32 Forum Posts by "KILLER80804"
At 9/3/13 05:36 PM, lapis wrote:
I don't support a system of direct democracy like in Switzerland where voters have the right to decide through referendum on nearly every policy proposal; I think this can only work in a small, strongly decentralised state. But what I'm proposing is slightly more towards direct democracy.
Let's get decentralised.
I think that if you want to know if it gives consent, you point your butthole at it and see what happens.
Not all Americans are violent nutjobs who use bombs instead of diplomacy and infuriate foreigners. But over 80% of Americans either advocate this policy or let it happen. If Americans had done away with fighting foreign wars, there wouldn't be so many terrorists.
At 1/8/13 06:56 PM, Poniiboi wrote: I have nothing in common with the trailer trash that usually upholds the viewpoint of the NRA. However, I can agree with their paranoia about the government. Though I don't believe that there is a coordinated effort to destroy the masses for the benefit of the few, I do believe that this behavior is ingrained into the human psyche at a core level, so the effect is the same.
If we allow the government to take away rights to assault weapons, yes, assault weapons, they have effectively enslaved us. Cuz cops and soldiers will still have them, leaving citizens with no way to defend themselves against martial law, which in theory, because of fucking W. Bush (and upheld by Obama) can be imposed at any time.
Why would the few destroy the masses if they can just indoctrinate them all their lives and effectively turn them into fuel for wars?
Also, THEY ARE NOT ASSAULT WEAPONS. The definition of an assault rifle is a selective fire rifle. The weapons that the government seeks to ban are semi-automatic rifles. The term "assault weapon" could apply to anything, it is a political term.
Why are you so surprised? Government has been wasteful and stupid for millennia, America is no exception.
At 9/11/13 05:39 PM, MOSFET wrote:
Think of it like this. Obama is a good guy with a gun. You have a maniac gassing and killing people around him. What would have Obama do?
Obama wouldn't do it himself. He'd have thousands of people with no stake in the conflict die for his politics. He is trying to stop the use of chemical weapons with other people's lives. He is most certainly no good guy, just a hypocrite and a liar.
At 4/28/13 12:13 AM, Korriken wrote:
Why the hell do we play nice with those who want to kill us?
Maybe because they were given no trial? Or because there is a high chance that they never were terrorists? The ones who are terrorists attacked because the U.S. government got this stupid conception that it should interfere in foreign affairs and devalue human life outside of our own borders.
At 4/29/13 02:39 AM, TheShrike wrote:
I mean, they're guns, right? GUNS KILL PEOPLE!
Seriously, that this remains an issue gives me headaches sometimes.
People kill people. Guns are objects with no thought process at all. If guns killed people, we would be prosecuting them for crimes.
People who prioritize moral rules against homosexuality over moral rules regarding murder and abortion are worse than homosexuals. Hopefully, these insane and statist eugenics expirements never take place.
Gnomes. With plasma rifles. On dinosaur unicorns. I know of few who would not buy it.
New Evil Waddling Gerbils Riding Odd Uranuses Never Dying Spoon.
At 11/8/13 11:39 PM, Entice wrote:At 11/8/13 11:34 PM, KILLER80804 wrote: Orwell was a democrat socialist, he was criticizing totalitarianism.Huh that's not what they taught us in school.
That old pig was an allegory for Marx, the other pigs were bolsheviks, the ordinary animals were ordinary people, and the farmers were metaphors for czars/industrialists. There are a lot of implications about that whole 'everyone recieves according to need, everyone works according to ability' stuff.
Orwell was a democrat socialist, he was criticizing totalitarianism.
My teachers had a ridiculous obsession with that naive pro-communist book. They seem to think that the allegory and metaphor make it a great book. 1984 was good, but Animal Farm was just ridiculous. What did Orwell expect from a system primarily based on the imposition of one person's wishes on another person?
There is no where to escape the state, there are no places lacking income tax.
I consider myself to be libertarian conservative. I hate government.
I don't really see how banning semi-auto rifles will do anything, they make up such a tiny percentage of murders using guns. And the extreme majority of guns used in murder are not acquired legally because criminals dodge the law. And gun murders in general make up an unimaginably small percentage of murders.
Bloombreg is just another fool that thinks that it's ok to give a pack of idiots even more power than they already have. What next, controlling chocolate sales?
Is an EA accoount required to play online?
Most of the reason that there is so much gun murder is because no one seems to actually enforcing the laws already in place and refuse to include mental health in background checks. And then people claim that assault rifles are to blame, although rifles in general-not just assault rifles, but any type of rifle- only make up 3% of all gun crime. Hammers, cars, and medical accidents cause more death than guns, but they are not limited because collectively the benefits outweigh the losses. Guns prevent more crime than they assist, and could prevent far more. As well as all this, the 2nd amendment is the only real deterrent to corrupt or tyrannical government. Government tyranny and genocide are possible everywhere and must be deterred at a constant rate. It is always helpful to have an effective firearm handy because THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A UTOPIAN SOCIETY. There are only free societies and oppressed societies.
At 11/2/12 05:25 PM, leanlifter1 wrote: The start of this video highlights what is fundamentally broken about the US and that is ignorant and uneducated people making noise and voting unwittingly for subjugation and economic enslavement.
I think I understand the problem you are getting at. People that know very little about what they are talking about are voting for someone that say they will help you, but are unlikely to. Most people I know that support Obama just say "Obama rocks" or "Romney sucks" when I ask them why they support Obama. They don't even bother to explain.
It seems that Obama only won because of demographics, not economics.
At 5/22/12 12:44 PM, tox wrote: Canada's army is actually better then the Americans...
We kicked your **** for a long time in the past, we have owned every single one of your military ships atleast once, and when you build a new own its a running joke for how long it will be before we will peacefully overtake the ship and sail around with it for a while...
we spend what... 1/200th what America spends on defence yet we are never invaded
We serve in more rebuilding missions around the world then most countries combined
plus we help everyone out if they have a hand up
Give us a break, we like the snazzy uniforms and the feel of a outdated tank or ship
the reason canada hasnt been annexed into the US or another world power yet is either because canadians havent given
any one a reason to invade canada, that world power would get very unpopular with most countries, or because canada and the US are supposed to be allies.
why is the catholic church being forced by the obama admin. to sell contraceptives? thats unconstitutional.
political parties are really stupid. no one ever agrees on anything, the nation gets divided, and politicians work more on making their party more poular than helping the people that live in the country that they lead.
it is pretty annoying when someone makes a game that says that there will be sequel but they dont make it.
i think that the high elves are more racist than the nords, so its kind of inaccurate to call the stormcloaks nazis.
and if there are historical references in skyrim, then it would probably from multiple events, not just one.
i dont think the government has the right to censor the internet. its completely unconstitutional.
it is obvious that the iranian government deeply dislikes us and wants nuclear weapons for that purpose. either it wants to directly launch nukes or is interested in selling nukes to al-qauda or other terrorist organisations. and the reason iran has nukes is because it wants to defend itself from countries that dont want it there. either way, it would be better that we dont have ANOTHER country with nukes in the world.
