Political Spergatory or How I Learned To Love /pol

I don't how powerful the NRA will be as it is filing for bankruptcy.

The first thing the left/libs go after is banning military themed weapons, it is their holy grail. Everytime gun control rears ots head it undoubtedly begins with banning 'assault rifles'. How will the pro control people be taken seriously when they do this every single time?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/21/def...sault-weapon-is-a-very-contentious-issue.html

Seriously, leave military style rifles alone and the gun control folks stop looking like fucking idiots and might get some shit done. The control side has valid points like unrestricted personal sales of weapons or at gun shows. Go after that.
 
Last edited:
I don't how powerful the NRA will be as it is filing for bankruptcy.
I think at this point it has become kinda a sort of movement. So even if the NRA won't be around anymore, the network they created is still around. A lot of people believe in this. That's something which made the NRA - politically speaking - very powerfull in the past at least. The activism behind it. I mean take the pharma companies they spend just a fraction of the money the NRA did in the past when it comes to lobbying. Yet the NRA was pretty much as effective in reaching representatives. Because they had very dedicated activists.

The first thing the left/libs go after is banning military themed weapons, it is their holy grail.

Bullshit I say. In no parliament, neither on State nor on Federal level will you ever get a majority to get anywhere even close to a weapon bann. You can look at actuall surveys - detailed one - and they often show two things. Yes a majority of americans think some sort of gun reform is needed, even among republicans. But they also don't want to bann weapons. Again a lot of gun owners are also democrats, libs what ever. Seriously, don't confuse very extreme and fringe movements with crazy ideas for the masses here or a group that has real political power. It would be like as If I made the claime Greene, the jewish-space-laser lady, would represent the majority of gun owners out there. No. She doesn't. She's just a very vocal but tinny minority. Crazy people exist everywhere but sadly the internet has this habit to crank them up to 11 and warping our own perception of things. But in reality, it's not as important as it might seem at first.

Again. If you really love guns. You actually don't have much to fear. But here is one thing to consider.

Fear sells guns. Each time a mass shooting happens the sales for amunition and guns skyrocket. It's incredible how effective it is for gun manufacturers. So there are some out there that have a keen interest that this "fear" of guns being taken away, snatched out of the hands of the citizens at any moment! is kept very alive. Even if the chance for this to happen is abysmal.

Look. I am not saying those people who say, bann all guns! Don't exist. Yes they do. But seriously they have no political power and they are like the absolute fringe movement out there. Don't confuse some twitter ranting or some person shouting something in a microphone for the masses. I am just saying you know. Just because someone is screaching and reeeing doesn't mean they have anything to say.
 
I never said they want to ban ALL guns. Never did.

I DID say most want to ban 'assault style weapons', HYUGE difference.

And there WAS a ban on all assault style weapons in the past so don't tell me there is no precedent or it won't happen again.

https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/n...n-to-seek-assault-weapon-style-ban-in-florida

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...alk-mandatory-gun-buybacks-licensing-n1045486

https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/09/addled-ar-15-charles-c-w-cooke/

https://scotscoop.com/ar-15-americas-most-hated-weapon/
 
Last edited:
And there WAS a ban on all assault style weapons in the past so don't tell me there is no precedent or it won't happen again.
But was it reverted? And in which instances did it happen? And do you believe this will happen on a national level? Yes some states always had very strict gun laws. But again. I just don't see this happening any time soon like in all of america. Like I said. It is and always will stay a "fringe" idea. Well at least for the next decades.
 
The assault weapon ban was national.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

It happened because of a mass shooting (the usual reason that causes these attempts), and unsurprisingly, introduced by a DEM. It is not 'fringe', at all. If anything, education and the internet should have woken people up from this irrational fear but it had not done so.

Just like how Morgan pointed out the GOP has more often been guilty of things like gerrymandering, the left and libs are by far the loudest calling for an assault weapons ban.
 
Last edited:
Gun reform is scary as it is a part of the Bill of Rights. Changing the Bill of Rights to have less freedoms is scary for a lot of people even with everything that has happened. Are a few dirtbags and a few hundred deaths from mass shootings worth that, or are there other options we can pursue?
Will this shooting trend even continue to last in the coming decades?
I'm not quick to change the Bill of Rights myself despite everything.
 
Pistol grip shows up twice, why am I not surprised. also don't forget the dreaded barrel shroud. it shrouds barrels.

Also paying $200 dollars for hearing protection is retarded and some dickhead saw too many movies(or played games) and now they think Suppressors make little TWIHT noises instead of being as loud as a thunder clap so they get mad when you want to get rid of that tax stamp.
 
Last edited:
Gun reform is scary as it is a part of the Bill of Rights. Changing the Bill of Rights to have less freedoms is scary for a lot of people even with everything that has happened.
If I remember correctly wasn't there already cases infront of the courts where they actually deiced that gun reforms and certain restrictions are not unconstitutional? I could be wrong here though.

Anyway. I still don't think that there will be a a nation wide ban on weapons any time soon. Not even AR-15s. There is no real legal basis for it. And it would be piss easy to battle that in court.
 
That bitch just basically said what all the tin foil nuts were afraid of.
 
Back before the election when Harris said she didn't trust vaccines because trump was one that really got the tinfoilers rolling, people kinda ignore that happening.
 
Holy shit so many people are gonna die before the end.
upload_2021-4-2_0-14-28.png


In the coming years if you're not in safe quite towns, or a part of the med/tech sector you're communities are probably fucked. Pill prescriptions, shit jobs and bad food for everyone.
 
By the way, anyone watching what's happening in Mozambique?
It fascinated me, because it illustrates the concept of "combat morale" in a perfect way. Morale isn't just about sadness, downyness - too de-energized to fight - it is also a matter of having way too much to lose. A soldier who much more wants to go home to his family and friends, and continue living, is a soldier who will be unwilling to risk death or mutilation against some savage enemy. And it is 100% understandable - why would he?
"Because ISIS rebels have taken control of an oil facility and a population of over 100 000 people!"
"So? Why should I die because of that? I have but one life."

The ISIS forces count about 300 soldiers. Mozambique's military has (check's wiki) 11 200 soldiers. Basically, ISIS troop numbers represent only a decimal of what Mozambique can whip out - but that means nothing to a soldier who does not want to be one of "19 dead" or "26 wounded" SHOULD they obliterate those 300 ISIS troops in a single day (ISIS has been occupying a town in Mozambique since last year. Mozambique retreated from the area, before ISIS felt ready to take a second town, just now)

If a soldier knew that his equipment would shield him, at the very least, confidence could be boosted. But these troops have no such confidence. Let's wiki again: Mozambique has 100 T-55 tanks "status uncertain", 60 T-54 tanks, "status uncertain", BRDM APC, of which around 2/3 are operational, which leaves the operational ones still being 70 year old hunks of useless iron.
If I were a Mozambiquean soldier with access to... a callendar... I would know how utterly useless this hardware is. They could just as well charge ISIS in tracked wheel barrows.

So - they don't want to attack. They don't want to fight. They don't want to die - understandably. Instead, they've contracted South African mercenaries, who immediately drew criticism cus they did what mercs do - had fun shooting shit up willy nilly - from the safety of a helicopter.

This makes me think of the Finland-trope, where USSR is crushed by little Finland, and everyone's all "whoa, Finland has balls of steel!" - yes and no, Finland had just been through a remarkably barbaric civil war, brother on brother, everyone's a "traitor", so when the USSR attacked, they were still drenched in brother-blood, and fought like fucking beasts.
Finns today have healthcare, education, good homes, good families, plenty to live for.
Look at how Ukraine just stood back, when Russia imposed themselves in Crimea - and are still restraining themselves in terms of the Donbass rebels. What is the army for, if nobody wants to get hurt?

Certain countries "enjoy" a continual "access" to conflict, coupled with a high degree of technological superiority over their selectively chosen foes, and so their soldiers are well capable of waging offensive warfare, even taking numerous individual casualties. The propaganda machinery is well established, and well oiled. Not so for most else!
 
I'm good :V

(if you didn't know, my "narrow interest" is deeply imbedded in vertebrate paleontology. Dinosaursss :0)
 
Back
Top