DrewGunner
Regular Member
imported post
xiphoris wrote:
xiphoris wrote:
You let the cops frisk you?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Yesterday I was the suspect in a manhunt
- Thread starter xiphoris
- Start date
DrewGunner
Regular Member
imported post
double tap.. oops..
double tap.. oops..
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
You guys know the anti-gunner liberals hate us right? They have an irrational fear of firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens. But the most important thing to remember is that they hate us. Not just fear, but hate. You can hear it in the tone of their voice when they talk to you, not ask you questions, but presume to lecture you on the supposed law.
People like my mother will never be convinced that guns serve any purpose.... and she loves venison.... but that's where she thinks private ownership should end... the standard hunting rifle... and that's it. That's probably where most Liberals stand. But some, like the guy in the story, actually hate us.
You guys know the anti-gunner liberals hate us right? They have an irrational fear of firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens. But the most important thing to remember is that they hate us. Not just fear, but hate. You can hear it in the tone of their voice when they talk to you, not ask you questions, but presume to lecture you on the supposed law.
People like my mother will never be convinced that guns serve any purpose.... and she loves venison.... but that's where she thinks private ownership should end... the standard hunting rifle... and that's it. That's probably where most Liberals stand. But some, like the guy in the story, actually hate us.
kparker
Regular Member
imported post
ghostrider,
That's actually not the effect it has here. By setting a larger font in the actual text of your reply, what really results is your comments appear in a much bigger font than everyone else's. For those of us who have the font size already set to a good size, this does indeed make yours too large to read comfortably.
If the default size here is to small for you, then you should change your browser settings to use a larger font and leave your comments here at the default size.
ghostrider,
That's actually not the effect it has here. By setting a larger font in the actual text of your reply, what really results is your comments appear in a much bigger font than everyone else's. For those of us who have the font size already set to a good size, this does indeed make yours too large to read comfortably.
If the default size here is to small for you, then you should change your browser settings to use a larger font and leave your comments here at the default size.
Bill Starks
State Researcher
imported post
If you have a mouse with a scroll wheel do the following: hold down the CTRL Key and roll the wheel. The font will get bigger or smaller depending on the direction.
joeroket
Regular Member
imported post
And if you don't have a scroll wheel on your mouse then you can hold ctrl and tap the + and - keys to make it larger or smaller.
And if you don't have a scroll wheel on your mouse then you can hold ctrl and tap the + and - keys to make it larger or smaller.
grishnav
Regular Member
imported post
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
Why is it that anti-gunners have to be liberal? Fascists hate armed populations just as much as socialists...
amlevin
Regular Member
imported post
NavyLT wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
Machoduck
Regular Member
imported post
grishnav's "Why is it that anti-gunners have to be liberal? Fascists hate armed populations just as much as socialists..." is a good one. The Economics definition of Fascism is that private individuals own the means of production while the gov't runs them. In Socialism, the gov't both owns and runs the means of production. There's a common thread here, folks; the gov't runs things. What a surprise! In relation to gun control, the nice life minders at the gov't can't really control things if the "right wing extremists" might upset the apple cart with rifles etc.
MD
grishnav's "Why is it that anti-gunners have to be liberal? Fascists hate armed populations just as much as socialists..." is a good one. The Economics definition of Fascism is that private individuals own the means of production while the gov't runs them. In Socialism, the gov't both owns and runs the means of production. There's a common thread here, folks; the gov't runs things. What a surprise! In relation to gun control, the nice life minders at the gov't can't really control things if the "right wing extremists" might upset the apple cart with rifles etc.
MD
Metalhead47
Regular Member
imported post
grishnav wrote:
grishnav wrote:
Fascists are liberals. Fascism is another form of stateism, just like socialism, making it a left-wing form of government. Even the word Nazi is an amalgam of "National Socialism." The further right you go on the political spectrum, the less government you have. Pure anarchy is actually the most extreme form of right-wing "government."
American Rattlesnake
Regular Member
imported post
Metalhead47 wrote:
Metalhead47 wrote:
This is only true in a one dimensional model.
sv_libertarian
State Researcher
imported post
NavyLT wrote:
NavyLT wrote:
I use my Russian SKS as my standard hunting rifle. As do countless others in this country. Favored by the Navajo and Eskimo both as a fine rifle. I guess I'm in good company there. I'll carry that around instead of my revolver if that makes the antis happy.
New Daddy
Regular Member
imported post
Metalhead47 wrote:
Metalhead47 wrote:
Not many people know that. Several of the leading Nazi's like Goebbels started out as communists and branched over to the Nazi's because they were Nationalists (vs Internationalists). Hitler then sold them out to the industrialists.
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
American Rattlesnake wrote:
Don't you mean two dimensional? And two dimensional is all we need.
<--100% Gov ----------------------------|------------------------------- 0% Gov -->
Everyone, Fascists, Communists, Republicans (pure form, not GOP), Socialists, Dictators, Monarchs et al fit very nicely on this scale. To distinguish tyranny on a compass by social and economic terms is to hide the truth of tyranny... its just government power seeking and control. Get over the need to define economic or social control and you are left with a pure scale... one that is more honest.
American Rattlesnake wrote:
Don't you mean two dimensional? And two dimensional is all we need.
<--100% Gov ----------------------------|------------------------------- 0% Gov -->
Everyone, Fascists, Communists, Republicans (pure form, not GOP), Socialists, Dictators, Monarchs et al fit very nicely on this scale. To distinguish tyranny on a compass by social and economic terms is to hide the truth of tyranny... its just government power seeking and control. Get over the need to define economic or social control and you are left with a pure scale... one that is more honest.
jmlefler
Regular Member
imported post
Don't talk to the police. They don't care about your 'credibility'. You are now on file with your local dept., and quite probably DHS, as admitting to being a gun owner who scares his neighbors or, if you prefer, whose neighbors are scared.
Carry on.
Don't talk to the police. They don't care about your 'credibility'. You are now on file with your local dept., and quite probably DHS, as admitting to being a gun owner who scares his neighbors or, if you prefer, whose neighbors are scared.
Carry on.
American Rattlesnake
Regular Member
imported post
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
A one dimensional scale like above is fine if you're simply looking at government involvement...because as you've illustrated, it runs from 0% involvement (anarchy) to 100% (totalitarianism.)
Some people are interested in more than one facet (dimension) of social theory. For these people, a multidimensional analysis is often much more helpful.
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
No, I mean one dimension. The scale you have illustrated above is a single dimensional scale.
A one dimensional scale like above is fine if you're simply looking at government involvement...because as you've illustrated, it runs from 0% involvement (anarchy) to 100% (totalitarianism.)
Some people are interested in more than one facet (dimension) of social theory. For these people, a multidimensional analysis is often much more helpful.
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
xiphoris wrote:
xiphoris wrote:
Interesting - the guy admitted to "confronting" you? wow. Nut case. And the thing about holding somthing in your carry hand is kinda cool eh? i often do it too.
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
American Rattlesnake wrote:
A point is one dimensional. A line from a point with no variation except to go in one direction is one dimensional. A line which varies from a 0% value to a 100% value representing two ideas like Liberty vs Governmentis two dimensional as you're actually representing two ideas along the XY access. Move towards the 100% government mark and your liberty decreases in an inverse relation to it.
100% 0% Liberty
|\
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
|________________0% gov 100% liberty
Using Courier above for clarity.... scale is wrong, but you get the picture. While the line I showed before did not show this linear model, if you see the numbers indicating values, you can assume a two dimensional model... otherwise, the values would not change. The dimensions we're talking about are Government and Liberty and their inverse relationship to each other.
Every other analysis technique is just double talk and sleight of hand designed to rationalize tyranny. So they want to know the variations between social controls and economic controls... they're equally evil and equally tyrannical and both need to be crushed along with their proponents. Liberty is non negotiable... but it's being traded... they say, we'll give you this in exchange for that... one freedom for another... unacceptable. Give me Liberty or give me Death. Good saying and still has meaning now... we just need people brave enough to fight the statists.
American Rattlesnake wrote:
A point is one dimensional. A line from a point with no variation except to go in one direction is one dimensional. A line which varies from a 0% value to a 100% value representing two ideas like Liberty vs Governmentis two dimensional as you're actually representing two ideas along the XY access. Move towards the 100% government mark and your liberty decreases in an inverse relation to it.
100% 0% Liberty
|\
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
|________________0% gov 100% liberty
Using Courier above for clarity.... scale is wrong, but you get the picture. While the line I showed before did not show this linear model, if you see the numbers indicating values, you can assume a two dimensional model... otherwise, the values would not change. The dimensions we're talking about are Government and Liberty and their inverse relationship to each other.
Every other analysis technique is just double talk and sleight of hand designed to rationalize tyranny. So they want to know the variations between social controls and economic controls... they're equally evil and equally tyrannical and both need to be crushed along with their proponents. Liberty is non negotiable... but it's being traded... they say, we'll give you this in exchange for that... one freedom for another... unacceptable. Give me Liberty or give me Death. Good saying and still has meaning now... we just need people brave enough to fight the statists.
American Rattlesnake
Regular Member
imported post
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
I disagree with the last statement quoted above. I understand why you find it useful to simplify things down to Liberty vs. Government, and at times it is appropriate to do so. However, understanding that there is a difference between Socialists, Communists, Fascists, etc. does not mean that I'm rationalizing the tyranny rampant in those systems. In fact, understanding their differences may, in some situations, be helpful in combating the systems. One simply must not lose sight of the fact that these systems share the common thread of totalitarianism. I think we can agree to that much, at least.
Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:
I understand your model, now, thanks for the explanation. In your first example, though, you weren't modeling "Liberty" vs. "Government," it was just "Government" on a sliding scale. By implication, I can now see what you meant, but for what little my opinion is worth, your second example/model is much more clear.
I disagree with the last statement quoted above. I understand why you find it useful to simplify things down to Liberty vs. Government, and at times it is appropriate to do so. However, understanding that there is a difference between Socialists, Communists, Fascists, etc. does not mean that I'm rationalizing the tyranny rampant in those systems. In fact, understanding their differences may, in some situations, be helpful in combating the systems. One simply must not lose sight of the fact that these systems share the common thread of totalitarianism. I think we can agree to that much, at least.
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
American Rattlesnake wrote:
What's to study?
American Rattlesnake wrote:
They're all the same in the end, and that I do agree with. They destroy lives and enslave whole populations by fear and threat of violence and implementation of those threats. At the root, they are all the same. They are totalitarian scum.
What's to study?