That last part is a gem. Register your guns so we know where they are if used by criminals.
That last part is a gem. Register your guns so we know where they are if used by criminals.
It's like a fish trying to describe how to climb a tree.
It's like a fish trying to describe how to climb a tree.
Black people are responsible for 73% of all mass shootings in america, and I'll bet you 99% of those mass shootings were done with a 9mm pistol or smaller.
Black people are responsible for 73% of all mass shootings in america, and I'll bet you 99% of those mass shootings were done with a 9mm pistol or smaller.
shit i tried but couldn't make it all the way threw. wtf was that? my head hurts.
shit i tried but couldn't make it all the way threw. wtf was that? my head hurts.
Liberals are quite annoying, but "Gun Guys" take hardheadedness to another level entirely.
Liberals are quite annoying, but "Gun Guys" take hardheadedness to another level entirely.
Fuck you, at least we know what we're talking about. Read also: Shall not be fucking infringed!
Fuck you, at least we know what we're talking about. Read also: Shall not be fucking infringed!
Freedom of speech is also "shall not be infringed", but we got:
- Intellectual property laws
- Counterfeiting laws
- Hate speech laws
- Incitement laws
- Obscenity laws
- Child pornography / Bestiality porn laws
- Slander/Libel laws
- Privacy protection laws
- Classified information laws
- Advertisement laws
- Public disturbance laws
- Contact/Communication restrictions laws
- Dress code laws
- Other laws that restrict speech which I could not think of yet.
All of these restrict speech, expression, media, or information in some way, usually using language that is vague, ad reasoning that is questionable, the restrictions largely exist because people think they should and feel strongly about it, whether or not you agree with all of these or just some of these, you probably feel strongly about at least one of them, that's the issue with freedom, allowing people do do things you don't like is a problem when some of those things turn out to be stuff you REALLY don't like, and that most people are i agreement with you in not liking these things to an intense degree.
This list doesn't even get into restrictions on speech via regulations on protests, gatherings, and demonstrations, which would be whole 'nother list, but I'm sure you could think some restrictions that apply too "peaceful assembly for redress of grievances".
This is the just the first amendment.
As you know, there's the second, and it goes all the way down.
Basically, you aren't so different.
Not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but I'll give you my take, for all freedoms, I think you should be able to own anything that is physical besides another human being, and I think that you should be completely unrestricted in what you should be able to do with your property, and I think that the government should only concern itself with physical interactions, and not with anything that can be seen, said, shown, or heard, meaning that all speech, expression, media, or information should be completely legal and unregulated. Victimless crimes should not be crimes, anything that does not affect someone else against their will or without their consent in a direct and physical manner should not be capable of even being considered a crime. Also, every crime should be universally agreed on by all the people they apply to (to clarify that last bit: even a murderer agrees that murder should be illegal, because when asked if he would consider it wrong for someone to kill him or someone he cares for, he would say "no", it's a bit of a deontological idea, see).
This may not sit well with you, but from my perspective, the problem with "reasonable limits" is that what constitutes them is always up for debate, this guy in the video, he is showing you what is his idea of "reasonable limits" is with regards to firearms, and I bet that makes you upset.
Freedom of speech is also "shall not be infringed", but we got:
- Intellectual property laws
- Counterfeiting laws
- Hate speech laws
- Incitement laws
- Obscenity laws
- Child pornography / Bestiality porn laws
- Slander/Libel laws
- Privacy protection laws
- Classified information laws
- Advertisement laws
- Public disturbance laws
- Contact/Communication restrictions laws
- Dress code laws
- Other laws that restrict speech which I could not think of yet.
All of these restrict speech, expression, media, or information in some way, usually using language that is vague, ad reasoning that is questionable, the restrictions largely exist because people think they should and feel strongly about it, whether or not you agree with all of these or just some of these, you probably feel strongly about at least one of them, that's the issue with freedom, allowing people do do things you don't like is a problem when some of those things turn out to be stuff you REALLY don't like, and that most people are i agreement with you in not liking these things to an intense degree.
This list doesn't even get into restrictions on speech via regulations on protests, gatherings, and demonstrations, which would be whole 'nother list, but I'm sure you could think some restrictions that apply too "peaceful assembly for redress of grievances".
This is the just the first amendment.
As you know, there's the second, and it goes all the way down.
Basically, you aren't so different.
Not saying anyone is right or wrong here, but I'll give you my take, for all freedoms, I think you should be able to own anything that is physical besides another human being, and I think that you should be completely unrestricted in what you should be able to do with your property, and I think that the government should only concern itself with physical interactions, and not with anything that can be seen, said, shown, or heard, meaning that all speech, expression, media, or information should be completely legal and unregulated.
Victimless crimes should not be crimes, anything that does not affect someone else against their will or without their consent in a direct and physical manner should not be capable of even being considered a crime.
Also, every crime should be universally agreed on by all the people they apply to (to clarify that last bit: even a murderer agrees that murder should be illegal, because when asked if he would consider it wrong for someone to kill him or someone he cares for, he would say "no", it's a bit of a deontological idea, see).
This may not sit well with you, but from my perspective, the problem with "reasonable limits" is that what constitutes them is always up for debate, this guy in the video, he is showing you what is his idea of "reasonable limits" is with regards to firearms, and I bet that makes you upset.
(post is archived)