• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cold War against Gun Rights!

Michael McMahon

Michael McMahon

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 6, 2019
Messages
2,396
Reaction score
123
Location
Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Whatever happened during the Cold War God certainly wasn't happy. Even if America would win a nuclear shootout leaving Russia and China in ashes it'd still lead to most of the west being obliterated. So if the Cold War was interpreted religiously then the question is why would God create a system where most of his believers might have been killed even if the belief in God still proved victorious. Maybe it's a sign that those who embrace the extortion of billionaires don't tend to care about all other forms criminality like gun crime. The only way billionaires could be a lesser evil against communism would be if society engaged in absolutely no other forms of evil. In other words a lesser evil would never work in an ethical system unless you're devout about making the evil as minimal as possible. Maybe a mixed economy is like a lenticular photo that can be interpreted as good or evil depending on how more evil the society could have been under a different system.


Kansas City teenager shot after going to wrong house
 
Wonderful gun culture we have. Shoot first and ask questions later. Poor teenager made a legitimate mistake as to the address and was guilty of ringing the wrong door bell. A ****ing disgrace.
 
Equality of outcome might sound like communism. Equality of outcome is often contrasted with equality of opportunity when it comes to free education in a mixed economy. Perhaps equality of outcome could be combined with criminal victimhood as a hybrid metric to expose absolute inequality. So society rewards a CEO with millions of dollars while someone else is not only poor but actually murdered or left disabled after a crime. As such we can see why an underfunded police service could severely aggravate wealth inequality with safety inequality. There's an amoral part of society where a citizen can sue a company for millions over a fall while a police officer who gets stabbed on duty might only get a small level of financial compensation. Maybe as an academic reference point we've to view the theory of communism as morally neutral seeing as there's an exception to every rule. It's not impossible for Christianity to have a close knit village of subsistence farmers in the Andes where everyone prefers financial equality. That way spirituality would be the goal in life and the economy would be viewed only as the background. As such it's the reckless application of communism where evil and the threat of personalistic dictatorships can occur. This is an important distinction because society cannot be cognitively dissociated where people believe in every form of equality bar financial equality.
 
Communist countries were intimidating but as a theory it's impersonal seeing as an agricultural co-operative or restaurant buffet are both harmless forms of equality.
 
A militia is unable to conscript people seeing as citizens would have access not only to rival militias but also the state military. A militia cannot tax non-members. Hence a militia is pretty much a glorified gun club with bigger weapons and greater cohesion. A militia is compatible with direct democracy where voters are equal in self-defence no matter who wins the majority of votes. The formation of a militia doesn't interfere with other voters. In theory a minority shouldn't really require the consent of a majority if everyone were equally entitled to form a militia. In practice ethnicity is historical and intergenerational where no society has a clean blank slate and so a militias need to be morally vetted. Indeed a militia could become a tyranny with a silver lining that their victims would have a fighting chance with access to weapons. A fight between national militias would be just like a macho duel!


"Appaloosa" Best Scene; Viggo Mortensen vs Jeremy Irons
 
Hari Seldon said:
Wonderful gun culture we have. Shoot first and ask questions later. Poor teenager made a legitimate mistake as to the address and was guilty of ringing the wrong door bell. A ****ing disgrace.
Click to expand...
"But he would likely have been in a car crash on the way home! Until you solve that keep the guns a'coming!"
 
Lycanthrope said:
"But he would likely have been in a car crash on the way home! Until you solve that keep the guns a'coming!"
Click to expand...

You can't stop an earthquake but you can stop people buying guns! As my 1861st post I've pre-empted a second American civil war!
 
“Four people were killed and 28 others injured when a mass shooting broke out at a crowded sweet 16 birthday party in rural Dadeville, Alabama, on Saturday night, authorities said.”
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/live-updates/alabama-Dadeville-mass-shooting/?id=98616435

The left wing isn’t an ethnicity. We’re all descended from the colonial era where anyone could blend in with a right wing demeanour. The left wing is really only identified with charity. Yet any charitable person can simply stop being charitable. As such gun control supporters could simply pretend not to care. The right wing could not defeat gun control advocates in a civil war because gun control advocates can hide. Unlike the Cold War the right wing cannot defeat criminality because criminals are individualistic. Moreover the right wing is supporting their enemy by allowing criminals to be easily armed. The right wing will be a victim of its own success in America. If most people are right wing in America then over long periods of time right wing voters will always form the majority of casualties from random gun violence. Left wing people can temporarily espouse selfish policies and infiltrate the right wing worldview until the right wing are forced to implement gun control themselves.

A07DFBDE-A877-41B9-91BF-B2B63BB4C7A2.jpeg
Athena Faris
 
Last edited:
“Las Vegas shooting: Man pictured giving finger to gunman amid terrified crowds... Just interviewed Shaun Hoff who was in the 4th row &I recorded this video. Says "we couldn't do anything." A woman was shot 30 ft from him.”
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-photo-video-concert-attack-a7979791.html?amp

If every single American were forced to own a gun then by definition every single victim of gun violence would be a gun owner. There’s no way to ostracise fellow gun owners who get shot. As such there’s no pride in owning a gun when everyone owns a gun. For example a soldier looks really cool with a gun to an unarmed citizen but the novelty of carrying a gun surely wears off for soldiers when every other soldier owns one too.
 
Part of the reason colonial empires collapsed is simply that they became bored of being evil rather than having converted to the good side. Britain might never colonise another country ever again because they’d be too rueful of the large empire they won’t be able to recreate. This is a really expensive way of redeeming evil people where they simply begin to view killing others as being repetitive. We cannot wait hundreds of years for sadists to become tired of committing mass shootings.

“In his History of the Wars, Procopius mentions a likely apocryphal story where, on hearing the news that Rome had "perished", Honorius was initially shocked, thinking the news was in reference to a favourite chicken he had named "Roma".
At that time they say that the Emperor Honorius in Ravenna received the message from one of the eunuchs, evidently a keeper of the poultry, that Rome had perished. And he cried out and said, 'And yet it has just eaten from my hands!' For he had a very large ****, Rome by name; and the eunuch comprehending his words said that it was the city of Rome which had perished at the hands of Alaric, and the emperor with a sigh of relief answered quickly: 'But I thought that my fowl Rome had perished.' So great, they say, was the folly with which this emperor was possessed.” wiki
 
It’s theoretically possible for an unarmed adult to kill dozens of primary school students in a gun control zone. A five year old is far weaker than a 20 year old. Yet young students could simply throw school chairs at the unarmed attacker or else they could use dagger motions with pens. The fact that simultaneous mass killings by an unarmed adult are so rare in gun control countries highlight that the rapid killing by guns can intoxicate impulsive murderers. There’ve been many unarmed sequential serial killers in gun control zones but the long time spans between each victim gives the detectives a long response time too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom