Random Politics & Religion #28: The Last One

Probably expected it would be much easier to maintain a private and public persona split than it was and it didn't work out so well. It's understandable.

If you are for gun control, you are not against guns. Guns will be needed by authorities to disarm the people.

There is no such thing as gun control, there is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small political elite and their minions.

I find this interesting.

because I understand the intent. But NRA people are the first to jump on the no legally obtainable weapon is technically an assault weapon thing whenever AR-15s and similar guns are brought up.

Y'know, as long as you ignore how amazingly easy it is to modify them.

Which begs the question, the *** is your non assault weapon going to do against the united states military if it ever comes to that?

Also, the stock in question was introduced after a full automatic weapon ban had been introduced to circumvent the ban. Good on you, NRA.

Back then, the gun was an advanced weapon. Expecting to overthrow a tyranical government with guns in this day and age is borderline HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE. Anyone dumb enough to believe otherwise should not be in control of a gun, as a matter of public safety.

https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/915929442547109890

To the idea that the left doesn want to ban guns.

No, I am amused that cow farts are a big part of global warming and that science takes cow farts seriously.

Fone is there a Simpson's episode about cow farts? How about South Park?

Back then the most complex weapon systems on the planet were often in private hands.

As to today? Ask the Bundys.

The ever-illusive illusion of safety.

Let me know when it's safe to do anything ever again.

We dont have a right to trucks

You should know better. It's long past the point where it's safe to do anything.

I mean, we have liability warnings on everything. People driving directly behind gravel buckets need a warning to stay away from them or they will have broken windshields. People need warnings to not give plastic bags to babies for choking hazards. People need warnings that California is known to cause cancer in the state of California.

We are a hopeless society.

Donny please !

Who is to say the military wouldn't turn against the government ? If things get really bad it would be pro government supporters vs anti government.

Actually it's a numbers game, the US Military isn't big enough. Furthermore in your liberal mind, soldiers are just faceless mooks for you to shoot in the latest FPS game, but in reality they are people with families, religions and beliefs. Soldiers overwhelmingly lean conservative on the political spectrum.

So in any "people vs the government" scenario, the very first thing to turn against said government would be that military. Any entity wanting to maintain power would need a private military loyal only to them, which isn't the military of the USA.

The reason the 2nd Amendment exists is to ensure that there are more then sufficient weapons available to the people to fight a split government. Go on a map and find out where national guard and reserve bases are at, now look at whats in those bases, then look at the dominate political ideology of the people of that area. So yeah a liberal government would have all of zero chance at maintaining a tyrannical government.

True story.

If Donald Trump gets a wild hare up his *** and tells troops to just start shooting anyone that disagrees with him, you really think everyone is going to agree to that? Their oath is to the office of the president and what it stands for, not the man himself. At that point it would be a clear abuse of power and actively against the entire principle. Yeah, some may very well follow that order, but sure as ***not all.

Hopefully almost none of them would but...you know how it goes.

Sounds kinky.

Jesus I wish we didn't. *** go slow, clog up traffic, casually drive through city streets that are clearly labeled "No trucks except for local deliveries" when they obviously aren't making local deliveries.

And don't get me started on *** dump trucks and their unsecured loads.

I'm more interested in better/better-enforced regulations for truckers and their employers than I am in gun regs.

Who's to say a militaristic turn against the government would be for the peoples sake?

#TruckControl

Did you know truck control comes in pill form, too?



CDL jokes. Whee.

1: Not a liberal, but don't get me wrong, I'm not a conservative either. Both sides are as bad as each other. Identity politics is the scourge of the earth, try thinking for yourself instead of going along with the crowd you happen to have chosen. Free thinking beats identity politics any day.

2: Who the f**k do you think you are making a presumption about what I think of people who serve in the military? I didn't mention a thing about my views on any of that. You use more strawmen arguments than anyone I've ever come into contact with. Argue against points being made, not what you assume someone thinks.

3: Feel free to back up your claim of most soldiers being conservatives with some sources. It couldn't be that people say 1 thing, then vote another way could it? Does that happen? You seem to be claiming that an oppressive regime will always be liberal leaning. Sources or examples throughout world history? How often has the military of any country turned against it's government? How often has a government used their military to crush any rebellion by comparison?

4: Civilians getting involved in a war where both sides have tanks and jets never ends well. It's like a group of people turning up to a mass gun fight with water pistols. Get out of the way and let the people with the correct equipment do their job. Guns are outdated as a tool of war.

5: "US military isn't big enough"... lol k. How many bombs does it take to wipe out a city, and how many people does it take to drop those bombs?

6: "We have bases near liberal leaning areas ready to strike! Essentially holding our citizens hostage because they don't believe in what conservatives do. Freedom! If we're going to have an oppressive regime it will damn well be conservative! Murica!"

Your guns are useless in a war scenario. All they are good for now is killing innocent people and hunting. At best they will help you kill civilians on the other side who you don't agree with. Super!

I get that people want to keep their guns, but at least be honest about why. Just say, "Look I really like guns". That's fine. Hiding behind "public safety" and all the other, frankly terrible arguments is nausiating.

Actually soldiers are NOT loyal to the President of the United States, that's just the commander in chief. This isn't a bad FPS game where the soldiers just run around and blindly do dumb ***cause someone else says so.

Actual oath of enlistment

https://www.army.mil/values/oath.html


Notice the sequence, first is loyalty to The Constitution and to defend it against all those who would demolish it, including those within the USA. That the soldier will stay loyal to that oath and not waiver. THEN there is the part about obeying orders of the President of the USA and his appointed officers, aka the chain of command. Catch is, there is legal stipulation that those orders must be "lawful orders".

The President ordering people to shoot random individuals for disagreeing with him would definitively fall into the "unlawful order" category. There would first need to be a law defining that disagreeing with the President was an offense punishable by death, then there would need to be a jury trial and that person would have to be convicted and then sentenced to death. THEN the soldier could shoot.

The Constitution was deliberately setup to be a giant *** block against overt power grabs by greedy and corrupt politicians. All those amendments don't grant any rights, instead the explicitly spell out and outline the rights inherently granted by that Constitution. The 2nd Amendment is so important to the freedom of the general population that the only thing stronger is the right to speak our opinions and the right to protest the actions of the government. After that is the rights governing the judicial process and thus limiting how much abuse the government can inflict on the population.

...did you read what I wrote or just start presuming you knew because you think you know me?

Claims to not be a liberal, then proceeds to prove they are a liberal....

Read the oath of enlistment and realize that the oath isn't to the President but to the Constitution itself.

Ok, so you're splitting hairs and nitpicking semantics. I'm sorry I didn't get the exact wording right, ffs. The spirit of what I said holds true and is accurate.

This looks like too much reading 140 character limit please !

Semantics...

That's a pretty *** big difference, especially since the topic was that said military would be on the side of the tyrannical government which is violating that Constitution.

Good arguments, well done. again you prove my point. You do understand that the world isn't liberals or conservatives? There's an entire spectrum of people who understand that both sides make valid points on a range of issues. It would be easier to see if you removed your head from your rectum.