Calexit Storytime?

File: 1500140769996.png (167KB, 894x598px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 894x598px

It's been story timed twice, once on /k/. It was fun talking shit about dilusion asshurt commies

>>93931453
>>93931453
Archive Please?

it's be done 4 times. twice on /co/ once on /k/ and once on /pol/

>>93931559
>once on /k/ and once on /pol/

Oh boy.

Real talk... I recently spent time in Missouri in Kansas in NYC in Oregon Washington D.C. and finally California. All of which were practically different countries. Why doesnt the USA dissolve into something akin to the EU? No one can agree with other states and the disdain for others are palpable. What's the problem with a calexit? Or a Texit or anything like That?

>>93933406

Actually the entire thing reads like a ridiculous /pol/ strawman except its creator was completely serious about it. I really hate how the board of peace full of screaming, shitposting edgy internet nazis more often end up right than not.

I would read it, never heard of it

t. commie

>>93934717
>What's the problem with a calexit? Or a Texit or anything like That?
A couple states tried that once. It didn't really work out for anybody.

>>93934937
Of all sad words of tongue or pen
the saddest are these:
"/pol was right again".

>>93934937
>I really hate how the board of peace full of screaming, shitposting edgy internet nazis more often end up right than not.

Gee whiz, Anon.
It's almost like they're on to something.

>>93934937
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNCTH4gQJ-Q

>>93934717
E

>>93934717
>Why doesnt the USA dissolve into something akin to the EU?

Because the USA is already what the EU would be if the EU wasn't a gaggle of faggots. Besides, it's already effectively the same thing, except instead of a bunch of assholes in Brussels telling people hundreds of miles away what they can and can't do, it's a bunch of assholes in Washington D.C. telling people hundreds of miles away what they can and can't do.

>>93934987
If cali tried it would work out for the rest of us. We'd finally have an excuse to roll in, exterminate most of the population, and resettle it with actual Americans.

>>93935041
PLURIBUS

>>93934717
Why the fuck should we just let them walk away with a bunch of valuable west coast ports? Better to get rid of the people and keep the land.

>>93934717
The point of the US is that we are supposed to be 50 mini countries that aren't supposed to interfere with each other, just united by a common framework. The whole goddamn political problem is that our politicians looked at the EU faggots and said "that's a good idea."

The US is a version of the EU now. The secret is that the EU is fucking terrible and its model fails on 2 goddamn continents.

>>93935103
The US was a single unified nation long before the EU even existed.

>>93935089
>Why the fuck should we just let them walk away with a bunch of valuable west coast ports?

A bunch of federally owned military bases and research facilities too(NIF, Livermore labs, China Lake, to name a few). Remember how the civil war started?

File: 213431241324123.jpg (145KB, 1111x597px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1111x597px

>>93931440
>Absolutely everyone in California has an AR-15, a handgun, and one dude even has a fucking Barrett M82
>Hilariously over the top evil villain who mails peoples severed heads doesn't call in an airstrike to whip out entire neighbourhood of resistance fights and the key player of the revolution, instead sends ground troops with fucking flamethrowers long after everyone is gone to burn empty houses
>Sub-5'6" Mexican girl of average build and only one leg can violently break 2" thick wooden floorboards with her head by casually standing up
I'm not entirely convinced this shit isn't satire.

>>93931453
>>93934937
Honestly I really hope they try even though it's absolutely fucking retarded. I'd sign up to go burn San Francisco in a heartbeat.

>>93935143
Nah, this is what shitlibs actually believe. There's a good reason people why say that liberalism is a mental illness.

>>93931440
May as well. It's a good window into how liberals think.

>>93935143
>Absolutely everyone in California has an AR-15, a handgun, and one dude even has a fucking Barrett M82

Truth in television actually, California has the second highest number of gun owners in the U.S. Spoilers:We wouldn't be on the side of the people that have spent every waking moment telling us we are worse than Hitler, and that we are the reason crime happens. We'd turn on the secessionists as soon as the feds show up, fifth column style.

>>93935190
> liberals
> think
Pick one and only one.

>>93935148
I imagine the Military would have special measures to prevent people like you from seeing any major cities. Way too many people really want to be the next Sherman to the point you'd immediately resort to turning any city into Atlanta.

>>93935213
>Truth in television actually, California has the second highest number of gun owners in the U.S.
It also has a massive population.

What's the per capita ownership rate?

>>93935241
> implying most of the military isn't just as eager to burn SF/LA to the fucking ground
> implying it wouldn't be a massive improvement for the rest of the country

File: rare plum pepe.gif (1021KB, 600x726px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 600x726px

>>93935213
>Spend decades telling people that the second amendment is stupid and your AR-15 isn't going to stop a tyrannical government you fucking baby killer scumbag
>The moment Trump gets elected start buying guns to defend yourself against a "tyrannical" government who will surely send out right wing death squads any day now
>...Any day now
>No really guys, it's gonna happen
I hope they find out about the bullet buttons and ten round magazine bans only after they get into their first combat situation

>>93935260
The per capita ownership rate isn't very representative. It doesn't take into account that the vast majority of guns in the US are in the hands of a small number of people. The average gun owner in the US owns more than 8 guns, and the majority of guns are owned by people who own 20+ guns.

>>93935260
Was going to mention that if anyone was all "well if there's so many of you how come your state has such shitty gun laws". We make up about a third of the total population of the state. Meaning we get outvoted two to one, every time.

>>93935287
>The per capita ownership rate isn't very representative.

The point here is that the reason you have so many gun owners in California is because of all the people.

>>93935241
> I imagine the Military would have special measures to prevent people like you from seeing any major cities.
Of course the regular military wouldn't be doing it themselves. That sort of thing is what militias are for. Going house to house culling the population is hard, dirty work best left to people who are there because they love their country rather than the average grunt who might only be there for the paycheck.

>>93935311
>Was going to mention that if anyone was all "well if there's so many of you how come your state has such shitty gun laws"
No, we all know and sympathize. Stay strong.

>>93935275
Funny story, remember the Rodney King riots? A bunch of shitlibs get scared during those too, and decided they needed guns RIGHT NOW. Which gun store employees happily sold them, and then told them to come back to pick them up in ten days because lolcoolingoffperiod. The prospective gun owners were of course outraged, to which all the gun store workers responded that maybe they shouldn't have voted for that ten day waiting period(because when you need a weapon you tend to need it right the fuck now).

>>93935241
>Sherman is good until he's bad

I just want to remind you and everyone else that when Obama was elected, several states threatened secession and many MANY People, particularly here on 4chan, said, "good I hope they do so we can burn down the south all over again."

I'm sure this will be a good thread, and about comics.

>>93935373
Sherman was a general who did it at the end of the war. I doubt the Military wants a bunch of new recruits trying to kick things off by razing LA to the ground

>>93935432
I don't think doing it at the end of the war was any better to be honest.

>>93934937
God damn it, never thought about it that way

File: 1400095430226.jpg (12KB, 284x276px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 284x276px

>>93935359
As much as it usually fucks the rest of us over, you have to admit it's kinda fun to see libs fuck themselves up and only realize it when it's too late.

>>93934937
> still being surprised when /pol/ turns out to be right again
Seriously, it's current year.

>>93935432
Again, that's not what new recruits are for. That's what we have militias are for. I guarantee that if you put out a call for private citizens to pack up and go to California to exterminate LA or SF, you'd easily get 5 or 6 million volunteers willing to do it, already trained and equipped, and many of them already organized and just waiting for the word.

>>93935529
Hell, there are probably at least a few million already in california who have been training for that for years.

>>93934717
Ever played Crimson Skies?

>>93935275
This might not come as a surprise but mexicans love guns and the military because they think it's manly or whatever so California's large spic population is keeping them with some arms.

>>93934717
>Why doesnt the USA dissolve into something akin to the EU?
Essentially for a time we were.
States were more autonomous and the federal government was far less reaching than it is now.

There's a lot of reasons why that changed but the long and short of it is it became easier and faster to connect to other nations and so trading connected us more so things that affected other nations started affecting us more as we started exporting and importing more.

Being completely shut in like an amish community means that while you aren't beholden to any other body, and are less affected by trade with other bodies, you are ultimately unable to trade - which has in history routinely lead to greater wealth of a nation. There's a limit to how much wealth a nation can generate and how many people a nation can support on its own economy.

>>93935601
Spics are naturally conservative, particularly spics in the military. They'd be happy to help clean out faggot cesspools like SF.

>>93935275
>bullet buttons
Didn't they say those were illegal now and you couldn't even use those?

>>93935621
Yeah, it's all thordsen stocks now.
Or grip fins if you're a retarded fish.

>>93935635
>grip fins
I'm sickened but curious.

I'm fucking amazed that Black Mask picked up an eisner nomination for the garbage they're pushing.

but storytime of pain weekend is coming. Why not wait for that?

>>93934717
The way the US system was SUPPOSED to work is that the states are supposed to be the bulk of the government, with the federal system dealing ONLY with interstate commerce, war, and other issues.

Unfortunately the trend for the last 100 plus years or so has been a more or less ramp up to federalize the fuck out of everything. This means like California's Dianne Feinstein trying to write gun laws that affect Texas like the assault weapons ban, or ultra christfags in the bible belt trying to fuck with funding that might be used for abortions in Oregon through tricare. Even shit that's explicitly in the constitution as "we leave this up to the states" is becoming a hot potato.

The EU system is even worse for the things you care about. The EU's equivalent of the senate isn't elected at all, and they don't announce debate over laws before passing them, or have their debates in public.

File: Grip Fin 1dd8eb0e996a70583264581d8b39b724.jpg (2MB, 1440x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1440x1080px

>>93935643
As I said, honestly I don't know why anyone would want to use one. Even if the thordsen stock looks kind of durpy, it's way more comfortable and controllable than this thing.

>>93935359
>Rodney King
how the fuck do you get acquitted after having fucking video tape evidence? This always annoys me because it's not even a black issue it's a cop issue.

File: SPACEBALLS THE REACTION IMAGE.jpg (31KB, 499x268px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 499x268px

>>93935676
Is this some kind of sick joke?
Is this how you get your kicks?

>>93935728
No, as I said it's a grip for retarded fish.

>>93935676
And shit like this is why every California thread on /k/ consists of California anons posting walls of DO NOT COMPLY.

>>93935707
> how the fuck do you get acquitted after having fucking video tape evidence?
Doesn't matter. One nog getting beat up is nothing, they do that shit to each other every single day. They were just looking for an excuse to smash shit, as usual.

File: 1471812401123.png (1MB, 852x854px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 852x854px

>>93935753
I don't think you could hold this thing right with any configuration of tentacles, claws, hands, fingers, or fins.

My fucking wrist cramps looking at it. Why the hell would you subject your hands to this disaster?

>>93935529
>/pol/fags actually believe this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsTo_iq2SJ8

>>93935707
>This always annoys me because it's not even a black issue it's a cop issue.
"We have investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing."

>>93935765
No, grip fins are just dumb. There are other choices that are perfectly legal in cali that are much better. The restrictions on foregrips are something to seriously complain about, but if you're willing to subject yourself to a grip fin then you deserve the fucked up wrist.

>>93935782
That doesn't excuse shit cops do this shit and get away with it all the time and i don't get how the system just gets them off.

File: 1499260949729.jpg (353KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 800x800px

>USA

File: Thordsen Stock 51NzglSh+1L._SL1000_.jpg (40KB, 1000x347px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 1000x347px

>>93935806
> My fucking wrist cramps looking at it. Why the hell would you subject your hands to this disaster?
Because some people think it looks cooler than the main alternative.

>>93935811
This video lists a state as democrat or republic if it voted for the same party in the past 4 elections...

But Wisconsin didn't. Wisconsin was republican this past election and the 3 before that it democrat; by the definition given, it's a swing state.

>>93935841
No one's saying it does. But what it does mean is that whether or not the rodney king shit was justified or not had basically nothing to do with the riots. Nogs riot, rodney king was just an excuse.

>>93935862
Why you would want a gun that looks better but is effectively useless in your hands seems to be asinine.

>>93935909
Because some people are dumbasses who care about form over function.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity.

>>93935841
>i don't get how the system just gets them off.
Because there's zero oversight and the investigation is performed internally by the department.

In simple terms:
The police department responsible in every case investigates itself.

>>93935909
The grip fin is slightly easier to install/remove.
Also, if you already have an ar, it's about $100-$120 cheaper to buy a grip fin for it than a thordsen stock.

>>93935878
the whole video is click bait fun because it's basing it on final vote rather than the population. Case in point, NY state and OR are land wise extremely conservative and religious always voting Republican but there two major cities NYC and Portland always make the states themselves Democrat. Also we hit the road issue of voting and register to vote, By registered users most states would be independent however they all don't go out and vote. And that's not even tailing issues of people that are not even registered. But we humans being tribalistic need things in camps of "us" and "them" because it just helps us cope with all the shit in the world.

Oh shit what have I done?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcydbnPVzZI

File: countymaprb1024.png (264KB, 1024x694px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1024x694px

>>93935952
I loath how media tries to drum it up like it's something it's not. They try to paint it like there are these huge blue sections but the truth of it all is the country is for the most part red as fuck.

>>93935952
>it's basing it on final vote rather than the population.
Even under that definition it's not accurate. The final vote in the 2016 for the president in Wisconsin was republican.

I mean I could go on about the politics here but it's a bit less interesting than you think.

>>93936002
The country is also for the most part empty as fuck.

>>93935974
You don't have to pretend you didn't want another one of these daily threads, nobody here cares.

>>93936024
I didn't upload the comic yet and people have already started shitposting.

>>93936002
This election it certainly seemed that way.

But I can speak for Wisconsin only, the politics here I wouldn't call this strictly a red or blue state even if up until recently we voted for a republican president for the first time in about 40 years.

But I'll end up on a tangent. Suffice to say - by the video's definition that it gives wisconsin would not be considered a blue state as of right now.

>>93936020
If you watch that video it even admits populations are not that different and it's just basing it on the states rather than what the people register themselves as. You get into that mess and it turns 3 to 1 in the Republicans favor. It's just in the nature of the winner take all effect it doesn't seem like that. It's why the Trump win was such an upset, people got a rude wake up call on how it feels being on the other side of that system.

>>93936002
The votes were close and hillary won the popular vote meaning the red parts are empty and the blue concentrated.

>>93936078
> hillary won the popular vote
Nope. Discounting california's fraudulent results, Trump won the popular vote.

>>93936077
That video is wrong on multiple levels, and isn't worth listening to.

File: o9gs0uborw.png (444KB, 1929x672px) Image search: [Google]

444KB, 1929x672px

>>93936002
Honestly we should just bomb all the high density points in the country

>>93936077
>It's why the Trump win was such an upset, people got a rude wake up call on how it feels being on the other side of that system.
A system that almost exclusively helps Republicans.

>>93936098
Except he didn't.

File: govenorsracepng-1257c87c290589b1.png (23KB, 343x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 343x300px

>>93936020
>empty county meme
Many states are like OR where it's just a little over 55% win it out as Democratic

>>93936070
Yes, but you are obviously just using it as a pretense. I don't believe you wanted anything else for this thread other than what you got, so why bother adding to the bump limit?

>>93936117
Not really. Only in this last election did it work out for them.

>>93936140
It also worked out for them in 2000.

>>93936140
And bush.

>>93936124
Repubs are facing a demographic nightmare as their main voting base is starting to die off. I would say they would benefit from a socially moderate candidate but we've seen that with Trump.

They lost the popular vote in all but the one election this century. Its only going to get worse. Specially if they're stupid enough to run Trump again.

>>93936148
2000 was a mess on it's own and the fault there was Gore stupidly calling it over when he should have waited till much later. If he had the brain power to wait it out things would have played out differently.

>>93936150
Bush got lucky and his opponent gave in too soon to want to undo his mistake. All it would have taken for a Gore win would have been him being like Hilary and waiting till 3am to forfeit

>>93936155
> the dims actually think this
Once we have national voter ID laws, it won't matter what the dims do. Their entire "demographic" advantage is built on illegals. Whites, both men and women, overwhelmingly vote republican.

>>93936177
>if you remove the most populous state in the country on the basis of no evidence whatsoever, it changes the result
Really makes you think.

>>93936155
Both parties are getting insane so it's going to be a toss up next election. PC culture has just spread beyond control, and even normal people are seeing it spread to real life and a lot of moderate democrats are getting pissed off them.

Republicans are also getting batshit insane the other way with the tea party members. Honestly, something huge needs to happen for anything to change.

>>93936211
> based of no evidence
California literally encouraged illegals to vote. Their results are meaningless garbage that can and should be discarded. Why should we reward people for blatantly breaking the law by letting them get away with their crimes? California's votes should not be counted unless they agree to actually follow the law when it comes to voting.

>>93934717
Americans are tied under our national identity and state identity second you mongrel.

I'm an American, I love my country and state. If you don't like being in the Union or respecting the American identity from our shared history of blood, trade, wars, and more. Leave the damn country.

>>93936221
Name a single thing the "tea party" has done which is anywhere near as bad as the dims, antifa, or BLM. BLM flat out murders people, antifa attacks people for daring to say things they don't like, and the dims blatantly break the law at every opportunity. Name a single damn thing that the tea party (which is basically just what the MSM calls regular conservative Americans in order to make them seem creepy or unusual) has done which is anything like that.

>>93936262
> our national identity and state identity second
Liberals don't value either of those things, all they care about is a global leftist identity. They're the ones who should leave the damn country.

>>93935707
The short answer is that the jury, and in the case of the federal trial, the judge felt that the violence was acceptable, as you're allowed to use violence to stop a dangerous suspect.

Also, juries are VERY ok with a hell of a lot of use of force, if they think the person on the recieving end is a criminal scumbag, even if the circumstances at the time don't warrant it. Considering the number of extrajudicial beatings that happen in your average comic book, this shouldn't be that much of a suprise.

>>93935831
Even when it goes to a jury, the juries are frequently calling for aquittals, or only voting for relatively minor penalties. When Obama, with Eric Holder, had the FBI investigating questionable agencies and actions, they still weren't getting enough to take any serious action, so it's not simply a matter of self investigation either, although that is a significant thing.

File: AlmSXkS.jpg (81KB, 800x471px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x471px

>>93936221
This was predicted a couple hundred years ago

>>93936282
> nog jury proclaim that the violence is acceptable
> nogs then scream that it's unacceptable and riot
Pretty much this.

>>93936263
It's a batshit insane ideal it's values are stupid and it promotes idiots and it als managed to grab a lot more power than people realize. I don't know why but hardcore religious conservatives gravitate towards flatearth and creationism. They want unrealistic goals and an even worse educational system then what we currently have in place.

antifa and BLM have no real power and don't have members in house seats. It's a bunch of pointless rioting.

>>93936286
Then they shouldn't have designed a first-past the post electoral system that by its very nature leads to the consolidation of power in the hands of two political parties.

>>93936275
Do you think all liberals think the same and have the same mentality? There's a broader spectrum of people that you're missing out on and not everything is as black and white as you're suggesting.

>>93936286
The people that founded this country were some of the smartest, most forward thinking people to ever live on this planet.

>>93936311
Their flaw was underestimating how stupid we would eventually become.

>>93936291
Is the flat earth thing actually real? I thought this was an internet meme asking if the earth is flat.

Are people actually retarded now?

>>93936291
> It's a batshit insane ideal
> limited government, limited taxes, protection of private property and individual rights
> batshit insane ideal
> it's values are stupid
Go fuck yourself.

> antifa and BLM have no real power and don't have members in house seats. It's a bunch of pointless rioting.
It's a bunch of rioting in which neighborhoods are destroyed and people are fucking murdered you mong. When was the last time the tea party engaged in violence? Oh, that's right. Fucking NEVER. Even when king nigger was wiping his ass with the Constitution, did you see conservatives rioting? No. Because we're not a bunch of fucking animals like you retarded crybabies.

>>93936332
There have been an assload of right wing terrorist attacks recently. Where the fuck have you been?

>>93936311
They were still taking a shot in the dark. The problem was that for all of their wisdom, something like the US was a really new idea and was basically untested. They simply couldn't foresee all the problems that we crop up down the line. They figured we would revisit the Constitution and draft a new one in a few decades to a century. But instead we've kept the same basic Constitution for more than 250 years. There were some serious problems, like the first-past-the-post system that created the modern party structure, that need to be fixed.

>>93936332
Not that Anon, but.

>Limited government is government
Not in modern times. Limited governments always fail and super hard at that

>Protection of private property and individual rights
Already being done.

>>93936332
You are you just don't get up and do shit you sit on your fat ass.

These riots are shit but the tea party doesn't magically get away with not being shitty just because a group is worse. Some of the things it promotes are fine but that's not all it promotes. The republican party is going to be at odds with itself between the old line and the new line. The tea party is part of that issue.

>>93936327
Yes, I wish it was fake but it's real.

>>93936362
> right wing terrorist attacks
Isn't the same thing as the tea party murdering people or rioting in the streets.

>>93936327
While this will surprise no one, Shaq is a flat earther.

>>93936369
> Limited governments always fail and super hard at that
It worked for the US for literally more than a century. Fuck your historical revisionism.

> Protection of private property and individual rights
> Already being done.
So I guess I must just be imagining things when commiefornie passes yet more gun control, depriving millions of both their individual rights and their private property all in one go.

>>93936394
>It worked for the US for literally more than a century.
I assume you're referring to the 1800s correct?

Because 1900s america was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from limited government.

>>93936394
>It worked for the US for more than a century
You missed the fucking part of "NOT IN MODERN TIMES" dumb ass. This is why the Civil War was fought and a bunch of European Wars took place, namely the Unification of Germany.

>So I guess I must just be imagining things when commiefornie passes yet more gun control, depriving millions of both their individual rights and their private property all in one go.
You still have the individual right to property and firearms. Not too mention it was legally voted by the people's representatives in that state, numb nuts.

The right to deprive people of their own rights is done by the people. If the people of a state want stricter firearms and their representatives vote for it, it is their right as Americans and their state governments right to do it. If people don't want this to happen they can simply create a petition, move, or vote for people who align with their interests who can appeal the law.

This is how the legal system work. You don't see a man going into peoples houses taking guns one by one. Not too mention for a law for the federal government to pass it need a majority in both houses and president signature or him being out voted, stop being dumb ass. If the law passed that means not just Californians wanted stricter gun laws across the US, but other representatives from the states.

You do not respect the American system.

File: 67346367383578.gif (45KB, 580x630px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 580x630px

>>93936299
you say that like we have figured anything out that isn't corrupted by humans. Every good idea can and will be poison by those who are both evil and with power all we can do is keep trying in hopes we find some new system that isn't corruptible
we won't

>>93936362
Well of course, radical islam is as conservative as you can get

>>93936443
> Not too mention it was legally voted by the people's representatives in that state, numb nuts.
Doesn't matter, the Constitution says that the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Amending that takes far more than just a few million shitskins in SF/LA and the dims who bought their votes. Until that happens, those laws are illegal acts of tyranny.

>>93936263
>BLM flat out murders people
No it doesn't. BLM does not in any way condone violence. That's like saying the pro-life movement kills people. However, the Tea Party is largely responsible for undermining the democratic process in this country via REDMAP. Since you have no idea what REDMAP is, it's the Koch funded operation that utilized mass data analysis to optimize 2010 congressional redistricting to basically make it impossible for the Democrats or any other party to ever retake state or federal legislatures. Gerrymandering has always been around, but never at this scale, with this precision.

>>93936469
Okay, Tim. just go back to /pol/ while planning your next attack.

>>93936459
First-past-the-post is a shitty type of voting. Acknowledging that doesn't mean that I'm promoting communism/dictatorship/whatever. Proportional representation and mixed-member proportional representation exist. They're somewhat more recent developments among democratic nations than the US Constitution, and they help break up political parties.

>>93936476
>BLM does not in any way condone violence.
Not even you believe this.
The entire movement consists of nothing but rioting and calling for cops to be murdered.

>>93936476
> BLM does not in any way condone violence.
Yet it's members are constantly going out and committing violence. Funny how that works.

> However, the Tea Party is largely responsible for undermining the democratic process in this country via REDMAP. Since you have no idea what REDMAP is, it's the Koch funded operation
Since you have no idea who George Soros is, shut the fuck up about things you're completely ignorant of. Nothing even comes close to the level of corruption that the dims have engaged in when it comes to trying to steal elections.

>>93936382
Don't underestimate his shaq fu, or his troll fu.

>>93936435
>Because 1900s america was faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from limited government.
WW1 really cemented that idea with the Wilson administration. Boy if you think the bush "free speech zones" and trump wall were strict, you should read about the alien and sedition acts and what happened to anybody who even criticized the government, let alone the war.

Wilson takes the cake there. People were tarred, feathered and lynched for anything short of glowing patriotism. Then look at the palmer raids.

My god one day alone 10,000 people were detained to find maybe 15 people who were draft dodging.

You aren't joking when you said the federal government was big back then.

>>93936476
> BLM does not in any way condone violence.
Pffft HAHAHAHHAAHHA.

>>93936469
>the Constitution says that the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Yeah, if you're forming a well organized militia. Says nothing about Cletus buying an AK47 to make up for his micropenis. The most powerful firearms when the second amendment was written had a firing rate of about 4 rounds per minute, if you were really good.

>>93936464
Islamic terrorists are liberals and are supported by liberals. Look up intersectionality. The fact that they're supposedly an "oppressed people" means that the left considers them their own.

File: Philosophy 101.png (165KB, 777x656px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 777x656px

>>93936469
Restricting the type of fire arm you might be able to buy is not infringing on the right to bear arms as you are still able to acquire and own fire arms.

The right to bear arms is not defined to one statement and can be interpreted loosely. The right to bear arms can be though as simply owning multiple single shot pistols and no automatics or semi-automatics.

A big problem with the right to bear arms is that the Founding Fathers had no idea the way fire arms would evolve into wanton killing machines. Which leads to circular debates in Congress, numbnuts.

>Amending that takes more than a few million shitskins.
Chill the fuck out and stop being mad. The people in Congress decide amendments and what they pass is law of the United States and not illegal or an act of tyranny.

>>93936488
I wasn't saying you were so much as just showing anything that should work on paper just never will. Any system will ensure corruption. All we have seen is the more open to change and speed it has the longer it takes the poison to set in.

>>93936534
> misunderstands what well organized militia meant in the original context
Check
> blatantly anti-white
Check
> non-argument based on claim that technology has improved so rights are somehow no longer valid
Check

Fuck off shitlib.

>>93934937
>I really hate how the board of peace full of screaming, shitposting edgy internet nazis more often end up right than not.
I'm sure that if we continue plugging our ears and tell everyone who doesn't agree with us to go back to /pol/, reality will eventually bow to our whims

>>93936286
To be fair Washington was talking about the political parties of his own time, which he got fed up with dealing with. He was not a guy who liked to be told what he can do and what not.

>>93936534

You can literally smell the California coming off this post.

>>93936534
>Yeah, if you're forming a well organized militia.
No, that is the purpose of the amendment. It literally states what the purpose of the amendment is for and why it exists as a separate clause, not a dependent one.

>The most powerful firearms when the second amendment was written had a firing rate of about 4 rounds per minute, if you were really good.
Also wrong. Believe it or not, at the time, the giradoni air rifle had a better muzzle velocity and rate of fire.

There's a few reasons why we didn't use them of course and that's kind of a different topic.

>>93936564
Well clearly the janitors don't.

File: seattle protests.jpg (35KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x360px

>>93936476
> BLM does not in any way condone violence.
This is what leftists actually believe.

>>93936547
>A big problem with the right to bear arms is that the Founding Fathers had no idea the way fire arms would evolve into wanton killing machines.

Source, or I'm calling bullshit.

>>93936547
>A big problem with the right to bear arms is that the Founding Fathers had no idea the way fire arms would evolve into wanton killing machines.

Girandoni Air Rifle.

>>93936619
Didn't make it to the US until the 1800s, well after the Second Amendment was drafted.

File: Capture.png (30KB, 638x468px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 638x468px

>>93936547
>Restricting the type of fire arm you might be able to buy is not infringing on the right to bear arms as you are still able to acquire and own fire arms.
>image
apparently there's also some discussion as to whether infringe meant the 1st definition or 2nd, but some guy on the internet says its the 2nd based on historical evidence, dunno if biased but he used examples so i'll post the link so you can be the judge
http://onsecondopinion.blogspot.com/2009/02/meaning-of-shall-not-be-infringed.html

>>93936603
Source: The founding fathers died before the first automatic pistol was made 1892 or breech loaded guns become common in Europe in 1860s. Repeating carbine was patented in 1860s, revolvers didn't happen until 1835.

The simple fact they died before this and didn't have a back up plan for the evolution of firearms proves that the founding fathers had no idea about fire arms evolving into easy to use weapons delivering lots of firepower.

>>93936638
A weapon that the founding fathers were still aware of at the time of its inception. Under no circumstances did they envision solely muzzle loaders when the technology was available and employed at the time the document was drafted. It is painfully obvious that it was something that the authors were aware of. Especially when most canon and siege weapons were privately owned in the revolutionary war.

>>93936327
That's bad but antivaxxors are worse.

>>93936659
By the second definition the moment the United States Congress started regulating the types of firearms that can be sold to the public and what can be used by the militias/military, meant the law been broken.

Which is stupid.

>>93936669
>The simple fact they died before this and didn't have a back up plan for the evolution of firearms proves that the founding fathers had no idea about fire arms evolving into easy to use weapons delivering lots of firepower.
The technology at the time was actually already there and available at the time the founding fathers were alive and commissioned to Lewis and Clark by Thomas Jefferson himself.

Not only did the founding fathers know about them. They commissioned them.

>>93936703
>Which is stupid.
it is

>>93936601
Not that Anon, but the problem with BLM is that it is a fractured group filled with criminal shits and some factions not being violent.

If anything it should be dropped and reformed into a proper peace group working with police organizations, but that's just my two cents as a black guy in the south.

>>93936703
>the United States Congress started regulating the types of firearms that can be sold to the public and what can be used by the militias/military, meant the law been broken.

Correct.

>Which is stupid.
One rule for the ruler, another for the ruler is stupid.
The founding fathers did not want a standing army and were strongly opposed to one.

>>93936703
Why? Because if the government does something it must be okay? The fact of the matter is that the government IS regularly breaking the law when it comes to gun control.

>>93936547
The federalst papers and the various drafts of the bill of rights are very unambiguous on this topic.

The fear was the goverment would use force to oppress the people. So, the idea is that use of force by the government by arms is an extenstion of use of force by the people.

>The right to bear arms is not defined to one statement and can be interpreted loosely. The right to bear arms can be though as simply owning multiple single shot pistols and no automatics or semi-automatics.

That's why the the justification for the law is specified as a properly equipped militia. So, weapons that are suitable for a militia. Look up the saturday night special ban. Cheap pistols that can only fire a few rounds before breaking aren't suitable for a millitia, the courts ruled, so it's ok to ban them. Same with sawed off shotguns, although the dude died before it went to the supreme court. A supersoaker filled with anthrax probably wouldn't be seen as suitable for a millitia.

The idea that you can have police officers with glocks, mossberg shotguns, and AR-15's, while restricting the bulk of the people to break action weapons is completely anathemiatic to the founding fathers.

>>93936706
Just because the technology was there doesn't mean anything, as you and Thomas Jefferson wouldn't expect your average joe to own and operate one.

The fact that the technology became mass produced and easy to use is the main problem. Which is why Congress later passed firearm regulation acts.

>>93936507
>Not even you believe this.
Don't project your delusions on to me. Outside of a few individuals not actually affiliated with the organizational structure of the BLM movement the group has condemned violent demonstrations. Meanwhile, the current president has actively encouraged his supporters to attack his critics, even offering to fund the legal defense of those who use violence in his name. This is a matter of public record, but you will no doubt deny it because it doesn't fit the "best timeline" narrative you've built for yourself.
>>93936516
>Yet it's members are constantly going out and committing violence. Funny how that works.
Funny how the same thing happens with antiabortion groups.
>Since you have no idea who George Soros is
I know who Soros is, I'm familiar with all the popular right wing conspiracy theories circulating today. Soros is one man, however, and has no where near the resources to pull off half the bullshit you people accuse him of. The Kochs, on the other hand, represent the third and forth richest Americans, and have build a political machine without equal to bring the US government to it's knees.

>>93936745
> while restricting the bulk of the people to break action weapons is completely anathemiatic to the founding fathers.
That's also not what is the case even in places like california. That's something you just made up.

>>93936752
>as you and Thomas Jefferson wouldn't expect your average joe to own and operate one.
Had he not wanted firearms of that lethality, which were obvious that they existed and available, he could have amended what was written.

He didn't.

>>93936757
> dismisses the idea that Soros can pull shit as conspiracy theory
> talks about the Kochs as if that isn't far more ridiculous
The kind of double-think you shitlibs display is really amazing.

>>93936728
You didn't understand the post. The second definition of infringement makes no sense and automatically dissolves the law, especially after the first congress passed laws to regulate firearms the militias could control.

>>93936726
>The founding fathers didn't want a standing army.
This is incorrect. The Army and Navy of the United States has been standing since their times as the Continental Army along with the various military academies. They didn't want a large governing army like you would've seen in France or Prussia

>>93936562
Fuck off swarmfront. You're not going to convince anyone here with those hot mantras.

>>93936791
> The second definition of infringement makes no sense and automatically dissolves the law,
Yes, it automatically bars any attempt by the government to restrict the ability of the people to defend themselves from government tyranny. That is the whole fucking point you illiterate mong.

>>93936669
>The simple fact they died before this and didn't have a back up plan for the evolution of firearms proves that the founding fathers had no idea about fire arms evolving into easy to use weapons delivering lots of firepower.

No, it does not.

I will likely die before I will see the invention of a laser rifle that can saw a building in half, but that doesn't mean I have no idea that technology will progress to that point.

You must believe that the founding fathers were clinically retarded to believe "Firearms will never improve past this point."

>>93936538
>Islamic terrorists are liberals
This is the single stupidest post on this site right now. Not this thread. Not this board. This entire site.

>>93936821
The left treats them like their own.
They even invented the concept of intersectionality in order to call them liberals too.
Look it up.

>>93936791
The continental army was succeeded by the united states army. The continental army disbanded; what little of it was left.

>>93936812
The point is that the first definition of Infringment bars any attempt by the government to restrict the ability of the people to defend themselves from government tyranny. You illiterate mong.

>United States
>government tyranny
The United States has never had any form of tyranny like Russia, China, North Korea, France, or any other country in the world.

Hardest tyranny the US ever got was the interment camps for the Japanese and if you're a southerner who isn't a unionist, you can say the Union was a tyrant.

>>93936847
>The United States has never had any form of tyranny like Russia, China, North Korea, France, or any other country in the world.
being armed helps

>>93936847
>The United States has never had any form of tyranny

And of course we knew that there wouldn't be tyranny in the united states in the future when the nation was founded.

>>93936757
BLM doesn't really HAVE an organizational structure. That qualifier is meaningless. Personally, I'm not concerned as whether the violent motherfucers fuckers burning down the cities are BLM or try for the high score in cop killings or some off brand imitation BLM substitute, as I am concerend that there's enough violent, motherfuckers who ARE doing it. And the're doing it in numbers, and with enough organization to be successful at burning shit down.

>>93936766
Read the dude I'm replying to. He's the one claiming that single shot weapons would satisfy 2A..

>>93936865
Being armed didn't help the South after it got raped to death. As the Confederate military was basically a militia drafted from its states (And I'm butthurt about my state being a battle ground with Confedashits doing nothing for it.)

While the United States copied the standing army models of the French and Prussians.

File: 195v2ypf9v17pjpg.jpg (70KB, 800x430px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x430px

So I get that this thread is Russian propaganda and all that but have you guys ever seen In Smog And Thunder -The Great War Of The Californias?

It's a documentary about the Great California Civil War, I highly recommend it.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2h8cgt

>>93936752
I'm sure they wouldn't expect the average person to own and operate a computer either. Does that mean shit you say on the internet isn't protected under the first amendment? The problem with your argument, is that you are arguing that any tech invented after the bill of rights was drafted, is not covered by the bill of rights. Which is completely retarded seeing as half the founding fathers were god damn inventors, they knew tech would advance, and they knew that they wouldn't be able to predict how it would advance. They always intended for the citizenry to be on equal footing with the government, when it came to things like force, or distribution of ideas(speech, writing, and such).

>>93936813
The thing is, the technology he speaks of actually existed at the time of the writing of the constitution. The fact that guns HAD advanced to that point means it wasn't a stretch of the imagination at all considering the tech was right at their doorstep.

As for manufacturing, the start of the industrial revolution was prior to the revolutionary war. not only was mass production something they were aware of, it was essential to arm the new continental army. Granted, it was mostly french guns and some stolen british ones. But those were nations who were well into the industrial revolution.

>>93936752
Rights not enumerated by the constitution are retained by the people.

>>93936905
The first amendment right to free speech isn't unlimited either. In a lot of places in the US you can't go around at 3 in the morning screaming from a megaphone. Similarly, it's a crime to walk up to someone on the street with five of your friends and say "give me your money or we'll kill you" even if you don't follow through.

>>93936752
>The fact that the technology became mass produced and easy to use is the main problem.
Not only was this phenomenon something the founding fathers were aware of. It was something they exploited. Previous technology that had could not be mass produced that now was being mass produced was literally used to arm the same continental army they had just used to fight a war with.

The mass production of technology that was previously too complicated to mass produce was literally how guns used in the revolutionary war were made. They were purchased on credit from the french and mass produced in france and europe.

>>93936973
>In a lot of places in the US you can't go around at 3 in the morning screaming from a megaphone
Or shouting, you mean. And I'll get to that in just a moment.

>Similarly, it's a crime to walk up to someone on the street with five of your friends and say "give me your money or we'll kill you" even if you don't follow through.

These two things were not limited by technology of the time, now, were they? Which was what your argument was. Both of those things might have happened and probably did happen in the late 18th century.

>>93936745
>A supersoaker filled with anthrax probably wouldn't be seen as suitable for a millitia.
You know in fairness, that probably wouldn't pass strict scrutiny, ya know?

>>93931440
So I read a couple of pages and does US army ever send tanks or call airstrikes on the rebels? Because all I saw were people in riot gear and few armored cars.

>>93937005
>Which was what your argument was
Heads up that's a different Anon that responded to you..

>>93937031
no you see trump is such a bad president that he somehow destroyed the US military funds

>>93936752
> is the main problem
No, no it fucking isn't. That "problem" you're complaining about isn't a problem, it's the entire fucking point. The government can't get away with something tyrannical if it doesn't have a monopoly on force and instead has to stay on good terms with its people. What exactly is the problem that comes from a private citizen owning a firearm? So what if technology has improved? The fundamental principle remains. So what if we now have automatic weapons? What exactly is the problem with people having the freedom to own automatic weapons? You and the government might want to keep them from us, but what is your actual justification?

>>93936787
The Kochs are actually American and have far more resources than Soros, so if you accept the premise that billionaires are likely to "pull shit" then they are far more likely to do it.

>>93937046
Wait I thought he's a militarist faschist who want's to make military even bigger.

>>93937031
They aren't rebels. They are rioters or loons.

Usually the police, state police, or their SWAT/Riot teams handles nuts like them. If things get out of control the FBI and ATF get involved at which point the National Guard might be mobilized (See the Waco Incident for how the Federal Government responds to people being ass hats).

If the National Guard can't retain order they might be federalized and joined with others parts of the military to assist them. If it gets too out of hand and Congress recognize them as a legitimate threat, then you'll get airstrikes.

>>93937005
I'm not making a technological argument. My argument is that in the real world, all rights must have their limits. It's simply not practical otherwise. So the idea of having a right that 100% shall not be infringed using an absolute definition of the term infringed is absurd. Such a thing simply isn't practicable. Should a convicted felon in prison be allowed to continue bearing arms even within the confines of his cell? Clearly not. So an absolute reading of the Second Amendment simply isn't useful.

>>93936882
>While the United States copied the standing army models of the French and Prussians.
Legitimate concern.

It's also one of the reasons posse comitatus was passed. The other of course being a few war crimes committed by the united states.

>>93937089
Almost any and all of your rights can be taken away -
With due process. That means standing before a court and jury of your peers.

The second amendment isn't being infringed. Your rights are being revoked through due process. Which is something the constitution lays out can happen to you.

>>93937101
>Legitimate concern
What is concerning about the United States copying its standing army models by the French and Prussians.

The United States copied the French since the 18th century and started copying the Prussians during the 19th century. During the American Civil War the United States invited Prussian military officials (Moltke one of the strongest Prussians/Germans during his time next to Roon and Bismarck) got to observe the American Civil War taking notes on our style of warfare and the destructive capability of modern warfare.

Though the Prussians were not a big fan of the way we use cavalry, as the Prussians used them for shock factors in gutting the enemy forces/routing them while ours were mounted units with rifles who traveled distances. Prussia took some examples of the United States warfare, especially notes on how we employed trenches, destroying defensive positions with heavy artillery, and added into their warfare strategy and schooling.

>>93937116
If you go by the second definition of infringe, which is encroach on, undermine, or limit, then revoking through due process does constitute infringement, because there is a limit to it in the form of removal through due process. Using an the absolutist definition of infringement in reading the second amendment would require that there be no such thing as due process sufficient to revoke your second amendment right to bear arms. Thus, an absolute reading of the second amendment's statement that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed upon is absurd, since it would require that there be no mechanism for revoking those rights period.

>>93937089
>Should a convicted felon in prison be allowed to continue bearing arms even within the confines of his cell? Clearly not. So an absolute reading of the Second Amendment simply isn't useful.

That is covered under a different amendment, something about due process, court of law, jury of peers. Someone deciding proles shouldn't have something just because, is not due process. Rights can only legally be removed through due process. Any other method is illegal, per the fifth amendment, to the united states constitution.

>>93937136

>Though the Prussians were not a big fan of the way we use cavalry,

Thats because the US cavalry was founded by a hungarian and a pole, both hussars who loved the concept of light raiding cavalry

>>93937052
>>93937052
>The government can't get away with something tyrannical if it doesn't have a monopoly on force and instead has to stay on good terms with its people.
Funny thing is, it actually can. All you have to do is convince the population that tyranny is in their best interest, then the people will actually use their weapons to support their beloved tyrant. Moreover, your overall premise, that citizens are to use their guns as a last line of defense against a government gone bad, doesn't hold any relevance any more. You could not overthrow the government using weapons you can currently legally buy; you could hardly put up a meaningful resistance. Automatic weapons are quite effective if your target is a crowd of innocent by-standards, but not so much against predator drones.

>>93937152
So you're trying to establish at what point how literal we take language? Or at what point we establish what an infringement is?

>>93937173
>You could not overthrow the government using weapons you can currently legally buy;
This argument does not support what you think it does.

>>93937173
>he thinks you can create a police state with predator drones and nothing else

Look at this retard, look at him and laugh. If I had the /k/ copypasta on exactly why such a thing is completely impossible, I'd post it. Alas, I did not save it the last time I saw it.

>>93937201
>>93937173

I'll give credit where credit is due.
He is right that people can be told that tyranny is in their best interest and believe it. It worked for gun control.

>>93937201
i want the pasta where the guy went nuclear about the constitution not giving you rights but acknowledging your natural rights

>>93937176

He's trying to enact creeping fascism by whittling away at gun rights, like all gungrabbers do.

If you don't take an absolutist reading of the second amendment, then you can just gradually ban things under the form of "compromise", until they're all made illegal.

This is the goal and tactic of all gungrabbers.

>>93931440
Patrolling the mojave makes you wish for nuclear winter

>>93933406
Amazingly the /k/ one was the least /pol/

>>93937238
At some point arguing in good faith seems the rational thing to do.
If you apply one definition of infringement to the second amendment, that must be applied to all of them.

Which would mean that many of the restrictions the bill of rights places on the government from passing such laws would be very easy to circumvent by positing that it's not technically being infringed. This includes things like illegal search and seizure of legal aliens or visa holders or even immigrants.

I mean, after all, we can restrict who we allow to extend unlawful search and seizure to. We can't be absolutist and say NO unlawful search and seizure, right? So that means SOME are ok - really, let's just say that the first amendment doesn't protect electronic communication. It's not an infringement, really!

>>93937201
I never said anything about using only predator drones. Learn to read.
>>93937191
You're not thinking it through. Either you take the position that private citizens need to be able to arm themselves with an arsenal capable of challenging the US military, including nuclear weapons and air support, or you concede that the right to bear arms is irrelevant in safeguarding democracy. The former argument will reveal you to be an ideological nutjob who doesn't understand/care about the implications of his position, thereby isolating you from the general public. The latter forces you to abandon your case for the second amendment all together.

>>93937176
I'm saying that being absolutist about rights is impractical and doesn't mesh with reality. I'm saying that the claims earlier in the thread that took a very broad view of what was an impermissible infringement are unhelpful because they aren't really applicable to reality, in which all rights are, in practice, limited. Some limits must be permitted, that is simply a requirement of putting a concept like a right into practice. The more appropriate question is what does constitute an infringement that is prohibited by the second amendment and what limits are permitted.

>>93937313
your choice is artificial and ridiculous. Simplest example: It's more difficult and more expensive to oppress armed people than unarmed one.

Second simplest example: MLK is easier to ignore without the threat of Malcom X.

>>93937325
>The more appropriate question is what does constitute an infringement that is prohibited by the second amendment and what limits are permitted.

I'm still listening.

>>93937282
> We can't be absolutist and say NO unlawful search and seizure, right?
The limit on search and seizure that lets the idea mesh with reality is right there in that phrase. Unlawful. Some searches and seizures are permitted, the protection against search and seizure is not unlimited. The question is what constitutes a lawful search and seizure.

Illegal searches and seizures are, by definition, illegal. However, what is legal is another issue, so a particular act might be allowed, or it might not be. That will depend on whether it is supported by the weight of the law.

File: guumodus.png (9KB, 420x376px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 420x376px

Never let the communist fucking traitors take your guns murricans.
Your firearms are the last line of defense of your family and your people, from tyrants and despots.
Never fucking ever let them disarm you.
EU is busy trying to disarm all of us here in Europe and unfortunately getting guns is already kinda hard here so I am getting pretty fucking nervous.

The more the EU federalizes, the more screwed we are. If this is not stopped politically soon, violent means have to be used. I will never accept the rule of foreigners over my people ever fucking again.

>>93931440
Only like 5 posts here are /co/ related, are /co/ mods asleep or lazy?

>>93937313
Yes, that's why Vietnam won the war. They had nukes.

>>93937357
Yes, that is what I said. Now apply that to say, a federal law allowing police to no-knock raid or search or seize anyone who immigrated from mexico for example regardless of citizenship status.. And I'm using this because I don't see it as out of the realm of possibility.

Technically if such a law were passed that would be lawful search and seizure to just start raiding everyone born in mexico.

Yet somehow, I don't think that would be what one might call constitutional and might be an infringement of that right.

>>93937349
Okay, so the starting point that seemed to be mostly agreed upon earlier was the idea that the government can, through due process, revoke a right. So that means that, if due process requirements such as those provided in the Fifth Amendment are respected, a person's second amendment right could potentially be revoked.

So, for example, upon conviction of a crime, a felon might be barred from possessing a firearm as part of probation, even after (or instead of) a prison sentence.

We good so far?

>>93937376
Given the US time, I'd bet asleep. Or maybe they just want the calexit comic threads to burn out a little. And at least nobody's going maximum asshole.

>>93937406
This is currently the law in some states.

But we're super off topic at this point. If you're going to make a multi page argument, maybe it should go to a more correct board?

>>93937406
>So, for example, upon conviction of a crime, a felon might be barred from possessing a firearm as part of probation, even after (or instead of) a prison sentence.

>We good so far?

This is something that exists, yes. In some states a convicted felon may never get the right to possess a firearm back. In some they can. But that feels like semantics.

I can patiently listen though. Can't promise how much I agree with the end conclusion.

>>93937400
> Now apply that to say, a federal law allowing police to no-knock raid or search or seize anyone who immigrated from mexico for example regardless of citizenship status.
No-knock raids are already a thing. The issue with your example is more that status crimes (wherein what you ARE is criminalized) aren't a thing in the US, conduct is criminalized instead. For example, a number of ordinances in the US have been struck down because they crossed the line into criminalizing the status of being homeless, rather than particular acts. So you would need to be raiding for some reason other than simply being born in Mexico.

>>93937434
>So you would need to be raiding for some reason other than simply being born in Mexico.
It's also lawful to search someone if you believe they are or have been in the commission of a crime. I'm falling asleep but in this case, I believe this is called probable cause.

In point of fact, it's already legal in some states and areas for police to stop and search and seize you if you are in a particular neighborhood because that neighborhood is known to be dangerous or often criminal.

You can see where this is headed.

>>93934717
The states have never gotten along. That's why New York tried to leave the union as far back as Thomas Jefferson's term in office. Hell, they didn't get along during the Revolution. General Washington thought the New England states were filled with whining primadonnas who all left the fight after their year of service was up and let others (Virginia especially) keep fighting for their freedom. Meanwhile the New England states all thought they did all the work while the South just loafer around. Both sides try to forgot that their biggest cities were under total British occupation for much of the war.

States not getting on is an American tradition. It's the corruption in Washington DC and the collusion with pedophiles and whores in Hollywood and the MSM that have made things seem worse than they already are.

We need a containment wall around Washington DC more than we need one on the southern borders. That or the villagers need to surround the city with pitchforks and torches and burn that shit to the ground and salt the earth so it's stench never rises from the swamps again.

Add a threat to do the same to Hollywood and Portland and we'd probably fix 90% of the nation's problems.

Why are there so many Jews involved in gun grabbing lobbyist organizations?

Was /pol/ right again?

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20140820/anti-gun-lobbying-organizations

>>93937432
Okay, so we agree that courts, as punishment for a crime, can restrict an individual's second amendment rights. Now the question shifts to what a legislature is permitted to do, rather than a court. In some cases, they can't do as much, but in other cases, they can do more. For example, courts are prohibited from making rules without a case and controversy before them. No advisory opinions in the US, if a court wants to talk it needs to have a case before it. Legislatures, however, are under no such restriction, they can pass laws without a specific case and controversy prompting a law.

Now, legislatures have already been permitted time, place, and manner restrictions for other rights, such as the right to free speech. As mentioned before, noise ordinances and laws against extortion are permitted, even though they technically limit the right to free speech. This is generally only permitted if a state can put forward a compelling interest in favor of such a restriction. In the case of noise ordinances, this is because sleep is important. In the case of extortion, it's fairly obvious why we want to prohibit that.

The idea is that, rather than restricting based upon message, the state is restricting based upon the time, (dead of night) place, (residential areas) and manner (running around screaming) in the name of a compelling state interest (people being able to sleep).

Would you be willing to permit time, place, and manner restrictions on the second amendment, based on a compelling state interest? For example, not allowing private citizens to carry firearms into courtrooms or onto planes? How far would you be willing to go with that? Would, for instance, a school be permitted to ban guns from school grounds?

>>93931440
>storytime thread
>go into thread for storytime
>no storytime
Fuck you OP.

>>93937499
Jews fear that the goym will turn upon them once they learn of the trickery the jews have played upon them.

>>93937367
I'm so tired of this barbaric tribal game that I'm kinda wishing for a world order ruling over everything. Why fight foreigners when you can just love your life and work with them under a unified order?

>>93937500
>Now the question shifts to what a legislature is permitted to do, rather than a court.
Legislature is not due process, nor has it ever been.

>For example, not allowing private citizens to carry firearms into courtrooms
Already a law where I live.

>onto planes
Seems like that might have to be a federal thing since planes have a tendency to go from one state to another. Traveling with a gun where it's legal in one state and not in another would be a nightmare. But I assume you mean carry on your person. Which is also already a law as far as I'm aware. You can travel with them but there's particular ways you have to do it and it's generally not going to be carry-on luggage.

But I get the feeling you're trying to give examples that are already law for a reason. And it feels like you're baiting a bit if you want to drag that out too much.

>>93935529
militias are mostly around as a remnant of the early era of the american republic before a standardized army formed. Now they're for people to play at being in a real military and for forming domestic terror threats.

anyone who places any trust in a citizen militia is just waiting for a mob to fuck their shit up in event of a disaster.

>>93931440
It was her turn!

It didn't have to be this way!

>>93937573
You are aware, of course, of posse comitatus?

>>93937549

Because we would need approximately three more earths to have enough resources to provide our current population with a first world standard of living, and that problem is constantly getting exponentially worse.

File: your own people.jpg (90KB, 564x641px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 564x641px

>>93937549
Because fuck you.
I only care about my people and would not sacrifice a single hair from my head for the causes of foreigners. If I had to choose between sacrificing all foreigners to save my people, and sacrificing my people to save the rest of humanity, I'd sacrifice all the foreigners and save my kin in a heart beat.
My people, my family, are the most important things there are, and if ensuring our prosperity and survival demands the destruction of foreign tribes, so be it.

>>93937555
> Legislature is not due process, nor has it ever been.
No, it isn't. However, legislatures are afforded the ability to place some limits on rights such as freedom of speech even though they do not constitute legal due process. If a legislature is permitted to put time, place, and manner limitations on first amendment rights in cases of compelling state interest, what is the rationale for prohibiting that in the case of the second? What is your reason for treating it differently?

> Already a law where I live.
I know this is the case for much of the western world, I am trying to work out what you're willing to accept.

>>93937500
If you know what a compelling state interest is, you should also know what the strict scrutiny test is.

>>93937549
The track record of unified orders turning to tyranny is a pretty terrible one anon.

>>93937573
Hurricaine Katrina shows otherwise.

>>93937598
Anon clearly doesn't know that. And don't bother going into detail here. This is still /co/, not civics class.

>>93937608
I get the feeling you're being facetious and trying to satirize sentiments of putting yourself and family first and conflate it with the nazis.

>>93937389
>Vietnam won the war
Not that Anon.

From the legal standpoint the US got its treaty and South Vietnam was recognized as a non-communist state + US raped NV to death militarily 2:1.

South Vietnam fell years after the US withdrew all of its military support and wouldn't renew its continued support for the state after North Vietnam invaded again.

>>93937599
>>93937608
And by failing to see a unified force can acomplish far more and advance us at speeds far greater than any competition you show the sad fact that you contribute to the one problem blocking us from realizing our potential as a human species.

>>93937629
> If you know what a compelling state interest is, you should also know what the strict scrutiny test is.
I am. I am also aware that the restrictions that I have mentioned on first amendment rights have consistently survived strict scrutiny.

>>93937646
Bucket of crabs won't advance anywhere, Anon.

>>93937608
>I'd let all humanity survive so my family can live.
I love my family too, but I wouldn't let them live to let all of humanity die out. Even Jesus wouldn't sacrifice all of humanity for his family and he already gave himself up.

>>93937684
Humans aren't crabs, Anon.

File: Nazi-spurdo.png (57KB, 309x433px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 309x433px

>>93937632
I am not being satirical in the least.
Putting your people and family first, is at the core of national socialism. It is just the allied propaganda that has made you think that "nazis are evil". I do not buy into that bs. My great uncle was in the volunteer SS forces and the Germans fought valiantly on my people's side against the Soviet scum that the Allies supported.
Securing the existence of my people, and a future for our children, is a noble goal towards which to strive for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE2KHPzUMBU

>>93937646
I do not care about the humanity. I only care about my folk, and a future where all of humanity barring my people lie dead, is preferable to me than a future where my people have ceased to be.

>>93937625
>what is the rationale for prohibiting that in the case of the second? What is your reason for treating it differently?

In every other case, a good cause was provided by you.

In this one. In the case of _what_ firearms. Not where, but WHAT, you haven't. I haven't seen anyone provide a good case for it. Ever. Statistics of gun ownership, magazine capacity, guns used in crimes and by whom - all of it points to a simple inalienable truth that in the united states, gun ownership, and what guns, has never even correlated to violent crime or murder. The national academy of sciences performed a 10 year study and found no link between violent crime or murder; or ANY gun control law or regulation and a decrease in crime whatsoever.

>why treat it differently.
Perhaps because many of the compelling state interests you have presented passed strict scrutiny. Many other proposed and previous firearms restrictions cannot.

"Can I reasonably shout all I like for protracted periods of time in the middle of the night and have it harm no one in the city?"

No.

Can I own a 30 round magazine in my ar-15 and still used it and have it harm no one?

Yes. You know as well as I that above all else. Many of what is proposed can be reasonably done and not endanger the public. You can present that there's no time you could ever safely use a firearm on a plane (though that's largely fiction actually) or have anyone and everyone do so.

You cannot however present that there's no time I can use a "shoulder thing that goes up" safely.

>>93937698
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_mentality

We are.

>>93937629
>The track record of unified orders turning to tyranny is a pretty terrible one anon.
Yet we all inherently desire a massive unified force. Just look at the glorification of Ancient Rome, America, and the Soviet Union. Germany would not be the unified force it is today without all the nations and different people it was originally made of. We even conceive of unified utopias in many works of fiction.

>>93937689
I spoke of my people, not just my family.
Sacrificing all of humanity just to save my family, would solve nothing ultimately, because my family is too small number of people to survive alone in the long run. My people on the other hand, the larger kin group formed of other families of my ethnic brothers and sisters that have lived in this land for untold generations? For their sake, I would gladly sacrifice rest of humanity, for we are numerous enough to be able to survive without rest of mankind.

>>93937724
There was nothing glorious about the Soviet Union, you dumbass commiecuck.

>>93937718
Humans have overcame that mentality multiple times though to get us to where we are now.

So that mentality fails to hold water as we don't always do it and recognize the flaw in it. We are not crabs, we may act like it sometimes, but we learn and grow to develop.

>>93937689
>Even Jesus wouldn't sacrifice all of humanity for his family
...didn't he technically do just that?
It's been a while since sunday school.

>>93937724
Ancient Rome wasn't a unified force you mega cuck.

It was an Empire; with distinct regions and cultural expectations.

>>93937644
The US failed in that the proxy it sought to back folded. It should be noted that the Soviets never had to back the North to anywhere near the degree that the US backed the South. The North was a better proxy, but the Soviets were also better patrons. The US didn't realize until far too late that simply picking a proxy based upon what he says, then shoving your proxy aside and trying to do everything yourself is not a winning strategy in a proxy war.

You first need to pick your battles, and the North had an inherent advantage over the South in rhetoric. Vietnamese people weren't really interested in fighting and dying for "South Vietnam," but plenty of them were willing to die for the idea of a unified Vietnam. That makes a proxy war virtually impossible, because you need to be able to trust your proxy to do the heavy lifting. The patron doesn't have the language or culture of the population, so they are at a massive disadvantage in terms of swaying the populace. The Soviets could just rely on the North to do that legwork. The US couldn't say the same of the South.

Then, the US failed to remedy this imbalance. By trying to just do everything itself and pushing the South to the side, it failed to properly prepare the South for when the US was gone (which would have to happen eventually). The North, on the other hand, was very much ready for when the US left, as illustrated by the rapid disintegration of the South in the face of the North's renewed offensive.

The US failed to grasp that the strategy needed to win a proxy war is substantially different than a direct conflict

>>93937735
>>93937700
This is some grade /a/ retardation.

>caring about ethnicity
Confirmed for a europoor.

>>93937684
Crab mentality can be applied to any sort of system, it's a matter of either choosing a system where we are on the same team or a system where we constantly bicker until the inevitable next war to further some petty goal instead of unification.

File: punching spurdo.png (74KB, 750x800px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 750x800px

>>93937764
You posted zero arguments.
Of course I care about ethnicity. I care only about my people and non-Finns will never become my kin and I'd gladly see them all dead if it ensured the survival of my people.
And I never denied that I was European you moron.

>>93937753
It doesn't help the fact the US government really didn't do anything to establish a functioning government in South Vietnam and allowed corruption in it to get out of fucking control.

>>93937764
But shitskin countries generally are fucking awful.

I don't want a "unified force" with people who suck.

>>93937724
Humanity wants shit that's probably terrible for it.
Is this really a suprise? It's also a reason why the US went with a republic and not a straight democracy.

>>93937740
But the idea that everyone should unite as a single unified force to accomplish and advance us anywhere can't stand, for sole reason that all of humanity is too diverse to not fall in to crab mentality as a result.

Instead of making any advancement or accomplishments, would most likely to seek to bring all its members to same level, which is unsustainable any amount of time before that level needs to be lowered again due to depleting resources and growing population.

>>93937796
Most of the fucking world sucks: Eastern Europe, Indochina, Middle East, India, Africa, Central America + South America, Pretty much anything in the sea of Asia minus Japan.

>>93937824
A straight democracy is mob rule. It's way worse.

>>93937737
>>93937751
The point being that they where close to the preferred model of unification and have constantly been glorified by many for simply being massive forces remembered through history that produced both creative and helpful things we use to this day. Rome is so glorified that many monarchs after tried to keep the title Caesar. The Soviet Union helped advance the space era and was far more unified and efficient then what the Russian empire could ever be.

>>93937711
>You cannot however present that there's no time I can use a "shoulder thing that goes up" safely.

I personally don't support most feature restrictions. However, things such as registering and tracking guns, background checks, or safe storage requirements for guns, do have a very beneficial effect. They help to address the ability of people who would commit crimes to acquire those guns in the first place.

A huge amount of gun crime in the US involves guns that come from a handful of states, states such as Mississippi and Alabama. Chicago gun crime, for example, heavily features guns that come in illegally from out of state. Restricting black market flow of guns does serve a compelling state interest. These are, after all, already the products of a crime, and go on to be used in future crimes.

The appropriate place to address the issue isn't in features, it's at the point where the gun passes from the hands of a legal owner to someone who should not possess it. Often times that is theft, since fewer than 1 in 9 guns in states like Alabama are secured in some way, so if a burglar breaks into a home when the person isn't there (which is how most burglaries in the US occur) then they will be able to steal the guns present with little issue. Gun control addressing safe storage of firearms can hinder that, thus reducing the amount of illegal guns present in the black market.

Background checks are another way, this time addressing the sale of a gun. Tracking transfers are another way of doing so, helping to prevent people who would use those guns in crimes from acquiring guns less directly by giving law enforcement more information with which to piece together the route that the gun followed.

>>93937833
In some ways yes but it really depends on the situation and specific ways things are set up or else you end up with a government that constantly pisses off the majority until the majority starts to grow violent and in doing so cause mob mentality to become even more extreme

>>93937784
Yeah, that's part of picking/building/backing a good proxy. You need someone willing to fight, and the corrupt rarely are.

Guys how do we impeach Blonald Blumpf?

We must #resist

Russia runs the WH

>>93937915
It's funny how democrats reverted to basically cold war mentality when it comes to the Russians.
Why should Russia and USA be enemies?

>>93937915

We need George Soros to buy us more vagina hats.

>>93937700
It's an inevitable fact that your supposed people will change to a point where they are no longer your people. Race mixing, idealogical change, and border change is inevitable. Being attached to a nationality or ethnicity is for those who do not plan for long term change. On a side note, a massive genocide of races is practically impossible and near unlikely to provide anybody with the full desired effect of their own pure race.

>>93937915
I don't like Donal Trump, I think he's an old man who should retire and enjoy the next 30 years he might have.

I do not believe he should be impeached without proper evidence and people should calm their tits. Comedians should also grow the fuck up, dude is 70 years old, give him a break for being elderly.

File: 1478085558954.png (142KB, 270x390px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 270x390px

Why do leftists still think they're being edgy and countercultural? Do they not realize that they literally have the entire establishment backing them?

>>93937824
Straight democracy has never really been considered viable by anyone. Even supposed democracies like Athens functioned (sometimes) because there were only ever a few hundred to a few thousand people who could vote. The rest were slaves, women, poor people, people from other cities, etc. who were denied the vote. It was basically a really massive aristocracy that voted on things.

Democratic systems with representative rule, however, do consistently perform better than less democratic systems. Even democracies with less wealth do better. Compare Croatia and Russia. Russia had higher GDP per Capita up until last year, yet life for the average person in Croatia has been better than in Russia for much longer. Russia had more wealth to go around, but Croatia was more democratic and so was able to use it more efficiently.

>>93937936
>Why should Russia and USA be enemies
Not that Anon, but Russia literally undermines the US influence in Europe and wants to restore its Soviet influence in Eastern Europe.

>>93937936
Well, after expelling Russian diplomats over baseless allegations of hacking, Putin turned the other cheek and invited all the US diplomats and their families to a Christmas party.

Getting played that hard must be fairly REEE inducing.

>>93937936
Russia wants to control Eastern European nations that are members of NATO and thus US allies. The US and Russia can stop being enemies when Russia stops coveting dominion over Poland and the Baltic states.

>>93937985

Then maybe those countries should actually pay their fair share of NATO assets.

>>93937884
I'm bailing out on this thread. You've literally had hours to make your case, and we're still in first semester pre law.

Also, in the future, if you really care about this shit, you might want to avoid proposing shit that has no track record of working, or worse, has a track record of being blatantly abused. Like the Jim Crow versions of some of the shit you've proposed.

>>93937947
>It's an inevitable fact that your supposed people will change to a point where they are no longer your people.
Nah.
We Finns remained largely the same for over 800 years of being under foreign rule, in terms of genetics. Of course, culture changes as time goes on, but the idea that people mongrelize naturally over time is nothing but leftist bollocks.

> Race mixing,
Prevented if we begin to reject race traitors and punish them for their actions.

>idealogical change
Prevented if we eliminate the people pushing subversive ideologies and treasonous thoughts into our homeland.

>and border change is inevitable
Only if you lose wars. Can be prevented if you are strong enough to not lose.

What is most important to me, is ensuring that my descendants, and my people in general, will live safe and prosperous, and free of foreign tyranny, or the malevolent acts of subversives and traitors. Nothing is as important as ensuring the above goal. All harmful foreign influence must be eliminated.

>>93937915
Fuck off shitlib.

>>93937998
Poland actually meets NATO reccomeded defnese spending levels iirc

>>93937998
Estonia and Poland do.

>>93937998
>If war breaks out, the wars will be fought on that countries territory while the US isn't touched in the least, but they are in the wrong.
>Those countries don't pay their fair share
Are you retarded?

>>93937549
>Why fight foreigners when you can just love your life and work with them under a unified order?

Because in 99/100 cases they're exploiting you because they conquered you.

Unity doesn't come from koombaya and everyone holding hands, it comes from fucking murdering everyone with the capacity to resist you.

>>93937954
Conservatives hold majority in both house and senate and have a supposedly conservative president in charge of office.

>>93937965
And USA is actively trying to undermine Russia constantly.
Russia has the right to pursue it's geographical interests. Or do you think that they should just sit there passively and let USA freely create and foster hostile satellite states all around Russia's border?

>>93937985
>Russia wants to control Eastern European nations
Proofs?

>>93937884
I can agree with some of what you say.

Registration of guns I disagree with both on principle and on paper. You're right that a lot of crime guns come from a handful of states. Unfortunately, those guns aren't purchased legally. Most crimes, believe it or not, are committed by felons with previous records and felonies that are already not permitted to own or purchase a firearm. Exact numbers (and citation is available here if you like but space is going to be tight in this post)
75-80% of murder
arrestees have prior arrests for a violent (including non-
fatal) felony or burglary.
93% of guns used in crimes are obtained illegally in point of fact.

Of all those, anything proposed would affect the smallest percent.

As for background checks:
I'm always vexed this is brought up. Every time I bought a firearm, I had to have one. Which was required by law. They're required by any licensed gun dealer. Including at gun shows. the nics isn't PERFECT but nothing is.

>safe storage
While a lot of guns are stolen, what's often left out is from WHERE. The unfortunate truth is many of these are stolen from police armories. Which have no armorer on staff. At all. Ever. They have logs and keep track, but there's often or sometimes never someone physically present at the armory to make sure nobody unscrupulously steals or takes an unlogged firearm.

and safe storage laws...
gun safes are expensive. really, really expensive. And it seems a little unfair to make it unlawful for anyone but the very wealthy own firearms, when you should be able to secure means to recreation or protection reasonably no matter who you are without putting a giant extra fee that only the wealthy or well to do can afford. Moreover, I think safe storage laws would severely harm the ability to access a firearm when needed. As for something like gun locks, those are a safety measure and I could go over that up and down but this post is already buffer limit.

>>93937999
Considering you've presented nothing, I don't really mind that this didn't get far. Background checks are helpful. Are they a panacea? No, but expecting one thing alone to solve the issue is overly optimistic. We need a larger net to deal with guns getting into the hands of people who would use them to commit crimes. We have some, and it helps a bit, but we're currently stuck approaching the problem from the wrong angle because things like registration or safe storage are politically difficult in the biggest problem states.

File: 1469698953035.gif (208KB, 312x322px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 312x322px

>mfw white nationalist groups are beginning to radicalize as they get pushed more and more into the world minority by anti-white rhetoric coming from the left, and the end result will likely be a full-on race war that claims millions of lives

You caused this, liberals.

>>93938029
A fascist state isn't that bad of an idea either, cleanse those unlike us and brutally absorb the rest

>>93938040
>USA actively trying to undermine Russia.
Russia started it by holding Eastern Europe gun point and the US is defending itself and its allies.

>Hostile satellite states all around Russia's border.
US doesn't create hostile satellite states and nobody wants Russia.

>Russia has the right to pursue its geographical interests
The same ones who held Eastern Europe at gun point, fucking ruined them, and got many of those nations to hate the fuck out of Communism and Russians? + All the genocide and oppression?

>>93938029
>Unity doesn't come from koombaya and everyone holding hands, it comes from fucking murdering everyone with the capacity to resist you.
This.
Leftists are idiotic children who do not fucking understand that Imagine was just a shitty fucking song that has no bearing on the reality of the tribal conflicts that are typical of our species.
War, strife and competition between different human tribes has been a constant in our specie's existence for untold eons. There is no changing that. Life is an endless struggle, and any sort of utopian vision of a global unified humanity can only come forth if a single tribe of humans conquers everyone else and basically wipes them out.

>>93938038
And yet the deep state, which controls the vast majority of the media and manipulates public opinion, has been at WAR with Trump since 2015.

>>93938058

We could also stop electing Democrats who do shit like "operation fast and furious".

>>93938065
Nice mixing of USSR and modern Russia.

>>93938064

Too bad white people are too good to debase themselves with genocide anymore. One of the reasons why i'm a weeb 2bh, i see the legacy of manchuria bubbling beneath the veneer.

>>93938061
We have yet to reach the levels of Weimar in terms of societal decay. When we do, expect shit hit the fan.

>>93938061
There's gotta be a perceived doomsday around the corner by everybody. Be it nuclear war, race war, super plague, asteroids, or Russian Jewish nazi metro confederate nationalist super soldiers.

>>93938082
>too bad white people are too good to debase themselves with genocide anymore.
Only because things are relatively good and pleasant right now, and majority of people are complacent.
Once shit hits the fan, we will see bloodshed.

>>93938079
The Russian Federation is the successor and inheritor of the Soviet Union + Russian State there (UN and Security Council acknowledge it) and the point still stands.

If Russia actually chills the fuck out, US and it can get along.

>>93938061
>muh raise whore

Some neckbeard neo-nazi is gonna shoot up a mall and then kill himself after an hour

>>93938082
Such a shame nobody is willing to do what it takes to make a strengthened super nation upon corpses and fervent supporters these days.

>>93938023
Sounds like the definition of "not our fucking problem."

where's the story time at?

>>93938055
> The unfortunate truth is many of these are stolen from police armories.
Yes, and I am completely in favor of reforming police departments to help address that. Also getting them to stop using their budgets to shove more equipment into their mouths instead of using it for better training.

> gun safes are expensive. really, really expensive.
Replacing guns that are stolen is also expensive. And someone getting shot and killed by a gun that was easily stolen because it wasn't securely stored. A tax on the firearms themselves in order to pay for a gun safe subsidy would help to remedy the problems that might lead a consumer to buy additional guns instead investing in storage. It would make an individual firearm more expensive, increasing the gun-owner's interest in keeping it secure, while also decreasing the expense of the gun safe needed to secure it.

>>93938109
>If Russia actually chills the fuck out, US and it can get along.

By "Chilling the fuck out" you mean "Let USA fuck you in the ass and don't protest as we plunder your wealth."?

>>93938082
You'll always want to avoid genocide if it's possible. Genocide isn't a nice thing.

>>93938116
>Make defense pact with Ally country who does trade with yours
>They get attacked
>Not my fucking problem.

>>93938075
Same thing happened with Obama just in the form of would be assassins and angry radio men. Being in a red state I was used to hearing nonstop hatred and will to kill Obama so it's no surprise liberals are throwing their fit in their way now.

>>93935806
Do your hands cramp up using a standard shotgun or hunting rifle?

>>93938061
I still can't believe this all started with fucking Gamergate. Anita Sarkeesian may actually be responsible for bringing doomsday upon us.

>>93938129
>Plunder your wealth
Russia wealth is Oil and the price of it is fucking low and the US doesn't even need it. Shit most of the oil for the US comes from Saudi Arabia and Canada with some Texas.

If the US get desperate Venezuela is on the chopping block and so is Alaska.

>>93938078
The sad reality is that fast and furious wasn't even a drop in the bucket. It was a four thousand guns in one year. The illegal gun market in the US is literally millions of guns.

File: nazi pepe.png (74KB, 402x428px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 402x428px

>>93938061
I've become a full blown nazi.
>mfw I am gonna start studying political science in an university in my homeland's leftist infested capital in few months.
It's gonna get groovy.

>>93938058
Have you forgotten strict scrutiny already?
You need more than just HELPFUL when we're talking about fundamental rights.

>>93938008
>Everything will be fine if we kill people that don't think like me! No one will protest and fight back ever!

>>93938178
>Nazi
You mean you are a follower of National Socialism. You can't be a Nazi as the real deals are dead, in the process of dying, or LARPERs like you.

>>93938193
The term you are looking for is neo nazi, sweetie

>>93938190
I advocate killing of people who would bring harm to my people.
That is completely reasonable.

>>93938157
Angry virgins are going to lead us all into a horrible conflict filled with memes and guns. fantastic times to be alive

>>93938178
So you are going to be an even bigger social reject as no one will ever want to associate with someone that calls himself a nazi?

>>93938127
>Replacing guns that are stolen is also expensive.
Replacing ANYTHING stolen is expensive. Generally, lock your doors. Get a good lock. Most burglaries occur because people left the door open and unlocked. Average burglar just checks if the door is open and then goes to the next house. Isn't a locked apartment or house secured?

>A tax on the firearms themselves in order to pay for a gun safe subsidy would help to remedy the problems that might lead a consumer to buy additional guns instead investing in storage. It would make an individual firearm more expensive, increasing the gun-owner's interest in keeping it secure, while also decreasing the expense of the gun safe needed to secure it.

You're still increasing the cost to people on a somewhat arbitrary measure. More to the point, what about people in apartment buildings?

I'm having a hard time envisioning getting my landlord to OK a gunsafe. Not to mention where the hell would I put it? You're still demanding that gun owners be a minimum class for something that really doesn't necessitate it.

>>93938178
Sounds like we got another Anders Brievik here

>>93938154
Do your eyes give the impression that thing is anywhere near a standar shotgun or hunting rifle?

>>93938225
Are you under the impression that I want to befriend the treasonous lefties that infest our universities?
I intend to go there to take the necessary educational steps towards gaining power, so I can eventually purge all these traitors who would see our people become a minority in our homeland. Ensuring their elimination is my moral obligation.

>>93938209
You should read Boafeaugh's critic of race-mixing

File: 1335836225709.jpg (106KB, 665x699px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 665x699px

Hi, where's the storytime? The OP said it would be a storytime thread.

>>93938255
See you in a few months when you'll be posting >tfw no gf on /r9k/

File: SS.png (1002KB, 1156x518px) Image search: [Google]

1002KB, 1156x518px

Is anyone talking about the comic at all? I just skimmed through it and it's unacceptable. The guy hunting illegals (pic related) is a poor man's version of Hans Landa from 'Inglourious Basterds'. The bad guys are white, good guys consist of mixed race, interracial couples, disabled people. The propaganda is like "Holy Terror" minus the stylized art - the author living out some sort of power fantasy.

>>93938276
Nice projection m8.
I have far grander aspirations than something so banal as weather or not I have a gf. In fact, having a partner and children of my own would most likely be a hindrance to me, for my eventual enemies could use them against me. It is unfortunate, for I would actually like to have children eventually, but as it is, the radical vision I have, would make me a target of the treasonous cunts that seek to enslave my people again, and they would surely attack my children in order to attack me.

>>93938294
There's not much really to talk about regarding the comic itself. It's all pretty self-explanatory. Pretty much this entire thread has been a discussion of what will come about as a result of things like this comic. And it ain't anything good.

>>93938294
We have had this discussion several times over. On every level this comic is bad.

>>93938316
>be a white nationalist
>don't have white children
Isn't that directly contributing to the problem? There's still time to reverse this.

File: tumblr_osx25m6QBZ1w6v1v3o1_1280.png (318KB, 584x616px) Image search: [Google]

318KB, 584x616px

>>93938061
Yeah, I'm so scared

>>93938335
Not really, not while EU politicians are actively trying to import the entire third world.

>>93938320
There's plenty to talk about in the comic. None of it is in the thread. I mean if it wasn't for the gloriously bad America Chavez ongoing, this would be pretty much an automatic worst of the year.

Even still, it's a lock on future storytimes of pain for tears to come.

>>93938316
As long as you don't breed, I'm fine

>>93938240
> Isn't a locked apartment or house secured?
No. No it really isn't. The fact that people think it is enough is a serious problem. The reality is that a lock is not going to do much to stop most burglaries because, as mentioned before, most burglaries occur when no one is there. The Burglar has plenty of opportunities to force entry and plenty of time to do it. Actually preventing entry is basically not realistic if there is no one there. What you can do is limit what the burglar is able to take by making certain things simply take too long. The clock generally starts for the burglar when they force their way in. That's usually the loud part that gets peoples' attention. After that, they're looking for things that are easy to pick up and are relatively valuable. A gun fits that, but a gun safe doesn't.

> You're still demanding that gun owners be a minimum class for something that really doesn't necessitate it.
A tax/subsidy system can resolve that in the case of people who are acquiring both a gun and gun safe. They pay more for the gun, but less for the gun safe.

> More to the point, what about people in apartment buildings?
> I'm having a hard time envisioning getting my landlord to OK a gunsafe
There actually are apartment gun safes designed around this issue.

>>93938335
It is quite a conundrum, indeed. Like I said, I do want children eventually (I'm still young so it's not like I am out of time or shit like that), but like I said, pursuing these politics and having children would put my children at risk, for the "powers that be" would surely use them to get to me.

For example, our state has the powers to forcibly take away your kids if they deem that one is unfit to be a parent. They could claim that my politics make me unfit and thus steal away my kids which would be utterly torturous to me. Family is my everything, and I can't stand the thought of some faceless bureaucrats stealing away my kids.

>>93938316
How can I be projecting when I have a gf (she's not white ;^))

>>93938339
Do you think that fucking Sargon is a white nationalist?
Because if you do, you are utterly fucking clueless. The guy is a pathetic fucking liberal that thinks that filling his homeland with third world migrants is OK as long as they adopt "Brittish values" whatever they may be.

>>93938396
I never said he was. His fanboys on the other hand are filthy right-wingers and that's a fact

>>93938320
Ah, shit. I thought I managed to escape /pol/.

I doubt the comic will have any sort of real-world ramifications. Look at Harry Potter and, to an extent, the way Star Wars has been adopted by liberals. They like to fantasize about being rebels ("just like in my films!") but ultimately their means of expression (self-righteous, higher-than-thou attitude) is what puts the wider public off and will never gain a revolutionary momentum.

>>93938414
Hardly. Most of his fans are liberals as well. Actual right wingers and nationalists fucking hate him and his fans. The whole kekistan bs is mockery of nationalism.

>>93938178
Pekka, sä kerroit tästä jo yliksellä.

File: spurdo at computer.gif (89KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x600px

>>93938430
Entäs sitten?