to an astounding degree. For most states with concealed license options, the initial licensing requires a demonstration of proficiency, with periodic renewals. There is a labyrinth of legislation, particularly once you start counting in all levels (local, state, and federal) which undoubtedly affects every gun owner, and does so often. Defining the exact times and methods that is does is an open-ended exercise mostly beyond the scope of this post, which is why I offered the previous link and can offer more if you'd like to educate yourself. LeJackal fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Apr 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:The bikers paid 15,000 dollars for their fully automatic weapons, which is way less than the $236,000 quoted, and actually sort of comparable to market rates for similar weapons in the United States. Okay, now you're just loving with us. You didn't actually read a drat bit of that post aside from the number did you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
I hope conservatives never discover that literally all modern medicine is just an excuse to torture babies. Cancer never even existed! :shh:
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
This reminds me of how conservatives talk about Helen Keller. "She's an inspiration- she overcame blindness and deafness to accomplish great things! What's your excuse?" Aside from the grossness of using a real person as "inspiration porn," they overlook that Keller was an open socialist who said the only reason she was able to succeed was because her parents were wealthy enough to afford good teachers and treatments. In other words, one person's overcoming odds does not negate systemic challenges that millions of people face.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:This reminds me of how conservatives talk about Helen Keller. "She's an inspiration- she overcame blindness and deafness to accomplish great things! What's your excuse?" Aside from the grossness of using a real person as "inspiration porn," they overlook that Keller was an open socialist who said the only reason she was able to succeed was because her parents were wealthy enough to afford good teachers and treatments. In other words, one person's overcoming odds does not negate systemic challenges that millions of people face. Just another head of the positive psychology hydra.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 04:27
|
|
|
Why is Stefan Molyneux a featured channel on Youtube? And who listens to an hour and a half of a video titled "Why Feminism turned me alcoholic"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 07:35
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Why is Stefan Molyneux a featured channel on Youtube? And who listens to an hour and a half of a video titled "Why Feminism turned me alcoholic"? You do know /mensrights exists, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 08:36
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Oh my! I got some libertarian in the wild. Which is pretty unique in Belgium, so here we go! You could nitpick the facts, but that kind of misses the point in that facts aren't driving this kind of bullshit. The best response is to remind them of Oliver Wendell Holmes' quotation that taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. Conservatives want to live in the sort of first-world country made possible by taxes but don't want to pay for any of it. That doesn't make them rugged individualists, it makes them greedy hypocrites.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Why is Stefan Molyneux a featured channel on Youtube? And who listens to an hour and a half of a video titled "Why Feminism turned me alcoholic"? Try doing a YouTube search for "feminism" and see what comes up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 11:33
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:You could nitpick the facts, but that kind of misses the point in that facts aren't driving this kind of bullshit. The best response is to remind them of Oliver Wendell Holmes' quotation that taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society. Conservatives want to live in the sort of first-world country made possible by taxes but don't want to pay for any of it. That doesn't make them rugged individualists, it makes them greedy hypocrites. That depends, really. Wealthy conservatives generally understand why They do not want a civilized society. They want a society where they are in total control and can exterminate unruly peasants like vermin with no repercussions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 12:40
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Why is Stefan Molyneux a featured channel on Youtube? And who listens to an hour and a half of a video titled "Why Feminism turned me alcoholic"? R/theredpill You'll thank me for WAKING you UP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
What's up with Stefan Molyneux anyway? My anarchist/militant atheist/redditor dad freaking loves his videos or podcasts. Literally listens to them as he takes naps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
He's kind of an insane weirdo who can't keep from circling back to "libertarianism is correct" within the space of a single argument. Slightly more intelligent than the average Galt filth, which is always funny because it results in him conceiving of and endorsing all the ridiculous things that "freedom" would result in.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Is Molyneux the one who hates the idea of families and thinks children should abandon their parents ASAP?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Mornacale posted:Is Molyneux the one who hates the idea of families and thinks children should abandon their parents ASAP? I think so, I've heard stuff about Molyneux considering families to be a form of brainwashing (along with religion and government).
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Yeah it's called "defoo" (Depart Family Of Origin). I think he accidentally makes some good points that children in abusive situations should have more rights to live independently, but he does so by the usual insane riffing on a world where you pay a monthly oxygen bill to Dow or something, because otherwise you're participating in collectivism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Gygaxian posted:What's up with Stefan Molyneux anyway? My anarchist/militant atheist/redditor dad freaking loves his videos or podcasts. Literally listens to them as he takes naps. I tried to listen to a podcast of his. Once. He opened with "I was thinking about how to enforce contracts in an anarchistic society, and it's so simple: use the same honor system that our current politicians use to enforce their back-room deals!" I think he went on about private armies, assassins and blackmail, and I just gave up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
Wow. There needs to be a better word than projection here, because that doesn't convey the full scale of something like that. Like, nothing applies to actual Liberals, but every single thing applies to Conservatives.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 07:17
|
|
|
Liberals, unlike socialists, seek to monopolize and control wealth and act like whiny babies at any mention of distributing it equitably. A Good Macro. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
Liberals will whine to get their way. For example they will threaten to force this country to default on its debt if a thing they don't like isn't repealed.....oh, wait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
But they do it like five year olds. Like reading a book intended for five year olds while whinging publicly about affordable health care. Oh wait.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
This reminds me of something...conservatives and wealthy idiots accusing anyone who criticizes the wealthy of being jealous. Is there a word that doesn't mean wanting something someone else has, but wanting NO ONE to have something that someone else has?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:03
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:This reminds me of something...conservatives and wealthy idiots accusing anyone who criticizes the wealthy of being jealous. There's Crab pot, sour grapes, the dog in the manger and the Woes of the Pharisees. One of them's got to fit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:20
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:This reminds me of something...conservatives and wealthy idiots accusing anyone who criticizes the wealthy of being jealous. Spite.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Is there a word that doesn't mean wanting something someone else has, but wanting NO ONE to have something that someone else has? "Equality"
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:This reminds me of something...conservatives and wealthy idiots accusing anyone who criticizes the wealthy of being jealous. That's kind of what jealous used to mean. Scrooge was a jealous miser, Smaug jealously guarded his treasure. Then jealous ended up becoming a synonym for envious. Its also peculiar how conservatives will defend greed as a motivating factor, but being envious is somehow bad. Its like how voting in your own interests is somehow a bad thing if you happen to be poor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 09:43
|
|
|
I think the trouble is most words for that concept presume that someone--usually the speaker--wants what they're decrying. I can't really think of a word for wanting nobody to have exorbitant wealth, besides the political terms which change like the dunes. There's "equality" and "equity" but those are concepts and, in reality, Conservatives think we already have equality and need to shut up about outliers (who purposefully failed out of a working system). Whereas Democrats concede wealth redistribution is hugely important but that flow is dammed up by lobbyists, leading to a Republican Lite party (All the flavor with none of the effectiveness!) Anything more left-wing than that (Socialism, communism) is where you find philosophies primarily concerned with the provision of equity. But they've been stretched into unrecognizable bogeymen by despots using them as a mask, and a century of rhetoric about those selfsame despots by everyone to the right. And man, the Google results for "Anti-wealth" lead me to conclude there's no rehabilitating THAT particular term, either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Spite. It's spite that makes me want no one to have the power to buy legislators (for instance)? Strom Cuzewon posted:That's kind of what jealous used to mean. Scrooge was a jealous miser, Smaug jealously guarded his treasure. Then jealous ended up becoming a synonym for envious. In both of those cases it was because they wanted to keep something for themselves. Envy doesn't really encompass not wanting something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 14:57
|
|
VideoTapir posted:It's spite that makes me want no one to have the power to buy legislators (for instance)? If you are suffering from cancer or some other horrible disease, you may very well envy people for their lack of cancer. If you come home to a terrible spouse whose actions make your life miserable, you may envy your unmarried neighbors. If you are being crushed under a mountain of debt... well, you get the picture.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:If you are suffering from cancer or some other horrible disease, you may very well envy people for their lack of cancer. If you come home to a terrible spouse whose actions make your life miserable, you may envy your unmarried neighbors. If you are being crushed under a mountain of debt... well, you get the picture. Uh, what?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:If you are suffering from cancer or some other horrible disease, you may very well envy people for their lack of cancer. If you come home to a terrible spouse whose actions make your life miserable, you may envy your unmarried neighbors. If you are being crushed under a mountain of debt... well, you get the picture. "Nobody at all, including me, should have enough money that it gives them the ability to rig the system" isn't envy. While there are those that are, in fact, envious of the rich not everybody speaking out against the hoarding of vast fortunes is envious. Meanwhile, "I would like my job to pay enough that I can eat well and have a place to live" isn't envious. We live in a country where the minimum wage is not a living wage. The obscenely rich are using their wealth to pillage the country and gently caress everybody else over. Generally speaking, people aren't talking about envy in this case but rather "I would very much like to not starve to death, thanks."
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:"Nobody at all, including me, should have enough money that it gives them the ability to rig the system" isn't envy. While there are those that are, in fact, envious of the rich not everybody speaking out against the hoarding of vast fortunes is envious. Meanwhile, "I would like my job to pay enough that I can eat well and have a place to live" isn't envious. We live in a country where the minimum wage is not a living wage. The obscenely rich are using their wealth to pillage the country and gently caress everybody else over. Generally speaking, people aren't talking about envy in this case but rather "I would very much like to not starve to death, thanks." I think Compassion is the word that best fits these views. "Nobody at all, including me, should have enough money that it gives them the ability to rig the system" is an argument about equality in governance, which is ultimately about protecting the powerless from the powerful. "I would like my job to pay enough that I can eat well and have a place to live" I assume by extension to mean "all jobs should pay enough so that people are not struggling to survive" which is a moral argument about how we ought to arrange society, and a compassionate one about preventing undue suffering and hardship.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 17:11
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:"Nobody at all, including me, should have enough money that it gives them the ability to rig the system" isn't envy. While there are those that are, in fact, envious of the rich not everybody speaking out against the hoarding of vast fortunes is envious. Meanwhile, "I would like my job to pay enough that I can eat well and have a place to live" isn't envious. We live in a country where the minimum wage is not a living wage. The obscenely rich are using their wealth to pillage the country and gently caress everybody else over. Generally speaking, people aren't talking about envy in this case but rather "I would very much like to not starve to death, thanks." I don't disagree with anything in your post, and I am not sure how what I wrote could be interpreted to mean that I do. I disagree that human beings cannot be envious of the lack of a possession or quality, so I dropped a couple of examples.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 15:24 |
|
|
VideoTapir posted:It's spite that makes me want no one to have the power to buy legislators (for instance)? If you keep couching it as anti-something, yes. You're trying to set up the term as "I am anti wealth", instead of the much better "I am for people having enough money to live comfortably, and everyone having an equal say in their democracy". The former inherently makes you negative and seem as if you don't want anyone to enjoy huge wealth since not everyone can have it - thats spite. The latter is the much more agreeable and positive position that cannot be easily just dismissed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2014 22:55
|
|