Liberal Progun/Gun Owners

>>33175940
Modern conservatives in the US have moved so far from classical conservative viewpoints that I have somehow ended up in the "liberal" camp.

Tbh my politics tends to fall in line with the Founding Fathers but that seems to be an out-dated form of thinking.
One side hates the second, the other thinks if you're a """"""""terrorist""""""" then the 4th and 5th shouldn't apply to you. And here I am thinking they're all pretty good ideas. I also like the essence of Teddy Roosevelt's "square deal". Natural resources are preserved and corporations aren't allowed to run amok and screw the consumer by forming monopolies.

For some reason this makes me a weirdo in the current political climate.

>>33175993
There's a difference in being a conservative and being a filthy Neocon

>>33176011
Honestly man, the Republican Party has gone so off the rails this last year that I don't even understand what "conservatives" want anymore. I couldn't stand either candidate so I tossed my presidential vote in for the Libertarians because I knew Gary Johnson wouldn't win (and I didn't want him to) but an uptick in independent numbers might eventually bring them federal funding as a party. I did a ton of research on local candidates instead because that way my vote would still do something useful for my state.

>>33175940
>want to purchase my first personal firearm in a year but don't know how it'll affect my life
you don't have to tell anyone, you know. It's probably better that you don't.

>>33175940
The number of single-issue voters in the pro-gun camp seems pretty high.
What I don't understand is how the supposedly more intelligent Democrats (according to them anyway) don't understand that the one thing holding them back from absolutely dominating American politics is their asinine view on gun control.

My dad is progun and my mom is antigun.
He uses classic arguments like "guns don't kill people, people kill people."
She cites cases of idiots going full retard with guns.
Since we have guns in the house, I'm hoping she'll slowly realize that owning doesn't mean it'll go off at any moment, or that having one in your house turns you into a bloodthirsty maniac.
It took her a few years to ride on my dad's motorcycle, so maybe she'll come around with guns, too

>>33176332

Give liberals a .22 and a printout of Trump's smuggest face and you might just win a few over

File: 1481085119095.jpg (102KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 900x900px

>>33175940
as long as you keep voting antigunners into office you will forever be an antigunner you cock smoking hippie communist

File: Political Spread.png (11KB, 507x250px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 507x250px

>>33176062
>the Republican Party has gone so off the rails this last year that I don't even understand what "conservatives" want anymore
You are under the assumption that the Republican Party was ever completely united in the first place. The Republican Party has never been hiveminded like the Democrats have for the past decade. If anything it shows you that Republicans aren't fucking party first over beliefs and have no problem kicking each others asses for what they believe to be right unlike the Democrats where you have individuals like Bernie Sanders say one thing but, lick Hillary's shit like a horse with a salt lick.

>>33176488
As opposed to demagogues who are only pro gun for now because it helps them

>>33176332
>What I don't understand is how the supposedly more intelligent Democrats (according to them anyway) don't understand that the one thing holding them back from absolutely dominating American politics is their asinine view on gun control.

No. That party has gone off the fucking rails and wants to destroy every scrap of freedom it can find. Granted, much of the GOP is only marginally better and the party is like 80% RINOs right now too.

The only people that actually believe in SHALL but also think it's ok for the government to grab every other type of power "for the good of the people," or whatever, are fucking schizoids that aren't consistent at fucking all. If you truly believe that gun ownership is a natural right, every bit of logic that got you there will also tell you that the government has no business fucking with your life elsewhere as well.

Being ok with "letting" people own guns, but only if they're Fudd guns or after prospective owners pass some kind of test does NOT make you pro gun or pro 2nd Amendment. Gun ownership is a civil right, just like freedom of speech and the others.

Find me a big government statist that is also SHALL, it would be fascinating to talk to them.

My dad grew up on a farm where my grandpa would shoot all the time. Dad is liberal and anti-gun. Won't listen to statistics or evidence against his retarded arguments. He always spouts bs about "assault rifles" and mass shooting. He thinks it should all be illegal.

I asked him if it was hypocritical for him to base his opinions on the actions of a few crazies with guns when he always blabs about "not all muslims!" His response was the basic guns are made to kill and we would be better off without them.

Loved guns since I was 5. Didn't get to touch one until I turned 18 and bought one when I was out of their house.

File: 1487952749748.png (332KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 900x900px

>>33176556
>every liberal only says they're antigun now, maybe they'll change their mind later!
pro gun is pro gun so fuck off cunt

>>33175993
same boat. All of the sudden loving guns and loving the outdoors suddenly became opposing viewpoints on the political spectrum, which is insane.

I have to choose between getting to have guns or getting to have a woods to take them into.

>>33176062
Here's a tip.

Look up how "neoconservative," as a neologism, came about. Now realize that "neoconservatives" are, in theory and practice, Trotskyists. What is a Trotskyist? An offshoot of Marxism. Now you understand why RINOs have such sever and fundamental disconnect with implementing actual conservative principles in government.

>>33175940
Are you a child or a grown ass man? Can you make your own decisions and be responsible for them, or does everything you do have to be approved by consensus?

If you want a gun, get a gun. If your mother and siblings freak out, tell them they're being ridiculous. If you're still living at home, move the fuck out.

>>33175940
Nope. My family actually produces tangible products for a living and understands what work is and what it takes to defend liberty. A couple of my sisters did marry fudds though who think I shouldn't own handguns.

File: 1481339233652.png (195KB, 417x578px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 417x578px

>Grandpa is pro 2A
>Part of the NRA and likes to wear his NRA hats to piss off antiguns
>Against things like FOID cards
>But still believes in fuddery like magazine restrictions, a rifle with a small mag for hunting, and a shotgun or revolver for home defense
Living in Chicago for all your life does something to a man.

>>33176077
He's probably underaged desu

>>33176332
Modern SJW liberals are more hated with every passing second anon, turns out telling over half the country that they're absolute garbage because they're white and heterosexual doesn't turn them to your side, it makes them want to spite you.

>>33175940
how about move out, then it wont matter

>>33175940
>fingers in mouth

This triggers me

>>33176011
This.

>>33175940
>older siblings both vegetarian hipsters, 100% anti-gun as well
>>33176437
>She cites cases of idiots going full retard with guns.
>>33176691
>Dad is liberal and anti-gun. Won't listen to statistics or evidence against his retarded arguments

Why won't these people listen to reason? A cursory search on gun control reveals how despicable its goals are and its futility in stopping crime. How do they not see that THEY are the hate filled bigots, condemning a group of people they don't understand nor even attempt to understand? It's so fucking obvious that gun control doesn't work and the evidence is all over the place. These are likely the same people who will claim that the police will protect you, then call all Police racist klansmen. I just don't get it.

>>33180797
Also, why do politicians push gun control anyway? Who makes money from gun control?

>>33180829
Police, hospitals, lawyers, judges ect... Gun control creates crime.

>>33180797
I wish I had an answer for you.
I truly do…

>>33180829
a large voting block of wailing and terrified people that helps keep them in power

>>33176546
>Implying the Republican party as it is now isn't just schizophrenic pandering to Christian Fundamentalists, Lolbertarians, Tea Party nuts, and now stealth White Supremacists

The problem the DNC has is they locked step too hard, and treated a genuinely popular candidate who had a better shot at winning the presidency as a rogue "spoiler" working against getting Hillary her "due." That said, what should Bernie have done? Promote a candidate he knew stood opposite everything he stood for in his campaign? Or the one he could at least advise and at least lean towards being more acceptable to his voters?

>>33176636
Last I checked the GOP was in power when the PATRIOT act was passed.

I guess I'm what you would call a Gun Toting Liberal. Although I'd really just call it common sense.

>>33180045
Fucking this

>>33180854
Try harder next time


lib
cuck

>>33176437
I-I'll ride your dad's motercycle, desu

File: 1330628870991.jpg (66KB, 533x800px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 533x800px

I dont trust either party anymore. Trust only yourself and cold steel in your hand as far as politics go now adays.

>mfw George Washington literally said not to split when he went to europe and came back to a bunch of donkeys and elephants

I'm liberal on social issues. I also enjoy hunting and other outdoor sports. It's not really a big deal. Ignore internet sensationalism and be an adult.

Eh, I am heavily Pro-Gun, but am a Socialist. So not quite the same.

But regardless, I know of quite a few Liberal Gun Owners

>>33175940
>>33175993
You're just a classic liberal anon.

It's okay to support abortion, gay rights, and also gun rights and free trade capitalism. Our current system is a bastardization of what the founding fathers had in mind for the country. The issues that the parties associate with each other are arbitrary.

>>33176636
>>33180546
I'm pretty much 90% democrat but I'd kill anyone who tried to take my shotgun away from me. Most main-party liberals don't seem to understand that supporting a healthy amount of regulation and social programs should not come at the price of surrendering the one unique and special right that guarantees our co-ownership over the use of force in our country. It could partially be blamed on how bullish pro-gun advocates are, which in turn is because they'll take all of the friends that they can get, even if they're the kind of people who make democrats retch instinctively.

Democrats also tend to focus on the wrong aspects of the gun argument. Even if guns did create crime (they don't), does it change the fact that owning that essential bit of lethal agency is an inalienable right? Even if they are only for taking another human life (they're not), is that not at times necessary and desirable? My ultra liberal sister kept going on the other day about how she could never take another human life, even if it was a home invader, and I couldn't help bursting out laughing. When your home is actually being invaded, be it a criminal or a tyrannical force foreign or domestic, the only thing you'll pray for is the ability to eliminate it, no matter what your political inclinations. If Trump were to decide that the liberal media is hurting his feelings too much and decided to have them all iced, what could be done about it? It would put liberals in the position of ditching their previous methods of resistance in favor of something that was previously despised but clearly more effective, or simply being steamrolled. I know which one I'd choose.

It's almost as if corporations want us to be one thing or another and stay very divided. Imagine that.

I'm a moderate liberal and I own 3 guns.

>>33182598
tl;dr fuck off commie

>>33182612
>corporations
Idk about that. George Soros, the Clinton """Foundation""", sure. But not like, walmart and shit.

>>33182629
Brainwashed. Individual politicians aren't making the decisions that run our society. Stop listening to them, regardless of party.

>tfw describe myself as "Classical Liberal."

>NOBODY fucking knows what that means today.

>>33182598
I'm not OP and you're spot on about everything in that first paragraph except capitalismy, it's outdated. Libertarian socialism is the only future

>>33182658
I don't think any individual controls society. There are people who try to influence decisions, but overall, the people are in control of the direction that society heads. That's my perception, at least.

I identify as Left-Libertarian, and I see Guns as being necessary to prevent the state from overstepping their bounds.

As long as a state exists, the People must be armed so when the state inevitably oversteps their bounds, the people can fight back.

>>33182716
This guy gets it

>>33182621
I'm going to fuck you and your kulak friends too.

>>33180797
Because reason and rationality don't matter and are highly overrated. Facts don't matter. Self- image trumps everything else. As long as they see themselves as intelligent, peaceful, and rational when it comes to gun politics, no amount of data will ever get through. Your best reasoned, most airtight arguments will fall on deaf ears or trigger cognitive dissonance. Short of a life changing personal experience (or being really good at persuasion), nothing will change. That's why people who report the most success with changing opinions on gun stuff are the ones who take people to the range and show them a safe and fun experience that allows them to modify their self-image in a way that doesn't trigger cognitive dissonance. Experience is by far the best teacher.

Read Influence by Robert Cialdini

>>33180112
Durrr these capitalist fundamentalists are


>communists

Get back to the 50s Mccarthy.

This is why I don't identify as anything
>I'm a libertarian
>but you should give more of your money to the givernment

>I'm a classical liberal
>but socialism is good!

Goddamn what the fuck

>>33182789
>I'm a libertarian

But we should let the factory owners take more of our wages, it'll totally trickle down guys

>>33182806
To many Americans socialism has be perverted into being only the Stalinist form of a Centrally Planned economy.

The Idea of a genuinely collectively owned workplace is a foreign concept to them.

>>33182806
You don't understand what libertarianism is.

>>33175940
Iktfb
>Born into classic NYC liberal family
>Be just as liberal with the one exception of guns
>Get yelled at constantly

Honestly I'm not even necessarily against any kind of gun control I just think most liberals don't have any real perspective on guns and focus far to much on what looks scary rather than on seeing which people might be dangerous (which isn't always possible). Liberals also tend not to understand the idea that the 2nd is an amendment just like the others and we at least need to be extremely careful when it comes to anything like limiting constitutional rights.

File: 1444400626600.jpg (106KB, 960x524px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 960x524px

>>33180797

There's studies out there that suggest that in an argument or discussion between two people with strong, entrenched positions then one party providing the other with evidence to disrupt their position actually makes them MORE resolved in that position.

Meaning, if you're arguing with someone and present them with a series of facts then their mind (which is already made up) will protect them from those facts. And they will disagree with you even further.

This is why the Socratic method can be so effective when used properly. You plant seeds in people's minds with questions and you let their own brains do the work for you.

>>33182888
You don't understand the origin of the term.

It originated in the early 1800's to refer to Anarcho-Communists.

>>33182888
A mostly wishful thinking system that assumes everyone is a rational actor and that a magical "invisible hand" balances everything out?

File: 1487976859197.jpg (80KB, 445x720px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 445x720px

>>33175940

>>33182977
You didn't have to remind me.......

>>33182598
>It's okay to support abortion, gay rights
>implying

libtard degenerates need to leave our board

>>33183130
/k/ is more Liberal and Socialist than it lets on

>>33183134
/k/ is fully right leaning. Libtard communist faggots like you need to stop coopting our board for the sake of your progressive cuck agenda

>>33180045
We need another great outdoorsman like Teddy to redirect the retards towards realizing that hunting and hiking aren't the only reasons to have guns and parks. Even though I lean more Libertarian on most issues I recognize that dumb ass CEOs and politicians aren't going to protect the environment and the state needs to hold more land in trust for the people.

>>33183147
Sure... Except in the more political threads it really becomes apparent just how left it is.


Also, since what are Capitalist Liberals the same as Anti-Capitalist Communists?

>>33183147
Grow up.

>>33183180
>Capitalist Liberals
This is a contradiction. All liberals hate capitalism and wish to throw us into a fucked up communist world like the chinese and soviets and cubans they idolize

>>33183189
Evidently you have zero understanding of the American Liberals.

Nancy Pelosi responded to a question critique capitalism with this "We’re capitalist and that’s just the way it is"


And then we have all of the Capitalist start-ups being headed up by Millennial Liberals from SF, LA, NYC.


Liberal Socialist is more of a contradiction here

>>33183130
>Implying Abortion doesn't reduce crime due to not forcing poor women to have kids they can't afford
>Implying Conservitard beliefs on sex ed don't cause more unplanned teen pregnancies
>Implying gay rights affect your life at all
>Implying you aren't just an asshole

>>33176332

Fucking this.


Dems need to shut the hell up about guns. Full stop. Don't bring up guns at all. Take it off their party platform. The only cool Democrat candidate for president was Jim "pounding vagina from French imdochina" webb

>>33183189
>All liberals hate capitalism
No, we don't like uncontrolled, crony capitalism that produces a Socialist, can't fail system for the rich and a cut-throat capitalism for the rest of us.

>>33176332
If Democrats were pro fun I would probably have voted for obummer

>>33183130
>other people should do what i tell them to do with their vaginas and penises because i think its icky!!
>GOVERNMENT TELL THEM WHAT TO DO REEEEEEEE

lmao kys

>>33183284
I honestly think thats part of the reason Sanders had quite a bit of success in the more Red states.

He wasn't explicitly anti-gun. well, atleast not in the HRC/Obama Neo-liberal way.

>>33183247
Jim "When I spot a gook, I shoot." Webb.

>>33183308
hell, there were ultra-lib news outlets who were saying he wasn't anti-gun enough.

>>33182514

>Last I checked the GOP was in power when the PATRIOT act was passed.

Last I checked it was a Dem President that signed the sunset clauses back into law.

>>33183379
Perhaps both parties are capitalist cronies owned by the same corporations and influenced by big money. Capital is going to protect its interests with all the resources they can

>>33182716
I've found a better waybto frame that, to make it more palatable to lefties and head off the "lol muh drones" argument is citizens owning guns prevents a monopoly on force/violence by the state.

>pro gun
>Liberal

Pick one.
T. Califag who's pissed at you guys voting in regards like DeLeon

>>33175940

>self-proclaimed Marxists want to see more gun control
>even Marx said that shit was stupid and should be resisted at any and all costs
>self-proclaimed Marxists don't actually know what Marx said

I can't going to college with a bunch of tryhards, but I know that not having a degree is limiting

>>33183466
>Hurr you can't have complicated politics or it hurts muh hed!

>>33183308

I don't think Sanders really cares that much guns.
He's not antigun in the way djt isn't pro gun. I've never heard djt say anything progun. If djt went Infront of Congress and said repeal the nfa I'd get an enormous boner though

>>33183466
>implying classical liberalism doesn't believe in LIBERTIES like gun rights

File: don_t.png (4KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 800x533px

>>33183246
>>33183303
These

>>33183246
>Implying gay rights affect your life at all
It does when it creates a "some are more equal than others" situation.

File: IMG_0504.png (93KB, 500x357px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x357px

OP here. Good to see this dialogue getting going, makes me feel warm fuzzies and shit.
Anyways here's an update. Spoke to my dad and he says I should do whatever the fuck I want since he trusts me, just that anything going towards firearms should be out of my own pocket (which was the plan anyways, finances were only relevant since I'm in university). My mind is made up but I brought it up as a hypothetical for now to my siblings and my sister figured it was ultimately just my choice though she wouldn't support it while my brother did some weird screeching routine about necessity. It was unique.

>>33182915
As one of my friends put it, it stops being a debate when it becomes religion. Basically everyone takes being wrong as an ad hominem attack, which is retarded.

>>33182578
>Guard
wot.
Hilariously it was Jackson who reclaimed the Ass symbol as the Democratic animal after an insult. Bigoted as he was the guy was hilarious.

>>33183148
My man.

>>33183990
Explain.

>>33184247
>Explain.
They can't. They just "know" it.

File: Kucinich.jpg (19KB, 384x361px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 384x361px

>>33176546
>Democrats
>hivemind
Nigger what?

Gun control is a Democrat fallback. It's good for getting the base riled, but it also mobilizes the opposition. Go too long and too hard, and it bites them in the ass.

Smart Democrats know to use it sparingly to neutralize distractions to their agenda, and then drop it once their voters are back on board. Dumb Democrats go full retard, especially when it's obvious they're incompetent or exceptionally crooked. They only know it gets the crowds cheering, so they double down.

You'll notice Obama and Sanders had a pretty Fudd-like ambivalence on guns until they started getting pressure from their own ranks. Hilldog, on the other hand, grasped for it every chance she got. I honestly don't know if her lackluster campaign was rooted in incompetence or hubris, but it seemed to be the only thing she could use to get people on board. Well, that and the woman-card.

>>33176546
It's usually been the exact opposite desu

Liberals can't cooperate for shit.

File: 2124_t2.jpg (20KB, 320x428px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 320x428px

>>33175940
Liberal gun owner myself

I want to keep my queers married, marijuana growing, and guns oiled and polished.

Liberals would own a supermajority of the country if they just dropped their war on gun rights. Or just pull a Bernie and put it at the very bottom of "Things we need fixing"

>>33184834
The Dems used to be the crusader for the common man, but after Reagan killed unions and then Bill and Obama's trade acts and getting in bed with the big money, they became the voice for gender and identity politics that no one but those specific groups give a shit about.

>>33184901
it really shows when they got 53% of the popular vote yet lost because they couldn't convince ~30,000 white people through white guilt.

they would have CRUSHED if they took out their anti-gun agenda.

>>33183517
>i like guns but i vote for the people who want to take them away durrr

>>33184834
If Obama had ended all of the PATRIOT/PRISM/NDAA shit, the GOP would basically be the cuck party from now until the end of time.

If Hillary had tried to repatriate all of the offshore wealth, crack down on tax evasion and clean out the lobbyists, she'd be President.

The Democrats suffer from a chronic inability to actually confront people, which is why they spend their time on meaningless identity politics instead of fixing the country.

>>33184958
once you get out of highschool and into the real world you'll understand that are more issues than just gun issues.

I'm generally liberal, but illegal immigration and gun control are my main points of interest when it comes to voting.. and the Democratic party keeps moving further and further left that they'll NEVER get my vote.

I hope the Democrats go the way of thd Whigs.

>>33184958
>it's impossible to have opinions that that conflict with the two party system hurr durr
I'm pro choice and support LGBT rights, but I always vote in favor of guns above all else.

>>33185013
I don't get why people are butthurt about not letting in illegals? You're just enforcing the fucking law, if you don't then whats the point of having a border?

I support allowing citizenship to be acquired by children who were taken here without choice by their parents through the military or college but the border needs to be controlled.

File: 1451533967550.png (74KB, 230x230px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 230x230px

>>33182506
>Promote a candidate he knew stood opposite everything he stood for in his campaign?

You mean literally Hillary Clinton?

>>33182774
Here's how you identify a dogmatic leftist retard. McCarthy's list was literally accurate. You can look it up yourself if you're not too afraid to step outside of your comfort zone.

I bet you're dumb enough to still believe he was involved with HUAC. kek.

>>33183535
>I've never heard djt say anything progun

Then you haven't been listening. He hasn't gone full /k/ "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED BURN THE ATF NO MORE BOATING ACCIDENTS NECESSARY," but he was arguably more overtly pro-gun than like half the Republicans running last year.

File: liberals.jpg (351KB, 598x597px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 598x597px

>>33180112
>>33182774
>>33185166
Fucking these.

I know I'm pushing it more than one might in a fairly reasonable topic, but this is why I hate the lefties. This is why I legitimately believe that, while you might not end up "Right wing," once you mature and really invest yourself in the logic and fact of politics, of the actual historical events, you will not what we consider a Liberal in the modern day. That's why so many people identify as moderate now, and that's why there's a "rise of the right" lately. People aren't turning fascist, they're getting sick of their bullshit.

Tracing the actual people involved in the formation of "Neo-Conservatism," their schooling, their families, their mentors, we can absolutely determine that if they aren't straight Trotskyist, they are heavily influenced by that. That poisons the well of actual Conservatism, more than one might imagine, and in some sense aligns both parties with a Communistic bias, which I believe is antithetical to the desires of all of us who identify as "wanting what the Founding Fathers wanted."

McCarthy is another major casualty of this. While some tactics and zealotry are questionable, there was legitimate reasons to be so strong against Communism, and Communistic subversion. We have direct reports from old KGB officers, things like the writings of Alinsky, just basic doctrinal commie crap that shows it's all about subversion. It's not about bringing people over through rights or argument, it is not about a fair fight, they spread their ideology through subversion. He sought out agents of that subversion, and while some accused were not, history has shown that almost all of those accused were, in fact, Communists, or sympathizers. Even if they lied about it at the time and admitted it later.

Which, briefly, leads me to the big problem now. Their absolute doublethink. That's what put me off of it, that's why I refuse to follow. They scream about McCarthy, and here they are making a second Red Scare.

>>33185076
Part of the problem is that we have his huge sprawling administrative orgy that is an immigration process that immigrating illegally and risking being put into human trafficking is easier.

We can streamline the entire process by just modernizing it. you should be able to know if you can work in the US within a week of applying for a work Visa, that is not too much to ask. the more Illegal Immigrants turn into the legal migrants/temp legal migrants the more taxes the gov't gets then you can pay for the wall with the Mexican's money.

>>33185035
Same here buddy

>>33175993
>For some reason this makes me a weirdo in the current political climate.
Nope, you're just slightly to the right of the average leftist (totalitarian).

Please go back to where you came from.

>>33175940
>progun
>leftist
It's not logically consistent, but if you cared about that, then you wouldn't be a leftist.

>>33185397
>flat tax
>good
REEEEEE

there's literally nothing wrong with increasing bracketed taxes

the "make more money, have less after taxes" meme is because govt benefits are fucked up

>>33185541
That's fair. But as with almost everything, especially guns and the economy, if you don't like the Republican solution, then very rarely will the Democrat solution be any fucking better at all. I'd take a flat tax over the current system with benefits and the like. Here's hoping Trump gets the GOP in line well enough to actually do that tax reform he wants.

>>33185541
>there's literally nothing wrong with increasing bracketed taxes
Yes, deincentivizing success is a good idea.
Are you even remotely aware of how a percentage works?

>the "make more money, have less after taxes" meme is because govt benefits are fucked up
No, it's so that leftists can buy votes and pretend to balance the budget.


>>33185584
>if you don't like the Republican solution, then very rarely will the Democrat solution be any fucking better at all.
This.
Degenerate liberties are cool and all, but they are not worth totalitarianism.

>>33185525
How is it not logically consistent? I support civil rights, which includes the right to bear arms. What's really inconsistent are conservatives who think its okay that the government tells you can't smoke a certain plant but guns are okay. Shouldn't someone who despises the government interfering in personal lives support both?

>>33185516
>agreeing with the principles of the founding fathers makes you a leftist in the 21st century

>Please go back to where you came from.

You first.

>>33185679
>How is it not logically consistent?
Leftists are statists, statism and rights are diametrically opposed.

>I support civil rights, which includes the right to bear arms.
Most civil rights that the left supports are actually restrictions on the rights of others to enforce parity.

>What's really inconsistent are conservatives who think its okay that the government tells you can't smoke a certain plant but guns are okay.
This is also inconsistent. The ideal solution is freedom.
Let people/idiots consume drugs, and let private individuals take action as they please against those that do.
(read: let me hire/rent to who I want to) (example of left supported civil right that is actually an infringement of other's rights)

>shouldn't someone who despises the government interfering in personal lives support both?
Yes. But you're confusing liberalism from 1780, with liberalism for the past 150+ years.


>>33185712
>supports non-absolute 'rights'
>vote buying is a good idea
>monopolies are bad
(for god's sake, please take a non-marxist econ class)
>Believes that the state should be expanded to 'serve ;)' the people

You are really fucking far left of the founding fathers, modern conservatives, and classical conservatives.

>>Please go back to where you came from.
>You first.
But I'm 7th generation...

>>33185076
If you don't enforce borders, you are more of a region than a country. If you only enforce the laws on some, but not all, it's not equal. We shouldn't have an open border while being country with a myriad of social programs that are shared by all, but only funded by some. The reason a lot of people don't want to face it is

1. It's non whites, so you appear racist if you say anything about it.

2. The emotional appeal, they can parade families that will be split up if it was to be enforced. Well my family is from europe, we are split, and it's unfair that just because Mexico is south of us they can piss on our border with near impunity. Meanwhile my family has to go through the legal process we have set in place.

3. Mexicans vote Democrat, so why would they want to stop the flow of future votes, and the voters they already have? It's just fucking dirty.

>>33185659
>Are you even remotely aware of how a percentage works?
Are you? You still make more money when you earn more. That's literally the entire point of tax brackets. The rich pay a higher percentage because they have the ability to live with a higher tax rate and still be richer than those who make less.

>>33185875
>Are you?
Yes.

>The rich pay a higher percentage because they have the ability to live with a higher tax rate and still be richer than those who make less.
So let's take this to the logically consistent extreme and tax all income at 99.99%, and then distribute a universal basic income.

It's not my fault that your labor isn't worth enough to have the life that you want. Stop stealing my money.

>>33185659
Like the other anon asked, are you aware of how progressive tax brackets actually work?

Let's set up a hypothetical:

In the nation of Donglandia the progressive income tax brackets are set up as such

10,000 and less pay 10%
10,001 to 50,000 pay 15%
50,001 to 100K pay 20%
100,001 to 150k pay 25%
150,001 to 200k pay 30%
200k and up pay 35%

In this system, if you make $8k you pay 10%. If you make $15K you pay 10% on the first $10K and 15% on the remaining $5K.

If you make $250,000 a year you pay 10% on the first $10,000, you pay 15% on $10,001 to $50,000, you pay 20% on $50,001 to $100,000 etc.

So you're actually not paying 35% in income taxes on all $250,000. Rather you're paying 10% on your first $10K of income, 15% on your next $40K, 20% on your next $50K and so on. So any increase in income is an actual increase in take home pay even if you're in a higher overall tax bracket.

Let's say you get a raise from $10,000 to $11,000. You're still only paying 10% in income taxes on that first $10K. You're only paying the 15% on the new $1000 per year you're making. You still come out on top.

>>33186046
>>33185541
My bad lad, I misinterpreted >"make more money, have less after taxes" meme

>>33186081
No problemo. Most people don't understand how a progressive tax scheme actually works because it's not something that's actually taught in public school. If it was any popular support for a flat tax or sales tax only system likely wouldn't exist.

>>33175940
I know. Both my parents loathe and hate concept of military and weapons. I bought rifle despite what their opinion was. They forgave me.

Do your thing and buy gun. Don't fight back if argument start. Just nod and let it slide. When you have enough just tell them thx bue! See ya folks again. Arguing with your folks just makes things worse.

>hoplobhobia
Ehh... I hate those fuckers.

>>33186098
>If it was any popular support for a flat tax or sales tax only system likely wouldn't exist.
I disagree. The appeal of a flat tax remains whether the confusion is cleared up or not.

It ensures that no one gets fucked too hard, especially the middle class. It also ensures that the state remains small, provided deliberate inflation is prohibited.

>sales tax
I don't know of anyone right of stalin who believes that a consumption based tax system is a good idea.

Are you sure you don't mean tariff based taxation? We managed well enough with it for ~140 years.
Personally, I would rather have other people's labor taxed at 1%, and a donation-based 'tax' system for things like NASA, DARPA, etc.

>>33185790
Leftism is not inherently statist. There are a whole host of Left-Libertarian views.

De Leonism
Syndicalism
Anarchism
Mutualism
Luxembourgism
Libertarian Socialism
Democratic Confederalism


>>33183514
At least the Marxists I know actually know of that little bit, and supports Gun Rights for the Proletariat

>>33183535
>>33183356
True, I guess he fell into more of the "Do what ever the fuck you want" camp. Not explicitly Pro or Anti gun. Which seems to be the trend from Northern New England

>>33186275
Eh, I'm arguably to the Left of Stalin, and I still don't see sales tax as being a good thing.

Should be purely income based. Sales tax should not be a thing

>>33186323
>De Leonism
I was about to call you a massive faggot, becuase I thoguht it refered to the cali senator, but then I googled.

>Libertarian Socialism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

I consider libertarianism right, I don't think it's possible to be libertarian and left.
left and up is leftist totalitarianism, and left and down is leftist less-violent totalitarianism.
Granted, it's probably tainted by my upbringing as a political prisoner in Cali.

>>33186399
Eh, the term Libertarian originally referred to Anarcho-Communists.

So, that term has sorta been stolen by the American Right, and now refers to a Capitalist system.

Also, how can it be "totalitarian" if the community decides on rules and regulation collectively through a direct democracy of sorts? There is not real hierarchical structure in place that typically is found in a totalitarian society

>>33180797

Even in the face of hard facts and statistical evidence, some people have a strong emotional response to something that happened to them or, more likely, something they saw on the news. On some level they can't get over the fact that one time they saw or heard that someone got gunned down for no good reason and they're thoughts on the issue are all tied to that one incident.

My mom thinks motorcycles should be banned because one of her girlfriends like 30 years ago was institutionalized after her husband got decapitated going under a tractor trailer at like 95 mph.

>>33186447
>Also, how can it be "totalitarian" if the community decides on rules and regulation collectively through a direct democracy of sorts?
I meant that the outcome is more or less the same.

>>33186546
Another hallmark of Totalitarianism is the State Monopoly on violence.

How can their be a monopoly on the use of violence if the State is disheveled along with a now armed populace?

So, to me, two of the main characteristics of a Totalitarian system is a Centralized Hierarchical State, and a Monopoly on the use of violence.

In most LibSoc systems, the State would have been completely dissolved and the people would have what they need to prevent a monopoly on the use of violence

>>33186275
>It ensures that no one gets fucked too hard, especially the middle class.

Actually it doesn't. It fucks anyone who isn't in the top levels of income.

>It also ensures that the state remains small

This is just not a reality in any universe unless you really want to live in a state that is politically and economically bullied by your larger neighbors and you want minimal economic growth.

>Are you sure you don't mean tariff based taxation?

No, I mean a consumption tax based system.

>and a donation-based 'tax' system for things like NASA, DARPA, etc.

So you mean you would rather NASA, DARPA, etc. not exist at all.

>>33186694
>It fucks anyone who isn't in the top levels of income.
Can you articulate that point?
The majority of voters are middle class, so taxes won't exceed that which the middle class is willing to pay.

>unless you really want to live in a state that is politically and economically bullied by your larger neighbors
"everything you do to us, we will do the same to you". Looks like I just solved the economic negotiations.
>politically
I didn't say to disband the military...

All that needs to happen for the plan to be feasible is for people to be able to opt out of social security, end all welfare, and not allow future americans to join social security.
The problem is still there, but it should only be a resource drain for another 25-35 years, and all the smart people who are under 35 will opt out, which will dramatically lessen the burden for the next 100 years.
Your welcome.

>you want minimal economic growth.
Ah yes... More money in the hands of the middle class and the investor class, most certainly a bad thing.
Stop reading the works of a chair fetishist.

>So you mean you would rather NASA, DARPA, etc. not exist at all.
Well I like them, and I would have more than enough disposable income to kick them a couple hundred dollars each... So, the answer is no.
Once you eliminate wealth redistribution, there is more than enough to cover everything through voluntary contributions.

>>33182540
>Gun control creates crime
As in, illegal guns leads to arms trafficking, which is a crime.

>>33186931
>make something a crime
>now there is more crime

really activated my almonds

>>33186875
>and I would have more than enough disposable income to kick them a couple hundred dollars each

Dude, that's almost enough to pay for an entire HLV!


>I didn't say to disband the military...

The military is an organ of the state. Why wouldn't you want to shrink it if your goal is to minimize the footprint of the state?

You could just have voluntary militia units. Surely people would flock to volunteer for no pay, just look at how large of a percentage of our population is sprinting to MEPS in order to enlist while the military actually pays a salary.

>More money in the hands of the middle class

This is definitely a good thing because they are likely to spend it and spur economic activity.

>and the investor class

Only if they are going to spend it.

>"everything you do to us, we will do the same to you". Looks like I just solved the economic negotiations.

How old are you? You have to be at least 18 to post on 4chan.


>Can you articulate that point?
>The majority of voters are middle class, so taxes won't exceed that which the middle class is willing to pay.

Those in the "investor" or "owner" class have used and use public infrastructure in the course of growing their businesses. They would be taking advantage of public infrastructure while carrying the same tax burden as someone who gains much less advantage from said infrastructure.

If every single time a member of the "investor" class began a venture they conducted zoning, built roads, built schools to train their employees, built ships and ports to transport their goods to buyers, maybe I could see the argument for an identical level of tax burden.

>>33186967
>They would be taking advantage of public infrastructure while carrying the same tax burden as someone who gains much less advantage from said infrastructure.
Who gives a fuck what their burden is? They pay more in taxes, but are taxed at the same rate as everyone else.
Why is it important that people be punished more for success? That's asinine.
Everyone should be punished the same or not at all.

>maybe I could see the argument for an identical level of tax burden.
Flat tax is not everyone chipping in the same amount, it's the same percentage of taxation.

>How old are you? You have to be at least 18 to post on 4chan.
Not an argument. Imposing the same economic restrictions on others as they do on you is pretty much the best possible policy. It encourages free trade and permits a purely tariff based tax system.

>Only if they are going to spend it.
Or invest it. And even if they don't, all that happens is money is effectively deflated.

>Why wouldn't you want to shrink it if your goal is to minimize the footprint of the state?
Because the military actually serves a useful purpose other. And yes, ideally it too should be reduced, but welfare is twice the cost of the military.
Priorities.

>militia
The blades of grass are in america...

>Dude, that's almost enough to pay for an entire HLV!
It's several times more of a contribution than is my per capita share for NASA, and several dozens of times more for DARPA.
So... It pretty much is.

>>33186875
>Once you eliminate wealth redistribution, there is more than enough to cover everything through voluntary contributions.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Most of the US populace didn't support NASA getting a big budget EVEN DURING THE SPACE RACE. Do you think they'd get enough money to do anything if it was "pay what you want"?

>>33187297
>Most of the US populace didn't support NASA getting a big budget EVEN DURING THE SPACE RACE. Do you think they'd get enough money to do anything if it was "pay what you want"?
Because trillions of dollars will be freed up each year.
Well known and worthwhile programs like national foresty service, cmp, etc will have enough fans to either survive or die.

If there isn't enough funding, then the people didn't want it, so they shouldn't be forced to have it.


I am very confident that NASA would continue to meaningfully exist if it had to survive on donations. They would probably get a corporate sponsor if need be.
(predicated on taxes being tariff only)

>>33187343
>I am very confident that NASA would continue to meaningfully exist if it had to survive on donations. They would probably get a corporate sponsor if need be.
And I think you're too trusting in the public to do what's necessary for the nation. The vast majority of the public doesn't know that the Department of Energy is in charge of nukes, for example.

>>33187150
>Not an argument.

How am I supposed to argue with you if you don't even have a basic level of understanding of IR theory? In this case age is a pretty good metric for estimating your level of education.

>The blades of grass are in america...

Nicely memed.

>It's several times more of a contribution than is my per capita share for NASA

And you're ignoring that if it were voluntary you would likely be one of maybe a few hundred individuals who would voluntarily contribute "tax" money. If we lived under a system in which contributions to science and R&D programs was entirely voluntary you wouldn't have a personal computer to get on the non existent internet to shit post and meme about how you've discovered Atlas Shrugged at your high school library which also wouldn't exist.

>>33175993

You're not the only anon here who sees through the party-line bullshit, anon. Don't feel left out, I feel the same way.

>>33187852
>If we lived under a system in which contributions to science and R&D programs was entirely voluntary you wouldn't have a personal computer to get on the non existent internet to shit post and meme about how you've discovered Atlas Shrugged at your high school library which also wouldn't exist.
I disagree.

>How am I supposed to argue with you if you don't even have a basic level of understanding of IR theory?
Because fuck meta.

>Nicely memed.
Thanks.

>>33184834
>Liberals would own a supermajority of the country if they just dropped their war on gun rights
Fucking this

>>33177371
The ends don't justify the means, nigger.

>>33189295
>I disagree.

You think that people are going to voluntarily pay taxes if they didn't have to. Do you actually know any humans?

>Because fuck meta.
>Hurr fuck knowing things! Ignorance means I'm better!

That's you.

Leftists worldwide are universally anti-gun. Pro-gun rights is a right-wing position.

>>33192399
You can't be more Wong.

Marx has said that any attempt to disarm the worker should be resisted
Orwell has stated that the rifle is the symbol of democracy

There are Socialist gun rights organizations organizations in existence.

Gun right are neither left nor right wing. They are a Libertarian vs Authoritarian issue

>>33186951
We did the same thing with Prohibition :^)

>>33185863
>Mexicans vote Democrat, so why would they want to stop the flow of future votes, and the voters they already have? It's just fucking dirty.
>People who can't vote and have a lower crime rate break the law to vote because reasons!

>>33185875
And the old high marginal rates promoted higher payroll accounts and capital investment.

>>33185928
>Stop stealing my money.
>Stealing

>>33184793
>You'll notice Obama and Sanders had a pretty Fudd-like ambivalence on guns until they started getting pressure from their own ranks.

I'm glad at least someone else noticed this. Everyone else seems to have been, from day one: Hurr Obama gun take 'er GUNS! Hurr Bernie hates guns as much as Shillary!

Yes, Obama was more or less ignoring guns until the pressure from Sandy Hook. Bernie said outright that people from these anti-gunners from the big cities need to understand people from rural areas and why guns are okay with them.

>>33180829
why do politicians push banning abortion? because a big chunk of their voting base goes full retard over BABY KILLING DOCTORS

why do politicians push gun control? because a big chunk of their voting base goes full retard of BABY KILLING GUNS

i think we should just kill all babies and get that shit over with.

>>33194675
Yes anon
The state can steal

File: 1479414381659.png (58KB, 266x216px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 266x216px

>>33196128
>i think we should just kill all babies and get that shit over with.
You. I like you.
t. preschool assistant

>>33196208
Yes, for asset forfeiture it is theft. Taxes are your share for everything in shared use of society.

>>33196663
>stealing my money and using it to subsidize failure is providing me a service
Are you a retard or a nigger?

>>33196776
Then move, fgt

>>33196776
Go to live in international waters if you don't want to participate in a nation.

>>33196940
>nation
fun fact: a nation can exist without welfare.

>>33197009
>Welfare is the only thing taxes are for
>Implying poverty doesn't undermine the entire economy

>>33185076

>I don't get why people are butthurt about not letting in illegals?

It's not about illegal immigrants, it's about what color their skin is and what god they pray to.

Democrats want to shift demographics in order to force a one-party totalitarian leftist regime with zero effective opposition. Moderates get sucked in by identity politics which are mostly distraction issues of no real substance that require little sacrifice of political and social capital to support.

I vote pro-gun and against anything SJWs support, regardless of my individual opinion on the issues, because the American left has MADE ITSELF my enemy. They have nobody to blame but themselves for what comes next.

>>33197082
>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

>Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

>Fuck off damn dirty poor brown people!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6keZIUJBsQ

>>33175993
Same

>>33184247
>Unironically using the word "bigot"
>>>/tumblr/

File: 1456440077975.png (228KB, 1192x830px) Image search: [Google]

228KB, 1192x830px

>tfw vote conservative every time solely for gun rights
I mean it helps that the liberals in my country are absolute fucking moronic shitheads but even if they were top-tier I'd still vote con for dem gun rights.
Trying to save what little you have left of your hobby hurts.

File: you-went-full-retard-never-go-full-retard.jpg (63KB, 554x376px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 554x376px

>>33197153

>>33197133

Did you just stop reading after the first sentence or did you just fail to comprehend the message?

>>33175940
Oh boy do I know that feel.

>be socially liberal as fuck
>fucking love guns
>hate government intervention in my life

Suffer with me anon.

>>33197199
Aussie?

File: 44b.png (270KB, 600x436px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 600x436px

>>33196208
>When the State taxes you for living within its property, that's it's not using, but otherwise living your own life it's stealing
>When the landowner charges you rent for living on their property, that they're not using but otherwise it's enforcing your property rights
Taxes are either a rightful landowner enforcing their property rights over a tenant or rent is theft.

File: image_3.jpg (51KB, 1136x682px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1136x682px

>>33175940
Not a "liberal," no...

>>33187343
USFS employee here.
I guarantee my job wouldn't exist in the system you're proposing and a LOT more people would lose their homes to wildfires.

Just as an example

>>33197643
Welcome to libertarianism

>>33183130
>our board

File: Death_is_Fast.jpg (38KB, 676x664px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 676x664px

>4chan is inherently, pathologically counterculture
>When the Bush administration was in power it was significantly to the left of mainstream liberals
>When the Obama administration was in power it was significantly to the right of mainstream conservatives
>Trump administration has been in power for 6 weeks and the pendulum is already noticeably swinging they other way
>People who showed up during the Obama years and don't know anything else REEEEEEing because they're used to the place being a right-wing hugbox

File: 1482184280366.gif (871KB, 245x230px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 245x230px

>>33183130
>unironically whining about opposing views in your safe space

>>33198369
>counterculture
Hi leddit. Maybe you should lurk more and not go off what you read on knowyourmaymay.

File: 4chan_2b8b4a_1356773.jpg (131KB, 745x1660px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 745x1660px

>>33198369
>xDDDDD
Wow 4chan is soo counterculture huh guys?? Upboat me and gild my post pls!! Lol xDDD :PPPP remember in the Bush years when 4chan was just like Tumblr hehe!! :DDDDDD

>>33198369
Categorically untrue.

File: kek.jpg (17KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 413x395px

>>33198412
Nigger I've been here since Bush was in office, '06 to be exact
Sorry multisyllabic words freak you out but I don't fuck with Reddit at all.

File: Smug_Guts.jpg (29KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 450x450px

>>33198452
>People saying "nigger" and laughing about it is the same exact cultural paradigm we have now

>>33198477
Yeah I remember those years. /k/ hated guns because Bush was in office and /b/ was a multicultural wonderland that celebrated communism, political correctness, and diversity.

Oh wait. You're a retarded newfag.

>>33175940
this is pasta retards

>>33198504
Go ahead plebbit. Show us evidence that "4chan was liberal xDDDDDDDDD upboat :PPPP". You can't, and you need to leave.

File: seriously.gif (993KB, 236x224px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 236x224px

>>33198518
>/k/ hated guns
As this thread should illustrate, "liberal" and "pro-gun" are not mutually-exclusive.

>>33198538
>muhhh 1 liberal over here likes guns
>most liberals like guns
Statistics prove that liberals overwhelmingly hate guns. You can't claim that /k/ was generally liberal and somehow simultaneously supported guns.

Also if you vote for anti-gun politicians, you are anti-gun yourself.

reminder that Vertmont is one of the most pro-gun states in the union and the only state where Bernie Sanders won hands-down

>>33176332
it's because there are single-issue voters (or near enough) on both sides
you support guns and you lose the hippies and the pacifists, and if you lose people someone else might come by and scoop them up

>>33180797
>A cursory search
the people unwilling to change their minds don't want to even think about the topic unless they're some agitprop motherfucker

File: Janeway's thoughts on this.jpg (20KB, 470x362px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 470x362px

>>33196128

>>33185166
he helped get that shit started and didn't try to stop it
you can have correct ideas and still be a shitty person, if anything that's the trend for significant American figures

Some healthy insights in this thread, which I'm glad for. These are certainly wild times socially and politically. Personally, I'm leaning more and more Green party since I believe environmental conservatism, personal liberty to be top priorities. They aren't a perfect platform of for some of my viewpoints (I worry about potential 2A infringements, for example), but Reps and Dems are too cuckolded by commercial interests to my mind.

Also crazy that just a click away is /pol/ which has materialized the classic 4chan anti-semitism etc. into the real world. Easily the most tangible influence of this website on the outside world.

>>33198810
Commies need to be purged. HUAC needs to be restarted only 10x as harsh.

Send every (((news))) anchor, socialist, and anti-gun politician to a CIA blacksite and waterboard them for eternity.

My entire political philosophy boils down to "do whatever you want as long as you're not harming anyone else".

Apparently that makes me an enemy to both the left and right.

>>33183130
>you can kill a nigger but not a fetus
>implying

>>33198885
That's liberatarianism which is a rightwing ideology. Libertarianism only makes you an enemy of the left.

>inb4 muh left-wing liberarianism which is a literal contradiction and shouldn't be on the Political compass

>>33198930
The right considers me a prime target for "helicopter rides" since I won't go along with "peaceful ethnic cleansing" and the other moralistic authoritarianism they've been going for nowadays.

The right wing is more than just economic. There's also a social component.

>>33180829
>Who makes money from gun control?
politicians
also gun companies, they get to sell new guns or parts that are compliant with new laws and in some cases get protected from foreign competition due to import bans
basically the opposition is important to them
the question now is whether they're attempting to control that opposition

>>33198961
>wanting to flood the nation with shitskins
>not harming anyone else
Sounds like you do need that helicopter ride.

>>33198988
If the hard right actually carries out ethnic cleansing on my neighbors, white or non-white, I will gladly fight against the right.

>>33198961
>moralistic authoritarianism
Nice examples.

>>33199009
Your nigger neighbors can stay for now. This is a /pol/-certified opinion. But if you're for open borders, then you are a libertarian.

Also, in case you didn't notice, this "gas the kikes race war now" is a reaction to leftists trying to erradicate whiteness.

File: 20161017_140651.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

>family disowned me for buying a levergun
>after they disowned me I went on a buying spree

Now I am pro-gun af.

>>33199046
>>33199009
*then you are not a libertarian

>>33199046
I think open borders for people is a retarded idea. I'm aware that the shock memes are just memes for now to some people, but there's a significant amount who actually believe in them.

>>33182506
>The problem the DNC has is they locked step too hard, and treated a genuinely popular candidate who had a better shot at winning the presidency as a rogue "spoiler" working against getting Hillary her "due."
you can mark my words here, Hillary Clinton has been working towards this past election since she was still stuck in fucking Arkansas
she found every single skeleton she could and used them for blackmail, she called in every single favor, she paid off everyone she could, she even played the long game and let Bill keep some dignity way back in '98 by staying with her so she could use him later as a walking billboard
someday we're going to find out about the monumental effort that was wasted here-- unless Trump has just been another pawn all along, and she's going to run again like she said
next time it might well be a clean sweep

>>33199073
>memes
For my part, (((they))) legitimately need to be gassed. America was a demographically 90% white nation just 40 years ago. Now it is 57% white and rapidly decreasing.

In addition to the clearly anti-white concerted agenda, when our nation loses its Western majority, we will become a socialist dictatorial country like Mexico, Argentina, or Somalia. This is proven by looking at voting records by race.

>>33199130
*Venezuela, not Argentina

>>33198601
>Statistics prove that liberals overwhelmingly hate guns.
Real Liberals or strawman liberals?

File: demoncrats.png (64KB, 1036x512px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1036x512px

>>33199168
Oh look. It seems you're retarded afterall.

And keep in mind that these are just Democrats. Not even extremist liberals.

>>33199130
Civic nationalism > cuck racebait nationalism

IMO if you swear loyalty to the nation and its principles you're a good citizen.

File: liberals.png (70KB, 681x274px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 681x274px

>>33199168
>muh muh strawman
Sorry libshit. Pic related says you're the strawman here.

>>33199224
Civic nationalism is idealistic and is never shown to work in practice. You want other races here? That's fine, but if we don't maintain a white supermajority, all of the libertarian principles that you claim to defend will be thrown out the window. Voting is majority rule, so the end result is we will have a socialist dictatorship.

File: gun rights.png (74KB, 648x293px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 648x293px

>>33199224
And pic related is your "civic nationalism" in practice once whites are a minority. Guns will be outlawed, private property rights will be outlawed, and capitalism will be outlawed.

Just because Colion Noir supports guns, doesn't mean every single Tyrone on the block does. The numbers do not lie.

>>33199283
>>33199343
And what happens when they decide there are currently too many non-whites here, even if some of us were born into the country?

>>33175940
american fucktard always need to put shit words on everything so they dont have to say they got no balls.
Just do whatever you want, stop thinking about wut the others think. In EU it's completely illegal to own a gun for most of the people but you never read "omg my gov is 100% anti gun... Should I own a gun or not?"
Just fucking have some ball fagit

>>33199343
La verdad wei estamos tomando tu pais de mierda como tus ancestros han tomado sus tierras a los indios maricon

Translation: you american fucktard are living only an ounce of what native americans lived.
You deserve it

>>33199452
Just because your mamma dropped you in a white country doesn't mean you belong there. Civic nationalists will never get anything done because they refuse to finally the way and realize that every group has their own land and their bland should be for their group only.

>>33199580
t. spaniard rape baby

File: 1447473864743.jpg (2MB, 1951x1188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1951x1188px

>>33197922
Canadian
Trudeau is fucking horrendous

>>33183130
>being against abortion when we collect dozens of implements that can kill people and often talk about how best to do it.

Literally why. I'm not crazy on abortion but it's massively hypocritical of me to say "I can pop Jamal for stealing my toaster but you can't flush that unwanted guest out of your womb because Jamal left you and you can't afford childcare."

If abortion was supported more as well as general sex Ed and pregnancy prevention, our spending on social trash would drop dramatically because there'd be less of their dumbasses. I'd rather pay the far smaller amount to get someone birth control with my taxes than have to support their kid for 18 fucking years with childcare, foodstamps, education, etc.

Unrelated note, no idea why people give a shit about fags getting married. It does absofuckinglutely nothing to anyone else and when straight marriages are failing 50% of the time I say let them join in on the suffering.

>>33180269
>Living in Chicago all your life
This, my mom grew up there and she is the card carrying Republican of the family and she hates guns.
My dad is relatively progun and is the rural Democrat from southern Illinois.
>Go figure

>>33199633
Answer the question: And what happens when they decide there are currently too many non-whites here?

>>33185397
I don't get why the right doesn't just do the same to the libs. Start disseminating right wing/capitalistic thinking in subtle ways and infiltrate colleges/the democratic party.

>>33200217
>what happens when [insert unlikely hypothetical here]
Arguments by supposition are not arguments.

>>33200972
Answer the fucking question. Otherwise I'm probably not wrong in thinking that your final solution involves a deprivation of life, liberty, or property of people from other ethnicities.

>>33200972
I don't get it: if you're so proud of Making America Great Again, why aren't you comfortable with telling people how?

>>33184978
This is true.

>>33192967
>>33198112
>Rent is theft

You got the message, congrats you're a new socialist :>)

>>33198868
So you thinkle that torturing political opponents is a good idea? Thanks Papa Stalin, we should send the ones we don't Waterboro to the gulag

>>33185076
because people feel like we're the same and because of kids

>>33200177
It's similarly infuriating that people bitch about welfare but are adamant about any measures like raising minimum wage or resetting top marginal/executive bonus/capital gains taxes back to pre-Reagan levels that incentivized putting that money into payroll so fewer people need welfare.

File: C3EC7ppUcAAzg1I.jpg (56KB, 688x373px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 688x373px

>>33185013
>the Democratic party keeps moving further and further left

What color is the sky in your world? The Democratic Party has been following the GOP ever further rightward for at least the past couple of decades. Does nobody remember Bill bringing Reaganomics to the Dems?

File: n-k9vdg170sylv4thxvfsw.gif (14KB, 570x331px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 570x331px

>>33185525

>>33185659
>overlooking that when the US economy was booming the most, the highest marginal income tax rate was 90%

>overlooking the fact that we keep cutting taxes and keep getting deeper in debt

>overlooking the fact that Kansas has thoroughly discredited your economic model

>>33185863
>Mexicans vote Democrat

They can't vote, for one thing. If they could, the GOP would be falling all over themselves to recruit them--remember, they tend to be very religious, which is the GOP'ss bread and butter--and Republicans would flip California red in a New York minute.

>>33186275
>I disagree. The appeal of a flat tax remains whether the confusion is cleared up or not.
>It ensures that no one gets fucked too hard, especially the middle class.

Actually, it explicitly fucks the middle, working, and poor classes, while being an absolutely massive tax cut for the rich and filthy rich. Which is why nobody actually wants it except the rich, filthy rich, and morons.

File: types_of_libertarian1.png (129KB, 650x976px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 650x976px

>>33186399
>I don't think it's possible to be libertarian and left.

They exist.

>>33202760
Libertarian is just anarchy for rich white people.

I'm a liberal in most respects, voted for Bernie, etc. I have a fun for personal defense, but I'm not opposed to collectors and enthusiasts. Bottom of the barrel mental health funding and awareness causes mass shootings, not a chunk of metal.

>>33202760
What's funny there is that Heinlein also promoted a system that paid minimum income from the government while providing incentive/disincentives against overproduction of goods (For Us, The Living: A Comedy of Customs), a religious system that promoted communistic free love (Stranger in a Strange Land) and so on. He explored a broad range of sociology.

>>33203026
Don't forget the media blitz that ensures they have global fame for every incident.

File: usausausa.jpg (58KB, 680x497px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 680x497px

>>33175940
>Anyone else know the dilemma?
Don't listen to the tards in this thread anon. The only political stance your position on 2A should indicate is your own. You don't need to agree or disagree with any political party on any other issue to uphold your rights granted by our constitution. Abortion, etc. etc. are irrelevant.

>>33175993
>>33182598
Are pretty much me.

>t. Texas liberal, army vet, former Democrat. Voted Trump and am currently disgusted with absolutely everyone in Congress. There are no adults steering the ship right now.

>>33202752
Have you considered not having a spite based tax system?

>>33202695
>>overlooking that when the US economy was booming the most, the highest marginal income tax rate was 90%
You are aware that the post-war manufacturing boom is the reason for that, not the tax code... Right?

>overlooking the fact that we keep cutting taxes and keep getting deeper in debt
There is a really simple solution to that.

>overlooking the fact that Kansas has thoroughly discredited your economic model
Texas certainly hasn't.

>>33205708
>Have you considered not having a spite based tax system?

It's not spite based. Rich people in the "investor class" or "owner class" tend to get far more gain out of state infrastructure and state enforcement of property rights than middle class and lower people do. A progressive tax system is based on this. It also incentivizes more investment and development rather than hoarding currency thus incentivizing economic growth.

Conservatives like to talk about the "Golden Era" of the US without acknowledging that during this Golden Era the top tax bracket was taxed at 75-90% until after Vietnam.

>>33203026
>Bottom of the barrel mental health funding
I would encourage you to look up the history of american mental health treatment in the past 100 years. We used to lock nutters up until they were fixed or a viable treatment was available.
The issue isn't funding.

We went from a couple million nutters locked up and/or being treated to less than a couple dozen thousand. We didn't get that good at treating mental illness. The problem with nutters, is that if you leave it to them they stay nutters.

>>33205757
>You are aware that the post-war manufacturing boom is the reason for that, not the tax code... Right?

Then why did the US economy slow when taxes were cut but manufacturing was still going strong?


>There is a really simple solution to that.

Yeah, raise taxes. The government needs money to provide services because we aren't supposed to be some third-world hellhole.

>Texas certainly hasn't.

Texas is propped up by oil. Kansas has thoroughly proven that low taxes kills the economy, which is why they can't afford to pay for anything.

>>33205806
>Rich people in the "investor class" or "owner class" tend to get far more gain out of state infrastructure and state enforcement of property rights than middle class and lower people do.
Yes, but the difference in taxes payed with a flat tax is still way more than enough for this to not matter.

As far as infrastructure is concerned, I don't buy that argument. Heavy vehicles are already subject to unique taxes/fees for their greater wear. The average person doesn't make direct use of ports.

And finally, Pareto says that with a flat tax, the rich would still pay 80% of taxes.

>>33205838
>Kansas has thoroughly proven that low taxes kills the economy, which is why they can't afford to pay for anything.
>level of government handouts is unsustainable at given tax rate
>government is the economy
Silly, the soviets fell like 30 years ago...

>>33205838
>Then why did the US economy slow when taxes were cut but manufacturing was still going strong?
Because other nations rebuilt.

>The government needs money to provide services because we aren't supposed to be some third-world hellhole.
Alternatively, we could embrace that which distinguishes humanity from the sub-humans... Personal responsibility.

>>33200228
because they like to think they're more moral (they're not)

>>33185790
>Leftists are statists, statism and rights are diametrically opposed.
"rights" are irrelevant if they can't be defended, if anyone knows that it should be /k/, and one man or even one family cannot defend against an organized gang of thugs, which is something that pops up every time there is no state
you need help if you want to maintain order

>>33175940
Stop stealing my word.

>>33180269
There's nothing wrong with a shotgun for home defense.

>>33185659
>>Yes, deincentivizing success is a good idea.
>implying the government needs to incentivize people to get rich
>implying people won't have lots of money regardless
>implying people won't make money just for the sake of it
>>>/implying/

This thread is proof that this board has no mods. This entire thread has nothing to do with gun, weapons, or militaria. This thread is entirely political.

>>33196208
if taxes are theft then prison is kidnapping and so is the draft

File: 12202384_1145206985507689_675174348_n.jpg (27KB, 469x505px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 469x505px

>all these faggots shitting up /k/ with a political thread not even remotely related to guns
Go over to /pol/ if you want to argue politics.

>>33205708
saved

>>33205812
>I would encourage you to look up the history of american mental health treatment in the past 100 years.

Says the guy who has no idea of its history. The asylums were closed because they were little more than torture factories where we shoved undesirables. Your cousin acts crazy (ADHD)? Lock him away. Your daughter embarrassed you by getting pregnant out of wedlock? Lock her away. One of the court cases that broke the asylum system was a guy in Florida who had been locked up in a "mental hospital" for seventeen years without receiving any treatment.

>>33205873
You are missing the point by such a large margin that it must be intentional.

>>33205926
Schools are not government handouts. The court system is not a government handout. Roads are not government handouts.

>>33205995
>Because other nations rebuilt.

Then there should have been a similar boom when the Soviet Union fell, but there wasn't. Instead we had housing and dot com bubbles.

>Alternatively, we could embrace that which distinguishes humanity from the sub-humans... Personal responsibility.

How does personal responsibility build roads? Or fund schools? Or the courts?

>>33205708
You mean like a progressive taxation system? We try, but other assholes keep trying to force the poorest to pay everything and the richest to pay nothing.

>>33175940
>>mom former lawyer, 100% anti-gun
>>dad a former ranger,

>>33194608
>>33202733
>yet

look what happened to commiefornia after they passed amnesty. it was the testing ground for this shit. that state used to be very Conservative until mass amnesty. they dems want to pull this shit on they whole fucking country.

>>33206414
it's about the philosophy of gun ownership and self-defense as it relates to other things
admittedly it's drifted a lot

>>33206265
>militaria
Fuck off surplusshit. Your nogunz cringe fashion will never be /k/ related. This is proof that you fucks are trying to subvert the board, by seeing if you can slip in your cancerous interests and hoping nobody notices.

>>33206754
Yet Texas remained red despite also being awash in Messicans just like Cali.

>>33186046
so if i make say, 40k i pay 15% of the 40k and then 10% on 10k? In this example I'd be paying 6k (15% of 40k) + 1k (10% of 10k) so in total 7k. Not just 15% of 40k?

>>33207426
No, you'd pay 15% of the 30k over the first 10k, or 4.5k + 1k.

>>33205873
>I don't buy that argument.

You don't have to buy it for it to be true or logical.

There are people who don't buy that the Earth is a sphere or orbits the sun.

>>33205995
>Personal responsibility.

Unless you're the investor class then you socialize failure and privatize profit.

>>33207426
>so if i make say, 40k i pay 15% of the 40k and then 10% on 10k?

No. The first $10k you make would be taxed at 10%, so $1k.

The next 30K you make would be taxed at 15%, so $4500.

So your total in income taxes would be $5500 not $7000.

>Not just 15% of 40k?
Correct. You would be getting a $500 "savings" (15% of 40,000 is 6000).

>>33208207
cont.

So let's use the top bracket for this same example:

Let's say you make $200,100 this year. Your tax bill would be broke down like so:

$10k x .10 = $1K
($50K-$10K) x .15 = $6000
($100K-$50K) x.20 = $10,000
($150K-$100K) x .25 = $12,500
($200K-$150K) x .30 = $15,000
$100 x .35 = $35

So your total tax bill is $31,035. Which is significantly less than if you paid 35% on all of your income ($70,035).