good statement

Floorist

Dog furniture
Joined
Jun 11, 2016
Messages
5,418
Reaction score
2,272
Location
Free America
The debate over gun control can be summed up thusly: Those of us who don't like guns in the hands of our non-costumed brethren, will vote to ensure men with guns, under the guise of the "law," will come and take the property that is rightfully yours, killing you should you resist our will sufficiently.

This is what we call "violence by-proxy" and makes the voter for violence no less culpable in the extortion and death that will ensue.

As Stefan Molyneux correctly observed; if a person claims they are non-violent and are for “gun control” they are not truly anti-gun nor are they non-violent people - because the reality is that guns and violence will be needed to disarm innocent law abiding people.

This is because those people who claim they are anti-gun and anti-violence, who claim to support “gun control,” will need the credible threat of police violence and the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns should they resist the attempt to further centralize their monopoly on violence.

So those who claim to be anti-gun and anti-violence are really very pro-gun and very pro-violence. They ultimately believe that only government officials (which are of course portrayed as reliable, honest, moral, and virtuous) should be allowed to have guns. This obviously flies in the face of reality as the 20th century has proven once and for all.

It’s important to note that those who advocate this type of centralized monopoly of violence do so as cowards, because it’s not their lives 
on the line, rather they advocate others using violence on their behalf in
order to force their misguided views on innocent people who wish to do nothing other than protect themselves and other innocents.

There is no such thing as "gun control," there is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political class and the forces they control which, as recent history has proven is a murderous nightmare for the peace loving, disenfranchised, and disarmed citizenry.--Ron Danielowski
 

Floorist

Dog furniture
Joined
Jun 11, 2016
Messages
5,418
Reaction score
2,272
Location
Free America
Why I don't trust Trump on guns

Last February

Trump Just Told Lawmakers: "Take The Guns First, Go Through Due Process Second"
President Trump also said authorities should have confiscated firearms from the Florida school shooter, "whether they had a right to or not."
 

Floorist

Dog furniture
Joined
Jun 11, 2016
Messages
5,418
Reaction score
2,272
Location
Free America
The biggest problem with gun laws are that they inevitably create criminals out of law abiding people, while doing nothing to stop criminals from committing acts of violence. Is there anything remotely violent, or inherently dangerous in a law abiding citizen merely possessing a particular type of firearm, or certain capacity magazine? Absolutely not. Are there laws that make this a crime, when no other offense has occurred? Absolutely. Gun laws are arbitrary in nature, and do not prevent criminals from committing crimes. These laws are only followed by those who would never commit crime in the first place, and ignored by criminals.

Gun laws do nothing but restrict law abiding citizens, making them less safe, while protecting criminals, by making sure they are more well armed than their potential next victim
 

Chris

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2016
Messages
6,728
Reaction score
818
Location
SoCal
Look at California where every year you become a criminal because a law is changed.

Last year my truck got broken into and a pistol stolen and I was the one facing criminal charges for letting it happen. Probably harsher punishment than the guy who stole my gun.
 

Latest posts

Top