Should Authoritarian Socialists be Pro Gun

[Korouse]

No full-auto period, probably even go as far as restricting gas-operated systems as well.

So... banning a weapon classification that has been used in enough crimes to count on one hand with fingers to spare and arbitrarily going after a design that will accomplish nothing other then drive up the cost and popularity of piston driven system is your answer?

..........

And people wonder why the anti's are not taken seriously.

piston-driven systems and direct impingement both use gas from the propellant, genius.

[Grinning Dragon]

So... banning a weapon classification that has been used in enough crimes to count on one hand with fingers to spare and arbitrarily going after a design that will accomplish nothing other then drive up the cost and popularity of piston driven system is your answer?

..........

And people wonder why the anti's are not taken seriously.

piston-driven systems and direct impingement both use gas from the propellant, genius.

And?

[Paddy O Fernature]

piston-driven systems and direct impingement both use gas from the propellant, genius.

And?

^Seconded

[Korouse]

piston-driven systems and direct impingement both use gas from the propellant, genius.

And?

Not a lawyer but I would assume "gas-operated system" would include systems that rely on gas from a propellant to function. Lmao.

[Paddy O Fernature]

And?

Not a lawyer but I would assume "gas-operated system" would include systems that rely on gas from a propellant to function. Lmao.

You assume wrong.

Do you also assume that AR stands for "Automatic Rifle" as well?

[Korouse]

Not a lawyer but I would assume "gas-operated system" would include systems that rely on gas from a propellant to function. Lmao.

You assume wrong.

Do you also assume that AR stands for "Automatic Rifle" as well?

please tell me how a piston in a firearm isn't gas operated. what moves it? the hand of god?

[The Alma Mater]

You assume wrong.

Do you also assume that AR stands for "Automatic Rifle" as well?

please tell me how a piston in a firearm isn't gas operated. what moves it? the hand of god?

"Guns don't kill people, the hand of God does".

Sounds fair.

[Paddy O Fernature]

You assume wrong.

Do you also assume that AR stands for "Automatic Rifle" as well?

please tell me how a piston in a firearm isn't gas operated. what moves it? the hand of god?

Burned propellant, aka "gas".

However, the way you are trying to use it here isn't what it actually is and I think you know it.

[Korouse]

I giggled.

[Paddy O Fernature]

please tell me how a piston in a firearm isn't gas operated. what moves it? the hand of god?

"Guns don't kill people, the hand of God does".

Sounds fair.

To be fair, with some of the things gun grabbers have posted publicly in the past, I honestly wouldn't doubt that some of them might actually believe this. lol

[Korouse]

Seems like you have some weird superiority complex from being a gun fetishist. I'm fairly knowledgeable about guns - I just view them for their eternal purpose, not what the gun lobby markets

[The South Falls]

I mean, I'm a gun enthusiast as much as the next guy but does it really matter?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Seems like you have some weird superiority complex from being a gun fetishist. I'm fairly knowledgeable about guns - I just view them for their eternal purpose, not what the gun lobby markets

Swing and a miss.

Care to try again?

[Korouse]

Seems like you have some weird superiority complex from being a gun fetishist. I'm fairly knowledgeable about guns - I just view them for their eternal purpose, not what the gun lobby markets

Swing and a miss.

Care to try again?

don't you mean a shot and a miss?

Bazinga.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Swing and a miss.

Care to try again?

don't you mean a shot and a miss?

Bazinga.

Nice to see you have nothing left productive to say.

Have a nice day.

[Vegaslovakia]

I agree, Soviet Tankistan.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Guns are important to revolution and leftists as a whole. Many authoritarian socialists like guns and own them. I'm not saying that guns shouldn't be deregulated. I'm saying that authoritarian socialists should own guns and allow them. What do you think? Should they be pro guns.

Guns are tools. Sometimes english-speaking leftist debate gets too mired in the American idea that guns are some unalienable right, but they forget that guns are so unalienable in America because they were necessary for the protection of individual property largely taken from Native Americans, Mexicans, or even other Euro-Americans. So I believe guns that are made for hunting and recreational activity should be allowed, but clearly, ones designed for war should be illegal in the civilian market under socialism. Before that? I believe they're necessary.

Many firearms that are used for hunting and recreational activity were originally designed for war, and many that were designed for hunting and recreational activity are now used in war.

[Gun Manufacturers]

One thing I've noted about socialism/communism: It is always about seizing (stealing) the means of production or redistributing wealth (you would have to steal it before you could redistribute it) or violent revolution. It is always about stealing, never about CREATING anything or peacefully transforming society.

Well, in socialist theory, it's the capitalists (bosses and stuff) who steal from workers. Redistribution is just a way to minimize this. You can peacefully seize the means of production too. Make a law so that employees own 50% (or 51, or 75%, whatever number you want) of big companies (like Amazon). It means that workers will have a say about the decisions of the company. I don't see violence or stealing in that.

Socialism and communism is divided between revolutionaries and reformists. The revolutionaries reject the system as a whole and don't participate in elections whereas reformists do. The former only envision change through violence and the latter believe in a progressive evolution.

People already own that percentage that you want to give to the workers. You'd have to take (aka steal) it from the people that already own it in order to give it to the workers.

[Korouse]

Well, in socialist theory, it's the capitalists (bosses and stuff) who steal from workers. Redistribution is just a way to minimize this. You can peacefully seize the means of production too. Make a law so that employees own 50% (or 51, or 75%, whatever number you want) of big companies (like Amazon). It means that workers will have a say about the decisions of the company. I don't see violence or stealing in that.

Socialism and communism is divided between revolutionaries and reformists. The revolutionaries reject the system as a whole and don't participate in elections whereas reformists do. The former only envision change through violence and the latter believe in a progressive evolution.

People already own that percentage that you want to give to the workers. You'd have to take (aka steal) it from the people that already own it in order to give it to the workers.

Not true.

[Gun Manufacturers]

People already own that percentage that you want to give to the workers. You'd have to take (aka steal) it from the people that already own it in order to give it to the workers.

Not true. https://communistfacts.files.wordpress. ... .jpg?w=900

That, in no way, contradicts what I said. People own shares of stock in a company. You are suggesting says that we should strip shares away from the people that already own them up to "50% (or 51, or 75%, whatever number you want), and give those shares to the workers. That would be theft, as you'd be taking them without compensation.

[Tobleste]

So to protect sexual minorities, guns should be made available in a state where they're likely to be targeted? Should we only allow guns to be sold to minorities or only sell guns that can be fired by those minorities? Maybe give every woman a handgun to protect from sexual assault?

Sorry. From now on, I'll message you whenever someone dies.

Typically, the absence of guns have never helped minorities of any kind. Lynchings, for example, were typically done with the commonly abailable tools of rope and farming equipment. Your gun control would have done shit for dick to protect them. Your logic here is akin to declawing animals to make cats safer against packs of Rottweilers.

With a totally heartfelt speech about how horrified you are and how anyone that doesn’t want knife regulation has no problem whatsoever with people dying. Seems to be your M.O for gun violence.

And if guns were available in the civil rights era, they'd have been fine? Was the 2nd amendment passed in 1990?

Except knives are used for things other than killing people. Guns, not so much. Besides, if knives and guns are the same, why do you need guns? Your arguments for guns have already come down to them being much more dangerous than knives so you know the comparison is garbage.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Typically, the absence of guns have never helped minorities of any kind. Lynchings, for example, were typically done with the commonly abailable tools of rope and farming equipment. Your gun control would have done shit for dick to protect them. Your logic here is akin to declawing animals to make cats safer against packs of Rottweilers.

With a totally heartfelt speech about how horrified you are and how anyone that doesn’t want knife regulation has no problem whatsoever with people dying. Seems to be your M.O for gun violence.

And if guns were available in the civil rights era, they'd have been fine?

More fine than without them, yeah. There's a bunch of examples of armed blacks being left alone whereas people who were denied their right to bear arms had a weird tendency to end up hanging from a tree.

[Kowani]

And if guns were available in the civil rights era, they'd have been fine?

More fine than without them, yeah. There's a bunch of examples of armed blacks being left alone whereas people who were denied their right to bear arms had a weird tendency to end up hanging from a tree.

Citation needed.

[Tobleste]

And if guns were available in the civil rights era, they'd have been fine?

More fine than without them, yeah. There's a bunch of examples of armed blacks being left alone whereas people who were denied their right to bear arms had a weird tendency to end up hanging from a tree.

And the KKK having guns wouldn't have made any difference? Or does having a gun make one bulletproof?

[Telconi]

More fine than without them, yeah. There's a bunch of examples of armed blacks being left alone whereas people who were denied their right to bear arms had a weird tendency to end up hanging from a tree.

And the KKK having guns wouldn't have made any difference? Or does having a gun make one bulletproof?

Wearing a seat belt doesn't make me immortal, why should I do it?