By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Delta and United join list of companies to cut ties with the NRA - maybe this truly is the end of gun rights in the US?

o_O.Q said:

"Only if the armed oppressor is bigger, or less ethical. "

i think that being an oppressor and being ethical at the same time is kind of an oxymoron don't you think?

In general yes, that's an oxymoron.   

"I didn't realize you were unable to understand the facts beyond the examples that I gave you.  "

i was pointing out that it was fallacious to use the world wars as representations of how things have been throughout human history

I was pointing out that statistically, even the world wars were safer than most of human history.  Those are the facts.

"This is why there is a necessity to have an educated populace."

education does not taken away the limitations that cause people to be selfish, or envious or greedy etc etc etc

in fact it amplifies those traits in many instances

therefore, the idea that we can simply teach people out of wanting to be malevolent is a waste of time

Most people aren't needlessly malevolent.  The vast majority of people tend to be decent.  

The point is that people who are educated can vote for what is actually best for them.



Around the Network
McDonaldsGuy said:
Puppyroach said:

Is it legal to be drunk and drive?

This guy murdered 3 teenagers/young adults drunk driving and was released on bail: http://www.localsyr.com/news/local-news/camillus-man-accused-of-driving-drunk-killing-3-people-released-from-jail-on-bail/989969759

If a guy shot up 3 teenagers the NRA would get attacked; the second amendment would be under threat; the shooter would get life in prison/death penalty (rightfully so); constant media coverage; etc. etc.

Another drunk driver who has had 2 DUIs in the past killed someone and only got 4 years in prison.

If you drink then you have no room to complain about guns.

Do you need a drivers license to operate a car? Can you loose that license if you are a reckless driver? Well, apply that principle to gun ownership and you would come a long way. And I did not know the purpose of alcohol was to use it as a weapon, good to know =) 



o_O.Q said:

.

Here's some questions for you:

-How do countries like Japan, UK (countries with very low rates of gun ownership) maintain their freedoms?  

-How do guns equal the playing field against weapons like bombs and unmanned drones?



o_O.Q said:

"Lol so first you believe that the guy who allied with the German capitalists is a socialist"

lmao... ok i'll change my question... do you agree that hitler controlled the economy of germany through his government?

after you've answered that question tell me whether its socialism or capitalism that cedes control of the means of production to government

 

"now you believe that the Soviet Union is an example of tyranny of the majority."

now there's really only two ways that i can interpret this since you have acknowledged that the soviet union was democratic

either you don't think that the soviet union was a tyranny which would be a tragedy

or you're just being dishonest

 

" Oh also nice doublethink, there you agree with me that democracy in the Soviet Union was eroded by authoritarianism"

the only way you could say that is if you didn't read my post... i mean you quoted it... did you not read it?

 

so are you really trying to tell me though that you don't understand that a democracy can be authoritarian?

you don't think that its possible for the majority of people in a society to vote the rights of the people in their society away to government?

"Change your question"? Your question has been answered numerous times in the thread but you refuse to listen. You're kidding if you think I owe you another explanation. If anything you owe me for the question you have yet to answer in our last discussion about race

now there's really only two ways that i can interpret this since you have acknowledged that the soviet union was democratic

I said that democracy eroded away to authoritarianism from the central state, whereas you say "the soviet union was democratic" as a definite statement. If you think those statements are equal, try again. Maybe you should go find some Marxist-Leninists to hang out with and tell them how democratic Stalin was, you'll fit right in with them, lmao.

Oh and before god forbid, you say something like "Stalin was democratic!", the word is totalitarian.

you don't think that its possible for the majority of people in a society to vote the rights of the people in their society away to government?

So you do understand what it means. The real question is if you get what it means, then why did you choose the worst possible example instead of just saying this in the first place?

I know; I highly doubt you believe in half of the stuff you say. It's obvious you have a problem with the left, but all these bizarre arguments you make are just a front to mask your real points which is why you're always moving the goal posts. But I have no interest in discussing your point, I wanted to pick apart your example and I got what I wanted. I see no point continuing this conversation.

Regardless, I know you're going to reply to this post and I eagerly await to read it!

Last edited by Leadified - on 26 February 2018

Nem said:
spurgeonryan said:

Two major airlines. A cybersecurity firm. Six car rental brands. A home security company. An Omaha bank. Companies have scrambled to cut ties with the National Rifle Association over the past couple of days, and the list continued to grow into the weekend.

Delta Air Lines (DAL) announced Saturday morning that it's ending discounted rates for NRA members. "We will be requesting that the NRA remove our information from their website," the company said in a tweet.

United Airlines (UAL) followed a short time later, saying the company will no longer offer discounts on flights to the NRA annual meeting.

And TrueCar (TRUE), a car buying service, said late Friday that it would end its deal with the NRA as of February 28.

The companies were the latest to abandon partnerships with the NRA amid a renewed public debate over tightened gun laws following a school shooting in Florida last week that left 17 dead.

First National Bank of Omaha on Thursday pledged to stop issuing an NRA-branded Visa card. A bank spokesperson said "customer feedback" prompted a review of its partnership with the NRA, and it chose not to renew its current contract.

There was also a wave of car rental outfits. Enterprise Holdings, which runs the Enterprise, Alamo and National car rental groups, announced that it will end the discount deal it has with the NRA on March 26.

On Friday, car rental company Hertz (HTZ) said in a tweet that it's also ending its NRA rental car discount program.

Read rest at Source: http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/23/news/companies/enterprise-nra-car-rental-discounts/index.html

 

I think the government wants us to lose our gun rights. That way as soon as they can they will have total control of us. Only reason we have any freedom in America is due to guns. There are ways to handle this, sometimes when I see how easy it is to get a gun I laugh. Just fix the laws.

Ryan... honestly... we have no gun rights in europe. Do you think we have no freedom? (aquisition is highly regulated)

Why do some americans think this way? That is utterly ridiculous. Are you planning a revolution and that's why you want guns? Why are you defending Anarchy?

It's so backwards that i don't even know what to say. How can people not see that? Civilians don't need guns. You are living in a developed country. You are safe. All the easy to get guns do is make it easy for people to kill each other everytime they get angry at something. It's not civilised. It's not the wild west anymore.

Do you really need to sacrifice a bunch of children to the slaughter every year just to keep your illusion that with your gun you can go take down the government? This is utter lunacy!

Where's the like button when you really need one? Obrigado for pointing this out.

o_O.Q said:
loy310 said:

Gun rights have become a life or death issue, it’s so outta control that nut jobs are taking their 2nd right and using it against defenseless children. Guns don’t make you free, nor do they protect your freedom they do one thing and one thing only and that’s obliterate life, at the moment mostly children life it seems.

"Guns don’t make you free, nor do they protect your freedom"

the war for independence?

the civil war?

Where both fought by professional soldiers, not civilians.

During the independence war, the militias actually almost made the whole thing fail, because they refused to fight in a different state than the one they where living in, and the states where relying on them at first as unlike the Army raised by the Congress, they didn't need any pay and thus didn't pester them all the time to raise money for the army (at the time, Congress had to kindly ask for money from the states, which where none too happy sending anything to Congress as it meant less money for them). Only once General Washington pointed out that the army was on the breaking point and would start looting because they didn't get any pay in over half a year did they finally agreed to pay for the army, probably also because the militias where so ineffective when they actually fought that the army was badly needed to save the states.

Oh, and the militias got armed by their respective states, because having guns at the time was extremely expensive (think about a couple 100k in today's dollars) and only few of them had any before the war. Hence where the 2nd right actually comes from - not having to give them back to the states.

o_O.Q said:
Nem said:

Ryan... honestly... we have no gun rights in europe. Do you think we have no freedom? (aquisition is highly regulated)

Why do some americans think this way? That is utterly ridiculous. Are you planning a revolution and that's why you want guns? Why are you defending Anarchy?

It's so backwards that i don't even know what to say. How can people not see that? Civilians don't need guns. You are living in a developed country. You are safe. All the easy to get guns do is make it easy for people to kill each other everytime they get angry at something. It's not civilised. It's not the wild west anymore.

Do you really need to sacrifice a bunch of children to the slaughter every year just to keep your illusion that with your gun you can go take down the government? This is utter lunacy!

"Civilians don't need guns. You are living in a developed country. You are safe."

except for all those times in history when people needed guns to fight oppression

its infantile to assume that such a situation will never occur again

"Do you really need to sacrifice a bunch of children to the slaughter every year"

killing and death are a fact of reality and that will be the case whether guns are completely eradicated from society or not

"just to keep your illusion that with your gun you can go take down the government?"

this is how america as an independent country was formed to begin with... wtf are you talking about?

Look above for what you got wrong there.

Besides, you can hardly compare 250 years ago with how it would play out nowadays. Have fun with your peashooters against tanks, IFVs, MRLs, helicopters, drones and jets. The government would actually have to try very very hard to loose any civil war



Around the Network

I really understand US culture and the right to have a gun, and I think it is something that will never change. And that the problem is not necessarily with the guns themselves, also several other countries have so many guns and nothing happens.

But it is beyond my understanding why people need to have dozens of guns, assault rifles, machine guns, sniper rifles or whatever for the right to defend themselves.



Where does this paranoia come from? I mean the story about how the people are only free because they have guns and if they didn't, the government would kick in everybody's doors and.. something? It's batshit crazy, where is it coming from? Why would you be at war with your own government? Do you think all other countries with strict gun laws are somehow held hostage by their governments? What would be the point of that? Gun nuts are always using arguments from like the 1700's. If there was a mention in the founding papers that everyone has the right to a horse, I suppose all of the nuts would have a horse as well, just because old papers.
Listen, the greatest force of all is capitalism. Everybody wants your money. They don't want to lock you up, they want you to go out there and make money and spend it on them.



EnricoPallazzo said:
I really understand US culture and the right to have a gun, and I think it is something that will never change. And that the problem is not necessarily with the guns themselves, also several other countries have so many guns and nothing happens.

But it is beyond my understanding why people need to have dozens of guns, assault rifles, machine guns, sniper rifles or whatever for the right to defend themselves.

Like... what country has loads of weapons and nothing happens? That is just false.



EnricoPallazzo said:


But it is beyond my understanding why people need to have dozens of guns, assault rifles, machine guns, sniper rifles or whatever for the right to defend themselves.

Assault rifles and machine guns are heavily regulated in the United States by the National Firearms Act of 1933 and the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986. Sniper rifles are just any rifle with a scope on it that can shoot with high precision at long distances. Many sniper rifles are common bolt actions used by farmers and hunters. 

Overall, rifles make up only 4% of U.S homicides, in total. More than four times more people are killed with knives. 

Last edited by sc94597 - on 26 February 2018

o_O.Q said:
Machiavellian said:

You want to know what is interesting about the links you provided.  It took multiple people to perform those murders.  Lets say in the first link where 33 people were killed by 4 knife wielding assailants, but instead each one had an AR 15 what do you think the death toll would be.  Instead of 33 we would see hundreds.  Its just the order of magnitude which is where you are missing the point.  No one is saying bad people cannot find ways to kill.  The difference in America is that Bad people have a very easy time acquiring weapons where one person can kill and wound like they were 4.

it does not take multiple people to wield a machete or knife

let me present a similar argument to yours - 4 people can ride in a car but it does not take 4 people to operate a car

 

"Lets say in the first link where 33 people were killed by 4 knife wielding assailants, but instead each one had an AR 15 what do you think the death toll would be. "

suppose they decided to build bombs instead?

or suppose they decided to rent 4 pick up trucks and run people down?

Never said it took multiple people to weld any type of knife, I stated how many people you can kill with such a knife compared to how many people you can kill with an AR15 Assault Rifle.  When people try to defend guns they always throw in that people who want to kill will use said item.  Gun, Car, club you name it.  The difference is always access, and how many can be killed in that time span.  A semi auto with one half decent trained person can take out a lot of people in a very short span of time from a distance.  When people complain about even banning bump stocks then you have to wonder, why would anyone need an AR15 or bump stock for self defense.

Even with your suppose theory, each one is harder to do.  The greater the access to weapons that allow mass killing the greater the danger.  Why do you not see people make booms all day and just chuck them at people.  Because a gun is way easier to access and easier to deliver deadly damage.  Why do you not see people jumping into Trucks and cars all the time to kill a lot of people.  Because its not so easy to jump into a truck or car and kill a lot of people as it is to use a gun.