So, just to be clear, you see inherent evils everywhere.

Got it.

“You, on the other hand, see inherent evil everywhere.”
I see the evils of a manipulated society which forces children into government indoctrination centers so that they grow up to perpetuate the evils of the state. Five year old children understand that stealing and violence is wrong until the system you promote and defend uses state propaganda to make them believe that theft and murder is right if performed by your rulers. Teaching them that every relation in society is by choice except that of the government which is nothing more than force and coercion. You will not address these points and would rather watch your Hollywood indoctrination where the 1% can use gun violence to earn money and then have the audacity to lecture the American people about gun violence and the need for a “plan”.
Fucking pathetic!

“how many criminals can an individual ward-off with a single stun gun.”

Go get em’, tiger! All those criminals lining up outside your door aren’t going to shoot themselves.

“Sad that you subscribe to the belief that the entire human race is inevitably evil.”

You’re too stupid to be taken seriously.

I don’t need a gun exactly because I don’t believe the human race is “inherently evil.” Quite the contrary.

You, on the other hand, see inherent evil everywhere.

The evils in all of your government representatives, in your mooching neighbors, the police who actually confront criminals, the inherent evil of the constitution, the inherent evil of rule of law rule, and all the inherent evil in the eyes of all the killers and crooks you’re prepared to shoot down to justify your existence.

I’m missing the Django Unchained thread for this shit.

Is the rent reasonable in Mogadishu?

“A stun gun is less lethal and still delivers all your
protection needs.”

Wow. If this is true then there should be no resistance in the attempt to arm police officers with only stun guns, since it still delivers all the protection they need. After all they are encountering the criminals which act upon peaceful citizens, right? Think this one through genius, how many criminals can an individual ward-off with a single stun gun. Pretty ridiculous position and solution.

“Maybe a crossbow, or a really good samurai sword for
hunting.”

The fact that you believe the right to bear arms is intended for hunting shows your lack of intelligence and your ability to be easily indoctrinated by your rulers and their propaganda. And yes, I understand that you are being facetious with this statement but the intent remains the same.

The only thing preventing bands of thugs from taking what you have right now isn’t the gun in your holster. It’s Beldar’s Law, which states: “If I did not fear incarceration from human authority figures, I would terminate your life functions by applying sufficient pressure to your blunt skull so as to force its collapse!”

Sad that you subscribe to the belief that the entire human race is inevitably evil. Furthermore, you believe that the evil must be guarded against by the very same evil element but with some sort of justification for one group of thugs over another. Government is force and there is no difference between that and another form of criminality…except for most criminals do not violate you and say it is for your own good.

“Rule of law is like your silent Captain America deterring all would be marauders from ganking your shit and pissing in your face. You’re not a crime deterrent, nor is your gun the solution to government tyranny.”

Rule of law is based on the individuals which make up society and right now the populace seems to be content with a ruling elite dictating to them what is right and what is wrong and how individuals which deviate from these rulings are punished (often referred to as justice). I do not need to be a deterent for crime, just allowed the ability to protect myself and those I love. You wish to eliminate this ability and that makes you a disgusting individual. Thoughts, ideas and reason are the solution to government tyranny, it is an armed populace which should guard against and deter it.

“The same government that you think you’re protecting
yourself from is the same government that protects you.”

If you wish to believe in such a fallacy. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with Warren v. the District of Columbia, where the ruling stated that no government official or employee is obligated to protect a citizen. So we’re obligated (through coercion) to fund a government which holds no obligation to protect us? Sounds like something you would support. IF the state is assumed to be legitimate (which it is not), then it must exist in a reciprocal relation, otherwise one group is a slave and the other a slave master. There is no reciprocity on their part as numerous judicial cases exemplify. You are a slave, but the best kind because you will oppose those which oppose your master…a useful idiot one might say.

“How’s that?”

That’s serfdom! And you love it…

“If you actually believe that this government is involved in tyranny/oppression/murder/theft and you’re response is only to become a keyboard guerrilla, then you’re just a feckless coward without the courage to act on your convictions.”

Says the coward who would rather employ a mafia government force to take peoples earnings as opposed to having the integrity to steal from the victim directly and face to face. You must be completely blind to the actions of the state or a sociopathic apologist for its crimes. Please have the integrity to “act on your convictions” by walking down the street, knocking on a neighbors door and demand that you are there to collect a fee for existence and any resistance will result in my throwing you in cage or killing you with my armed agents. This is your stance on civility and I urge YOU to have “the courage to act on your convictions.”

“Why aren’t you actively opposing this tyranny? Where are the IED’s? Where is your principled stance in the real world? Bravely commanding the Keyboard Kommandos won’t cut it.”

I must assume from this statement that all your solutions rely upon force/coercion/aggression. Instead of having debate, discussion and ration thought practice, you claim that unless I am “actively opposing” my oppressors I have no principled stance (laughable). What is active opposition? Must I murder to meet your obligation or sit in a drum circle complaining? I wish to debate and have rational discussions based on the human element of reason. We can rid the nation of every scumbag politician but unless the individuals have an actual principled approach to civilization, the same scum will rise to the top. You support a system of force. I advocate a society based on voluntary association, but you seem to object to such a notion…sadly.

“We had an assault weapons and high capacity magazines ban in place for 10 years, and no one established any gulags or concentration camps, and the country didn’t descend into a post apocalyptic hellworld of gun free zones.”

So because this did not occur (and you might recognize that gun ownership was not eliminated), you will dismiss historical evidence. What happened to Japanese Americans during WW2? Ohhh, they were taken from their homes and placed in the euphemistically named “internment camps”. Really this was racial, false imprisonment…but such things are obviously permitted in your view of society and what you consider civilized.

“As a society, we already accept that some weapons do not belong in the hands of citizens. That’s the price you pay for living in a democracy. We, the people, get to decide the laws that govern our society, and reasonable gun safety regulations have majority support.”

Good old majority rule! So glad that you subscribe to such tyrannical and oppressive tactics. If you don’t like the choices I make in life, you claim the rights to have a greater number of people decide my fate, and in doing so violate my free will. Thank you so much master. How about this one, let’s get a majority rule to proclaim that one man can own another based on skin color…oh, wait…

Why must I pay the price for your majority rule?

“The principle that the majority have a right to rule the minority, practically resolves all government into a mere contest between two bodies of men, as to which of them shall be masters, and which of them slaves.” –Lysander Spooner

If you actually believe that this government is involved in tyranny/oppression/murder/theft and you’re response is only to become a keyboard guerrilla, then you’re just a feckless coward without the courage to act on your convictions. Why aren’t you actively opposing this tyranny? Where are the IED’s? Where is your principled stance in the real world? Bravely commanding the Keyboard Kommandos won’t cut it. We had an assault weapons and high capacity magazines ban in place for 10 years, and no one established any gulags or concentration camps, and the country didn’t descend into a post apocalyptic hellworld of gun free zones. As a society, we already accept that some weapons do not belong in the hands of citizens. That’s the price you pay for living in a democracy. We, the people, get to decide the laws that govern our society, and reasonable gun safety regulations have majority support.

I understand the point of showing both. However, neither apply to the current situation…at all.
In addition to that I was gently poking fun at folks that so often label someone (ex. POTUS) as both “Hitler and Stalin” not realizing they’re on opposite ends of the political spectrum.

All that typing, and you’re still a retard.

“That being the mafia entity known as government.” Again, when will you be moving to Mogadishu? Or are you writing this from Mogadishu? How’s the cholera this time of year?