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:
Nem said:

 

I know. I disagreed with your definition of "crazy people". You are still ok with the rest having easy acess to guns. I don't think that's smart and will just enable killings to continue, albeit less often.

" You are still ok with the rest having easy acess to guns. I don't think that's smart and will just enable killings to continue"

 

china a communist country with strict gun control:

 

"33 Dead, 130 Injured in China Knife-Wielding Spree"

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/33-dead-130-injured-china-knife-wielding-spree-n41966

 

"School attacks in China (2010–12)"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010%E2%80%9312)

 

"At least five people have been killed"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/10697924/Five-killed-in-market-stabbings-in-China.html

 

"2 killed, 18 injured in deadly southwest China stabbing spree "

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/guizhou-china-stabbing-spree-two-killed-eighteen-injured/

 

"Four dead in fatal stabbing"

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2018-02/25/c_136999268.htm

^^^^^^^^ this happened today btw

 

its about time you wake up to reality

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.



Around the Network
o_O.Q said:

"You're thanking freedom for having guns, when there are other countries that gained their freedom without guns."

you're trying to compare apples to oranges as i said previously

a country being actively oppressed and fighting for its freedom is different to the oppressor deciding that the control its exerting is not beneficial anymore

 

"This is the most peaceful time in history. "

no, the middle east, africa on a wider scale and even europe and asia are not peaceful at this point in time


"but because of democracy. "

"Social-Democracy, however, wants, on the contrary, to develop the class struggle of the proletariat to the point where the latter will take the leading part in the popular Russian revolution, i.e., will lead this revolution to a the democratic-dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry. "

vladimir lenin

the soviet union was democratic... how did that turn out?

there's a reason why america was founded as a constitutional republic and not a democracy... and there's a reason why there's such a profound push towards a democracy

 

"Many countries on Earth today, have enormous freedoms despite ridiculously low gun ownership rates.  "

i'm not saying you are wrong but can you give an example?

 

"The weapons that were available to common folk throughout history were much closer to the military weapons.  This isn't the case anymore.  The US government literally has the power to end nearly all life on Earth.  "

i already gave my response to this sentiment

there are people that are willing to fight for their freedom regardless of the circumstances, you might not be one of them but the point is that they exist

"you're trying to compare apples to oranges as i said previously

a country being actively oppressed and fighting for its freedom is different to the oppressor deciding that the control its exerting is not beneficial anymore"

The point is that guns aren't the only way to achieve freedom.  The UK has a very low rate of gun ownership, yet its citizens are free.  

"no, the middle east, africa on a wider scale and even europe and asia are not peaceful at this point in time"

No.  The entire world of conflicts in the middle east or Africa or anywhere else are nothing compared to world war I or II.  The fact of the matter is that this is the most peaceful time in human history.

It's a fact, there's absolutely nothing to debate with this point.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-10-23/world-actually-safer-ever-and-heres-data-prove

 

"i'm not saying you are wrong but can you give an example?"

Japan has a gun ownership rate of 0.6 (out of 100 citizens).

The UK has a gun ownership rate of 6.2

Poland - 1.3

Ireland - 4.3

Italy -11.9

Denmark -12

 

"the soviet union was democratic... how did that turn out?

there's a reason why america was founded as a constitutional republic and not a democracy... and there's a reason why there's such a profound push towards a democracy"

"The United States is a democracy because the authority of the government arises from the people.


Jefferson said it best in the Declaration of Independence:

...to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it... 

"

From Jefferson, governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed.  This is why it's so easy to delude oneself into thinking that guns are what give people freedom. The reality is that optimistically, guns give a bit more power to consent or not consent.  But they are not the only way to get such power.  There are plenty of famous people that proved that.  Gandhi, Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King and many others through history.  



sc94597 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Anyone who reads that "reducing gun rights to gun privileges" = "disarming the common man" is not literate in my eyes.

Privilege at whose authority? The bourgeoisie and the nation-state they control? I am not lacking literacy here, I just am thinking through the implications of handing authority over this matter to the capitalist state. Apparently you are not. 

When gun-ownership is not socially protected the people lack the means to affirm their will outside of the rigged political process. You might feel comfortable with your country's well-off controlling your access to guns, I am not.

I am assuming you are a reformist though, which has so many  practical problems one might as well call oneself  social democrat or left-liberal.

You might not be comfortable with limitations, but being part of society is not about ou feeling comfortable but to form a society that best benefits the people as a whole and i described in the unalienable rights that the declaration of independence describes: "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."

This phrase supercedes your right to bear arms any day. What society is about is finding this balance, even when individuals feel uncomfortable with the changes or who is in charge to enact them.

And what is your solution to having some kind of regulations in society if you don´t trust the government to do it?



o_O.Q said:

"but because of democracy. "

"Social-Democracy, however, wants, on the contrary, to develop the class struggle of the proletariat to the point where the latter will take the leading part in the popular Russian revolution, i.e., will lead this revolution to a the democratic-dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry. "

vladimir lenin

the soviet union was democratic... how did that turn out?

there's a reason why america was founded as a constitutional republic and not a democracy... and there's a reason why there's such a profound push towards a democracy

This might be the single worst argument against democracy I've ever seen. Try "tyranny of the majority" instead if you want to argue against democracy and make the point on why America is a republic.



Harkins1721 said:
And 11 teens die a day while texting and driving. Time to ban cars. Oh you need a license? Yeah not everyone follows this rule. Lots of people don't even have insurance of their cars.

Then why even have rules right.  Since people do not follow rules we should just get rid of them and let people do what they want and let GOD sort them out.  Or could it be that we have rules because they set the standard what our society is willing to tolerate and set defined penalties for breaking those rules.  So yes, teens can kill people texting while driving.  They might not actually die but if caught doing this act, we have laws to punish them and set an example.  There isn't one law today that anyone has to follow.  We as a society put those laws, rules and regulations in place to set the standard and penalty for disobeying the laws.

For people who want to have a deadly weapon, not having standards, Laws and regulations that put the onus and responsibility of possessing a weapon of destruction on those individuals really does sound silly.  



Around the Network
Leadified said:
o_O.Q said:

"but because of democracy. "

"Social-Democracy, however, wants, on the contrary, to develop the class struggle of the proletariat to the point where the latter will take the leading part in the popular Russian revolution, i.e., will lead this revolution to a the democratic-dictatorship of the proletariat and the peasantry. "

vladimir lenin

the soviet union was democratic... how did that turn out?

there's a reason why america was founded as a constitutional republic and not a democracy... and there's a reason why there's such a profound push towards a democracy

This might be the single worst argument against democracy I've ever seen. Try "tyranny of the majority" instead if you want to argue against democracy and make the point on why America is a republic.

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV (360+PS3) would outsell SSBB. I was wrong.

A Biased Review Reloaded / Open Your Eyes / Switch Gamers Club

sc94597 said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Anyone who reads that "reducing gun rights to gun privileges" = "disarming the common man" is not literate in my eyes.

1. Privilege at whose authority? 

2. I am not lacking literacy here

3. I just am thinking through the implications of handing authority over this matter to the capitalist state. 

4. When gun-ownership is not socially protected

5. I am assuming you are a reformist though

1.  Various options, possibly an equivalent to the institutions that issue Driver's Licenses and oversee auto insurance.  

2.  If you read one thing as a completely different thing, then your literacy is suspect.  

3. I'm not seeing evidence of rational thinking, though.  

4. That which is freely asserted is freely dismissed.  Pretty much the rest of the free world has figured out how to be free without a Second Amendment.

5.  Good for you.  You're wrong.



NightDragon83 said:

Right, because the NRA is to blame for the mass shooting in FL last week

No, the shooter is to blame for the crime and NRA are to blame for inciting violence with their rethoric of wanting to arm everyone in society. Just because they are a powerful lobby organization, doesn´t mean they shouldn´t be held accountable for their hateful rethoric, not acknowledging that there might be some problems with such an unregulated market. And mostly, politicians should be to blame for taking the money.

Look, I´m from Sweden and an American is almost five times as likely in being killed by homicide than a Swedish person and close to 19 (!) times as likely as being killed by a shooting compared to a Swede. There are ofcourse other factors that matter aswell, but gun regulation is a large part of it.



Puppyroach said:

You might not be comfortable with limitations, but being part of society is not about ou feeling comfortable but to form a society that best benefits the people as a whole and i described in the unalienable rights that the declaration of independence describes: "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."

This phrase supercedes your right to bear arms any day. What society is about is finding this balance, even when individuals feel uncomfortable with the changes or who is in charge to enact them.

And what is your solution to having some kind of regulations in society if you don´t trust the government to do it?

You need to be less vague than that. 

A few questions to ponder:

 

1. What constitutes a given society?

2. Where does the state gain it's authority to manage society?

3. Who controls the current political process? Is it "society as a whole?"

4. Why are billionaires and corporations so keen on gun control?

5. Should they have this disproportionate social power?

6. Is the United States of America democratic?

7. Which forms of democracy best represent the social interests and values of most people?

 

The rest of your post was liberal-democratic dogma which sounds nice on paper, but which is often used by the powerful to deprive the powerless of autonomy.

 

I don't even believe in "natural" rights. All rights are determined intersubjectively and in the United States we've intersubjectively determined that common gun ownership enhances our abilities to attain life and happiness. 

 

The state is the protector of privilege not the regulator. So what is my solution? Eliminate that which enforces social alienation through centralized violence -- the state and the capitalist class which controls it. That combined with lifting the poor out of poverty eliminates the bulk of violence in this country which is caused by those so desperate that they join the illegalized drug trade.

 



RolStoppable said:
Leadified said:

This might be the single worst argument against democracy I've ever seen. Try "tyranny of the majority" instead if you want to argue against democracy and make the point on why America is a republic.

The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.

That's true, at least on the surface level.