AI can and will be able to. Mind reading capability will be inevitable
-
00
-
RockyG wrote:
TKTKTK wrote:
Way to dodge the issue, RockyG. Now, do you want to actually try to respond to my question about who gets to decide what tyranny is? I challenge you to give it a shot.
Just answer the question: Who gets to decide what tyranny is? And then answer the follow-up: why should that group, and not another, be the arbiters of what constitutes tyranny?
Also, the name is TKTKTK, not "Slimey." Thanks for using it.
Its like you're a mentally immature imbecile. Who gets to decide? That sounds like an implication that no one does or nobody should decide.
Whoever is in power decides. The question is, are we as a society going to continue to allow degenerate destructive elites currently in power to continue to decide the warped direction our communities and states have been headed down??? You don't seem to bothered by the current state of things. You're in the minority. This is either going to get straightened out or societies will fall. And if it has to be the latter, so be it.
James Madison in the Federalist Papers feared a "tyranny of the majority". And in Federalist No. 46, Madison argued that it was important to have armed state militias because they would largely outnumber the Federal armed forces (Madison even ran the numbers). So, the whole point of the "tyranny" justification of the right to bear arms is to allow those who are not in power to rise up against those who are in power to prevent what they believed was tyranny. By design, those who have guns have free reign to determine whether there is tyranny or not. Whether they are in the end right about tyranny is decided by whoever has the greater capacity for violence. That is the fundamental principle behind the 2nd Amendment's tyranny justification. Everyone gets to strap on all the guns they can carry and open fire against what they believe is tyranny and people who are doing the tyranny can strap on their guns and shoot back against what they believe is tyranny. We just shoot it out and anyone who dies in the crossfire should have moved to Japan if they didn't like it.
37 -
Precious Roy wrote:
RockyG wrote:
Its like you're a mentally immature imbecile. Who gets to decide? That sounds like an implication that no one does or nobody should decide.
Whoever is in power decides. The question is, are we as a society going to continue to allow degenerate destructive elites currently in power to continue to decide the warped direction our communities and states have been headed down??? You don't seem to bothered by the current state of things. You're in the minority. This is either going to get straightened out or societies will fall. And if it has to be the latter, so be it.
James Madison in the Federalist Papers feared a "tyranny of the majority". And in Federalist No. 46, Madison argued that it was important to have armed state militias because they would largely outnumber the Federal armed forces (Madison even ran the numbers). So, the whole point of the "tyranny" justification of the right to bear arms is to allow those who are not in power to rise up against those who are in power to prevent what they believed was tyranny. By design, those who have guns have free reign to determine whether there is tyranny or not. Whether they are in the end right about tyranny is decided by whoever has the greater capacity for violence. That is the fundamental principle behind the 2nd Amendment's tyranny justification. Everyone gets to strap on all the guns they can carry and open fire against what they believe is tyranny and people who are doing the tyranny can strap on their guns and shoot back against what they believe is tyranny. We just shoot it out and anyone who dies in the crossfire should have moved to Japan if they didn't like it.
This is one of the few coherent things you've said.
However, the point you're missing is that when one side has all of the guns there is nothing to prevent the tyranny from being absolute which has occurred countless times through history.
This post was edited 41 seconds after it was posted.64 -
Novel Gun Technology wrote:
AI can and will be able to. Mind reading capability will be inevitable
Hell yeah, bring on the Precogs!
10 -
Holy sh!t go for a run everyone...
80 -
Hi there! wrote:
FYI, there have always been transgendered people, even when America was Great Again. You sound personally effected by transgenderism, even when it should have little impact on your life (unless something else is going on). You don’t want the government getting involved with people’s personal life do you?
Yes i want the govt involved. I want standards. I want law and order. I want values. MY VALUES that jive with traditional ones.
Lol @ there have always been transgenders. So what? They've always been ill.
And the idea that we aren't affected by the lgbt movement? Of course we are, we live in a society. Lgbt has demanded and gotten societal changes. Those changes need to be reversed. The entire lgbt movement is DESIGNED to affect us all. You act like activism is some passive thing that happens on some far off island somewhere and never insists on cultural shifts. At this point it's gotten so bad that one of the major foreign policy tenets of the united states is spreading sodomy throughout the world now. It's disgusting.
67 -
Rick Cheney wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
Please give an example of a weapon that is not “military grade.”
you anti gun nuts love to just throw around scary words
Go shoot a .30-.30 and an AR-15 at two hundred yards and get back to me with your results.
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
22 -
Yawn^42 wrote:
Rick Cheney wrote:
Go shoot a .30-.30 and an AR-15 at two hundred yards and get back to me with your results.
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
Hey genius; what’s the preferred weapon of choice these psychos all use? I’ll give you a head start. It’s an A-R……
25 -
4587 wrote:
All this talk again about what should we do to reduce firearm violence and deaths. It's not rocket science and numerous nations are able to have a fraction of the deaths that we have. Look at Japan. They average 10 firearm deaths annually. The U.S. over 40K. How about we pass laws like France:
Category D requires the owner to be older than 18.
Category C requires the owner to be older than 18, have hunting, shooting or ball-trap license of the current year stamped by a doctor.
Category B requires the owner to be older than 18, be affiliated with a shooting range, have attended at least 3 shooting sessions with an instructor, and have a medical certificate. The shooter then receives a 5-year authorization to purchase and own of Category B firearms (and therefore Category C firearms since they are affiliated with a shooting range).
Category A11 and A12 purchase not allowed since August 1st 2018, for gun ownership before its same requirement as Category B.
No civilian may carry any weapons in a public place. A special form allows a civilian to apply for a 1-year carry license, which allows them to carry a handgun and a maximum of 50 rounds if they are "exposed to exceptional risks to their life". In practice, such authorizations are rare.
Exceptions exist for children and teenagers with a shooting or ball-trap license and parental approval. A child aged between 9 and 12 can own D categorized weapon that shoot projectiles In a non pyrotechnic way between 2 and 20 joules. A teenager aged 12 to 16 can own C and D categorized weapons. They can also own one-shot, rimfire Category B firearms if they participate in international shooting competitions (only with a shooting licence).A shooter between the ages of 16 and 18 who has a shooting, hunting or ball-trap license can own C and D categorized weapons. They can also own Category B firearms if they participate in international shooting competitions(only with a shooting licence).
Carrying a gun is defined as having a gun by one's side on a public place ready to use. Transporting a gun is defined as having an unloaded, locked or disassembled gun and having a legitimate reason (personal defence doesn't qualify) for doing so in a public place. A legitimate reason to transport a firearm is a legal document like a hunting, shooting, collector, or ball-trap licence. Hunting, collector and ball-trap licences only work for D and C categorized weapon transportation. A shooting licence works for A, B, C and D categorized weapons.
Showing a firearm in public to scare people can be a charge of public disorder.
blah blah blah with these "laws" *yawn*
still missing the point that everyone wants to pretend isn't the real problem-
Laws don't matter to criminals and crazy people.
We need to do something about criminals and crazy people.
75 -
Rick Cheney wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
Hey genius; what’s the preferred weapon of choice these psychos all use? I’ll give you a head start. It’s an A-R……
You will have to be more specific about the psychos you are talking about. The ones in Chicago and Baltimore use handguns alongside. Virginia tech was a handgun I believe and I know NIU was a shotgun and handguns.
kinda sucks when you get caught being disingenuous huh
72 -
Yawn^42 wrote:
Rick Cheney wrote:
Go shoot a .30-.30 and an AR-15 at two hundred yards and get back to me with your results.
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
His comment is relevant because classrooms are 200 yards x 200 yards in his area.
These losers don't pick AR-15 style weapons for their effectiveness or ease of use they pick them because the media says they should and they think they look cool.
23 -
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
His comment is relevant because classrooms are 200 yards x 200 yards in his area.
These losers don't pick AR-15 style weapons for their effectiveness or ease of use they pick them because the media says they should and they think they look cool.
Correct. He isn’t a gun guy, so he doesn’t realize that in a class room setting against defenseless children the gun really doesn’t matter.
let’s look at it another way. Sandy hook and Nashville both involved “assault” rifles. The death counts were much different.
if the tool used was such a big factor then this disparity should not be as high.31 -
Yawn^42 wrote:
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
His comment is relevant because classrooms are 200 yards x 200 yards in his area.
These losers don't pick AR-15 style weapons for their effectiveness or ease of use they pick them because the media says they should and they think they look cool.
Correct. He isn’t a gun guy, so he doesn’t realize that in a class room setting against defenseless children the gun really doesn’t matter.
let’s look at it another way. Sandy hook and Nashville both involved “assault” rifles. The death counts were much different.
if the tool used was such a big factor then this disparity should not be as high.Fvck it. Toss out my argument on the AR-15 being a weapon designed specifically for KILLING PEOPLE. And I’ll raise you the gun that’s one of the most popular rifles on the market since the late 2000s. I’ve been deer hunting and living in rural America my entire life. Don’t try and out hill billy me you fvcking pvssies.
14 -
Rick Cheney wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
Correct. He isn’t a gun guy, so he doesn’t realize that in a class room setting against defenseless children the gun really doesn’t matter.
let’s look at it another way. Sandy hook and Nashville both involved “assault” rifles. The death counts were much different.
if the tool used was such a big factor then this disparity should not be as high.Fvck it. Toss out my argument on the AR-15 being a weapon designed specifically for KILLING PEOPLE. And I’ll raise you the gun that’s one of the most popular rifles on the market since the late 2000s. I’ve been deer hunting and living in rural America my entire life. Don’t try and out hill billy me you fvcking pvssies.
Grah, look at all my fake rage and bravado wrahah
You are a parody at this point. We are back to my main point: guns were made to kill. So what?
31 -
Rick Cheney wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
your premise is nonsensical. Different calibers and platforms will perform differently but both are more than capable of hitting targets at distance. Do you want to try again at making a point instead of googling gun terms and trying to compare a caliber with a platform?
Hey genius; what’s the preferred weapon of choice these psychos all use? I’ll give you a head start. It’s an A-R……
Except it's not...
You've been conditioned to think it is.
"The most commonly used weapon was a handgun or multiple handguns, which were used in 1,344 incidents. A rifle or multiple rifles were used in 107 incidents."
"K-12 mass shootings were more likely to involve the use of a semi-automatic assault weapon than mass shootings in other settings, but handguns were still the most common weapon used in K-12 mass shootings."
Pretty much everything you believe can be dispelled in 30 seconds with Google.
53 -
Yawn^42 wrote:
Rick Cheney wrote:
Hey genius; what’s the preferred weapon of choice these psychos all use? I’ll give you a head start. It’s an A-R……
You will have to be more specific about the psychos you are talking about. The ones in Chicago and Baltimore use handguns alongside. Virginia tech was a handgun I believe and I know NIU was a shotgun and handguns.
kinda sucks when you get caught being disingenuous huh
Columbine was handguns and shotguns...
11 -
"...white kids were..." or "if black people were..."
One of the biggest tropes on the net for the past 15 years.
10 -
read you a$$holes. Enjoy the rest of your day defending guns. Fvcking morons
15 -
Rick Cheney wrote:
Yawn^42 wrote:
Correct. He isn’t a gun guy, so he doesn’t realize that in a class room setting against defenseless children the gun really doesn’t matter.
let’s look at it another way. Sandy hook and Nashville both involved “assault” rifles. The death counts were much different.
if the tool used was such a big factor then this disparity should not be as high.Fvck it. Toss out my argument on the AR-15 being a weapon designed specifically for KILLING PEOPLE. And I’ll raise you the gun that’s one of the most popular rifles on the market since the late 2000s. I’ve been deer hunting and living in rural America my entire life. Don’t try and out hill billy me you fvcking pvssies.
Living near people who use guns doesn't make you knowledgeable about guns...
My neighbor is a dentist. That doesn't make me a expert on dentistry...
Which guns do you think were made not to kill the things you shoot them at?
22 -
Hey lefties - maybe brainwashing large groups of people into believing the world is against them and that society wants them dead isn't the smartest and most moral thing to be doing. Especially impressionable kids suffering from mental health issues. Just food for thought.71
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.