This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Chakas
Pages: 1 ... 678 910 ... 86
211
« on: March 01, 2018, 02:07:49 PM »
Rights are not something that can be amended. We are entitled by them by our own existence. you see no danger or folly in allowing men who lived two and a half centuries ago tell you what your basic rights are
They did pretty well if you ask me. They didn't cover everything, but I'm glad what they did cover is law.
212
« on: March 01, 2018, 02:05:55 PM »
If owning a gun becomes a basic human right - then we REALLY fucked up as a people. Not saying that we didn't fuck up, but imagine education and water being followed by a fucking rifle? What would that say about the state of the planet?
Evil is real. Man is fallen. Weapons hold influence. When only one side has one, the other falls.
213
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:57:35 PM »
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly
in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it
that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you
never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
"Easily".
>"viewers should not assume that these homemade firearms are easy to produce"
>"they remain quite sophisticated pieces of engineering and true craft-produced weapons"
>"they require considerably skill to replicate"
>"manufacturers must also obtain quantities of suitable ammunition"
>"criminals in the UK do not appear to have made any great use of them"
http://armamentresearch.com/pa-luty-9mm-submachine-guns/
Home-made firearms are at this point still a very poor argument against regulations.
The point I was trying to make that outlawing a mechanical concept is not possible. In that post I was not attacking regulations. I was only saying what I believed to be their limit.
214
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:53:55 PM »
I feel regulation against certain firearms and features as a whole do little to nothing to limit criminals. At least not in this country. Background checks are cool. They make sense, but I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights the most absolute law of the land and should not be violated.
the fact that the constitution has been amended so many times should suggest to you how fallible and subject to change it really is
Yes, but the Bill of Rights establishes the basic rights of the people. Rights are not something that can be amended. We are entitled by them by our own existence. The Bill of Rights only puts them into words and establishes them as law. No law is perfect, but what we have at its core is the best we have.
215
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:46:32 PM »
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
i already agreed that it's impossible, i'm just describing how things would be in my perfect world
so when i tell you that there would still be millions of good people owning guns under stricter gun control policy and 2A repeal, you know it's coming from a person who would ultimately get rid of all guns if he had it his way
in other words, i'm not allowing my personal bias against guns affect how i view guns in the real world
we're never getting rid of guns, but that doesn't mean we can't limit public access to them
and limiting public access doesn't necessarily mean giving criminals more power, it's quite the opposite
I feel regulation against certain firearms and features as a whole do little to nothing to limit criminals. At least not in this country. Background checks are cool. They make sense, but I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights the most absolute law of the land and should not be violated.
216
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:34:43 PM »
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly
in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it
that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you
never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
Most people don't have the drive or knowledge to actually do that.
Instead they just go to the store and buy one.
Yep. right after they wait a very long time, drop a lot of cash, and get probed by Uncle Sam.
217
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:30:40 PM »
Just so you know, but you do realize that it's a fact that it's the USA's loose gun regulations that directly contribute to Mexico's gun crime and play a significant role in supporting the power of the cartels, right? This has been known for years.
That wasn't my point, but I am aware of it. The cartels have also been known to manufacture their own weapons as well. They certainly have the financial resources to do so. I think by legalizing gun ownership, common folk in Mexico would be more able to openly defend themselves against the cartels. It would be bloody, but it would be a fight and not the rape of the citizenry like it is now.
218
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:25:55 PM »
i mean ultimately if i had a button that destroyed all guns and prevented anything similar from ever being created or used again, then i would press it instantly
in fact, i'd smash wayne lapierre's face against it
that's my ideal, no guns whatsoever, fuck you
never gonna happen though, so i have to try to discuss reality
I think banning a simple mechanical concept would be nigh impossible. Even regulating it is exceedingly difficult. You can actually easily manufacture a submachine gun, from materials you can buy at a hardware store (P.A. Luty). The law can only do so much to control what people do in their own homes.
219
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:20:21 PM »
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?
I'd consider self defense a basic human right, but not the entitlement to a specific method of doing so. No, it doesn't make sense. Yes, there should be limitations. Yes, it would and does make a difference.
Care to elaborate on specifically what makes a difference? And how it doesn't make sense? So I can only defend myself in a specific way? Basic human rights conform to the law?
I was just going over your questions in order. It's gun regulations that can and do make a difference. I just made a post explaining this in the Serious thread. What you said doesn't make all that much sense because you're ignoring the fact that you'd also supply "the bad guys" with more and more ways of harming your family in a battle you can't win. And I didn't say anything about basic rights conforming to the law. I'm saying that I don't think think that owning guns is a basic human right.
I don't think adding regulations to devices that are already in the hands of criminals will affect them much at all, so not adding the regulations wouldn't make a difference either. The ability to arm oneself covers more than just guns in my mind. EDIT: When I ask what regulations, I meant specific laws.
220
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:14:55 PM »
We should just be nice to each other. I propose a mutual randomized exchange of gifts between citizen of each country yearly. You send in your gift and it's sent to some random citizen in the other country. I think that'd be pretty cool. Everybody likes presents.
221
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:11:13 PM »
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right
it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon
it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way
So you'd prefer rape and murder possibly with illegal projectile weapons so the perpetrators of such can't get their hands on them because they obey the law?
okay, don't be fucking stupid
my entire thesis (that i've stated repeatedly) is that owning guns is like driving cars, in that it's a privilege, not a right
that means you can still easily get your hands on weapons if you've jumped through the necessary hoops like a responsible adult, it's just not your godgiven right in the same exact way that driving isn't your god given right
and since millions of people still drive, millions of people would still own guns
just because something isn't a basic human right doesn't mean it's banned completely
Well alright. I can't change your opinion by arguing with you. You've made what you believe pretty clear. Have a nice day.
222
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:09:21 PM »
I'd want to drive a road train. Sounds like fun. A truck to maintain with an absurd amount of trailers, almost entirely straight roads, and the wilderness. This is very appealing to me.
223
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:06:32 PM »
The cartels are everywhere. Murder, human trafficking, and corruption are rampant. Guns are illegal, so the bad guys have all of them. It's a downwards spiral that I see no end to. The only drastic measures I can think of that may improve the situation would be to legalize and regulate recreational use of drugs on both sides of the borders, or make firearms ownership legal in Mexico. Both would likely cause chaos, but I believe the power of the cartels would take a massive hit that I think would be worth it in the long run. Does anyone else have any ideas?
224
« on: March 01, 2018, 01:02:39 PM »
I've never experienced it, but the first thing that comes to my head when I think of getting past it is listening to the sound of rain.
225
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:59:28 PM »
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right
it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
still a better outcome than allowing any fucknut to carry a projectile weapon
it's pretty asinine to compare rocks to guns, by the way
So you'd prefer rape and murder possibly with illegal projectile weapons so the perpetrators of such can't get their hands on them because they obey the law?
226
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:56:24 PM »
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?
I'd consider self defense a basic human right, but not the entitlement to a specific method of doing so. No, it doesn't make sense. Yes, there should be limitations. Yes, it would and does make a difference.
Care to elaborate on specifically what makes a difference? And how it doesn't make sense? So I can only defend myself in a specific way? Basic human rights conform to the law?
227
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:55:25 PM »
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right
it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
you are now talking about the right to defend yourself, which is a different subject
Defending yourself from those that are armed without being armed yourself almost certainly results in bodily harm or death.
228
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:52:29 PM »
sporting rifle
229
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:51:33 PM »
no, in the same way that the right to drive an automobile is not a basic human right
it's a privilege that has to be worked for, and can be taken away
So if I'm a caveman and a rival tribe has sharp rocks and is regularly raping and killing people from my tribe, I can't get my own sharp rock and defend myself and my family because my tribal leaders say so? I specifically mean the ability to arm oneself regardless of what age or state of technology.
230
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:47:50 PM »
Racism is stupid. Color is just another feature on a person and should be treated as such. we should pay it no more attention than the color of their eyes or hair. What is exceptionally stupid is race specific gang culture. There needs to be more outreach to impoverished communities where gang culture is especially present. In my dream world, in these bad neighborhoods and inner cities, armored trucks drop off cheap, advanced, durable tablets with educational tools for all ages. From basic reading and writing to plumbing, carpentry and social skills. Interactivity and facial recognition for personalized learning profiles everyone regardless of what tablet you use. They would all work on a network proprietary to the area they were dropped off in to deter the selling of them elsewhere. Even if the adults shunned and even destroyed them, the children would find a way to use them regardless, and over the course of time, I think there would be a significant societal impact in those areas. It may be necessary to regularly replenish the supply of said tablets, but I think it'd be worth it.
231
« on: March 01, 2018, 12:35:39 PM »
In a dangerous world, is the right to arm oneself a basic human right? Would it not make sense that a man should be able to arm himself equally as well as those who would do him and his family harm, regardless if those people respect the law? Should there be limitations to how well someone can arm themselves? If the items being limited are already exceedingly simple, common and available, would this make any difference to those with no regard for the law?
232
« on: February 08, 2018, 07:08:35 PM »
You're a confirmed pedophile OP and I think you should be chemically castrated.
What makes you say that?
hes an angry little goblin dw
This is true.
Stay away from our foreskins chaim
I don't understand.
233
« on: February 08, 2018, 05:30:37 PM »
We're dying over here. We need more members. This is the first time I've visited this site in weeks
234
« on: February 08, 2018, 05:28:07 PM »
yeah my gf knows
body pillows don't count
235
« on: February 08, 2018, 05:27:05 PM »
Donald Trump. It would be chaos
236
« on: February 08, 2018, 05:24:40 PM »
You're a confirmed pedophile OP and I think you should be chemically castrated.
What makes you say that?
hes an angry little goblin dw
This is true.
237
« on: February 04, 2018, 02:29:22 AM »
You're a confirmed pedophile OP and I think you should be chemically castrated.
What makes you say that?
238
« on: February 02, 2018, 06:02:48 PM »
Saying they’re “above the law” seems a bit misleading but yes, I think law enforcement should be allowed certain priveledges that the public isn’t to do their job.
Being exempt from the crime possession and distribution of child pornography is not okay. In having this status and maintaining these websites, they enable those who view the content. The LEA adoption of a CP site even increases it's traffic capabilities. It's almost blatant promotion of that kind of behavior. Not only that, but some would consider it entrapment.
239
« on: February 02, 2018, 04:25:57 PM »
T4R. A good example of this would be LEA being allowed to operate CP websites in order to catch pedophiles. This would entail possession and distribution on their part. I think it would be a untrue if someone were to say that no one operating these websites at LE headquarters was sexually gratified by the content they were using as a trap. This and practices in the drug war beg the question if these agencies should be allowed to be above the law.
240
« on: January 12, 2018, 07:51:47 PM »
What is that?
Pages: 1 ... 678 910 ... 86
|
Show Posts