As usual, the real story is in the comments. Does anyone think these people would not cheer our deaths at the hands of Hispanic and "refugee" volunteers enforcing their diktats?
Hey! They just want to 'stick the head in'! It's not like it is real, full blown sex! It's the proverbial 'camels nose under the tent edge'. Ignore it at your own peril.
Listen up liberals. Taking one tiny step towards an attempt to disarm me will cause many hot speeding bullets to fly in your general direction. Kapeesh?
The comments on that site are revolting. It never ceases to shock me at how utterly stupid and deceived and evil libs can be. They are flat out dangerous. They are the enemy of free people. Unfortunately when I read such insanity it causes me to realize that we are Inevitably, inextricably headed for civil war in this country. These people are insane and unreachable with any form of logic or reason. There will be only one way to deal with them. But of course, history already proves that, doesn't it?
The point of that article is projection meant to distract. Two things jump out - first, the comment about the NRA in the lead. Setting the NRA up as moderate by slamming GOA is pretty funny but second is the foolishness about US trying to avoid the conversation about "gun control". The truth is...wait for it... We gun owners are the ones WANTING to have a real and true conversation about gun control! It is the gun grabbers who want to make up words and present false premise and false construct all in an attempt to get what they want absent a real and true conversation. It is gun grabbers who want to avoid a on the level truthful debate about guns and our rights to them.
The marked departure in that piece is astounding. Watch for more of it now about the NRA. As more figure out that the NRA whipping boy status strategy is failing miserably, the NRA will now be hailed as the "reasonable" gun group, worth "dealing" with. Watch. What the lefties don't get is that we already know about the NRAs "dealings"...earning it the Negotiating Rights Away moniker. It will be fun witnessing lefties jump from hammering the NRA to championing it. They will rip their own fudds to shreds but then collectivist liars often eat their own useful idiots first, before they devour one another.
Now as for "taking guns away". It is true they do not want to engage in house to house confiscation. They know better. What they want is to get people to turn them over voluntarily by standing down their rights themselves. They want to remove guns from society via attrition. Set more and more guns on the "cannot manufacture" list and grab them up one crime and one estate sale and one "buy back" at a time. As 3D printing and focused energy tech grows, they will be shown how and why their strategy is doomed to fail. Of course they will deny that as well, but no doubt they will employ the same old tired tactics of doing the same thing expecting a different result.
It's not surprising they fall back to lies and projection openly. They lost the debate the moment the Second Amendment was ratified. Their current tactic has been all they had all along. They are just now coming to grips with the fact that, barring repeal, those dishonest tactics are all they have to offer. The best part of it this - more see it for what it is today than at any other time in history.
We will Not Comply with their wishes - We will KEEP our arms and We Will BEAR them too. Period.
Yes, PO'd American is correct. Bob Porter of the 'progressive' San Diego Free Press doesn't particularly like Sipsey Street Irregulars readers and has closed comments. I guess he's not much of a fan of Free Speech.
All I would want to tell him is that the people he thinks don't really want to take our guns are the same people that told us we could keep our doctors and healthcare plans. But then he would probably think that comment was racist, too.
Whats hilarious about it, these collectivists are incapable of wiping their own arses without permission from the hive. You have to think about the signal here. Cultural Marxists alway signal their intent, you just have to learn the lingo of their dissimulation. Lying really. Of course in the larger scope, collectivists aren't concerned with our guns, it is both our right to all our property, not just our guns, they want to deny us of, this delegitimizes free men, disarms us figuratively and physically of the most basic dignity of our liberty, the right and means of defense. Most importantly it is freemen they want to take out. Hard thing to accomplish though. Because… It is not guns that kill tyrants, it is free men who have guns who kill tyrants.
Those Threepers are violent racists (haben waffen!), but don't worry, you are protected by the list-mom turning off comments.
Doug Porter says November 3, 2015 at 8:26 am So, gang, it would appear as though our posting has been discovered by the Sipsey Street Irregulars, a blog profoundly influenced by the idea that right is might. Unfortunately, the opposition comments that I’ve approved have been the nicer ones. I blocked the guy who thought submitting 7 or 8 long comments was a good idea. I trashed all the threats: No, we’re not moving to North Korea, and No, we’re not particularly fond of Hitler, Stalin or Mao. I blocked all the racist comments..what is it with you guys? Block, Blocked and more blocking…
So, in the interests of my productivity, I’m turning off comments for now.
Ultimately, there are some problems that can only be solved by getting everyone to agree, and other problems that can only be solved by accepting that some critical factor of the problem is NOT going to agree.
Women tend to excel at dealing with the former, as their prehistoric role as homemakers dictates that most of their problems are going to be getting children and other women to 'behave' (i.e. stop hurting each other), and these are basically entities of the sort susceptible to negotiation. Men tend to be more inclined to deal with the latter type of problem (whether or not they actually excel at it), because of their prehistoric role of dealing with threats outside of society, many of which simply do not respond to negotiation.
As much as 'gun-control' may seem like a problem of the former type to women and effeminate men, it is not. While there are a great many humans which can be disarmed with sweet reason, there will always be a few who will not, and if they are armed then those who deal with them must also be armed to have a hope of prevailing. There are many people who commit crimes for reasons which are negotiable, and they can be persuaded to give up crime in exchange for some offer of cooperation. But there are always a minority of criminals who will invariably respond to the outcome of any negotiation by taking what is offered and refusing to give what they promised in the negotiation. Further negotiation with such is costly, futile, and dangerous.
I'm all for finding out whether someone can respond to reason, and I think that no system of law enforcement can be just or moral if it does not involve significant incentives for those enforcing the law to ensure that reason has been exhausted before resorting to force. Because not every bump on the street needs to be escalated into a deadly shootout. But some do. That is a simple fact of human nature, sometimes there is simply no way to resolve a conflict other than being willing to kill the aggressor. And situations where being willing to kill the aggressor is a significant factor in resolving it short of that are actually quite common.
So speaking of the gun-control argument, which is ultimately an argument about who gets to control guns (rather than appeal to some super-human entity which will control guns without any humans needing to worry about them ever again), is nonsense because the fundamental problem has an irremovable component of dealing with situations where negotiation is simply not going to work. Shortly put, arguments can only disarm the people who probably shouldn't be disarmed, it absolutely will not disarm the people who will use weapons to cause problems.
Yes, logically those arguing that control of guns should be distributed among the citizenry have reason, evidence, and morality all on their side. But winning the argument doesn't ensure they keep their guns.
Being willing and able to shoot anyone who tries to take their guns from them is what matters. In the end, it is the deciding factor.
As is predictable, comments are turned off when people start to comment.
However they try to obfuscate, gun banners (who deny it) will always circle back to their intention of banning guns, gun grabbers (who deny it) will always circle back to their desire to implement confiscation, and those who whine that we are dangerous meanies will always get around to admitting that only our perceived willingness to kill them holds them in check from attempting to kill us.
They fear us, and they should.
But while their fear varies from season to season, their hatred for us is constant. When they forget their fear, and instigate the civil war which any sane person fears, there will be no turning back, no "discussions", no compromise, and no mercy given to prisoners.
14 comments:
Article was originally from Daily Kos...Need I say more??
I didn't want to read the entire article, but I forced myself to after scanning it and reading this-
"It wasn’t the mass killings in Aurora or Newtown that changed (Republican) attitudes: It was the presence of a black man in the White House."
Wow.
The hack told many lies in one column. It's their fall back position. Lie about it until it is perceived truth.
As usual, the real story is in the comments. Does anyone think these people would not cheer our deaths at the hands of Hispanic and "refugee" volunteers enforcing their diktats?
Hey! They just want to 'stick the head in'! It's not like it is real, full blown sex! It's the proverbial 'camels nose under the tent edge'. Ignore it at your own peril.
Listen up liberals. Taking one tiny step towards an attempt to disarm me will cause many hot speeding bullets to fly in your general direction. Kapeesh?
The comments on that site are revolting. It never ceases to shock me at how utterly stupid and deceived and evil libs can be. They are flat out dangerous. They are the enemy of free people. Unfortunately when I read such insanity it causes me to realize that we are
Inevitably, inextricably headed for civil war in this country. These people are insane and unreachable with any form of logic or reason. There will be only one way to deal with them. But of course, history already proves that, doesn't it?
MOLON LABE
I see where the "Free Press" isn't; all comments have been stopped because they didn't like the opposing side. Hmmm.
The point of that article is projection meant to distract. Two things jump out - first, the comment about the NRA in the lead. Setting the NRA up as moderate by slamming GOA is pretty funny but second is the foolishness about US trying to avoid the conversation about "gun control".
The truth is...wait for it... We gun owners are the ones WANTING to have a real and true conversation about gun control! It is the gun grabbers who want to make up words and present false premise and false construct all in an attempt to get what they want absent a real and true conversation. It is gun grabbers who want to avoid a on the level truthful debate about guns and our rights to them.
The marked departure in that piece is astounding. Watch for more of it now about the NRA. As more figure out that the NRA whipping boy status strategy is failing miserably, the NRA will now be hailed as the "reasonable" gun group, worth "dealing" with. Watch. What the lefties don't get is that we already know about the NRAs "dealings"...earning it the Negotiating Rights Away moniker. It will be fun witnessing lefties jump from hammering the NRA to championing it. They will rip their own fudds to shreds but then collectivist liars often eat their own useful idiots first, before they devour one another.
Now as for "taking guns away". It is true they do not want to engage in house to house confiscation. They know better. What they want is to get people to turn them over voluntarily by standing down their rights themselves. They want to remove guns from society via attrition. Set more and more guns on the "cannot manufacture" list and grab them up one crime and one estate sale and one "buy back" at a time. As 3D printing and focused energy tech grows, they will be shown how and why their strategy is doomed to fail. Of course they will deny that as well, but no doubt they will employ the same old tired tactics of doing the same thing expecting a different result.
It's not surprising they fall back to lies and projection openly. They lost the debate the moment the Second Amendment was ratified. Their current tactic has been all they had all along. They are just now coming to grips with the fact that, barring repeal, those dishonest tactics are all they have to offer. The best part of it this - more see it for what it is today than at any other time in history.
We will Not Comply with their wishes - We will KEEP our arms and We Will BEAR them too. Period.
Yes, PO'd American is correct. Bob Porter of the 'progressive' San Diego Free Press doesn't particularly like Sipsey Street Irregulars readers and has closed comments. I guess he's not much of a fan of Free Speech.
All I would want to tell him is that the people he thinks don't really want to take our guns are the same people that told us we could keep our doctors and healthcare plans. But then he would probably think that comment was racist, too.
Whats hilarious about it, these collectivists are incapable of wiping their own arses without permission from the hive.
You have to think about the signal here. Cultural Marxists alway signal their intent, you just have to learn the lingo of their dissimulation. Lying really.
Of course in the larger scope, collectivists aren't concerned with our guns, it is both our right to all our property, not just our guns, they want to deny us of, this delegitimizes free men, disarms us figuratively and physically of the most basic dignity of our liberty, the right and means of defense.
Most importantly it is freemen they want to take out.
Hard thing to accomplish though.
Because…
It is not guns that kill tyrants, it is free men who have guns who kill tyrants.
Those Threepers are violent racists (haben waffen!), but don't worry, you are protected by the list-mom turning off comments.
Doug Porter says
November 3, 2015 at 8:26 am
So, gang, it would appear as though our posting has been discovered by the Sipsey Street Irregulars, a blog profoundly influenced by the idea that right is might.
Unfortunately, the opposition comments that I’ve approved have been the nicer ones.
I blocked the guy who thought submitting 7 or 8 long comments was a good idea.
I trashed all the threats: No, we’re not moving to North Korea, and No, we’re not particularly fond of Hitler, Stalin or Mao.
I blocked all the racist comments..what is it with you guys?
Block, Blocked and more blocking…
So, in the interests of my productivity, I’m turning off comments for now.
Ultimately, there are some problems that can only be solved by getting everyone to agree, and other problems that can only be solved by accepting that some critical factor of the problem is NOT going to agree.
Women tend to excel at dealing with the former, as their prehistoric role as homemakers dictates that most of their problems are going to be getting children and other women to 'behave' (i.e. stop hurting each other), and these are basically entities of the sort susceptible to negotiation. Men tend to be more inclined to deal with the latter type of problem (whether or not they actually excel at it), because of their prehistoric role of dealing with threats outside of society, many of which simply do not respond to negotiation.
As much as 'gun-control' may seem like a problem of the former type to women and effeminate men, it is not. While there are a great many humans which can be disarmed with sweet reason, there will always be a few who will not, and if they are armed then those who deal with them must also be armed to have a hope of prevailing. There are many people who commit crimes for reasons which are negotiable, and they can be persuaded to give up crime in exchange for some offer of cooperation. But there are always a minority of criminals who will invariably respond to the outcome of any negotiation by taking what is offered and refusing to give what they promised in the negotiation. Further negotiation with such is costly, futile, and dangerous.
I'm all for finding out whether someone can respond to reason, and I think that no system of law enforcement can be just or moral if it does not involve significant incentives for those enforcing the law to ensure that reason has been exhausted before resorting to force. Because not every bump on the street needs to be escalated into a deadly shootout. But some do. That is a simple fact of human nature, sometimes there is simply no way to resolve a conflict other than being willing to kill the aggressor. And situations where being willing to kill the aggressor is a significant factor in resolving it short of that are actually quite common.
So speaking of the gun-control argument, which is ultimately an argument about who gets to control guns (rather than appeal to some super-human entity which will control guns without any humans needing to worry about them ever again), is nonsense because the fundamental problem has an irremovable component of dealing with situations where negotiation is simply not going to work. Shortly put, arguments can only disarm the people who probably shouldn't be disarmed, it absolutely will not disarm the people who will use weapons to cause problems.
Yes, logically those arguing that control of guns should be distributed among the citizenry have reason, evidence, and morality all on their side. But winning the argument doesn't ensure they keep their guns.
Being willing and able to shoot anyone who tries to take their guns from them is what matters. In the end, it is the deciding factor.
And we are very near the end.
Confisctaion is confiscation NO MATTER the euphemisms they use to make it look like that is not their goal.
Sign Me, Neal Jensen
As is predictable, comments are turned off when people start to comment.
However they try to obfuscate, gun banners (who deny it) will always circle back to their intention of banning guns, gun grabbers (who deny it) will always circle back to their desire to implement confiscation, and those who whine that we are dangerous meanies will always get around to admitting that only our perceived willingness to kill them holds them in check from attempting to kill us.
They fear us, and they should.
But while their fear varies from season to season, their hatred for us is constant.
When they forget their fear, and instigate the civil war which any sane person fears, there will be no turning back, no "discussions", no compromise, and no mercy given to prisoners.
Post a Comment