OFFS: The Forsakening

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 17956
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Hugh Akston » 13 Aug 2019, 16:28

JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 16:15
BTW, I recently read a few discussions on the anarchist perspective on gun control; most participants were left-anarchists (I think because most people who identify with the anarchist label are left-anarchists), and most of them rejected the idea, pointing out that control implies a controller. There were one or two Bakuninites who said things like "Well, all arms should be kept in community armories, managed by democratically elected committees..." but even in left-anarchist forums they tended to be hooted at by those who asked how that wasn't just government under a different name.
Cartoon heart emoji
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 24077
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by JasonL » 13 Aug 2019, 16:49

Oh no it's deffo not limited to the left, but branding of the left suggests they might want less of that and I think that's not true. They love to make things be put through a democratic process then, provided the votes go in accordance with their values, brutally enforce adherence to the now blessed right and true state of the law.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13541
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 13 Aug 2019, 18:21

Painboy wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 13:20
I imagine the anti-gun counter argument is cops shouldn't have them either and ultimately when we get rid of all guns cops won't need them. Then we can get to banning knives.
That's exactly the argument I see among Blues and Europeans on the subject. I also see Blues using "anyone could have a gun!" to justify no-knock paramilitary raids.

(As I mentioned in another thread, I went shopping for a Swiss Army Knife out of spite after encountering a bunch of Brits online who kept hyperventilating about why anyone would be such a monster as to want to own and carry such a deadly killing implement.)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13541
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 13 Aug 2019, 18:23

JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 16:15
I don't think it's even really limited to the left. Most people want to be ruled by a Great King, who has the power to do anything he wants, as long as he's their kind of king.

BTW, I recently read a few discussions on the anarchist perspective on gun control; most participants were left-anarchists (I think because most people who identify with the anarchist label are left-anarchists), and most of them rejected the idea, pointing out that control implies a controller. There were one or two Bakuninites who said things like "Well, all arms should be kept in community armories, managed by democratically elected committees..." but even in left-anarchist forums they tended to be hooted at by those who asked how that wasn't just government under a different name.
And yet, all the self-described "anarchists" I run into are all-in on gun-grabbing. But then, as people have pointed out, "anarchist" gets used by some marxists the same way "libertarian" was getting used by some conservatives a decade back.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13541
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 13 Aug 2019, 19:03

dead_elvis wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 15:26
OFFS what could possibly go wrong:

Screen All Adult Patients for Drug Abuse, National Panel Urges

It should then be insisted that doctors start every appointment with a reading of Miranda rights.
I just like the whole, "We urge this be done! Side note—we really don't have any studies that suggest this would be a good thing, so we also need more studies so we can find some to back up our urging." thing
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24547
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Mo » 14 Aug 2019, 07:01

Painboy wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 13:20
JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 12:42
Dangerman wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 11:07
lunchstealer wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 00:23
For fuck's sake if an AR15 is designed to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible, they have no legitimate use for law enforcement whose job is not to kill as many people as possible. They are not assassins or soldiers, and they never have authorization to engage in non-defensive killing. If an AR15 has no legitimate defensive value, then cops should be banned from possessing them.
This is an extremely solid argument IMO.
This is what I've felt too. If they're only good for killing as many people as possible as fast as possible, why do the police have them? Of course, every time I bring up some variation of this argument, I get responses like, "Cops might need to face bad guys who are heavily armed! Cops are special and different! You're not being serious! You want everyone to have an AR-15!" etc. etc.
I imagine the anti-gun counter argument is cops shouldn't have them either and ultimately when we get rid of all guns cops won't need them. Then we can get to banning knives.
It works here and guns aren't banned here. Some cops have guns, but the average beat cop does not. The thing is if you need those sorts of weapons, it shouldn't be the patrolman dealing with it, it should be the SWAT team. It's the whole reason why you need special weapons and/or tactics.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15878
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Aresen » 14 Aug 2019, 10:33

Mo wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 07:01
Painboy wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 13:20
JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 12:42
Dangerman wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 11:07
lunchstealer wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 00:23
For fuck's sake if an AR15 is designed to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible, they have no legitimate use for law enforcement whose job is not to kill as many people as possible. They are not assassins or soldiers, and they never have authorization to engage in non-defensive killing. If an AR15 has no legitimate defensive value, then cops should be banned from possessing them.
This is an extremely solid argument IMO.
This is what I've felt too. If they're only good for killing as many people as possible as fast as possible, why do the police have them? Of course, every time I bring up some variation of this argument, I get responses like, "Cops might need to face bad guys who are heavily armed! Cops are special and different! You're not being serious! You want everyone to have an AR-15!" etc. etc.
I imagine the anti-gun counter argument is cops shouldn't have them either and ultimately when we get rid of all guns cops won't need them. Then we can get to banning knives.
It works here and guns aren't banned here. Some cops have guns, but the average beat cop does not. The thing is if you need those sorts of weapons, it shouldn't be the patrolman dealing with it, it should be the SWAT team. It's the whole reason why you need special weapons and/or tactics.
Unfortunately, some police departments feel SWAT teams are required for parking scofflaws.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17315
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 14 Aug 2019, 12:45

Mo wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 07:01
Painboy wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 13:20
JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 12:42
Dangerman wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 11:07
lunchstealer wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 00:23
For fuck's sake if an AR15 is designed to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible, they have no legitimate use for law enforcement whose job is not to kill as many people as possible. They are not assassins or soldiers, and they never have authorization to engage in non-defensive killing. If an AR15 has no legitimate defensive value, then cops should be banned from possessing them.
This is an extremely solid argument IMO.
This is what I've felt too. If they're only good for killing as many people as possible as fast as possible, why do the police have them? Of course, every time I bring up some variation of this argument, I get responses like, "Cops might need to face bad guys who are heavily armed! Cops are special and different! You're not being serious! You want everyone to have an AR-15!" etc. etc.
I imagine the anti-gun counter argument is cops shouldn't have them either and ultimately when we get rid of all guns cops won't need them. Then we can get to banning knives.
It works here and guns aren't banned here. Some cops have guns, but the average beat cop does not. The thing is if you need those sorts of weapons, it shouldn't be the patrolman dealing with it, it should be the SWAT team. It's the whole reason why you need special weapons and/or tactics.
I should note that I don't make an exception for SWAT teams. No MP5s, no M4s, no AR15s. If we accept the argument that the AR15 is designed to kill as many people as possible as fast as possible, then even SWAT teams shouldn't need them, because they still aren't trying to kill as many as possible.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 24547
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Mo » 14 Aug 2019, 13:22

There are situations where a SWAT team may need to take out a number of people quickly. It’s rare, but not unheard of.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 28154
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by thoreau » 14 Aug 2019, 13:38

Whatever one's opinion on SWAT and other exceptional circumstances, my view is that if a beat cop routinely carries it on their belt or in their patrol car then we should be able to own it as well, and if we aren't allowed to own it then ordinary cops shouldn't be issued it either.
"They were basically like D&D min maxers, but instead of pissing off their DM, they destroyed the global economy. Also, instead of their DM making a level 7 paladin fight a beholder as punishment, he got a +3 sword of turning."
--Mo

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 18769
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by D.A. Ridgely » 14 Aug 2019, 14:48

thoreau wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 13:38
Whatever one's opinion on SWAT and other exceptional circumstances, my view is that if a beat cop routinely carries it on their belt or in their patrol car then we should be able to own it as well, and if we aren't allowed to own it then ordinary cops shouldn't be issued it either.
That's crazy talk! How are cops going to kill people's dogs for no good reason if they're not armed?

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17315
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 14 Aug 2019, 15:05

JD wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 16:15
JasonL wrote:
13 Aug 2019, 15:13
One of a continuing series “most shitty things are that way because people want them that way”, I don’t think you’d get much disarming the cops talk from the left. They fucking love jackboots they can control for the greater good. Love love love the absolute monopoly of force.
I don't think it's even really limited to the left. Most people want to be ruled by a Great King, who has the power to do anything he wants, as long as he's their kind of king.

BTW, I recently read a few discussions on the anarchist perspective on gun control; most participants were left-anarchists (I think because most people who identify with the anarchist label are left-anarchists), and most of them rejected the idea, pointing out that control implies a controller. There were one or two Bakuninites who said things like "Well, all arms should be kept in community armories, managed by democratically elected committees..." but even in left-anarchist forums they tended to be hooted at by those who asked how that wasn't just government under a different name.
This is the "Once communist perfection has been achieved and the counterrevolutionaries are properly educated, the state will fade away" brand of anarchy. In the meantime these anarchists will happy to see the boot stomping on the faces of the people who aren't in line.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Dangerman
Posts: 6711
Joined: 07 May 2010, 12:26

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Dangerman » 14 Aug 2019, 20:27

'in the meantime' like that isn't actually the point.

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 13541
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Eric the .5b » 14 Aug 2019, 20:34

thoreau wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 13:38
Whatever one's opinion on SWAT and other exceptional circumstances, my view is that if a beat cop routinely carries it on their belt or in their patrol car then we should be able to own it as well, and if we aren't allowed to own it then ordinary cops shouldn't be issued it either.
This seems like a reasonable tentative standard.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17315
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 15 Aug 2019, 03:01

Dangerman wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 20:27
'in the meantime' like that isn't actually the point.
Have you been the boot? It's fun to be the boot.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7833
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Pham Nuwen » 15 Aug 2019, 10:53

lunchstealer wrote:
15 Aug 2019, 03:01
Dangerman wrote:
14 Aug 2019, 20:27
'in the meantime' like that isn't actually the point.
Have you been the boot? It's fun to be the boot.
Just remember only the right people are the boot otherwise it's tyranny!
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 3215
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 07:56
Location: Newyorkachusetts

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Jasper » 15 Aug 2019, 12:21

Might may not make right, but it's fuckin' fun.
"i'd like to move toward not combusting except on special occasions like arbor day." - dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26683
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 15 Aug 2019, 13:44

I do not enjoy being the boot. In fact I'm really incapable of being the boot. Not fun for me. Zero fun.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7833
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Pham Nuwen » 15 Aug 2019, 15:44

Warren wrote:
15 Aug 2019, 13:44
I do not enjoy being the boot. In fact I'm really incapable of being the boot. Not fun for me. Zero fun.
Don't worry. You are a visual booter with your grammar and poor taste in general.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15878
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Aresen » 15 Aug 2019, 15:52

I like to wear good boots.

Image

With jodphurs. And spurs. And carry a crop.

And a monocle, of course.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17315
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 15 Aug 2019, 16:14

And pearl-handled pistols?
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26683
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Warren » 15 Aug 2019, 16:42

Pham Nuwen wrote:
15 Aug 2019, 15:44
Warren wrote:
15 Aug 2019, 13:44
I do not enjoy being the boot. In fact I'm really incapable of being the boot. Not fun for me. Zero fun.
Don't worry. You are a visual booter with your grammar and poor taste in general.
Son, first you go out and acquire some taste, and then you'll see how much more sophisticated my taste is.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7833
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Pham Nuwen » 15 Aug 2019, 16:43

No u?
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15878
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by Aresen » 15 Aug 2019, 17:07

lunchstealer wrote:
15 Aug 2019, 16:14
And pearl-handled pistols?
Actually, ivory handles. Pearl is for der Amerikaners.

And a cigarette holder.

And a funny accent.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17315
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: OFFS: The Forsakening

Post by lunchstealer » 15 Aug 2019, 17:26

I believe the exact quote is,

“Son, only a pimp in a Louisiana whore- house carries pearl-handled revolvers. These are ivory.”
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests