You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
Again, don't make up arguments or assumptions for me to fit your narrative. I believe in solar and renewable energies.
I know you do, which is why I made the analogy. You wouldn't argue for subsidizing coal miners, so why would you argue for sinking tax payer money in technological abominations like the F-35? The subsidization of the military industrial complex in the US is one of the best examples of out-of-control socialism: inefficient, sub-par work done by government funded organizations for the sake of job creation over creativity and efficiency...
Sure, lot's of innovations have come from military spending, doesn't mean it's the only way forward, and that certainly doesn't mean the US military spending budget is reasonable.
But anyway, we're veering horribly off-topic. The question at hand is why do a significant portion of Americans spend so much time idolizing and glorifying guns?
Re: US Politics Thread
There's been a lot of talk in the recent pages about the 2nd Amendment and how we need to have the right to bear arms in case the government turns on us.
I got news for ya, if the government turns on the citizens using the military, your AR15 ain't gonna save ya.
Carry on.
Re: US Politics Thread
There's been a lot of talk in the recent pages about the 2nd Amendment and how we need to have the right to bear arms in case the government turns on us.
I got news for ya, if the government turns on the citizens using the military, your AR15 ain't gonna save ya.
Carry on.
Explaining the why doesn't mean you endorse it. We're not talking cannons vs single-shot rifles here. The gov't has technology way beyond what any citizen has or can legally have.
The best defense is going to be trusting the day to day military folks to not kill other citizens if it ever came to that. Civil war on the other hand would be catastrophic.
Re: US Politics Thread
bigbri wrote:There's been a lot of talk in the recent pages about the 2nd Amendment and how we need to have the right to bear arms in case the government turns on us.
I got news for ya, if the government turns on the citizens using the military, your AR15 ain't gonna save ya.
Carry on.
Explaining the why doesn't mean you endorse it. We're not talking cannons vs single-shot rifles here. The gov't has technology way beyond what any citizen has or can legally have.
The best defense is going to be trusting the day to day military folks to not kill other citizens if it ever came to that. Civil war on the other hand would be catastrophic.
I would hope military leaders and those below would never go after citizenry, but you never know. Police, armed like the military, go to some pretty drastic measures short of shooting people with real bullets regularly when encountering protesters.
A Civil War would probably decimate most of this country and its people in this day and age. All sorts of factions would come out of the woodwork to use the chaos to further their agenda, exact revenge, take their "piece," etc. It's not a pleasant thought.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
There's been a lot of talk in the recent pages about the 2nd Amendment and how we need to have the right to bear arms in case the government turns on us.
I got news for ya, if the government turns on the citizens using the military, your AR15 ain't gonna save ya.
Carry on.
True. It’s not like the Iraqi or Afghani insurgencies caused any problem. Look at Vietnam, not a single soldier died to small arms fire.
Can anyone tell me the difference in decibels between an ar-15 and one with a suppressor? I’m sure it’s just like on the movies.
Re: US Politics Thread
bigbri wrote:There's been a lot of talk in the recent pages about the 2nd Amendment and how we need to have the right to bear arms in case the government turns on us.
I got news for ya, if the government turns on the citizens using the military, your AR15 ain't gonna save ya.
Carry on.
True. It’s not like the Iraqi or Afghani insurgencies caused any problem. Look at Vietnam, not a single soldier died to small arms fire.
Of course citizens would take out their share of soldiers out, but you're talking small arms vs. high-powered automatic weapons, various grenades, artillery, tanks, armored personnel carriers, copters, planes, bombs, etc. In the end, I think I know who's on the losing side.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
All I know is Democrats, Republicans, and Now the NRA are open to restricting bumpstocks, yet ID, Buzz, and Flagg all said it is pointless and there is no value to it and that it truly does't make a gun full auto.
Sorry the NRA and Repubs are about to let you down on the bumpstock issue.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
All I know is Democrats, Republicans, and Now the NRA are open to restricting bumpstocks, yet ID, Buzz, and Flagg all said it is pointless and there is no value to it and that it truly does't make a gun full auto.
Sorry the NRA and Repubs are about to let you down on the bumpstock issue.
Can you cite where any of us said that? Don't start going SLC on us. All any of us said is that there is nothing you can do to prevent bad people from harming others. But feel free to track gun violence from bump stock weapons before and after the bill passes and tell me what kind of impact it had.
- IRISH OS1R1S
- Rep: 59
Re: US Politics Thread
I think the focus on bumpstocks and auto weapons is a smoke and mirrors job to look like they are doing something. In reality it doesn't address Americas problem. It's guns, period.
Of course I'm just an Irish guy so what the hell do I know. I swore not to get involved in political matters on the web. Damn-it.
Goes back in my hole.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:All I know is Democrats, Republicans, and Now the NRA are open to restricting bumpstocks, yet ID, Buzz, and Flagg all said it is pointless and there is no value to it and that it truly does't make a gun full auto.
Sorry the NRA and Repubs are about to let you down on the bumpstock issue.
Can you cite where any of us said that? Don't start going SLC on us. All any of us said is that there is nothing you can do to prevent bad people from harming others. But feel free to track gun violence from bump stock weapons before and after the bill passes and tell me what kind of impact it had.
None of you supported my request to ban the bumpstock. All cited it was legal and seemed very indifferent to support then said it wouldn't do anything. At minimum it is symbolic. Best case it saves some lives.
