Page 34 of 53 FirstFirst ...
24
32
33
34
35
36
44
... LastLast
  1. #661
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Yeah, those people are dumb. Doesn't change the original intent of the 2nd amendment. Like I said, even if they were well regulated, it's debatable if they'd be able to form enough of a resistance to matter when the US has nuclear weapons to dissuade outside adversaries. As you said though, those dipshits aren't well regulated, which is the only hope of even making that a question.
    Just to make a quick point;

    Even the Founding Fathers were opposed to insurrection and revolution against their rule. The Insurrection Act was passed in 1807, and the actions of insurgents would still have been criminal via laws against murder and such beforehand. The 2nd Amendment was not about any supposed "right to oppose tyranny". In fact, the idea itself is pretty stupid, and it's kind of baffling that it's taken root in American culture; any tyranny would just revoke that law as part of the process of becoming a tyranny, if it was even concerned about gun ownership in the first place (Nazi Germany, of course, expanded gun rights for Germans).

    It's like instituting a rule in your marriage contract that "if you divorce me, you can't sleep in my bed any more." If you're at that point, it's already off the table, so why would that rule even make sense? This is less me accusing you of anything, and more pointing out that the Founding Fathers were two-faced idiots in a lot of ways.

    See also speaking of liberties and freedom when a significant chunk of them were literally slaveowners.


  2. #662
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Yeah, those people are dumb. Doesn't change the original intent of the 2nd amendment. Like I said, even if they were well regulated, it's debatable if they'd be able to form enough of a resistance to matter when the US has nuclear weapons to dissuade outside adversaries. As you said though, those dipshits aren't well regulated, which is the only hope of even making that a question.
    Well regulated militia, is the national gaurd. Everyone else that does any shit claiming well regulated militia is just a gang.

  3. #663
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    regulations don't have to come from the government
    Just so we're clear: are you suggesting, like Gaetz is suggesting, that the 2nd Amendment is (amongst other things) for fighting against private entities? Because Gaetz was saying that. And I can think of dozens of ways that can go sideways.

  4. #664
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Just to make a quick point;

    Even the Founding Fathers were opposed to insurrection and revolution against their rule. The Insurrection Act was passed in 1807, and the actions of insurgents would still have been criminal via laws against murder and such beforehand. The 2nd Amendment was not about any supposed "right to oppose tyranny". In fact, the idea itself is pretty stupid, and it's kind of baffling that it's taken root in American culture; any tyranny would just revoke that law as part of the process of becoming a tyranny, if it was even concerned about gun ownership in the first place (Nazi Germany, of course, expanded gun rights for Germans).

    It's like instituting a rule in your marriage contract that "if you divorce me, you can't sleep in my bed any more." If you're at that point, it's already off the table, so why would that rule even make sense? This is less me accusing you of anything, and more pointing out that the Founding Fathers were two-faced idiots in a lot of ways.

    See also speaking of liberties and freedom when a significant chunk of them were literally slaveowners.
    Of course they were. They didn't see themselves as tyrants. The amendment is there literally because of how england disarmed the scots and the fact that having an armed population allowed the US to be formed. The federalists admittedly wanted the federal gov't to be in control of the militias, but even hamilton argued that with citizens being in control of their own weaponry, that the fed gov't would be both more restrained in it's efforts to curtail liberty (because the power is in the hands of that citizenry) as well as more trusted by the citizenry:
    If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia, irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition, for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves universal hatred and execration? Are suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.
    It very much was about the opposition of tyranny, but it was supposed to be about how the defense structure of the US was supposed to be organized along lines that prevented tyrants from abusing military power. Just because the framers clearly didn't get it right, doesn't mean that's not what it was about. Literally about having to fight to compel people who are already armed to oppress their fellow citizens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Just so we're clear: are you suggesting, like Gaetz is suggesting, that the 2nd Amendment is (amongst other things) for fighting against private entities? Because Gaetz was saying that. And I can think of dozens of ways that can go sideways.
    Just so we're clear, you're saying it's illegal for corporations to have internal regulations and verboten for security guards to be armed? Or are you done misconstruing what I'm saying.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  5. #665
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Or are you done misconstruing what I'm saying.
    Gaetz said:

    The Second Amendment—this is a little history for all the fake news media—the Second Amendment is not about hunting, it's not about recreation, it's not about sports.

    The Second Amendment is about maintaining, within the citizenry, the ability to maintain an armed rebellion against the government, if that becomes necessary.

    I hope it never does, but it sure is important to recognize the founding principles of this nation, and to make sure that they are fully understood.
    I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Okay. Fine. Which branch of the government are "the internet's hall monitors out in Silicon Valley" in? Because, a little history for fake news Gaetz, Silicon Valley isn't part of the government. The point of the Second Amendment, by his own admission, was not about private, non-goverment entities.

    So he's either advocating violence, a complete idiot, or both.
    You replied directly:

    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    That's part of what it's for. The well regulated militia isn't just to protect the borders, but also to safeguard against tyranny. "...security of a free state..." Militias aren't necessarily governmental, and regulations don't have to come from the government (unless you're saying that all entities that employ security or pass regulations are government, which would mean corporations are governments). Nothing in the 2nd says that the militias are gov't entities.

    Whether or not it's plausible for a modern civilian militia to disrupt the gov't enough to allow an existential threat from an outside force to manifest is debatable, but it was clearly possible during revolutionary times and is exactly how the US came into being. It's the same as de-arming the population of conquered people. If you don't think the writers were thinking about both the arms regulations that had historically happened in what is now the UK as well as the action they had just taken part in to create our country, your view is being warped by your place in time.
    I have helpfully bolded the important parts of what Gaetz said, and my response to such. You will notice I was very specific about pointing out (a) Gaetz said the 2nd was about rebelling against the govt (b) I responded by saying Silicon Valley wasn't the govt (c) you objected to what I said.

    Your move.

  6. #666
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post

    I have helpfully bolded the important parts of what Gaetz said, and my response to such. You will notice I was very specific about pointing out (a) Gaetz said the 2nd was about rebelling against the govt (b) I responded by saying Silicon Valley wasn't the govt (c) you objected to what I said.

    Your move.
    Again, there's nothing in the 2nd about militias being gov't entities. It was one of the fundamental differences between the federalists and anti-federalists. The federal gov't being in control of the militias or not. Neither of them disagreed about the 2nd amendment being about an armed populace being difficult to control for a tyrant. Silicon Valley has literally nothing to do with whether dickbag is right about the 2nd. He is. The amendment was dual purpose: providing a defense force against outside (and internal threats) and also about prevention of tyranny. Literally quoted for you from a federalist's point of view, who would have been most opposed to threats to centralized authority.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Obviously, Gaetz will hide behind "I hope it never does". But I feel compelled to point out, in the same breath as he said "a little history for the fake news media", he said the Second Amendment was for rebelling against the government.
    This is what I was responding to. Which I notice you felt compelled to elide what you quoted yourself. Again, hamilton himself writes about this exact thing as I quoted.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  7. #667
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    Which I notice you felt compelled to elide what you quoted yourself.
    Gaetz said the 2nd Amendment was for rebelling against the government.

    Gaetz also said the 2nd Amendment people should go after Silicon Valley which I pointed out was not the government.

    You then went on an unrelated rant about whether non-government entities could have a militia. Irrelevant. Gaetz put back-to-back two things: (a) the 2nd Amendment was for fighting government tyranny (b) the 2nd Amendment people should go after Silicon Valley. He was saying that Silicon Valley was the government.

    That was incorrect.

    You tried to defend that with unrelated bits about the origin of the militias that he wanted to go after Silicon Valley.

    I don't know why you're doing that. Gaetz said nothing about the origins of the militias he wanted to go after Silicon Valley. He said something about the point of the 2nd Amendment, then instantly followed that with evidence that he didn't know the point of the 2nd Amendment. I don't know why you're spending your time ignoring that to talk about the difference between a mall security guard and a National Guard member, but I've not pointed it out three times and am done dealing with irrelevant info Gaetz never mentioned.

  8. #668
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    He was saying that Silicon Valley was the government.
    That's not what I'm getting from dickbag. Shooting people in silicon valley is separate from rebellion. He's not saying silicon valley is part of the government (there are two articles, one mentions shooting people in silicon valley, the other talks about armed rebellion). He's deranged for suggesting either murder or rebellion, but he's not suggesting what you're saying (silicon valley=gov't). That's in neither of the linked articles.

    The only thing I was defending him on is that he's entirely correct about the 2nd amendment. It originally was, in no way, about recreation and hunting. Just because pro-gun rights people have expanded its original intent doesn't change its original intent. It was supposed to be a safeguard against tyranny, both external and internal. Even though the founders clearly did not understand that the system they were setting up was not a workable solution, doesn't change what their intention was.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  9. #669
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    That's not what I'm getting from dickbag.
    *ahem*

    Well, you know what? Silicon Valley can’t cancel this movement, or this rally, or this congressman. We have a Second Amendment in this country, and I think we have an obligation to use it
    That's a literal sentence->sentence quote. It was used to start this part of this thread. You read it.

    This was, I'l remind you again again again, within a few seconds of his "fake news media history lesson".

    Therefore, he's saying that Silicon Valley is the government. Or, he's spewing random nonsense.

    Neither option is "but militias could be funded privately" which you responded with, completely irrelevantly.

    Oh, and you're agreeing with neither by saying "it really was about government tyranny". Because (a) Gaetz said Silicon Valley was the government, meaning you're not defending him, or (b) he was spewing random nonsense, in which case nothing can defend him.

  10. #670
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by agm114r View Post
    Oh, look, another member of the profession of lies (politics) gets caught.

    Just remember, liars like this aren't just Republicans, no matter if it makes you feel better to think <your favored side> are the paragons of virtue.

    They're almost all crooks and liars and thieves these days. Anyone who actually trusts either side are the real stupid people now. YMMV.
    Cool, you do realise that this argument's a crock of shit because Democrats regularly kick people out of their party for far less serious offenses (see: Al Franken) when Republicans continue to support people like Matt Gaetz and Donald Trump?
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  11. #671
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by agm114r View Post
    Oh, look, another
    Oh, look, another "both sides do it" with no evidence, to defend their side without having to condemn it. Please post constructively.

  12. #672
    Quote Originally Posted by agm114r View Post
    Oh, look, another member of the profession of lies (politics) gets caught.

    Just remember, liars like this aren't just Republicans, no matter if it makes you feel better to think <your favored side> are the paragons of virtue.

    They're almost all crooks and liars and thieves these days. Anyone who actually trusts either side are the real stupid people now. YMMV.
    This can be boiled down to "herp derp both sides" and it's a lazy ass argument at best and stupid's second cousin at worst that removes all context, scale, and work on the thinkers part to not have to compared anything.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  13. #673
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Dual US/Canada
    Posts
    2,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Dontrike View Post
    This can be boiled down to "herp derp both sides" and it's a lazy ass argument at best and stupid's second cousin at worst that removes all context, scale, and work on the thinkers part to not have to compared anything.
    Just remember the only people who have a vested interest in convincing people that everyone is corrupt are the corrupt. It allows them to wallow in their own vile nature while saying "You can't do anything about it, even if you get rid of me you'll get someone just the same, so why bother?" The only way they can keep power is by convincing everyone else that we're powerless, so rather than it being a 'lazy argument' it actively is an outright evil one.

  14. #674
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynarii View Post
    Just remember the only people who have a vested interest in convincing people that everyone is corrupt are the corrupt
    I believe the term is "passing gaslighting". But I believe what we have here is less active, more reactive. Their side was proven corrupt losers who lost, and now they're trying to convince themselves, not us, that they somehow didn't back a corrupt loser because everyone is a corrupt loser.

    We can circle 'round to this discussion again in 2024 when Team Biden has zero members in jail.

  15. #675
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    *ahem*



    That's a literal sentence->sentence quote. It was used to start this part of this thread. You read it.

    This was, I'l remind you again again again, within a few seconds of his "fake news media history lesson".

    Therefore, he's saying that Silicon Valley is the government. Or, he's spewing random nonsense.

    Neither option is "but militias could be funded privately" which you responded with, completely irrelevantly.

    Oh, and you're agreeing with neither by saying "it really was about government tyranny". Because (a) Gaetz said Silicon Valley was the government, meaning you're not defending him, or (b) he was spewing random nonsense, in which case nothing can defend him.
    Yeah. Like I said, he's deranged. He's urging murder and later, possibly rebellion. Saying that they should use the 2nd amendment doesn't necessarily mean to rebel against the gov't, just use the armaments guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. He's talking about shooting people in silicon valley, and, later, if needed, rebel against the gov't (ostensibly because they enabled those private entities and put a fix in on the election, while in reality because he doesn't want to go to jail). Two separate acts. Again, he's right about the 2nd amendment. You sneered at him for saying that. I generally take issue with things like that. I dislike the guy and don't want the hate train on him to be derailed because people maligned him under false pretenses. Use the real shit he's done. Like encouraging murder and rebellion because he wants to stay out of jail. Edit: Not because you have a 21st century view of something written in the 18th century.

    The reason I talked about militias not necessarily being gov't entities was because I misread what you wrote, because I didn't think you'd misunderstood what dickbag was saying. I thought

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    The point of the Second Amendment, by his own admission, was not about private, non-goverment entities.

    So he's either advocating violence, a complete idiot, or both.
    was talking about militias because I was reading quickly. I absolutely agree with the bolded.
    Last edited by Ripster42; 2021-05-30 at 03:31 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudol Von Stroheim View Post
    I do not need to play the role of "holier than thou". I'm above that..

  16. #676
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripster42 View Post
    The reason I talked about militias not necessarily being gov't entities was because I misread what you wrote
    I was hoping it was something like that. Glad we worked it out.

  17. #677
    Quote Originally Posted by agm114r View Post
    Oh, look, another member of the profession of lies (politics) gets caught.

    Just remember, liars like this aren't just Republicans, no matter if it makes you feel better to think <your favored side> are the paragons of virtue.

    They're almost all crooks and liars and thieves these days. Anyone who actually trusts either side are the real stupid people now. YMMV.
    Oh no buddy. We aren't doing "both sides" on this.

    Sure, politicians lie, but only one side made racism, fascism, terrorism rallied around career criminals, rapey creeps and conspiracy theorists their calling card. Namely Republicans.

    We first have to deal with that little national emergency before we can go back to the whole "both sides" thing.

  18. #678
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    Oh no buddy. We aren't doing "both sides" on this.

    Sure, politicians lie, but only one side made racism, fascism, terrorism rallied around career criminals, rapey creeps and conspiracy theorists their calling card. Namely Republicans.

    We first have to deal with that little national emergency before we can go back to the whole "both sides" thing.
    But Obama may have oversimplified a bit when he said people could "keep their healthcare plans", because he didn't specifically and explicitly state that insurance companies would be free to fuck over customers; he was correct that the government wouldn't make you change your plan, but he should've maybe said the insurance companies could.

    That was a terrible, awful, very bad "lie". They thought he should be impeached for that shit.

    But Republicans saying "it was just tourists" when we have them on video camera literally barricading the doors with security the day of. And that's fine.


  19. #679
    Pretty nice boat fivehead won't be enjoying this summer.

  20. #680
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    I wonder if it’s in any way related to his ongoing troubles
    I share your skepticism, Scoobs, but after looking into it, Gaetz garbled the message.

    He wasn't hacked, he was swindled.



    I suppose it's possible he used a "fake news" swindling to hide money, but considering the boat was being renamed Thirsty, I think it's more likely he got conned.

    Oh no, a Trump supporter being conned. However can I feign outrage? Oh I can't even do that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •