The firearm thread

[TheDemonLord]

The NRA are good for hypocrisy. If a black guy has a legal problem arising from gun ownership they got nothin'. The 2nd Amendment is "whites only."

Let's ask Colion Noir about that and....

Oh.

Oh Dear:

[pritch]

Let's ask Colion Noir about that and....

Oh.

Oh Dear:

Not really. You found one guy. There are continually stories about black guys who, while acting legally, run into trouble with the cops. The NRA don't want to know. As was discussed in the clip, Mr Nior is considered by many to be the token black guy. He has the right name for a token black guy though. Mr Noir, 10/10 for that.

[TheDemonLord]

Not really. You found one guy.

There's plenty, if you only take time to look. Colion specifically worked with the NRA.

There are continually stories about black guys who, while acting legally, run into trouble with the cops. The NRA don't want to know.

Plenty of stories eh? I'm sure if we were to look at the elements in most of the stories, we'd see factors that are not to do with Race that are applicable.

As was discussed in the clip, Mr Nior is considered by many to be the token black guy. He has the right name for a token black guy though. Mr Noir, 10/10 for that.

Wow.

Can you hear the Racism in that statement? Why don't you go ahead and call him an Uncle Tom or a Coon? Jesus Christ.

[husaberg]

Not really. You found one guy. There are continually stories about black guys who, while acting legally, run into trouble with the cops. The NRA don't want to know. As was discussed in the clip, Mr Nior is considered by many to be the token black guy. He has the right name for a token black guy though. Mr Noir, 10/10 for that.

The sooner everyone stops entering a dialog with him the sooner he just goes back to trying to convert strangers to his religion with the rest of the J.Vs

[TheDemonLord]

The sooner everyone stops entering a dialog with him the sooner he just goes back to trying to convert strangers to his religion with the rest of the J.Vs

What Religion and why don't you follow your own advice?

[sugilite:Me]

I've heard this refrain often - for example Sugi's comments of how quickly the Laws would change if Politicians were the target.

And it's something I've thought about.

Think harder, I'm not talking about a once in a blue moon presidential assassination attempt, but rather US school shooting level of incidence - in other words, all the fucking time.
And the perps are looking for notoriety, hence targeting schools for maximum shock value rather than your ill thought out "low gun locales". Dead kids are actually shocking to most, except those that cannot get over their shallow and fanciful 2nd amendment gun rights narratives. If you put just a little more thought into this shit - the truth of these things might actually be revealed to you.

[TheDemonLord]

Think harder, I'm not talking about a once in a blue moon presidential assassination attempt

Yet the point remains - when Politicians were attacked (and in some cases, killed) - the Laws didn't change. And they aren't once in a blue moon either - it's about once a year that an attempt is made on a President with some degree of success (e.g. shots fired or a cordon breached or similar)

And the perps are looking for notoriety, hence targeting schools for maximum shock value rather than your ill thought out "low gun locales".

JBP has done a series of lectures on this - Notoriety is certainly a component of it, but it's much deeper than that. You are partially right that it's shock value - it's more about the destruction of Innocence. They want everyone to feel as bad as they do.

But hand-in-hand with that is they want easy targets - hence why they target places where there are people who are unlikely to be armed and unlikely to be able to fight back.

Dead kids are actually shocking to most, except those that cannot get over their shallow and fanciful 2nd amendment gun rights narratives. If you put just a little more thought into this shit - the truth of these things might actually be revealed to you.

Indeed they are - although it's funny how each side of the Political Spectrum gets worked up.

Republicans are called heartless for not breaching the Constitution on the basis of ~900 Children a year murdered with Firearms.
Democrats are happy to shout with glee at the nearly 1,000,000 Abortions performed yearly.

I will also note that of those 900, the Majority are teenagers involved in Gang Violence in Democrat run areas.

Once you look at the actual data - the total number killed per year is relatively small. Doesn't mean it's right - Banning Guns won't stop it.

Cases in point, look at Norway - had a massive Mass Shooting by Anders Brevik, they talked about changing the laws but in the end didn't (because Norway has a long tradition of Civillian Marksmanship), Semi-Autos are still legal over there (although you will find news articles saying they were going to be banned in 2019 - the actual Norwegian legislation still says they are legal).

How many Mass Shootings have they had since? Well there was one carried out by Islamists this year (2 people dead) and one carried out by a guy using a Bow and Arrow (5 people - and good luck banning Wood....)

Also case in Point - here in NZ - There have been more Firearm incidents since Labour banned Firearms than before, hell I saw this about where I used to live: Didn't happen when Semi-Autos were still legal

Then there's the likes of P.A Luty, Evelyn Owen etc. People who made successful submachine guns at home with hobbyist tools and equipment. That's without getting into 3D printing

But let's assume you manage to Ban all Guns and all ability to make Guns (Like Japan - Oh...) - well, do you remember the Trucks of Peace and how many people where able to be killed by using a Truck? What about a trip to your Local RD1 - all the things needed to make the same explosives used in the Oklahoma city bombing are available.

Malevolent and Motivated people, despite best efforts, will ALWAYS find a way to inflict Death and Destruction. No matter what the Law says, Evil will always find a way.

Therefore the only way to defend against it is to make sure you have the tools needed stop it.

That's the cold hard truth of it.

[sugilite:Me]

Yet the point remains - when Politicians were attacked (and in some cases, killed) - the Laws didn't change. And they aren't once in a blue moon either - it's about once a year that an attempt is made on a President with some degree of success (e.g. shots fired or a cordon breached or similar)

19 child deaths in Uvalde alone, how many presidents this century been assassinated you toss pot? Your writings are simply misleading pieces of pooh designed to prop up your fragile ego that simply cannot fathom it is entirely wrong.

[husaberg]

Here we are, years later we still we have a small minority fringe people moaning about losing access to owning a gun they never even needed in the first place.
Its now many years past the time you should have figured out why its was a stand supported by the majority of NZ.
No different than our stand condemning the French terrorists who bombed the Rainbow Warrior or the Nuclear free zone we made in and around New Zealand.

The change in NZ law is about lives, not money or some pathetic weapon you want to have for pose value or fun. Its not about your "perceived right" to have a weapon you don't actually need.
NZ doesn't have a right to bear arms in its constitution. Nor do you need a semi auto Military style assault rifles or similar, you simply want one.
People in NZ can still continue own a firearm as a privilege, to hunt with, as a hobby or sport or collecting.
But simply as a result of 50 innocent people getting killed in the mater of minutes by a total loser, you longer have that privilege anymore to own a military style semi Automatic anymore on a A cat licence. Its over.
you are not allowed one that fits a large mag or a butt-stock that's modified in the effort to get around the no pistol-grip rule.
Its over.
For those that continue on moaning. Man up and face facts. ITS OVER.
If you don't like our gun laws move to the US.

[Kickaha]

Here we are, years later we still we have people moaning like little bitch's about losing access to owning a gun they never even needed in the first place.
Its now many years past the time you should have figured out why its was a stand supported by the majority of NZ.

The change in NZ law is about lives, not money or some pathetic weapon you want to have for pose value or fun. Its not about your "perceived right" to have a weapon you don't actually need.
NZ doesn't have a right to bear arms in its constitution. Nor do you need a semi auto Military style assault rifles or similar, you simply want one.
People in NZ can still continue own a firearm as a privilege, to hunt with, as a hobby or sport or collecting.
But simply as a result of 50 innocent people getting killed in the mater of minutes by a total loser, you longer have that privilege anymore to own a military style semi Automatic anymore on a A cat licence. Its over.
you are not allowed one that fits a large mag or a butt-stock that's modified in the effort to get around the no pistol-grip rule.
Its over.
For those that continue on moaning. Man up and face facts. ITS OVER.
If you don't like our gun laws move to the US.

What a total load of shit, It wasn't about lives, it was knee jerk reaction to make a decision which given what had just happened was always going to be the popular option in peoples minds and score points with the public

How much safer has it made NZ, fuck all if any given the increase in gun crime

[TheDemonLord]

Here we are, years later we still we have a small minority fringe people moaning about losing access to owning a gun they never even needed in the first place.
Its now many years past the time you should have figured out why its was a stand supported by the majority of NZ.
No different than our stand condemning the French terrorists who bombed the Rainbow Warrior or the Nuclear free zone we made in and around New Zealand.

The change in NZ law is about lives, not money or some pathetic weapon you want to have for pose value or fun. Its not about your "perceived right" to have a weapon you don't actually need.
NZ doesn't have a right to bear arms in its constitution. Nor do you need a semi auto Military style assault rifles or similar, you simply want one.
People in NZ can still continue own a firearm as a privilege, to hunt with, as a hobby or sport or collecting.
But simply as a result of 50 innocent people getting killed in the mater of minutes by a total loser, you longer have that privilege anymore to own a military style semi Automatic anymore on a A cat licence. Its over.
you are not allowed one that fits a large mag or a butt-stock that's modified in the effort to get around the no pistol-grip rule.
Its over.
For those that continue on moaning. Man up and face facts. ITS OVER.
If you don't like our gun laws move to the US.

Is it Over? Less than 30% handed in suggests it's really not.


But guess what - I could replace every reference to a Gun to say a Motorcycle - and you, by your own principles, would have to give up Motorcycling.
I could replace every reference to a Gun and say Meat (in some Vegan's Fevourish wet dream) - and you, by your own principles, would have to give up Meat.
I could replace every reference to a Gun and say Tools - and you, by your own principles, would have to give up DIY, Home repair, Bike Repair.
I could replace every reference to a Gun and say Swimming Pools - and you, by your own principles, would have to give up Swimming.
I could replace every reference to a Gun and say Homosexuals - and you, by your own principles, would have to Hate the Gays.
I could replace every reference to a Gun and say Jews - and you, by your own principles, would... I'll let you figure that out.


See - that argument can be twisted to 'justify' banning just about Anything and Everything. Until you are left, by your own logic, naked and without owning anything. All at the tyrannical behest of everyone else.

This is the post where your mask slips - here we see the real face of the Fascistic Tyrant, the prideful boasts of how the world would be perfect if we just ban this thing and Murder this dissident - then we can get to Utopia.

Wheras I accept that the principles which allow me my freedom are the same that protects everyone elses. I accept that allowing other people their freedom must, necessarily, mean that there is a risk to Me.

In your hellish scenario - there is no limiting principle nothing to stop the inevitable push for more restrictions, more 'Safety', more more more more - it never stops and it never ends. You might lie to yourself and say 'We'll stop when we achieve X' - but they never do, you are simply ousted by the next group of radicals who go even further. Eventually it leads to destruction of the individual.

In my scenario - the limiting principle is me, I cannot force something on others, I can only control myself. So for the things that I perceive as the biggest threat to myself, I can take measures to avoid and mitigate them. That self-limiting principle mean that my ethics can never expand to a point beyond where it was intended.

But hey - you sleep well at night - knowing all those Eeeeeeevil Semi-Autos are still out there and knowing that Firearm crime has increased to the point where there are multiple drive-by shootings in Auckland on a regular basis.

[F5 Dave]

Actually Warwick. Look at Auss. Demonstrably safer.

Actually demonstrably. Less guns. Less gun violence.

Fuck America.

And TDL swallow one. .

[TheDemonLord]

19 child deaths in Uvalde alone, how many presidents this century been assassinated you toss pot?

1/46 (and I'm being generous and including all the presidents, not just the ones in this century) is a much higher risk than 19/73,000,000.

Point was not about Children per se - but about the idea that if Politicians faced a threat they would change the law. Clearly the Politicians face the threat but none support repealing or amending it.

Your writings are simply misleading pieces of pooh designed to prop up your fragile ego that simply cannot fathom it is entirely wrong.

Wrong about what? My point is that this law Objectively has not made NZ any safer from Firearm Crime.

Before Labour - can you ever remember a time, ever, where there were multiple shootings in a single night in any part of NZ? We've been lucky that more through sheer luck and incompetence (and the fact that the Gangs are primarily motivated by Profit) that we haven't had serious injuries or deaths from the spate of gun crime at the moment.

you might 'feel' safer, but there are umpteen ways that someone with sufficient motivation could use commonly available tools/materials/items to commit acts of terrorism on par with Christchurch.

[F5 Dave]

Sorry, I didn't hear that over the cum dribbling out of your mouth.

[TheDemonLord]

Actually Warwick. Look at Auss. Demonstrably safer.

Actually demonstrably. Less guns. Less gun violence.

Fuck America.

Did it though? See Aus is often touted as a shining example - the problem is that is you look at the overall trend and you exclude the Port Arthur shooting as an outlier - the trend before and after the ban is almost identical. Which is to say, it had no meaningful impact.

Since the ban, there have been up to 10 Mass Shootings (that is, the FBI's definition of a Mass Shooting) and IIRC two of them involved Firearms banned in 1996. So it hasn't stopped anything.

Last I looked the gangs in Australia were charging $15K for an Unused (that is, not used in any criminal enterprise) AR. If you were the rare type of person hell-bent on causing Death and Destruction - $15K really isn't that hard to obtain. Even easier if you have no intention of paying it back.