Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览约翰·德比郡档案馆
我没有放弃我的枪支-是时候放弃特朗普了吗?
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

关于第二次降临,有一个老笑话,我相信大多数听众都知道。

一位高级枢机主教冲进了梵蒂冈教皇的办公室。 “圣父,圣父,快来看! 最神奇的事情发生了吗?”

“什么?” 问教皇。

耶稣基督回来了! 他骑着驴骑着马穿过罗马的街道! 人们在他脚下撒满棕榈叶! 哦,圣父,我们该怎么办? 我们该怎么办?”

教皇苦思片刻,然后说:“看吧!”

那种本能 看起来很忙 所有官僚组织,包括联邦政府,都是共同的。 它在本周抓住了特朗普总统。 28月XNUMX日星期三,他举行了 一个小时的电视会议 在白宫,有一群来自双方的联邦立法者。 [特朗普使立法者支持更严格的枪支管制感到惊讶, 安妮·基兰(Anne Gearan),迈克·德波尼斯(Mike DeBonis)和金胜敏 华盛顿邮报, 28年2018月XNUMX日]

演习的目的是要制定出国会可能采取的新联邦法律的方式,以防止发生恐怖事件,例如最近在佛罗里达开枪的学校。

会议本身是一个糟糕的主意。 当特朗普向他的工作人员提议时,他们应该对他作呕,绑住他的手和脚,将他绑在椅子上,并让他观看与电视台主持人的电视转播会议的循环播放。 那是 9月XNUMX日 讨论移民政策。 当时在报告,我说:“总统显得笨拙,缺乏见识。”

我的是较温和的反应之一。 塔克·卡尔森 思想 9月XNUMX日的移民会议真是一场灾难。

好的; 但我正在努力避免绝望。 特朗普拥有的一切就是我们,宁愿不让我们的国家变成多元文化贫民窟的公民。 关于民族问题,特朗普目前的每一个政治替代方案都更加糟糕。

但是,我必须承认,在看完最后一个节目之后,绝望情绪难以抵挡。 特朗普简直太可怕了。 就像在XNUMX月的会议上一样,他热情地同意最后一个讲话的人,即使那个人说过 相反 前一个人所说的话。 我发现自己在想:特朗普真的了解吗 含义? 本篇 是伟大的谈判者?

特朗普的这种趋势是如此明显,即使国会议员自己也注意到了这一点。 内布拉斯加州参议员本·萨斯在活动结束后告诉记者:

坚强的领导人不会自动同意对他们所说的最后一句话……我们不会放弃任何宪法保护,仅仅是因为总统今天与之交谈的最后一个人不喜欢他们。 [共和党参议员责骂特朗普:“我们有正当程序是有原因的”, 作者:布雷特·塞缪尔(Brett Samuels),2年2018月XNUMX日]

在9月XNUMX日的惨败之后,我们被告知,会议结束后,在镜头外,总统集思广益,并说了一些更明智的话。 现在,我们也被告知相同。

也许; 但是,为什么要让他在空中举行这些会议,而他却像是在颤抖呢? 我们知道特朗普是一个电视狂人,他喜欢在他身上戴那些摄像机,但是他的工作人员中有人不能束手无策吗?

如果您认为我很苛刻,请查看我们在全国对话中的其他反应。

例如,《 Z人》。 Z-这就是我指的他的名字, 不能 代词-Z是互联网上最聪明的博客作者之一 异议权。 在白宫举行枪支管制会议之后,他以报复的方式抛弃了特朗普。 报价样本:

  • [特朗普]关于枪支问题的最新滑稽动作……表明他只是个愚蠢的推土机,他很幸运……
  • 特朗普犯了一个经典的共和党人的错误,即从敌人那里征求意见……
  • 不再可能认为他的动作是4D棋。 特朗普只是一个不可靠的骗子……
  • 亲枪手的选民对这些东西没有幽默感,他们对手腕弯曲的政客们零容忍,他们太害怕女孩们做正确的事。 我只为自己说话,我现在会为特朗普投票赞成一个同性恋黑人穆斯林……
  • 他对枪支权利造成的损害是无法估量的,而且不会被遗忘。 除非他最终签署一些大胆的亲枪法,否则他的许多选民将选择在2020年的选举日前度过。

[不是我的总统, 2年2018月XNUMX日]

哎哟! 正如我所说,Z是一个体贴入微的家伙,几乎没有听起来真的很生气。 这周他做了。 如果特朗普星期三的演出做到了这一点 ,这对许多头脑较弱的选民而言可能会更糟。 可以说特朗普在本次会议的2018年中期选举中输掉了政党,这也许没有太大意思。

这不是一个快乐的时光 国家保守党。 唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)的大选所带来的希望几乎已经烟消云散。 当然,我们有一些保守的法官。 尽管仍然有太多其他类型的人喜欢立法者,[法官永久禁止印第安纳州封锁叙利亚难民, 美联社,1年2018月XNUMX日],国会对约束他们没有胃口, 轻松地。 我们还得到了什么?

减税? 嗯。 有趣的是,我不记得这是2016年大选的主要议题。

前几天他和一个志同道合的朋友聊天,他说

我可以看到,早在2016年,就已经有一个巨大的开放空间,等待一些精明的政客利用它,带动一名教练和四名教练通过它。 这是显而易见的! 然而,政客们都无视它。 只有唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)看到了它。 为什么一定要 他? 为什么有些能干的,华盛顿聪明的政治家看不到开幕呢?

答案。 我想,是我们这个时代的政客们胆怯得胆小,他们实际上并没有腐败,只是随捐助者的歌舞而跳舞。

那么我们应该屈服于绝望吗? 好吧,不完全是。 不过,有可能没有一个比特朗普更没用的人会学到2016年的教训:即使在这个令人窒息,僵化的政治正确性时代,仍然渴望采取大胆而直接的方式来解决我们国家的问题。 让我们来护理2020年的希望。

什么 应该 尽量减少发生另一种暴行的可能性,例如佛罗里达的暴行?

我只是看不到联邦法律和法规将如何提供帮助。 我看到的那些拼写分为两类。

  • 第一类: 这些建议完全违宪,将被法院驳回。

我们的总统在星期三提出的建议属于第一类:“先拿枪,再经过正当程序。” 酒吧里有人喝醉了吗? 不,那是美国总统。

  • 第二类: 建议,例如进行更多的背景调查或心理健康评估的建议,这将使联邦政府机构的运营能力达到极限。
立即订购

瞧,我并不是说所有联邦机构最终都无能为力。 如果您是温柔的听众,并且是联邦雇员,请不要冒犯。 一些联邦机构做得很好。 我已经与社会保障局进行了互动,并且总是觉得他们礼貌而高效。

在移民区,我非常 看到我们的法律得到了坚定而公正的执行。 如果我不认为相关机构可以做到这一点,那么我就不会花时间谈论和撰写此书。 重点是什么?

同样,我希望国会通过关于移民的新的更好的法律,而且我相信联邦立法者有能力做到这一点,只要他们中有足够的意愿就可以。 把自己绑在桅杆上 并忽略捐助者和族裔游说者的警笛声。

但是,移民控制相对简单。 您要么是公民,要么不是。 您要么属于可以合法解决的类别之一,要么就不是。 在移民控制方面没有概念上的歧义。

新的 操作 移民的混乱源于两个强大力量的结合。 其中之一是,大笔钱的利益(廉价劳动力的游说团体)决心阻挠人民法律的执行或完善。 另一种是民族受虐狂意识形态,一种对西方文明的仇恨,这种仇恨俘获了西方受过教育的阶级,使他们充满了将我们的国家淹没在大量非西方移民中的渴望。

枪支控制不是那样的。 移民问题是 从概念上讲 明确:枪支问题不是。

我们的枪支权利的根本基础,即《宪法》的第二修正案,是模棱两可的。 什么 is “管理良好的民兵”? 什么 究竟 人民有权享有“保留和承受”权吗? 手榴弹? 榴弹炮? 核武器? 策划者没有指定。

现代立法仅使歧义成倍增加。 究竟什么才算是“突击步枪”? 谁来决定我的心理健康与否?

这些是联邦机构所处的灰色地带 不能 善于维持治安,而且联邦立法者 不能 擅长定义。 我们已经在联邦调查局在佛罗里达州的案子中陷入困境以及1994年联邦突击武器禁令的经验中看到了这一点,在禁令过期十四年后,关于该禁令是否有任何效果,仍然存在争议。 [在一篇文章中,您需要了解的有关禁运武器禁令的所有信息, 作者:布拉德·普鲁默(Brad Plumer),WonkBlog,华盛顿邮报,17年2012月XNUMX日]

在这种混乱和不确定性盛行的地方,联邦政府的正确态度是克制的。 全国范围内的普遍共识为手榴弹,榴弹炮和核武器等问题提供了一些明显的界限。 将详细信息留给各州。 借来的话 Z-人 再次:

在诸如枪支之类的问题上,什么都不做通常是最好的选择。 大多数州对枪支都很明智,因此让州处理这对我们有好处。

因此,我向总统和国会提出的有关枪支管制的建议是:不要只是做点什么,坐在那里。

尾注: VDARE.com最近发布了两个有关同盟雕像的故事。 詹姆斯·富尔福德(James Fulford)报告说 一名黑人地方检察官撤销了指控 在北卡罗来纳州达勒姆(Durham)遇害的五个人遭到破坏毫无疑问,被告对公有财产实施了肆意破坏公物的肆意行事,他们将整个事情都拍摄了下来。 并放在YouTube上-但是……那是一个同盟国士兵的雕像,所以法院对此表示满意。

然后 杰森·凯斯勒(Jason Kessler)报道 去年夏天那里发生了安蒂法骚乱之后,法官下令删除覆盖弗吉尼亚州夏洛茨维尔罗伯特·E·李和斯通沃尔·杰克逊雕像的油布。

Antifa红卫兵已答应摧毁这些雕像。 他们很可能会或早或晚找到一种方法,因为他们知道,如果成功,他们将很高兴,因为其他一些支持法官将确保他们不会受到重大惩罚。

这是我们的文化大革命:来自我们左翼法学院的有同情心的法官怂恿无法无天的无政府主义者。

有人要拿走我的枪吗?

来吧,得到他们,你这些混蛋。

2010-12-24dl [1] 约翰·德比郡[给他发电子邮件]写一个 数量惊人 关于各种主题 适用于各种网点。 (这 不再包括 《国家评论》,其编辑发脾气和 解雇了他。 ) 他是 作者 of 我们注定要失败:恢复保守的悲观主义 和其他几个 图书. 他拥有VDARE.com com出版的两本书:异议权 (也可以在Kindle中使用) and 异议人士权利第二卷:《 2013年议论录》.

(从重新发布 威达 经作者或代表的许可)
 
• 类别: 思想 •标签: 唐纳德·特朗普, 枪支管制, 枪炮 
隐藏350条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. Smart people are saying that the root causes of mass shootings are things like fatherless homes and similar cultural changes.

    The recent Florida shooting appears to have been facilitated by a PC program that prevented that particular fatherless, technically Hispanic shooter from having the criminal record that would have prevented him from buying his gun(s).

    We already have all the gun laws we need, but we are doing everything to prevent ourselves from enforcing them.

    Trump stumbles in mysterious ways, and this latest flub will fade away as all of his do. There will be no elimination of due process just because Donny said something stupid, and that’s all that matters.

    We have precious few “like-minded friends” in or anywhere near positions of power, so “we are doomed” anyway, but why abandon our one-and-only life raft in the meantime?

    • 回复: @Rbel
    , @Michael1919
    , @Titus
    , @JamesinNM
  2. whyamihere 说:

    “1776 will commence again if you try and take our firearms!” Alex Jones to Piers Morgan

  3. 有人要拿走我的枪吗?

    来吧,得到他们,你这些混蛋。

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    I am armed to the teeth, my wife is armed to the teeth, my children are armed to the teeth, and my dog is armed WITH teeth, so just you try to come and get us. And if you don’t come, we will block the highway!

    Mr Trump is actually eminently reasonable. He has said that the NRA has some good ideas, but there is no need to buy into the parts of their ideology that are just plain silly, like wanting to arm people so they can form guerilla armies to fight the United States.

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns, or people who are too young to use good judgment due to psychological disturbances or problems with anger management, or sexual rejection by girls.

    Of course I would totally agree with gun advocates that if you were in a situation like this:

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed would be most useful, but this is fiction, like many of the fantasy scenarios the NRA uses to exploit naive gun owners and Call Of Duty video game fans.

  4. Reg Cæsar 说:

    我现在会投票给一个同性恋黑人穆斯林而不是特朗普

    A threefer– a trio of groups the authors of the Second Amendment would never have let anywhere near a working “firelock”.

    他对枪支维权事业造成的损害无法估量,不会被遗忘

    嗯? 仅仅通过在新闻发布会上自由交往? 第十四修正案和哈特-塞勒移民法对我们的枪支权利的威胁要大得多。

    注意:我说 在水底采捕业协会(UHA)的领导下, 枪支权利。 谁他妈在乎 他们的?

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn’t seem like it.

  5. Trump is playing a dangerous and stupid game in an election year.

    The lefties aren’t going to remember his gun control rhetoric come November, but his base will.

    We voted for and need a leader not a weather vane.

    • 回复: @Anon
    , @Wally
    , @Inque Yutani
  6. @Jonathan Mason

    we don’t need gun control, we just need to ban non-whites from having them and gun violence would drop precipitously

  7. niteranger 说:

    Cruz would have been in jail or a detention center if not for the fake statistics that must be generated for Hispanic and Black students to show that they are “succeeding.” If you want to know why you need an assault rifle (which is nothing more than a hunting rifle with a large magazine or clip) is readily apparent from the trial runs that Obama and his Marxist friends have already generated: ST. Louis, Baltimore, and Chicago to name a few.

    What did the government do? Nothing! They let them plunder, pillage and burn the city. People who know nothing about this type of stuff think that they will get into shooting match with these Antifa type thugs. Think again! They will firebomb you and your family. You’ll need a weapon that can deliver a lot of shots in a short period of time. Furthermore, you need a high speed bullet that takes them out with one shot and also a military type round which is easy to get.

    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight. They want you guns. What they don’t realize is that a handful of military skilled snipers in an urban environment can take down a ton of them and they won’t even know where the shots are coming from. They think what’s being done in S. Africa will be the norm here. The citizens of this nation in the 1700’s had the same muskets and guns as most of the military so it’s only fitting that we too have “equal” gun rights (how’s that for all this equality bs).

    • 回复: @Truth
    , @Logan
  8. Ok then 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    OK!! Thanks NWO grunt. I have never heard arguments that powerful before. Wow!

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  9. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    I’m for more gun control. What I oppose is gun bans.

    It’s a tricky problem because those who call for gun control eventually want to ban guns.

    The real issue isn’t dead school kids. It’s that Jewish elites fear white gentiles with lots of assault rifles. Notice how these anti-gun people fixate far more on assault rifles than on handguns when, in fact, many many more die of handguns. Why the fixation on rifles? Because an insurrection or resistance to government tyranny is effective with rifles, not with handguns. These Jews who oppose guns in the US are totally okay with gun ownership in Israel because, over there, majority Jews use guns to protect themselves against Palestinians. Power of gun-ownership always favors the majority over the minority. The majority simply have more guns. But if Israel were majority Arab, Jews would certainly be worried about all those Arabs with guns. Jews would prefer for the Jewish-run state to monopolize gun power… like Hussein kept gun power among the Sunni military and police.

    Jews are trying to use school shootings as excuse to ban rifles.

    For this reason, Jews promote the soul-murder of young people through drugs, sex, degeneracy, and broken families. Such problems will lead to more dead souls, and some of these dead souls will use guns in the worst way, as happened in Florida.

    This is why pro-gun people must do two things.

    1. Go for strict gun control so that it will be more difficult for young people to buy guns. And ban stuff like bump stocks. 21 as minimum age for gun purchase isn’t a bad idea. If you gotta be 21 to drink, why not to shoot?

    Maybe military age should also be raised to 21. Should people still in their teens be trained to shoot and kill? Imagine you’re 18 and serving in military and shooting people dead halfway around the world. Shouldn’t one be more mature before becoming a soldier with such lethal power?

    2. Wage culture war on forces that murder the souls of young people. Our pop culture is truly demented and degenerate. And the fads are disgusting. Imagine being a child in the 21st century and your father is some grubby goon with tattoos all over his body. And your mother is a skank with an ass tattoo. And they watch trash TV as culture filled with vulgarity and profanity. It’s soul-murder. Our pop culture is collective child abuse for kids across America.

    • 回复: @El Dato
    , @davidgmillsatty
  10. utu 说:

    You want the 4D chess move? He should take guns away from Dreamers first? Will alt-right defend Dreamers right to the 2nd Amendment?

    • 回复: @Truth
    , @freebird
  11. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Sandy Berger's Socks

    看…

    guns are good in the hands of sane and moral people

    但是

    guns are hell on earth in the hands of insane people.

    There is something really sick about our culture. Too many kids grow up crazy.

    We need to oppose gun bans, but we need more gun control.

    If US didn’t have so many sickos, we could have laxer gun laws. But we are not living in that kind of America.

    Now, we all know criminals shouldn’t buy guns, and there are laws against them purchasing them, which is why they get them illegally.

    But non-criminals can use guns to do crazy things. And our culture of profanity, vulgarity, trashiness, and drugs(legal and illegal) has turned too many people into nuts. Also, young ones are especially confused, and our sick culture gives them no guidance. The elites don’t even have the spine to oppose decadent homomania or condemn ‘twerking’ as ape-like behavior.

    In the past, the gun issue was good people with guns vs criminals with guns.
    Now, it’s far more complicated because so many people who do harm with guns are not criminals, and many don’t have a criminal record. Rather, they are crazies with dead souls.

    The current pop culture ideal for young girls is The Slut, and the current ideal for young boys is The Thug. Even churches fly homo flags and celebrate fecal penetration as rainbow and praise trannies to get their penises and balls cut to get fake vaginas. Our media are den of lies told by sociopathic propagandists.

    In this crazy world were young ones can easily grow up to be nuts, we need both more gun control and a total culture war on the forces that are murdering young souls. Deads souls will use guns to turn people into dead bodies.

    At any rate, guns should be the last resort anyway. Against tyranny or crime, guns are to be used only when push comes to shove. Guns, even if legally owned, are like insurance. They don’t come into play 99.99% of the time.

    The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.
    Since globalist Liberalism is murdering the souls of young people with degeneracy and decadency, the patriotic conservatives must save the souls with healthy and sane culture. That must be the theme. Saving souls from those who would murder souls.

  12. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    When Trump spoke of Muslim attacks and terror, he lucked out because some happened during his campaign.

    Now that school shootings are in the news, Trump has to be careful. If he just goes on as business-as-usual and if another shooting like this happens, it can hurt him bad.

    We live in a soul-sick society. We have to address that fact. We have to admit that there are too many crazy people on drugs, and they can do horrible things with guns.

    It’s no longer about good people with legal guns vs bad criminals with illegal guns.

    It’s too often about good people with legal guns vs crazy people with legal guns.

    We must work harder to keep legal guns out of the hands of crazy people.

  13. WhiteWolf 说:

    He was playing a stupid and dangerous game according to a lot of people during the 2016 election campaign. Now he’s the president.

    Trump isn’t up for re-election this year. The people who are don’t have to agree with Trump.

  14. I have the idea that in the USA civilians own more guns than there are inhabitants.
    Then, the country has quite a lot of criminal violence, and hunting is quite common.
    Borders are pretty open to the north and to the south, drugs smuggling cannot be prevented.
    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.
    So how one thinks how to create a USA without civilians owning arms, and ammunition, I’m curious how to to this.

    Guns were very difficult to get in the Netherlands, since the EU open borders kalashnikovs are the usual weapons in gang wars.
    Easy to transport from former Yougoslavia.
    Journalists had little trouble of buying one in Brussels for € 150.

    • 回复: @jacques sheete
  15. “What is “a well-regulated militia””?

    John, John, John… a well regulated militia is a militia of the people (all inclusive) as opposed to a more specific historical American militia, for instance when the City of Philadelphia used to keep an armory to provision that city’s citizens with arms in the event of necessity. BTW, that armory was where the cannons were kept, so, yeah, ‘regulating the militia’ had to do with making certain the people with the keys to the armory would hesitate to turn those cannons on the populace. If your neighbors are liable to shoot you for taking armed stance on the side of the state in a widespread circumstance of civil disobedience, the presumption would be one should hesitate to employ those cannons. The 2nd Amendment’s language is not vague at all when contextualized with other, related, portions of the document:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^

  16. whoa! It’s not all for naught as usual what is revealed is that democrats are simply going to dismiss protections when it comes to their agendas. For all of their apoplectic fits about the Bill of Rights — when push comes to shove they are more than happy to brush aside something as vital as “due process” .
    I don’t expect Mr Trump to be up to snuff on the constitution, most Presidents are not – even supposed constitutional lawyers. Their legal advisers usually address those issues. The fact that it was for all to see is buttressed against democratic lack of response — fortunately – that looms larger.

    What I appreciate about Pres trump is that we are getting a good look at how the democrats operate and more than likely, most Republicans as well – sadly.

    Allow me to extend my congratulations to all of those who hopped on the Patriot act and HMS band wagon and the subsequent surveillance and security protocols. What should have been temporary measures after 9/11 have become important government tools of convenience. Those of us who said “huh?” No way! Unnecessary!!

    Called unpatriotic, “panzies”, “cowards”, “gay” and an assorted lists and acts of humiliation for actually thinking through the implications — can relish in the

    “I told you so’s” with a clear conscience. Conservatism, took a long flight after 9/11 and for those us who stayed on the ground — we can only grind our teeth as machine eats its young.

    That is a very bizarre video exchange.

    Some pe

    • 同意: Seamus Padraig
  17. Dump him!
    He turned out way bigger liar than the nobelized one he replaced.
    But his BS was appealing.

  18. Some people think there are grey areas about the 2nd Amendment. I don’t. People are allowed to own, house, and use weapons. The second amendment notes one reason for said ownership. It does not bar ownership. Just because it doesn’t cite the myriad reasons one might own a weapon is not cause for banning ownership.

    Despite engaging in ill advised open forums, (though I get the Pres. desire to appear open) and despite his own comments, is not an indication that he has damaged weapons ownership in the least.

    What the NRA should be careful is responding to extremely traumatizing events where weapons are used by suggesting everyone should carry one — even in the classroom. Not because it’s a bad idea, b ut ignores the obvious trauma and makes the NRA appear obtuse.

  19. anon • 免责声明 说:

    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots. Same with academia. The media, and the cultural narrative it creates, is the current against which every conservative must swim, and even the strongest swimmers lose ground every year. Nixon understood this, but failed to do anything about it. Nationalize the media and set the current flowing in the other direction.

    Now, how do you get the courts, the congress and public to go along with this program when the media is telling them that it’s the most evil idea ever? “A free press is an essential ingredient of democracy Goys! And, what’s more free than having it monopolized by a dozen billionaire Jews*?” However you convince them, it must be done because it’s an essential component of the West saving itself: If the West saves itself, this will happen.

    * And a few dull, cowardly, zero noblesse oblige Gentiles.

    • 回复: @jacques sheete
    , @Anon
  20. animalogic 说:
    @Reg Cæsar

    I think you are pretty spot on. The Trump “meeting” was no more than political theater. Agree with the last speaker ? Why not ? It’s about perceptions — as if Trump is going to follow democrat advice ? I mean, hullo ?
    This Z guy seems a bit hysterical: “Unless he eventually signs off on some bold pro-gun laws, lots of his voters will choose to spend the election day at the range come 2020.”
    I guess the key word here is “eventually”… No one is ever satisfied however much they get.
    I like the way Derb’ picked up on a key linkage between Neoliberals & the PC crowd : immigration. Cheap labor and
    ” virtue”. In their own particular ways both sides are selfish, treachous and lacking in (dare I say it ?) wisdom.

  21. Randal 说:

    因此,我向总统和国会提出的有关枪支管制的建议是:不要只是做点什么,坐在那里。

    This is the only sensible approach.

    Experience teaches that this line can be held in the US most of the time, but there are periodic danger points following particularly big crimes when gun controllers are emboldened to try to exploit the inevitable emotional response to win what they cannot gain by ordinary, reasoned politics. At those times, the problem is that politicians tend to get nervous about their seats and fear that if they don’t compromise they will be portrayed as heartless and will lose sufficient votes to lose them.

    The good news is that to date the US (unlike many other countries in the US sphere) has proven able to weather such dangerous pressure points. The trick is to hold the line until the sentimental charge is reduced by familiarity, giving only meaningless sympathy during the danger period while turning attention to the other factors that always exist in such shootings (as they always will because guns do not kill people). And the benefit of having repeatedly done so successfully is that the gun grabbers do get disheartened – they will never give up so long as they think there might be a chance of getting what they want for deeply held basically irrational personal reasons usually unrelated to the pretext arguments they put forward openly, but they do temporarily give up and move onto other issues if they believe there is no hope of immediate “progress”.

    The very worst thing to do is to give them hope of any movement whatsoever in the direction they want. Doing so just reinvigorates their campaigning ardour and runs the risk of a snowballing emotionally manipulative effect developing. In effect, it is like showing weakness to a scavenging predator. This is the worst aspect of the seeming mistake Trump made on this occasion.

    The counter argument would be that Trump has no great difficulty in reversing past positions taken for tactical or rhetorical purposes and it might be that his performance served to deflect immediate criticism of him for “inaction” until the danger period is passed. The only real way to know, with someone as mercurial and inconsistent as Trump, is to wait and see what actual actions follow, rather than paying too much attention to the words.

    But this is surely a situation in which his words alone were, in themselves, at the least highly dangerous.

  22. Randal 说:

    It may not be too much of a stretch to say that Trump lost his party the 2018 midterms with this meeting.

    The saddest part of that is that the best way to help Trump do the right thing would be to elect staunchly pro-gun, anti-immigration, anti-interventionist politicians to try to make the legislative side do their job.

    答案。 我想,是我们这个时代的政客们胆怯得胆小,他们实际上并没有腐败,只是随捐助者的歌舞而跳舞。

    那么我们应该屈服于绝望吗? 好吧,不完全是。 不过,有可能没有一个比特朗普更没用的人会学到2016年的教训:即使在这个令人窒息,僵化的政治正确性时代,仍然渴望采取大胆而直接的方式来解决我们国家的问题。 让我们来护理2020年的希望。

    Well one problem is that if he’s genuinely patriotic enough to be useful, your side will probably call him antisemitic and the soppy antiracist wing (let’s call them the “American Conservative” branch) will call him racist as well. Meanwhile the establishment “right” will call him both and keep on more or less openly collaborating with the political left as they always have done.

  23. @Jonathan Mason

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed

    I’m pretty sure all bullets when fired travel at “high speed.”

    that if you were in a situation like this [bird attack]

    You may be shocked to learn that there are things called shotguns that fire a large number of “bullets” (or rather, pellets) at high speed simultaneously. Even Joe Biden 批准 of such a destructive device.

    • 回复: @c matt
  24. “Look, I’m not saying that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, please don’t take offense. ”

    Damn, John. You sound like Trump or one of those GOP cucks in Congress. Try this:

    “Look, all I’m saying is that all federal agencies are terminally incompetent; and if you, gentle listener, are a federal employee, kiss my ass and go get a real job.”

    See? That sounds like a man with at least one testicle.

    • 同意: jacques sheete
    • 哈哈: Truth
    • 回复: @Alden
  25. unit472 说:

    I too went Whaaat! when Trump made that remark but I don’t think gun absolutists like Zman or Derbyshire understand what they are up against this time.

    From CNBC-“BlackRock said despite its size it doesn’t see it as “our place” to dictate what a company should do. However, “based on our engagement conversations and our long-term view of the company, we may vote against specific directors or we may vote against management on shareholder proposals.”

    (((Larry Fink’s ))) Blackrock is a \$5 TRILLION dollar fund, i.e. it owns 20% of the S&P.

    Facebook’s Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    Trump walked back his dumb comment back but it had a calming effect on public opinion. People understood what he meant. A school teacher or even a concerned citizen should be able to request a restraining order to protect the public from an obvious lunatic even if law enforcement and school superintendents won’t! A hearing could be held and evidence presented. The Virginia Tech gunman, Tucson’s Jared Loughner or Parkland’s Nikolas Cruz could appear and argue they pose no threat to anyone. The judge would decide in the same way a domestic restraining order is issued ( they often aren’t) and due process is observed.

  26. So Derby’s Boomerposting has turned back to his usual blackpill self. Glad he returned to normalcy.

    As for Trump, I think Derby is overthinking it. Trump has no real ideological core. That was obvious to anyone who actually paid attention to his past electoral history. I suppose being “tough on trade” is one of the few consistent things about Trump. He was openly pro-Affirmative Action in the campaign.

    He ditched Bannon when ZOG came down on him like a ton of bricks. Ultimately, I don’t think the gun issue will go anywhere. Not because of Trump, but simply because of the upcoming midterms.

    Trump is the national version of Pete Wilson. The last GOP governor of California. The difference is that Wilson had a brain of his own and had consistency. Trump has neither.

  27. mcohen 说:

    I love a good stook,especially the little pink one’s with wurty brip on top.is a stooker alright and it gets the job done.bing bing bing and it glows.oh so hot……and now from the film “A clockwork orange” this memorable quote

    “Very hard ethical questions are involved,” he went on. “You are to be made into a good boy, 6655321. Never again will you have the desire to commit acts of violence or to offend in any way whatsoever against the State’s Peace. I hope you take all that in. I hope you are absolutely clear in your own mind about that.” (2.3.11)

  28. I found myself thinking:…This is the Great Negotiator?

    The average 2 year old has better negotiating skills. I admit he’s the best we have, and that says it all.

    MAGA? Hahaha.

    PS: Speaking of 2 year olds, the shape of his mouth reminds me of the “Gerber” baby’s, and his “defiant” demeanor’s consistent as well. The dude’s a pathetic lightweight, and waaay out of his element, but that goes for the rest of the DC goons as well.

    天堂帮助我们。

    • 回复: @anonymous
  29. @Jonathan Mason

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain…

    You forgot to add “addiction to bureaucratic control”… It changes the brain as well as the soul.

    • 回复: @lavoisier
  30. Dr. X 说:

    – Category One: suggestions that are just plainly unconstitutional and will be struck down by the courts.

    The suggestion our President extruded on Wednesday falls into Category One: “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”

    Derb is right that such an action is “plainly unconstitutional,” but he is WRONG in thinking that they will be struck down by the courts.

    Courts are staffed with left-wing ideologues, and so far they have failed to strike ANY of the “plainly unconstitutional” gun control laws in Derb’s own home state of New York (not to mention Connecticut, Massachusetts, and California).

    In fact, Derb, who holds a New York State handgun ownership permit, ought to know that the policy in New York has been “take the guns first, due process second” for over a century. Any and all registered handguns in New York can be confiscated on the spot for any reason or perceived reason. Get arrested for so much as a DUI? Hand ’em over immediately, before you go to court. Even if you win in court or get the charges dropped you’re not guaranteed to get your guns back.

    And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.

    You MUST always assume that ANY leverage that the government has over your guns will ALWAYS be used to maximum effect to disarm as many people as possible.

    King Cuomo must have been wetting himself like an excited puppy to hear Trump talk like that.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  31. Randal 说:
    @unit472

    The money goblins actively helped impose homo-ism on the US.

    It will be interesting to see whether gun control is a step too far for them, or not.

  32. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    He ditched Bannon when ZOG came down on him like a ton of bricks.

    True, actually what appears to really have done Bannon in is when the media, like Saturday Night Live, started saying Bannon was smarter than Trump, and “really in charge” and that he deserved the credit for winning the campaign. (As they did with Cheney and Rove to Bush)

    As the media probably knew, Trump hated seeing Bannon get the credit, and pettily, stupidly fired him. It’s really a pathetic joke that he’s such a petty man that the media manipulated him into firing the best person in his administration.

    If the media really wanted to get rid of Stephen Miller, all they’d have to do is have an SNL skit where Miller walks in and bosses Trump around, “Miller sits in the big boy chair” and Trump goes to the corner and plays with tinker toys. He’d fire Miller the next day: “No one gets credit but me!”

    无能。

  33. As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, 迄今为止) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    The military, particularly the most important parts like jet pilots and tank and sub commanders, is mostly made up of White men. If you have any cops or soldiers among your friends and family start putting pressure on them 联系 to be willing to fight against the government or lose your company.

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

  34. @Jonathan Mason

    Let me try my patience again, Jonathan, as this is an opportunity to show you my point from last week. Do you understand what Mr. Derbyshire meant by including “Come and get them, you bastards”? (often phrased “Molon Labe!” by the gun rights people.)?

    The 2nd Amendment was NOT about duck hunting or self-defense, even though Americans are right that these benefits of these tools we call firearms are good ones. What Mr. Derbyshire wrote about just before this was a description of the increasing 无政府专制 in this country. That, the increasingly-powerful police state, and the size of the US Feral Gov’t, is the reason patriotic Americans have been fighting efforts by people like you to destroy the 2nd Amendment since before you and John Derbyshire were living here, and even before we all on here were born!

    My point last week was that John Derbyshire has been here since the early 1990’s (just read the jeep story- fantastic!), while you say you’ve been in America 1/2 decade > than that. Why haven’t you learned a damn thing, Jonathan? Couldn’t you pick up anything from a fellow ex-Englishman, or better yet, your Southern* neighbors.

    .
    .

    Maybe you live S. of the I-4, so they may be your Yankee/Cuban neighbors – can’t learn much from them, I suppose.

  35. pyrrhus 说:
    @Lemurmaniac

    The guns possessed by non-white gangbangers are seldom legally obtained, so its an exercise in futility.

    • 同意: Alden
    • 回复: @Truth
  36. pyrrhus 说:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    And that’s why the US easily won the wars in Vietnam and Afghanistan, because it outguned the native population 100-1…..oh wait!

    • 回复: @EliteCommInc.
  37. Dr. X 说:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    Because as long as they’re getting paid, as soon as the order comes from President Oprah, they’ll shoot you, your wife and your little dog too to take your guns.

    That’s true, but only if they isolate and target individuals and pick them off one-by-one. They can’t do that to everybody, so the plan is to 1) make examples out of a few people, and 2) shut down the commercial sale and manufacture of guns and ammo and put a chokehold on the retail availability of guns rather than do a mass confiscation.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
    , @peterAUS
  38. Joe Hide 说:

    How could the author and others miss the 1000’s Of arrests of pedophile traffickers and murderous pyschopath elitists under Trump? Is this a forbidden topic? Gitmo is filling up with traitors. The Globalists, NWO’ers, and deep state are not only carrying out mis-information attacks constantly via the controlled media, they have also carried out assassination attempts on GOP leaders (….as in playing baseball and a large truck parked in front of an Amtrac train). How can political authors miss this and get distracted by President Trump’s seemingly unintelligible speech? Think about it, He and his Allies want the extremely wealthy and powerful (
    ..But arrogant) Deep State to be mislead as to his and their true Agenda. I like 乌兹网, but is it intentionally only covering relatively “Soft Topics”?

  39. @Dr. X

    All true Doc, but I would hope (and never would ask) that he’s got guns that are not known about. That’s why even the instant background-check system is way too onerous for lots of us. Anyone who knows anything about computers/software knows that the data on your check is not just “gone”. There is no such thing as it being gone.

    People in charge of it won’t admit it, but NICS is a low-level registration system, or at least a look-back type. You’ll only hear about it when it’s time for it to start being regularly used for this purpose.

    The cntrl-left keeps pushing and pushing. Most are useful idiots for the cause, like some, ahem, I’ve heard from lately, but the ones on the top know how this is supposed to end. I think they’re mistaken this time.

    Regarding my last paragraph, promotion of handguns for self-defense has been a great thing for enlightening the young people. The fact that many people need guns for this reason is not a good thing in and of itself, but they may come around to understanding the real purpose of the 2nd Amendment a lot quicker as they respect guns, are not wetting their panties about them, and hang around with the older crowd how have the guns for reasons of “Feral Gov’t”“再也不”.

    • 回复: @JMcG
  40. @Jonathan Mason

    Apparently, 25% of Americans own guns. So I presume something like 75% of Americans are like me: don’t own guns, don’t care much about them one way or another. Call us benighted, it’s ok, I’m just talking facts and perceptions here, not what is right and good.

    To be more specific about my own vague feelings about guns, I have used guns a few times and feel they are pretty fun and possibly useful and I like the idea of people having guns in a safe and responsible way. I’d prefer if the US could remain an exception among countries of the world with happily and safely armed citizens.

    However, I honestly don’t care much about the issue, so it seems utterly normal for me, after yet another nasty shooting incident, to talk about ways of avoiding such incidents. Why is it so easy for lunatics to buy horribly dangerous weapons, etc. bla, bla bla.

    And yeah these people reacting with “you can take this gun from my cold dead hands” sound hysterical to me. I don’t know what Trump said (don’t care much), but it seems odd to me that people would make this an issue of whether or not to dump him. The obvious smart thing is to triangulate and at least give the impression of trying to improve the problem of nutcases shooting bunches of people.

    Does Trump actually understand words and meanings?

    John, I usually like what you say, but here you sound like a nerd to me. I bet Trump understands words and meanings quite well when they are written down in a legal contract. He also understands that when they are just spoken, for example on TV, they have much fuzzier definitions. It’s all about emotions. Agreeing with what the last person said is often good politics.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.

    • 回复: @donut
    , @Twodees Partain
  41. @Achmed E. Newman

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

  42. Let’s see, taking the official story at face value, Cruz illegally went into a school armed with a rifle, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the “fun” of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a soda at Subway.

    Trump illegally went into Syria armed with cruise missiles, and started randomly killing people, apparently just for the “fun” of it. Then apparently to celebrate the act, he treated himself to a nice piece of cake.

    小世界。

    At first glance, it would seem that Orange Clown = Cruz = Charles Manson = the Zodiac Killer, etc.; from a moral perspective at least.

    But here’s the thing: Our constitution intended to ARM “the people” and DISARM the president, i.e., prevent him from being able to start a war on his own initiative.

    If we are to have “liberty and freedom” – which I thought America was supposed to be all about – it is understood by reasonable people that it will come at the cost of an occasional “lone nut” who drives his car while intoxicated (and kills people), for example, or an occasional “lone nut” (real or imagined) who shoots his gun while deranged (and kills people).

    The Framers of our constitution were not stupid people; of course they understood that crimes would be committed with guns by a small fraction of “the people”, but what could they do about it? Nothing, since “liberty and freedom” is a package deal. You want “liberty and freedom”? Then you have to put up with the inevitable down side that the same “liberty and freedom” also empowers deranged people.

    In other words, we don’t give up our cars because some small fraction of “the people” drive while intoxicated, and we don’t give up our guns because some small fraction of the people shoot while deranged.

    On the other hand, in contrast to Cruz, Charles Manson, etc., the illegal, immoral and unconstitutional acts of the murderous Orange Clown are not only completely antithetical to the concept of “liberty and freedom”, but they have the potential to destroy America and potentially wipe out life on earth.

    The Framers of our constitution clearly sought to prevent one man, “the president”, from being able to start wars on his own initiative. It is not only breathtakingly immoral but completely diametrically opposed to the constitution and the founding principles to allow “the president” to go all over the world invading countries, murdering people with missiles, etc., making threats, etc., as Orange Clown routinely does.

    As I type this, Orange Clown is recklessly bitch-slapping nuclear armed Russia and China around just like he’s bitch-slapping the constitution and his “supporters” around; and there are some signs that Russia is getting sick and tired of all the provocations.

    Thanks to the Satanic machinations of Orange Clown (and his handlers and enablers), the average American is probably much more likely to die in a nuclear war with Russia and/or China than from a bullet fired from the gun of a “lone nut”.

    So here we are, possibly just one more impulsive-reckless-illegal-immoral-unconstitutional-completely-unnecessary-pointless-cruise-missile-attack-by-Orange-Clown away from planetary extinction, but in the interest of “public safety”, we really need to further infringe the second amendment?

    • 回复: @El Dato
  43. And in New York, any doctor, nurse, social worker or psychologist can diagnose you as unfit to own guns, and you are forbidden under state law to sue that person for false diagnosis. There is no appeal process.

    This sounds somewhat similar to the child abuse reporting laws here in Florida except for the part about guns, so probably it only applies where the health care givers are professionally involved with the case rather than a general power to diagnose people who post on this blog under fake names.

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of ‘red flag’ law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  44. @Jonathan Mason

    Your schlocky arguments and jewy smears give you away.

    I don’t how to tell you this but — we know.
    We know who and what you are.

    We know that Jews hijacked Russia through subversion and terror, ultimately murdering 60,000,000 unarmed White Gentiles.

    I don’t know ANY gun owner who is anti-government. That is one of your emblematic Talmudic lies conjured of whole cloth. Gun owners want lawful, Constitutional government free of the perversions of Jewish subversion and terror.

    I’d be packing my bags if I were you. I hear that Alpha Centauri is nice this time of year.

  45. @Jonathan Mason

    I would certainly welcome a similar kind of ‘red flag’ law here in Florida. In fact I would set up an Internet site for diagnosing people with gun problems. ICD -10 code F63.81 Intermittent Explosive Disorder should cover it nicely.

    You sure would! Lucky for us you are not in charge of a damn thing. 普林斯顿 Communism could really use a guy like you, 乔尔 乔纳森

  46. @Dr. X

    “That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. ”

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    And the Framers of our constitution would probably also disagree with you, because it is the right to possess “hardware”, not “organization”, that the second amendment is all about.

    Moreover, the historical record shows that our masters have been engaged in a methodical, long term effort to disarm us. They seek to generally diminish our ability to resist/fight back while enhancing their own ability.

    An example is the “Hughes amendment” (1986) which effectively prohibits the average person from legally possessing fully automatic weapons. This amendment was not a legislative response to an automatic-weapon-fueled crime wave; rather, it was an agenda driven infringement that came out of the clear blue sky.

    Another example is the ban on armor piercing ammunition. The “government” has access to both level 4 body armor and effective armor piercing (AP) ammo (e.g., M995, M993 tungsten-carbide-cored ammo), but “the people” are not allowed to have any ammo with a tungsten carbide core.

    Our masters have also made repeated attempts to ban body armor (only for “the people” of course). Although AFAIK they haven’t been successful yet, they keep trying.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    It’s clear that “public safety” has nothing to with the long-standing effort to disarm us.

    • 回复: @Dr. X
    , @peterAUS
  47. @Reg Cæsar

    第十四修正案和哈特-塞勒移民法对我们的枪支权利的威胁要大得多。

    得问。

    第 14 修正案如何威胁枪支权利?

    我对第 14 条的理解是,它将宪法中对联邦政府的所有 BoR 限制,包括第二修正案,强加给了州政府。

    第14条保证州政府也不能侵犯枪支权利。

    出生权公民身份是对枪支权利的威胁,特别是因为它适用于非法外籍父母所生的锚定婴儿,这些父母至少包括一个联邦受保护的阶级群体。

    所有联邦受保护的阶级群体通常都是左派,反宪法和反第二修正案。

    如果第 14 条保护美国非法外国人所生的婴儿,这是值得怀疑的。

  48. @Jonathan Mason

    I’ve heard this crap from you for a week running, Mason. I guess you never heard about the whole damn police force of Los Angeles looking for one ex-cop for, was it 4 days?, a few years back. He wasn’t necessarily a good shot even, being a cop and non-white guy.

    Ever heard of the Viet Cong, the Moslems we used to be buddy-buddy with in Afghanistan in the early 1980’s, or 100’s of other cases of BIG GOV and BIG MIL getting slowly whipped by the little guy? It’s all over the internet, this stuff. It may be that you are still stuck in that old TV mode. Do watch CSI-Miami, Jonathan and really believe that these crack agents with their quick thinking and hands on all the data in the world are reality? I knew TV was bullshit during 一天一次 (glorifying single-motherhood) and 莫德 (glorifying, ugly feminist broads, I guess?) , when I was a wee one.

    Get off the TV, Mason. Maybe it’s the Jason Bourne ____ ty/cy/um movies that make you believe this hype that our FERAL GOV is omnipotent and omniscient. Think 再次, 再次再次, mujumbo!

    • 回复: @JMcG
  49. Truth 说:
    @niteranger

    Obama and the left believe that they have intimidated enough whites that they can take over the nation without a fight.

    According to Big Derb, and the POTUS himself, this is Trump and the Right! I’m not understanding here, Big Chief, explain this to me.

    • 回复: @EliteCommInc.
    , @niteranger
  50. @Jonathan Mason

    … as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played 警察和强盗牛仔和印第安人 with toy guns when I was a child.

    Let me guess, you were always the cop, right? Something tells me you played a few games in your childhood that most Americans didn’t know about – “Trotsky and Lenin” (with those cute plastic toy ice axes), “red guards and capitalist roaders” (with those big pieces of construction-paper, washable markers and fake pig blood), and “thought police and proles”.

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    • 回复: @Truth
    , @Truth
    , @Anonymous
  51. Truth 说:
    @utu

    Might need a constitutional amendment for that one Bro.

    • 回复: @MarkinLA
    , @Reg Cæsar
  52. Truth 说:
    @pyrrhus

    What about the ones possessed by white gangbangers?

  53. anonymous • 免责声明 说:

    The latest evil incarnate clearly identified himself with white supremacists, and he looks pretty pale too, for all to see. But, there is a deceitful narrative (so what else is new) being spun that he was not white at all, because he has a hispanic name… even though that simply means, of Spanish origins. Are the loser Spanish non-white? We also know what saints purebred lily white asses are, right?

    Anyway, who cares. After going through enough racist narratives, I am numbed. All I wish for now is for your kind to also feel the same pain they have caused the other unfortunates around the world. All in the name fairness, you understand.

    Given the hundreds of thousands of non-white babies/children blown up by degenerate palefaces… *耸肩*

    All that tells me is that justice is sometimes served in this world too. Just not enough of it, though.

    • 回复: @El Dato
  54. @jilles dykstra

    Abolition just made people as the old Kennedy rich.

    I think you mean prohibition.

    Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, which is interesting, because many of them got rich, first, from slavery!

    Anyway, “abolition” is another misapplied term because slavery was never abolished in the land of the free.

    Here’s a summary of the idea.:

    “但实际上,废除农奴制和奴隶制只是废止了不必要的过时形式的奴隶制,而取而代之的是更牢固形式的奴隶制和将更多人奴役的奴隶制。”

    –托尔斯泰
    一些错别字,但也可以做个简单的总结:托尔斯泰,《我们时代的奴隶制》,第8章,11年1900月XNUMX日 http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/WorldeBookLibrary.com/slaverytol.htm#1_0_7

    Americans have long been debt, wage and tax slaves but few possess the minimal clarity of thought to understand the concept, and those who do are powerless to do much about it.

    “He who has the gold has the power.” And he who takes your gold takes your power whether you agree or not.

    • 回复: @Curle
  55. @pyrrhus

    嗯。 。 。

    not home ownership, but on the battlefield in nearly every engagement (major battle) that is correct, And that is why they finally signed the peace agreement. Because the US was not going to leave without one.

    Let’s skip the “we lost Vietnam” nonsense. The reason the North invaded and started a second war was because the US left. And we left on our own accord.

  56. @Joe Franklin

    没问题。

    The fourteenth amendment applies to former slaves and former slaves only. The concept of “anchore babies” is unconstitutional on its face.

  57. @anon

    The thing that Trump needed to do upon getting elected was nationalize the media and put it in the hands of patriots.

    Except that he’s not a patriot, but a “Trumpiot” and that rhymes with “idiot.”

    Pathetic that’s the best we could do, and it was.

  58. @Truth

    What occurred in Florida was tragic. but it is a local, regional and state issue.

    The NRA has no culpability in what occurred.

    • 回复: @Fred on Nothing
  59. Dr. X 说:
    @Harold Smith

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    Well, I think we have far more in common than you might think. I am hardly arguing that ordnance is 不着边际; it is of course a very important part of the equation when we’re trying to quantify government power.

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not 只是 because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    And yes, of course disarmament has 没什么 whatsoever to do with public safety, and 一切 to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

  60. @unit472

    Facebook’s Zuckerburg, Bloomberg, Google, the Jewish money mafia are no longer content to let voters decide gun laws. When even Walmart feels it has to cave to Jewish pressure ( as if Jews shop there) you know things are different this time. Fink has openly declared he will force change upon gun makers so where is your right to buy an AR-15 if Fink, using your pension savings, can remove company directors at Sturm Ruger, Smith and Wesson, Beretta etc who manufacture them?

    Better wake up and smell the gefilte fish!

    It’s rotten gefilte fish, in fact.

    A couple of decades ago I spent some time looking up who controls or owns the weapons manufacturers including the ones you mentioned. If enough people knew who and what they were and probably still are, they’d poop loads of gefilte fish.

    Hint: The same crowd that owns/controls the big media and big banks also have done something similar to the arms manufacturers (and truth be known, 所有 other big industry as well).

    Look up the Swope Plan, who was behind it, figure out why, and curse FDR vehemently for being a such a disgusting puppet. No wonder he appeased and smooched Bolshie tuschie.

    Done deal folks.

  61. anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @jacques sheete

    天堂帮助我们。

    In the short term you fellows may get that wish, but in the looong term… No! 😉

  62. Truth 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    That’s a good one, AEN. I have to post an archaic LOL here because I already used mine.

  63. Truth 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Dude, that’s even 10x funnier, was this intentional humor or just comic deus ex-machina, like a young Jerry Lewis stumbling and falling down on stage with a guy named Dean Martin scheduled to come on after him?

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  64. El Dato 说:
    @Anon

    These are all good points for 2020, or sooner.

  65. @EliteCommInc.

    It is a national problem in that it is Jewish stochastic terror using “entertainment” to infuse the youthful population with nihilism, anger and shoot-em-up ideation.

    School shooting (disarmament) epidemic is a relatively recent phenomenon that has been kicked into high gear as Americans are coming to realize the true perpetrators of 9/11.

  66. El Dato 说:
    @anonymous

    Gb2RepublicOfKongo and get yourself a supersized serving of good old justice.

  67. Anonymous • 免责声明 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, Mason.

    Dude. SubMinister Manson. MANSON.

    http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/fiction/toast/toast.html#bigbro

    The next day I wake up like any party worker, with a vigorous bout of calisthenics supervised via telescreen. Unlike most party members, I have an instructor all to myself and she’s a babe; cute, winsome, and anxious to please. She lets me finish my morning coffee before starting the work-out, and stammers an apology with frightened eyes when I joke about inviting her round for dinner. I find that mildly annoying: it was a joke, dammit, I didn’t mean to scare her. That’s the sort of thing my father might have done.

    After the calisthenics, the propaganda: a new triumph in Mars orbit, our battleship beat their battleship. Chocolate ration to be increased by five grams—strictly irrelevant, I have a purple pass that gets me into the unlimited-quota food hall at Harrods. This week’s NOVA launch from the Bahamas is delayed; unexpected weather conditions will blow the fallout plume from the spaceship back over Florida unless they hold until the weekend. Something about intricate surgery, face transplants for disfigured burn victims, heroes in our war against Eurasia. I keep an ear open for real news but there isn’t any; not a peep about SubMinister Manson’s bid for a seat on the general auditing committee. Or his impending visit to Airstrip One.

    我大约十点钟到达办公室,坐在我的椅子上。 我把手伸进我的终端; 它会从我的左手小指头读取打印内容并登录。 一位纪律严明的主管给我端来更多的咖啡,而楼下的上班族则为他们的三分钟仇恨和每周一次的团队会议做好准备:在安顿下来开始一天的辛勤工作之前,我从镜子玻璃阳台的窗户后面观看。

    我是计算机抽象领域的系统经理,这是一台由 Party 设计的、晶体管化的、有思想的伟大机器,潜伏在 Docklands 的防弹掩体中。 我的工作是让庞然大物保持运转:为此,我拥有轮子权限,可以访问所有区域。 这一年可能是 2018 年,旧日历,但没有人再确定了——在 1980 年代出现了太多的转录错误,当时连 MiniLove 都没有保存真正准确的记录。 最安全的说法可能是正式宣布今年是 99 年,即我们敬爱的老大哥诞辰一百周年。

    到现在已经有99个月的100年了,我不确定在没有总局的人注意的情况下我们还能保持多久。 我是 XNUMX 年项目的 OverStaffCommanders 之一; 我的工作是在时钟转动时帮助阻止各种类型的混乱爆发,我们需要使用额外的数字来存储自我们的领导者和老师出生以来输入的日期。

  68. peterAUS 说:
    @Johnny Smoggins

    没有
    Can elaborate, up to a point on “open” Internet.

    暗示:
    Those pilots, tank and sub commanders have families and friends.
    Those live among the “targeted population”.
    Targeting tends to work both ways.

    Custom load 7.62 NATO, 30-03, 8×57, .303, 7.62×54, bolt action, accurized, optics, adjustable stock and trigger. Hand held ballistic computer, laser rangefinder. Just……one……..shot.

    喜欢此页 :
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winchester_Model_70
    甚至这个:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1903_Springfield

  69. peterAUS 说:
    @Dr. X

    Rare “practical” comment related to this subject.

    The heart of the matter:

    It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people.

    完全同意。

  70. Curle 说:

    Apologies if this is repetitive but,

    Trump just set the House Rs up to be heroes to their base going into the mid-terms AND he showed this sniveling lot that he can administer a whupping for incalcitrants if need be (that’s you Senator Graham).

    As Priebus said, Trump is unusually focused. That includes not permitting distractions to get in the way. We are going to have meaningful immigration controls in this country because of Trump.

  71. Curle 说:
    @jacques sheete

    “Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, ”

    I think I might agree with you but could you elaborate?

    • 回复: @jacques sheete
  72. peterAUS 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    You aren’t much coherent here.

    Had the act of Timothy McVeigh created general uprising of people of that , currently armed, the situation would’ve been unmanageable for US Government.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer

    Haha….oh, yes…..
    You just slipped “old boy”. That’s the lingo used by “leftards” all around the world for military personnel.
    “Trained killer”. What a load of bollocks. He was a member of simple regular (mechanized) infantry.

    I agree that most of people into the 2nd are of that “play soldiers”, but, takes just a spark, a tipping point, to shift from playing a soldier in real militiaman.
    Humans are….complicated….creatures. Nobody has solved that “will”, “mindset” thing. More you push people, more most of them fold. But, it, sometimes, comes that undefined point when a person stops folding. And, should he/she has means of resistance, everything changes.
    A firearm, in the eternal game of power between humans, is that means.

    TPTB just feel, and they are smart, that just maybe, that tipping point is being reached for “flyover” states. Trump election pointed there.
    So……….go for those means.
    Take them away.

    I know that an average “leftard” can’t get that.
    But, some other people can and. Those that count.

  73. @Dr. X

    “All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.”

    Your point about “organization” is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be “easily overwhelmed”, IMO.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  74. KenH 说:

    I guess we shouldn’t have expected much from Trump considering he’s always been surrounded by so many Jews and for all intents and purposes is an honorary Jew himself. If it’s too good to be true it usually is and this applies in the case of Trump.

    Trump’s so called centrist solution essentially gives the left about 75% of what they’ve always wanted just like his crap immigration bill which more than doubled amnesty recipients and delays ending chain migration for almost ten years.

    I want a president and not a reality TV moron who likes to create artificial drama and controversy. I don’t want to be entertained I want Trump to keep his promises and advance the agenda he ran on which wasn’t gun control and amnesty.

  75. El Dato 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    (Swish motions made with the hand implied)

    I thought his head became messed up by Janet Reno burning down Branch Davidians in Waco?

    戈尔维达尔“名利场”, in times that gave off the feeling of an incubating zombie outbreak (i.e. September 2001, thus written in August or earlier):

    Although McVeigh was soon to indicate that he had acted in retaliation for what had happened at Waco (he had even picked the second anniversary of the slaughter, April 19, for his act of retribution), our government’s secret police, together with its allies in the Media, put, as it were, a heavy fist upon the scales. There was to be only one story: one man of incredible innate evil wanted to destroy innocent lives for no reason other than a spontaneous joy in evildoing. From the beginning, it was ordained that McVeigh was to have no coherent motive for what he had done other than a Shakespearean motiveless malignity. Iago is now back in town, with a bomb, not a handkerchief. More to the point, he and the prosecution agreed that he had no serious accomplices.

    I sat on an uncomfortable chair, facing a camera. Generators hummed amid the delphiniums. Good Morning America was first. I had been told that Diane Sawyer would be questioning me from New York, but ABC has a McVeigh “expert,” one Charles Gibson, and he would do the honors. Our interview would be something like four minutes. Yes, I was to be interviewed In Depth. This means that only every other question starts with “Now, tell us, briefly . . . ” Dutifully, I told, briefly, how it was that McVeigh, whom I had never met, happened to invite me to be one of the five chosen witnesses to his execution.

    Briefly, it all began in the November 1998 issue of Vanity Fair. I had written a piece about “the shredding of our Bill of Rights.” I cited examples of I.R.S. seizures of property without due process of law, warrantless raids and murders committed against innocent people by various drug-enforcement groups, government collusion with agribusiness’s successful attempts to drive small farmers out of business, and so on. (For those who would like further evidence of a government running amok, turn to page 397 of my The Last Empire.) Then, as a coda, I discussed the illegal but unpunished murders at Ruby Ridge, Idaho (a mother and child and dog had been killed in cold blood by the F.B.I.); then, the next year, Waco. The Media expressed little outrage in either case. Apparently, the trigger words had not been spoken. Trigger words? Remember The Manchurian Candidate? George Axelrod’s splendid 1962 film, where the brainwashed (by North Koreans) protagonist can only be set in murderous motion when the gracious garden-club lady, played by Angela Lansbury, says, “Why don’t you pass the time by playing a little solitaire?”

    OT, but he continues with…

    Evidence, however, is overwhelming that there was a plot involving militia types and government infiltrators—who knows?—as prime movers to create panic in order to get Clinton to sign that infamous Anti-Terrorism Act. But if, as it now appears, there were many interested parties involved, a sort of unified-field theory is never apt to be found, but should there be one, Joel Dyer may be its Einstein. (Einstein, of course, never got his field quite together, either.) In 1998, I discussed Dyer’s Harvest of Rage in these pages. Dyer was editor of the Boulder Weekly. He writes on the crisis of rural America due to the decline of the family farm, which also coincided with the formation of various militias and religious cults, some dangerous, some merely sad. In Harvest of Rage, Dyer made the case that McVeigh and Terry Nichols could not have acted alone in the Oklahoma City bombing. Now he has, after long investigation, written an epilogue to the trials of the two co-conspirators. Herewith, some of his startling findings.

    等等

    Someone called Peter Lance also says there is a connection to the Qaeda team 此处, I don’t know what to make of this:

    “A growing body of circumstantial evidence suggests that Ramzi Yousef may have designed the Oklahoma City device for Terry Nichols when he was in Cebu, Philippines, in 1994–95. Nichols’s passport shows four trips to the Philippines since 1990; Edwin Angeles , a former leader of the Abu Sayyaf terror group, swears to police that Nichols, aka “The Farmer,” met Yousef in the Philippines in the early 1990s. Passport records show that on November 3, 1994, Wali Khan Amin Shah and Ramzi Yousef applied for Philippines visas while in Singapore. On November 4, Terry Nichols applied for his Philippines visa in Chicago. The most curious circumstantial evidence comes from Michael Fortier, the government’s star witness in U.S. v. Timothy McVeigh. Fortier swears under oath that the only ammonium nitrate–fuel oil device McVeigh ever built was a dud. Then, after Nichols was in Cebu City at the same time as Ramzi Yousef , Nichols and McVeigh built the 5,600-pound ammonium nitrate–nitromethane bomb that destroyed the Murrah Building.”

    • 回复: @anarchyst
    , @Bronson
  76. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Your comment is simplistic.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.

    A Midwest town of, say, 50 000 people, in a week, NOW, can be made into a death zone for combined arms brigade group.
    True, it can be reduced to rubble and THAT is the key here. It, technically, can; politically, it can not.
    That, I hope, doesn’t need explaining.

    With no will, firearms and some ingenuity a government can just walk and arrest a thousand people. 6 hours job with some fisticuffs.

    With scenario above, a week of heavy fighting. Simply not possible on US soil.

    Well…I do hope that even the most “leftard” idiot can see why firearms do make a difference.

  77. niteranger 说:
    @Truth

    It’s simple Trump is being intimidated by the left. Trump thinks he’s smarter than he is. He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail because they now allow unacceptable behavior no matter how sick it is to keep their statistics equal. You never give up the offensive. Attack ..Attack…Attack. The left cannot handle a sustained attack.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  78. El Dato 说:
    @peterAUS

    Ghouta-nya-nya.

    But would it work if there are no third-party players like the US/Saudi Arabia shipping in crates of weapons?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  79. peterAUS 说:
    @Dr. X

    All I am saying is that a SWAT team of a dozen guys is effective not simply because of the weapons they carry, but because they are organized and because they usually target individuals. To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily overwhelmed by five thousand organized civilians carrying only Remington 700 hunting rifles. But no such organized citizenry exists.

    少得多。
    Four guys, knowing what they do, with bolts and shotguns can keep that SWAT team at bay.
    12 guys can take them out with ease. If they know what they do.

    5000 organized civilians with Remington 700 hunting rifles, in a proper prepared positions (a week of decent US ingenuity and construction work) can have a mechanized brigade working hard, for a week at least, to break them.

    You are, of course, correct that ordnance matters very much when manpower is matched one-for-one. Those five thousand citizen-hunters with bolt actions would be no match for a five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns.

    不同意。
    five-thousand-man professional army unit with light machine guns. No problem at all. Those soldiers wouldn’t be able to get a foothold in a town defended by those 5000 citizens. Of course, organized civilians.
    Add armor and helicopter gunships they will, of course. Add artillery and they’ll smash through those citizens in a week. With considerable casualties.
    All irrelevant, actually.
    The political fallout of a town in US Midwest being pummeled into dust with 125 and 155 shells is…well…imaginable!?

    And yes, of course disarmament has nothing whatsoever to do with public safety, and everything to do with ensuring that the government will always have the upper hand.

    对。

    • 回复: @anarchyst
  80. anarchyst 说:
    @peterAUS

    “以及后来我们如何在营地里焚烧,想着:如果每个安全特工晚上去外面逮捕他时,不确定他是否会活着回来并不得不向家人道别,那会是什么样子? ? 或者,如果在大规模逮捕期间,例如在列宁格勒,当他们逮捕整个城市的四分之一时,人们不仅只是坐在他们的巢穴中,就在楼下门的每一声砰砰声和步伐迈入的每一步中都感到恐惧楼梯,但知道他们没什么可失去的,大胆地在楼下的大厅里设了伏击,用手指,锤子,扑克或任何其他东西伏击了六个人。 尽管斯大林十分渴求,但这些器官很快就会遭受人员和运输的短缺。 被诅咒的机器会停顿下来。 。 。”
    –古拉格群岛(Allagsandr Solzhenitsyn),古拉格群岛(Gulag Archipelago)

  81. @Jonathan Mason

    McVeigh’s participation in the OKC bombing is murky. But anyone with access to sea level oxygen knows that it was a Mossad op.

    By all means, keep squirming and prevaricating. I can do this all day, my lubricious little Hasbara rodent.

    • 同意: anarchyst
  82. anarchyst 说:
    @El Dato

    The Murrah building was destroyed by government operatives–NOT McVeigh. Not only were there questionable records and activities going on there, a way was needed to defuse the various “militia movements” that were increasing in popularity due to government abuses at Waco and Ruby Ridge. There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained. In fact, the glass windows of the “water board building” across the street were untouched. There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt). Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.
    Look how quickly McVeigh was executed, along with emotional non-testimony being allowed in the “kangaroo court” that was McVeigh’s “trial”.
    Governments are not averse to using innocent civilians as “pawns”, murdering them to achieve a political and social objective.
    Look at the school shootings in which “trained law enforcement” (still) sits on their hands until the shooting stops.
    Par for the course…

    • 回复: @El Dato
    , @Reg Cæsar
  83. donut 说:
    @European-American

    ”“我不知道特朗普说了什么(不在乎),但是对我来说,人们是否将其抛弃是一个问题,这对我来说似乎很奇怪。 显而易见的明智之举是进行三角测量,至少给人的印象是试图改善疯子射杀一群人的问题。”

    尽管第二修正案对我很重要,但这不是我不再支持特朗普的原因。 当他进入“集群”不到两个月的假性瓦斯袭击,向叙利亚人发射这些导弹以“报复”他时,我就死了。**主管部门的k。 对我而言,首要问题是谁来控制我们的外交政策,尤其是谁。 关于我。 他向我们保证首先要美国人和美国人。 他的举动似乎表明他几乎和其他警察一样。 把以色列放在首位。
    至于疯子是“行为沉沦”的表现,打鼹鼠不是解决办法。

  84. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Your point about “organization” is well taken, but a 12 member SWAT team equipped with with an armored vehicle, level 4 body armor, machine guns, thermal sights, etc., against any reasonable number of organized citizens with hunting rifles, would not be “easily overwhelmed”, IMO.

    简单化。

    METT-T

    地形 is the key and, interestingly enough, always kept out of “gun discussions”.

    A wooden/brick colonial, 12 vs 12…..SWAT wins all the time.
    A concrete, two story, with a cellar, much harder. Add just 48 hours to prepare, impossible for that SWAT to even get a foothold in one room.
    A compound of several such houses…no way that SWAT would even consider doing that.

    I can go on but then it, will, fast get into “forbidden zone”.

    Moreover, if the SWAT team knew that the opposition had effective AP ammo that would defeat their body armor, that alone may have a serious demoralizing effect. How many SWAT team members would be so enthusiastic about doing their dirty work if they had to consider that every day is another day they might not come home?

    Again the very premise of yours is, apparently, the SWAT is going against one guy, or a couple, do a job and then go home.
    An….interesting….viewpoint of…..internal unrest.

    How about that SWAT is just a small member of an organized force going against 30 000 people town which had a general citizen armed unrest. People with just hunting gear.

    That’s what Mr X pointed to here and is the crux of the matter.

    Or course that very SWAT can overcome and arrest 5000 people, one by one. One…..by……one…….
    But it can’t even one among 5000 working 一起 against that arrest.

  85. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @anon

    Conservatives should have raised their kids since the 60s to take over media, academia, and government, but too many of them were into ‘muh guns’ and ‘muh NFL tickets’.

  86. anarchyst 说:
    @peterAUS

    Let’s not forget the millions of us veterans out there who have been trained both in firearms and small-unit tactics.
    Definitely a formidable force, if the need arises.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  87. @Johnny Smoggins

    “As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far)”

    Nope, gun owning citizens outnumber cops and the military by well over 100 to 1. You just showed everyone participating here that you’re a shill and that you’re probably swapping spit with that Mason clown. You just made my ignore list.

  88. @Achmed E. Newman

    Don’t feed the trolls. This Mason imbecile would have given up and wandered off weeks ago if people here had been able to restrain themselves from flapping their meat at him.

  89. peterAUS 说:
    @El Dato

    If…if I got your comment right you are comparing current town operations in Syria with similar scenarios in USA?

    As I said, it’s politically, so, practically, impossible scenario.

    The key is to force the Government to use a heavy hand, hence it can not.

    So, yes, against any police effort and against any light military effort, an average town in Midwest can do well, no problem at all.

    It can not do well against heavy government push.
    Besides, even if Government does order that, would the troops do it? Not do it…but do it well?
    Not Generals and Colonels, they probably will…hell even Majors. But Captains, and the most important, squad leaders. Squad leaders are the key in this game. Would they lead their squads in heavy house to house fighting Falluja style?
    我只是不这么认为。

    Do I make sense here?

    • 回复: @El Dato
  90. @European-American

    ” I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.”

    I doubt that. Even the mewling little queers in California are divided on the subject of firearms and have an opinion on the subject. If you usually like what Mason says, you belong at Huffpo, not here.

    • 回复: @European-American
  91. Tipsy 说:

    There’s a story – perhaps apocryphal – that a journalist asked Pope John XXIII how many people worked in the Vatican Curia. Pope John responded “About half.”

  92. @Joe Franklin

    You’ve never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn’t “questionable” at all.

    • 回复: @Reg Cæsar
  93. @peterAUS

    “Your comment is simplistic.”

    Well of course it is; a simple truth can usually be expressed by a simple statement.

    “Armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns can be overcome by less than a week of intelligent and resourceful application of MOUT engineering.
    Any competent construction company, working for city council, can do that with ease.”

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter. You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard. Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  94. @Dr. X

    “To the contrary, a 12-man gun confiscation SWAT team with full-auto M4s and HKs would be easily “…wiped out by one good shooter armed with a 70 year old Garand in a position in an upper floor window overlooking their AO.

    The confiscation team would have to be rifle company sized, backed by a APC with a Ma Deuce to do more than disarm one household in a neighborhood. A dozen fat donut addicts wearing kevlar would scatter, pissing their pants if only one of their number were shot down while they attempted a home invasion.

    Let me know when that 5,000 man professional army turns up.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  95. Truth 说:

    He should have gone after Obama and the crazy left for not putting this kid in jail

    Dude, he has been president for 14 months now.

  96. peterAUS 说:
    @anarchyst

    The problem with these discussions is, well, we can’t go all the way into the subject on the open Internet.
    Just can’t, and, well, shouldn’t.

    Bottom line, in a simple settlement, just several families, with most people on the same wavelength, that 12 member SWAT team simply has no chance of success. The best case scenario for them, should the action start with just hunting gear, is to consolidate in one of houses and wait for a backup to help them. Or leave casualties, break contact and escape.
    I mean, that’s so obvious that it’s funny we are even discussing that.

    Of course that any trained SWAT member is just smirking reading all this.
    What is not so funny is how most people discussing “gun things” have, actually, no idea how that works.

  97. @niteranger

    It’s now obvious that Trump is actually a member of the left. He also has delusions of adequacy. I’ve often told his fans that they need to prepare themselves for the possibility that he’s a total mongoloid. I hope they’ve prepared themselves, because the evidence has just been made public.

  98. @Twodees Partain

    First hit in a search for “gun poll”:

    Three-quarters of people polled said gun laws should be stricter than they are today. That’s an increase — in a short period of time — from October 2017, when NPR conducted a similar survey in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. Then, 68 percent said gun laws should be stricter than they were.
    https://www.npr.org/2018/03/02/589849342/npr-poll-after-parkland-number-of-americans-who-want-gun-restrictions-grows

    Everyone’s got an opinion if you press them. But I bet most people don’t understand why guns are so important to the people here who wail that Trump has betrayed them over guns, and just don’t care that much. Except they’d like not to be shot by nutcases. This is a great opportunity for Trump to appear reasonable and representative of the vast majority of Americans.

    I don’t know Mason or what he usually says. I usually sympathize with what Derb says, and I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction. I’d get a little depressed locked up in Huffpo land.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @anarchyst
  99. @donut

    Exactly; I couldn’t have said it better myself. That one war crime in Syria, by itself, where Orange Clown showed the world that he was willing to risk WW3 for the sake of the jewish-supremacist agenda in the Mideast, should’ve been enough to convince anyone that he’s just another anti-American traitor.

  100. @donut

    I agree the Syrian attack was deeply disappointing. And I wish he would cut back on US military action all over the world, as he promised. But Rome wasn’t built in a day, and politics is messy. And I’ve come to realize Trump won’t do all the things I’d like him to do, nor even most of them.

    I still am happy he was elected instead of Clinton. Aren’t you?

    I may be naive, but I still give Trump the benefit of the doubt, and I don’t see anyone I’d rather have for the next term. I wish there was someone better, but for now I’ll settle for him over almost any Democrat or Republican likely to be elected.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  101. wayfarer 说:

    Freedom is something that dies unless it’s used.
    – Hunter S. Thompson

    “Laws? We don’t need no stinkin’ laws!”

    Ghetto Gun Control, LLC. a subdivision of Black Market, Inc.

    .....

  102. El Dato 说:
    @anarchyst

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained.

    I completely disagree. It’s just a standard compound used in mining & construction. Makes a big hole.

    Actually it was used in the first attack on the WTC (1997), too. Wrecked the parking garage.

    There had been signs of covert activity for months inside the Murrah building, in which “maintenance people” were seen at all hours (planting explosives, no doubt).

    That’s the first time I have ever heard of that, and I have seen some stuff (what about the “sudden suicide” of the guy who looked like John Doe 2 in the holding cell?). You sure this isn’t the WTC meme being backported in time? Really, you just need one guy, not a maintenance team; this isn’t precision work. Like in the that X-Files movie, where the bomb is rolled into the FBI building inside an apparently functional vending machine (I suppose this was a clin d’oeuil to the OKC bombing).

    Of course, they managed to find the truck’s axle, undamaged, not unlike the “passports” found in the rubble of the WTC.

    This must be “ironic”. Of course you will find the axle, it’s not an antimatter bomb.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  103. I don’t know what Donald Trump thinks. One thing at least has become clear in the last year: that he is an 技术专家 dissembler, and that this is one of his most effective tools in “the art of the deal”. 没人 knows what he thinks, and (so far as I can tell) he’s at least a lap ahead of all his opposition (the public ones anyway). The neat trick about being a lap ahead is that he 容貌 like he’s running neck and neck – while he’s actually a lap ahead.

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn’t share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire’s views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election – and that he loves his country and wants to save it. However, he is up against a situation that few if any other men have ever faced.

    We’ve all been trained to see the US President as a kind of emperor, who rules simply by decree: Thus it shall be, he says, and so it is. However, what few seem to understand is that the Imperial Presidency is merely the figurehead of the Establishment (aka “deep state”) that actually runs the country. So the Bushes, Clinton et al. could look like they are ruling by decree, because their decrees were what their real bosses wanted to happen, and the entire DC power structure was ready to implement them.

    So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.

    The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to “drain the swamp”. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.

    So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it? That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall? How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)

    There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One? (b) Trump had good intentions, but has been gradually (and rather quickly) influenced by those around him (including the traitors in his own family) to abandon them and get with the program. This scenario, however, doesn’t seem to fit with the clever, devious (though not dishonest) Donald Trump we know from his incredibly successful business career.

    Or maybe (c)? Finding himself alone in a very dangerous (possibly fatal) situation, he is doing everything he can simply to survive – long enough to see if the American people who put him in office will come through with enough actual, tangible support to allow him to actually get something done. And part of that strategy could be to cave enough to get his base angry enough to actually 做一点事, rather than just complaining that he’s not getting it done all by himself.

    我觉得 真实 turning point – if there is one – will be the 2018 midterm elections. Trump came on the scene so suddenly in 2016 that there wasn’t time for more than one or two supportive congressional candidates to give it a try – and, as in the case of the guy who ran against Paul Ryan, they didn’t get anywhere. The American people have been programmed for a long time. Many have been waking up in the last year, but it remains to be seen if there will be enough.

    One thing seems clear: if “conservatives” just throw tantrums (like the Z-Man) and abandon him, he will 当然 fail. But it won’t be his fault. This country is, after all, a republic; i.e. a “thing of the people”. It’s up to the people what they want to do with it.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
    , @Truth
  104. @European-American

    I think you misunderstand. When Trump fired those cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn’t know what the consequences would be, nor did he apparently care. With that one reckless act he not only became a mass murderer, but he could’ve started WW3 and for what, exactly?

    If someone raped and killed a girl in the past, would you give the murderer the “benefit of the doubt” and let your daughter date the guy? I bet you wouldn’t.

  105. @Jonathan Mason

    “Potentially dangerous”

    Yes well who determines this? At which point does an individual cross this line? Where is the line? Is it an arbitrary standard or will it be applied rigidly? If it is applied rigidly, and it’s found to have a “disparate impact,” what then?

    When your political ideology is found by (((psychiatry))) to be a symptom of mental illness, will it then follow that you are “potentially dangerous” and need to be disarmed?

    Driving is “potentially dangerous.” Opening your front door and crossing the threshold is “potentially dangerous.” Life is not a risk-free enterprise. Approach it like a man.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  106. @Anon

    “The real war must be fought with ammos of words, images, symbols, morals, and narratives. Too often, those on the Right cling to their guns as a crutch. They neglect the far more important war for the souls of America.”

    Did you miss the part where the Feds used bayonets to integrate schools in the South?

    It’s a myth that the left won it’s culture war simply with words and ideas. In truth it had the full might and power of the US government behind it. If you don’t educate the blacks/sell houses to immigrants/bake a cake for two poofters, the government will KILL YOU. First you get a warning. If you fail to heed the warning, you get a fine. If you ignore the fine, you will be imprisoned. If you resist imprisonment, they will kill you.

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We’re not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  107. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    And your comment is simply absurd; apparently reflecting your ignorance of the relevant subject matter.

    Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.

    You don’t make effective AP ammo in a garage in the backyard.

    One word: IEDs.

    Nor do you make a heavy machine gun that way.

    No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?

    The “war” would be a guerrilla war, and if the insurgents don’t have access to military weapons or at least significant quantities of suitable high explosives, they would be at a very serious disadvantage.

    Haha…you…白痴…with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you…idiots…are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    The truth of future wars, especially interal wars is simply staring you in the face every day you turn on the TV.
    URBAN…………..WARFARE.

    Repeat that 20 times and then, you and your ilk, could, maybe, get it.

    Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90’s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.
    One day, should you feel inclined, you can take a look at them.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
    , @Joe Stalin
  108. Svigor 说:

    The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”?

    Derb, you’re literate. You know as well as I do, barring senility, that the well-regulated militia part is largely irrelevant. It’s fluff. Like so:

    “Lots of sexy women being good, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    “Filthy lucre being wonderful, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
    “Pretty much everything works well on a pizza, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    The first part is a value statement, advice, etc. It’s a partial explanation of 为什么 the law is, not 什么 the law is. The second part, after the comma, is the imperative, the law, THE ORDER THAT SHALL NOT BE CHANGED WITHOUT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

    Leftists have no case here, so don’t feed the trolls.

    What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.

    This is pretty simple, too:

    4 move while holding up or supporting; “Bear gifts”; “bear a heavy load”; “bear news”; “bearing orders”

    Since only people can have rights, the 2nd is referring to man-portable arms. I suppose there might be a Constitutional question to be answered once we get to the point of strength-enhancing exoskeletons or genetically engineered super-strength.

    I suppose technically hand grenades and suitcase nukes are covered by the 2nd, and I don’t suppose too many patriots would mind if the Supreme Court said *咳嗽*not arms*咳嗽*. So it’s not the thorniest issue, no.

    现代立法仅使歧义成倍增加。 究竟什么才算是“突击步枪”? 谁来决定我的心理健康与否?

    Doesn’t really matter, since banning them or infringing the people’s right to produce, sell, keep, and bear them is unconstitutional.

    • 回复: @MarkinLA
  109. peterAUS 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    Getting into the “Red Zone” here, a?

    First, my compliments to Mr. Unz for allowing this exchange of thoughts.
    Only once, so far in my rather long Internet presence, I’ve been alllowed this type of comments/posts.
    All other times, no, not even on “patriotic” sites.
    So…..my compliments indeed.

    An interesting scenario above.
    Imagine four guys, different vantage points, interlocking fires.
    12 guys………
    40 guys……

    The level of “anti” ignorance is stunning.

    British Army, the best there is for that thing (yes, I do believe that, so let’s not lose focus here) couldn’t pacify Five Counties for decades.

    It’s interesting to see the “progs”, in a heartbeat, inventing Balkans, Chechnya, Lybia and Syria scenarios….on American soil.
    Of course that no civilian resistance is possible against a full might of US military.

    让你觉得?

  110. peterAUS 说:
    @Stripes Duncan

    一个很好的职位。

    I honestly believe that the conversations about mass shootings in USA should follow that line of thought.
    Not guns……….but society in general and individuals in particular.
    或更好, 部分 of US society that produce such events.

    为什么 一些部分 of US society have such events, and some parts do 不能, 例如?

    That would be a quite interesting conversation.

    I really believe that guys into the 2nd should go that way.

  111. @Harold Smith

    “So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.”

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    “The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to ‘drain the swamp’. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.”

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can’t appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can’t he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn’t be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the “swamp”, would he?

    “So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?”

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don’t ignore it. That’s what you should be worried about.

    “That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?”

    The “wall” is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    “How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)”

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he’s escalating. He’s getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn’t have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn’t have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    “There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?”

    You don’t know that Clinton was their “chosen one”. In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a “prop”. Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown’s camp, which swung the election to him.

  112. @unit472

    Century Arms, one of the largest assemblers of military look-a-like firearms in the U.S. (corporate headquarters in Florida, manufacturing facility in Vermont) is privately owned, although I believe the family owning it is Jewish.

  113. Svigor 说:

    It is becoming increasingly apparent from reading this and related blogs that possession of firearms, like alcohol and opiate addiction, changes the human brain, and that the longer people possess firearms and the more firearms they have, the more irrational they become until they are more or less saying:

    It is long since apparent that Jonathan Mason is either a troll, or non compos mentis, or both:

    https://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478 乔纳森·梅森 说:
    23年2018月6日,格林尼治标准时间下午04:300•XNUMX字

    美国不是一个部落酋长联盟,每个部落酋长都由军阀统治,国家政府的影响力微乎其微。 正如韦科和鲁比·里奇所表明的那样,用枪支来抵抗联邦政府的权力是徒劳的。 是的,政府确实搞砸了这件事并造成了许多不必要的死亡,但显然大卫教派永远不可能赢得与联邦政府的小型战争。 他们实际上成为了第二修正案的豚鼠,如果没有第二修正案,他们中的大多数人今天还活着。

    That’s probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever read. It’s like saying Jonathan Mason’s cardboard space ship didn’t make it off the ground, so Moon Landings are impossible. It’s really impossible to overemphasize how stupid Jonathan Mason is.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Twodees Partain
  114. @donut

    尽管第二修正案对我很重要,但这不是我不再支持特朗普的原因。 当他进入“集群”不到两个月的假性瓦斯袭击,向叙利亚人发射这些导弹以“报复”他时,我就死了。**k of an administration.

    Amen to that. The attack on Syria caused me to lose all heart for Trump the man. We need better candidates to help consolidate the nascent nationalist movement he tapped into to help propel his improbable presidential run.

    On the specific issue of gun control and mass shootings, I only have a couple of things I wish to add. The reason why these shootings continue to happen in America, the reason why they are attended with the same tiresome hand-wringing and “what is to be done” platitudes time after time, and the reason why they pass from the headlines in less than a week, is because such acts are reflections of ourselves. American culture is all about toxic individuality, sensational media circuses, fame by any means, splashy personalities, and about never being “dissed.” America is a playground for sociopathic extroverts and a hellhole for anybody who wishes to live a dignified, contemplative, and quiet life. All the talk about making the shootings stop is nothing but 形式 moral posturing. Nobody really gives a rip that another schoolroom or concert crowd gets blown away every couple of months, and they certainly do not care enough to be willing to amend some of the fundamental contributing causes within the culture.

    To discuss this subject as if it had anything to do with gun control or with the psychiatric imprisonment of the disturbed is to completely miss the point. We’ve created a world devoid of value and beauty. Personally, I am not of the opinion that a raucous, drunken mob, gyrating and twerking away in a gambling den to the loathsome noise that we call music, or a throng of fantasists pressed into a movie theater on the opening night of the latest Batman installment, represents anything that needs to be preserved or defended. Are these “innocent” people living meaningful lives? No; they are ghastly spectacles populated by subhuman beasts. I could not possibly care what happens to them, not because I am a cruel and sadistic person, but because there is inherently nothing there to care about.

    The difference in the spiritual makeup between the person who 形式 such a mob and the person who shoots it up, it is very much less than what the media’s treatments of the subject would have us believe. We are supposed to consider the shooter as a deranged misfit or a psychological cripple, looking only to him as the sole cause of the “tragedy,” and the only debate we are allowed to have is about whether it is the gun or the gunner who must be locked away for our protection. What we ought to be asking is, Why are these raunchy concerts and violent cinematic hallucinations allowed to exist in the midst of us? Why are our children warehoused in horrible public schools where barbarities are perpetrated on a daily basis, and the only punishment doled out is to those who dare to speak the truth or defend themselves? There are countless, perfectly legal means by which to abort a child, betray a spouse, or game a living out of the system, but the lives of revelers and their freedom to party unmolested are supposedly sacrosanct?

    There is no consistency in this attitude, save the consistency that the individual’s right to endless pleasure-seeking with no consequences must be upheld come what may. It is pointless to decry the existence of shootings and bombings under such circumstances, as we have long since dissolved the standards that would cause men to expect civilized behavior from one another. In the future things will only get worse. The 个人 slaughters will become rarer, but they will be replaced by mob-on-mob clashes devoid of any semblance of a motivating ideal, occasioned by nothing more than football matches and comicon conventions; and this will be accepted as normal. It is ever in thus manner that high history winds itself up.

    The task before us now is not to figure out how to return to decency, for that it is impossible. It is to figure out how the rare few who possess genuine inwardness and religiosity can preserve themselves, outlast this age, and make their landfall in the future.

  115. peterAUS 说:
    @Stripes Duncan

    正是。

    完全同意。

    I’ve, personally, used that line of reasoning plenty of times when discussing related topic. It’s simply mind boggling that most people simply don’t get it. Actually, more “educated” they are, less likely for them is to get it.

    让你思考。
    Or really cynical.

  116. Svigor 说:

    Jonathan Mason again:

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This man is stupid.

    Gooks who wiped their asses with their hands and wore sandals made out of used tires took 173,000 square kilometers of Vietnamese territory from the US gov’t, who were using every bit of their air supremacy, which the USG won’t be against domestic enemies.

    Goatherds who hump their sisters and their livestock are currently in the process of taking 652,000 square kilometers of Afghan territory from the US gov’t, whose military are under much less strict Rules of Engagement than they would be on US soil.

    The man is stupid. He couldn’t find his ass with two hands. He produces low evaluations of human competence because he is incompetent; he projects his own incompetence onto others. He can’t even avoid sounding like an idiot on an internet forum, where he has as much time as he likes to compose his thoughts beforehand.

    P.S., Ron Unz, looks like the link handling is mangling some HTML; I double-checked and that tag was formatted properly.

  117. Svigor 说:

    Here’s the link to show how truly stupid Jonathan Mason is:

    https://www.unz.com/rpaul/more-gun-violence-lets-look-beyond-politics/#comment-2216478
    乔纳森·梅森 说:
    23年2018月6日,格林尼治标准时间下午04:300•XNUMX字

    美国不是一个部落酋长联盟,每个部落酋长都由军阀统治,国家政府的影响力微乎其微。 正如韦科和鲁比·里奇所表明的那样,用枪支来抵抗联邦政府的权力是徒劳的。 是的,政府确实搞砸了这件事并造成了许多不必要的死亡,但显然大卫教派永远不可能赢得与联邦政府的小型战争。 他们实际上成为了第二修正案的豚鼠,如果没有第二修正案,他们中的大多数人今天还活着。

    He’s even too stupid to know that the potato-eating Micks whupped the British gov’t, right in their own back yard. Reading his posts is like driving down the road, looking over, and seeing a kid with Downs Syndrome driving the car next to you.

  118. @peterAUS

    “Ignorance wise, you’ve, apparently, never been in urban combat.
    Not even trained for it.”

    Idiot, I don’t need combat experience to know that if you’re wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle. But common sense isn’t your strong suit.

    “One word: IEDs.”

    LOL! As if IEDs grow on trees. You need high explosives, lots of high explosives, and you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It’s not a trivial thing, your wild imagination notwithstanding.

    “No, you don’t. You take that from that disabled vehicle. Or buy it. Or steal it from a factory. Or raid it from a depot. You want me to keep going?”

    Well it’s your fantasy, you might as well knock your socks off.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  119. Svigor 说:

    Jonathan Mason, I say this to be kind: you are too stupid for 乌兹网. You should find a nice, safe, soft, leftist space for your comments, where you won’t be subjected to constant reminders of how stupid you really are.

    Leftists will pat you on the head for your stupidity.

  120. Svigor 说:

    These are comments from people who have lost the plot and are replying to Jonathan Mason as if he is mentally competent:

    Lemurmaniac #6
    Stripes Duncan #110

    These are comments from people who are properly dismissive of Jonathan Mason, but still don’t really understand that he is a moron who needs to be subjected to megadoses of vitriol and constant attacks on his room temperature IQ:

    Ok then #8
    Jenner Ickham Errican #24
    jacques sheete #30
    Achmed E. Newman #35

    Fred On Nothing (#46) is in a class of his own; he actually thinks JM is a Jew, a group known for their 高于平均水平 intelligence and capacity for argument, something that is strongly contra-indicated in JM’s comments.

    Gentlemen, please stop treating this retard like a competent citizen in good standing. He’s probably posting from a mental institution, or a halfway house, or his caretaker’s smart phone.

    He’s a complete asshat. A fool. A buffon. A clown. An idiot. A retard. A nincompoop. A dummy. A simpleton. A cretin. A moron. A dummkopf. An ass. A ninny. A dullard. A mongoloid. A half-wit. A dullard. An ignoramus. An imbecile. A mental mendicant.

    Is this sinking in?

    C’mon guys, get it together already.

    • 回复: @Jenner Ickham Errican
  121. @Philalethes

    (Somehow I mistakenly made this reply to myself rather than Philalethes).

    “So what happens when the President is not part of the power structure, but is opposed to it? He is a man alone, in the midst of a snake pit.”

    Well one thing that could happen is that he would not go out of his way to make things worse, no?

    “The American people, or (barely) half of them, elected Trump to ‘drain the swamp’. Unfortunately, however, they didn’t elect anybody to help him. As we have seen, nearly everybody in DC (which voted, what was it, 98% for Hillary?) – including nearly all the members of what is supposed to be his own party – is totally opposed to him, and will do everything they can to block what he wants to do.”

    So how do you explain the appointment of Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN? Does the opposition even control his mouth, his hands and his twitter account? And what about the presidential bully pulpit? He can’t appeal to the people? Failing everything else why can’t he resign? If the views he expressed during the campaign were held in good faith he wouldn’t be willing to become an anti-American instrument of the “swamp”, would he?

    “So Trump is in a spot. What if he gives an order and everybody around him simply ignores it?”

    Seriously? What if he gives an order that may start WW3 and they don’t ignore it. That’s what you should be worried about.

    “That’s already been happening in small ways, but what if it were a big item – say, the Wall?”

    The “wall” is not a very good example. First of all, construction of the wall will also depend on the other branches of government. It has to be funded through congress and it may be challenged in court. Second, the wall is not a matter of life and death for America and/or life on earth.

    “How does it make him look if it becomes obvious that he – the “Alpha” Emperor – is finally simply impotent? (I don’t think it’s accidental that the MSM keeps pointing out that “real” Republicans are opposed to him.)”

    He and he alone has the power to order the U.S. military out of Syria, for example. Yet instead of getting the U.S. military out of Syria, he’s escalating. He’s getting in deeper.

    Does he have power to NOT do unconstitutional war crimes? For example, he didn’t have to attack the Syrian airbase with cruise missiles, did he? He didn’t have to shoot down the Syrian aircraft, did he?

    “There are several possible interpretations of recent events: (a) Trump is a phony, has been from the beginning, is really just another front for the Deep State. But if so, why did the DS put him in place, when Hillary was obviously their Chosen One?”

    You don’t know that Clinton was their “chosen one”. In fact I would argue that Orange Clown was the chosen one and Hillary Clinton was only a “prop”. Sanders was more electable than Clinton, but they ran Clinton against Orange Clown to make him look reasonable by comparison. And the icing on the cake came in the early fall of 2016, when Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia, in a successful attempt to nudge the anti-war democratic voters (disgruntled Sanders supporters) into Orange Clown’s camp, which swung the election to him.

  122. peterAUS 说:
    @Svigor

    差不多了

    Waco scenario. Interestingly enough, at the same time, overseas, there were plenty of examples of quite the opposite scenarios.
    Mogadishu comes as one, actually.
    And, well….Balkans………..
    Then, some parts of former Warsaw pact.

    Waco, again.
    Let’s imagine the same scenario but with:
    A former senior sergeant, US Army combat arms as an adviser; just two .50 cal or .338 caliber snipers; a couple of night vision devices (passive and/or thermal); just two RPGs or similar. All obtainable then, now, in the future with proper contacts, money and will.
    A week for those people to dig in?.

    All that event would’ve gone differently.
    Two ways, of course.

    The Clintons would’ve negotiated the outcome even if taking a year to do so.

    The Clintons would’ve sent tanks (reactive armor) and helicopter (armored) gunships.
    A “proper” Battle Group attack.
    新的 规模。
    Plausible at the time and place? Hard to say.

  123. Svigor 说:

    As long as the police and military can outgun gun owners (and they always can, by far) the government can take any guns away from you that they want. Or did you think you were going to successfully wage a Waco or Ruby Ridge shootout?

    This is pig-ignorant. History shows Western powers (US very much included) consistently losing guerrilla conflicts over the last century.

    That’s simply not true. The citizens can far outgun the police and the military, BUT they lack the organization to do so. It is not ordnance, but organization that allows very small police and military forces to control large numbers of people. That’s why the Founders envisioned “well-regulated (i.e., trained) militias” — to counterbalance an organized professional military.

    This is off the mark, too. It’s not organization that’s lacking, it’s . The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will “miraculously” materialize, the USG will get its ass handed to it in tatters, and the feds will rush to the negotiating table at C.

    A different scenario occurs when an entire population, even if disorganized, is “up in arms.” The cops are very quickly overwhelmed (e.g., the L.A. Riots of 1992).

    The lack of will goes in the opposite direction, in this case.

    Again, I admit I don’t know much, and am happy to be corrected. But I think I am representative of many voters’ views about guns.

    EA, you’ve lost the plot. The American voters have been clawing back their gun rights for the last two decades or so. That’s the trend.

    I disagree completely; “ordnance” is a very important element; “organization” cannot overcome the advantage of a government monopoly on armor, armor piercing ammo and machine guns, for example.

    My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings. The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace))。

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I’ve barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert.

    IIRC there have also been several attempts to ban .50 caliber rifles. A .50 caliber rifle isn’t something you use to rob a liquor store or shoot your neighbor with during an argument. It’s something you might use to defeat the level 4 body armor of a standing army or to stop an armored vehicle.

    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.

    I repeat: there is only one barrier to the USG getting its ass kicked by a popular insurgency: the populace isn’t remotely interested in mounting an insurgency. At all.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Harold Smith
    , @Dr. X
  124. Svigor 说:

    Achmed, old boy, see the post #34 above yours–this is precisely why your video game fantasies of gun owners banding together to take territory from the federal (or state) government is childish.

    This is the same kind of idea as that espoused by Timothy McVeigh who somehow believed that after he blew up the Federal office building in Oklahoma, there would be an uprising and a revolution, which was apparently based on a book called the Turner Diaries that was popular at the time.

    McVeigh was a government trained killer whose head became messed up during the Gulf War-like many other victims of that war.

    The reason the federal government, the two-in-one political party and its stooges in the Supreme Court allow the Second Amendment to continue to exist is because they know it is toothless and it provides a useful sop to people like you who are happy and represent no danger to the government as long as they have guns to play soldiers with, just like I played cops and robbers and cowboys and indians with toy guns when I was a child.

    This is a great example of how gobsmackingly stupid Jonathan Mason is. He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument. He’s too stupid to do arithmetic, for God’s sake (1 McVeigh = 168 dead feds, 5,000 McVeighs = x dead feds; can you solve for x, children?)

    It’s constant face-palm-level stupidity from this complete nincompoop.

    • 回复: @Jonathan Mason
  125. @El Dato

    ANFO is not a high explosive and its force is spent a short distance from where it is detonated. You can blow a stump, or move earth with it, but you can’t detonate it at the distance the truck was parked from the Murrah building and do more than break some glass.

    You should avoid trying to discuss subjects you have no knowledge of except to ask questions. Making statements like those you just made reveals your lack of knowledge. Go back to watching movies, but don’t expect to learn anything about explosives.

    • 回复: @Alden
  126. @Svigor

    If it’s apparent that he’s a troll, why feed him? Trolls don’t stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.

  127. Alden 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    Some departments are ok.

    For instance 150 years ago counterfeiting was rampant. The secret service cracked down and its almost non existent. Farmers appreciate the agriculture department. It does all sorts of helpful things.

    FAA makes flying safer than trains and car travel. Social Security administers the only pension system not subject to destruction by corporate raiders and the Wolves of Wall St.

    The crown jewel of the federal government is the national parks and the people who work in them.

    The rest might have some useful function but I can’t think of any right now.

    HUD needs to go. dept of education and EEOC need to go and all present past and employees sent to the gulag. The civil rights division of the DOJ needs to go and all present and past employees sent to the gulag.

    I’m sure there are some other useful federal departments but can’t think of any.

    • 回复: @Truth
    , @Twodees Partain
  128. Alden 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    Thanks for the information. If the truck had a sufficient amount of explosive in it would it be possible to blow up the building the way it did?

    Or would no amount be sufficient?

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  129. J1234 说:

    I’m Not Giving Up My Guns-

    I agree with John…except that I don’t have any guns to give up since I lost all of mine in that big trailer park fire in Mudville last year (just in case someone from the government is reading this.)

    And John, don’t you remember? You lost all of your guns when that big rig you were driving slid off a mountain road in Montana!

  130. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    ….I don’t need combat experience….

    理解。
    You are “educated and well read progressive”.
    Well read as not reading declassified, at least, Army manuals type.

    ….if you’re wearing level 4 body armor and riding around in armored vehicles armed with heavy machine guns, I am at a significant disadvantage if all I have to fight with is a hunting rifle.

    True. You are. Imagine…going into fight at significant disadvantage. Horror concept for “chattering classes” which, somehow, makes the fight for the 2nd even more promising.

    The opponents need to dismount. And approach the building you are in. Their approach being overlooked by several other guys with hunting rifles too. That’s what Five P’s, in combat, are all about. Or METT-T. Having a UNIT. Even with hunting rifles. The stuff you don’t read of course.
    无论如何…
    They need to get into the building. Takes time. All that time “overlooked by….”.
    Then they get in. Awesome. But, that vehicle is out. And the body armor is heavy. And up the stairs/down the stairs they go. On . Unprotected legs. Arms…even face…….12 gauge buckshot for example. And obstacles. Just little IEDs here and there. Etc.
    Say, 12 story building? Just one, OK, make it four.
    Full of civilians that don’t like them at all. Not some far away “towelheads” but Americans. As their family and friends. Just one too soon twitch of the trigger finger and a little American girl goes down. Or a fraction of second too late and he eats buckshot from 5 meters in face?
    Easy for them, a?
    You still think you are at serious disadvantage here?

    …you need some expertise to make and properly deploy IEDs. It’s not a trivial thing…

    I, somehow, believe that in an average Midwest town in USA you can probably find, what, 20 guys who can do that?
    Enough I guess. Or you disagree?

    …it’s your fantasy…

    Oh, I have more.
    One word:defection.
    As a platoon defection. Or guard squad at the depot. I just love that one. A good depot. With plenty of other things in copious amounts. They can even help you and your guys load all that into trucks.
    How about defection of a security detail at factory? Or supply unit moving that, and more, between posts/units?
    你想要更多?

    Re Svigor, below:

    C’mon guys, get it together already

    Well, you could try to put his idiocy in good use. Sort of “message relay” post.
    Besides, he is a proper member of “chattering class”. Good to see them in action. Know your enemy.

  131. peterAUS 说:
    @Svigor

    It’s not organization that’s lacking, it’s will. The US citizenry does not want a revolution. If and when they do (in significant numbers, and for real, not fringe shit talk), the organization will “miraculously” materialize…

    同意。

    As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what? What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night? Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip? (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens, though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).

    同意,直到某一点。

    You guys REAAAAAALLY need to read up on how guerrilla warfare works before you comment any further. I’ve barely spent any time reading about it at all, and I know infinitely more than some of you. Stand-up conventional warfare is simply not on the menu, except for dessert

    Disagree, up to a point.

    And, explanation is coming based on

    Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.

    This is how I see this and it is serious conversation now.
    You approach this as an individual American. You are what/who you are.

    I approach this as, well, not an American but with some experience in the matter.

    So, true, I don’t know you Americans, your heart and soul, hence, my approach (or, well, the approach I’ve seen in action) would maybe not work for you.

    I’ll try to explain by simple scenario:
    A uprising against the government of a county in Midwest. All…of….the…county. From political leadership there to the delivery boy there. Say,at least, 80 % of population. There are always people who will not fight no matter what. Different topic.

    In that scenario, yes, you do need to stop the armored vehicles. You do have to have a serious organization which would, simply, CiC the effort.
    Call this “European approach” if you will.

    You….approach this as “me and my mates and people on the same wavelength” are going against the government.

    Hope I make sense here.

    And, to be perfectly clear: the “county” option has serious chance of success.
    The “my guys” option, IMHO, has not.

  132. @Svigor

    “My God, this place is just thick with know-nothings.”

    Well you’re here knucklehead, so I can’t disagree with that.

    “The USG doesn’t have a monopoly on armor-piercing ammo, dummy! ”

    Yes it does, asshat.

    “You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    If you had a clue, you’d know they’re closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There’s a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    “As for armor, assuming you mean tanks and such, so what?

    I mean anything that soft lead bullets have trouble penetrating, which is lots of things, knucklehead.

    “What good will that armor do? Will it magically prove citizen Joe over there is the insurgent who blew up the bridge last night?”

    So now you want to change the subject again chumpy?

    “Or detonated the IED that killed 20 feds when they went to carry out a “pre-dawn raid” on an empty house they got from a bogus tip?

    What IED would that be? The one you pulled out of your ass?

    ” (if you were talking about personal armor, that’s wrong, too; lots of nice, advanced armor is available to private citizens,”

    The government has plentiful M855A1 and M80A1 steel tipped ammo that will generally penetrate level 3 and level 3+ body armor. That ammo is not generally available to “the people”. That means you’d need level 4 ceramic armor, which is expensive and needs to be replaced after being hit or even dropped.

    Also, the government has a choice of tungsten-carbide-cored ammo including M995 5.56mm and M993 7.62mm ammo that will defeat even level 4 boron carbide rifle plates. Thus the government has a monopoly on AP ammo, and as a practical matter, a monopoly on armor. I hope that clears things up for you, knucklehead.

    “though it’s hardly the sort of thing insurgents would wear (for urban ops, anyway; the idea is to blend in with the populace)).”

    For some reason you and peterAUS want to change the subject. My point was that hardware matters. Of course “organization” matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight. I didn’t mean to imply that the government would necessarily “win” an all out war against “the people”. And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn’t happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    “Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.”

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Twodees Partain
  133. Truth 说:
    @Philalethes

    I suspect Donald Trump doesn’t share my views on every little thing, or Derbyshire’s views. Nevertheless (though I may be wrong) I still think that he is an honest man – i.e. he meant what he said during the election

    A whopping 70 percent of Trump’s statements that PolitiFact checked during the campaign were false, while only 4 percent were completely true, and 11 percent mostly true. (Compare that to the politician Trump dubbed “crooked,” Hillary Clinton: Just 26 percent of her statements were deemed false.)

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/donald-trump-lies-liar-effect-brain-214658

  134. Truth 说:
    @Alden

    Aldey didn’t say all government jobs were held by blacks?

  135. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    “Oh, BTW, US military already, in 90′s produced plenty of documents, from docrinal to small unit tactics about the subject.”

    https://usacac.army.mil/sites/default/files/misc/doctrine/CDG/fms.html

    无限制

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/

    Army Field Manuals

    Make yourself really, REALLY dangerous to TPTB by learning basic infantry skills.

    Project Appleseed – Revolutionary War Veteran’s Association – RWVA.org

    “What has been overlooked in the debate over the combat potential of violent extremists is the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway, and it may generate serious concerns for U.S. security policy in the future if ignored.”

    “The days of imposing America’s will on others with impunity may be over. The diffusion of skills and technology, the increased likelihood of messy urban operations, and the waning political appetite for military adventurism should be sobering to our leadership. ”

    https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  136. @Alden

    According to Brigadier General Benton Partin, who investigated the bombing, no amount of ANFO placed that far out in front of the building could have done what the actual planted charges did. Main support columns were cut. That had to be accomplished with cutting charges placed on the columns.

    https://100777.com/node/106

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/PARTIN/ok8.htm

    There are lots of statements by General Partin archived online.

  137. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Well, maybe I was too harsh re that “chattering class”.
    也许。

    My point was that hardware matters.

    Of course it does. Just doesn’t in the way you were saying.
    A lot of other things matter too, even more.
    TERRAIN for example.

    Of course “organization” matters too, but Dr. X was wrong IMO to give hardware so little weight.

    Or maybe you give hardware too much weight?
    Tanks in rural, power.
    Tanks in CBD, not so much.

    I didn’t mean to imply that the government would necessarily “win” an all out war against “the people”.

    好。

    And all this speculation as to what would or wouldn’t happen in such a conflict is a waste of time.

    Ah……..没有.
    That is exactly what should be done, again and again, all the time.

    Interestingly how the Governments of the world, and especially “armed wings” of those governments do that all the time.
    What and what can and can’t happen with this/that potential enemy, threat, situation.
    Constant re-evaluation of all that; constant updating of processes and procedures; constant equipment upgrades, organizational/unit reorganizations; constant exercises/
    Constant effort.

    I mean, of course that governments can and should do that but citizens can’t, or shouldn’t, a?
    “Trust us, don’t worry”.

    “You have no chance, just give up on that.”
    Sort of cancels each other up, a?

  138. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Yup……

    …the diffusion of something much more rudimentary and potentially more lethal: basic infantry skills. These include coordinated small-team tactical maneuvers supported by elementary marksmanship. The diffusion of such tactics seems to be underway….

    对。
    Platoon level unit in urban environment. “Brick” as a basic element. Skip the squad/section level. Something between Marine 13 men squad and “common” platoon. 4-6 bricks with command element.

    …the increased likelihood of messy urban operations…

    And those “messy” in foreign lands. Even that not easy re “collateral damage”.
    On US soil…whoah……I’d expect.
    Precise vs intense. Precise, of course, on US soil. So, of course, heavy hardware out.

    Small unit combat in MOUT. Hostile environment for attacker, friendly for defender.
    Psychological over physical, for both sides.

    Team against team, in high rises/underground places.
    The will to endure and win.

    That’s, IMHO, is the game.

  139. @Sandy Berger's Socks

    And this is how the ProgLeft has taken over. They may squabble, but they can circle the wagons behind a moat of atomic level bullshît and agitprop with military precision.

    Our side hits a small bump, and people are ready to vote for Kamala Harris to “send a message”, or just sit the election out (same effect), and do more damage than anything Trump could do if he tried.

    This is Trump doing his art of the deal routine like he’s been doing forever. Sweet feathery Jesus will the midwit gammas on the right clue in already?

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  140. @Harold Smith

    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren’t full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  141. Svigor 说:

    If it’s apparent that he’s a troll, why feed him? Trolls don’t stay on discussion boards where they are ignored. I put him on ignore as soon as I read one of his little retarded posts, which are, BTW, just rehashed talking points that his kind have been using online since the mid 1990s.

    Cuz this is 乌兹网 and he’s gonna get fed. I say, feed this one nothing but shit.

    If you had a clue, you’d know they’re closer to hollow points than they are to actual AP ammo, goofball. There’s a reason why the army replaced M855 with M855A1.

    Yeah I’m sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech.

    Rest was TL;DR. You’re a dumb fuck.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  142. @Inque Yutani

    Whatever, Inque. This “art of the deal” shit is useless, especially in the case of someone like Trump who will make a really bad deal just to make a deal. Face it; Trump wasn’t playing 3D chess or making a deal, he was totally out of his depth, behaving like a moron on national TV.

    It may be time for you to face the fact that you’re backing a mongoloid. Another fact to face is that there is no political solution to the current problem with government, at least not with the current political system.

  143. Svigor 说:

    Haha…you…idiots…with that fixation to guerrilla warfare. I could be a relic from Cold War but you…idiots…are still fixated on South Asia and South America engagements.

    I use “guerrilla warfare” to refer, broadly, to fourth generation warfare.

    Dipshits think the USG will gain any advantage from tanks, or guided missiles, etc. They won’t. It’s like talking about how the USG will automatically win in Vietnam and Afghanistan because they have nukes. Stupid.

    Not that air supremacy is nothing, mind you; it’s a big plus tracking tangos.

    If the nitwits here had a clue, they’d be talking about the USG’s digital advantage, not how many tanks they can pile into the Fulda Gap. But they don’t; they’re nitwits.

  144. Realist 说:

    “National Question, every current political alternative to Trump is far worse.”

    Exactly and that is why our country is doomed. Even if an excellent candidate came along who would finance him/her? The Deep State will never allow this country to be governed. for the masses

  145. Svigor 说:

    “Why would a domestic insurgency care one whit about stopping an armored vehicle? Serious question. What would the armored vehicle be doing, that needed stopping? This is a serious question, I would like an answer, because I can’t think of anything.”

    LOL! Seriously? Maybe you could ask the Iraqis.

    Saw this dangling dingleberry hanging off you crap pile of a post. Come on, be specific, stupid, so we can really see how stupid you are. Tell us all about how teh Mytee US gubbmint is gonna use MBTs on US soil against…who? The guy who they say is a terrorist, but who denies it and has no weapons or military equipment in his house? This isn’t Iraq, you moron. The USG can’t just order a city evacuated and then bomb the crap out of it on the assumption that anyone left is an insurgent (for one thing, American insurgents will all leave with the civilian population, like they’ve got 2 brain cells to rub together).

  146. Svigor 说:

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.

    You dumb fuck.

    • 回复: @Miro23
  147. Svigor 说:

    PeterAUS, if we’re dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is “conspiratorial insurgency.” There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  148. Svigor 说:

    Words, memes, and ideas are powerless in the face of this. We’re not going to get a country made in our image by asking nicely.

    错误。

    Words, images, memes, and ideas are the only way to convince the people to mount a violent revolution.
    Words, images, memes, and ideas are the only way to convince the people to mount a non-violent revolution.

    Either way, getting the people into a revolutionary state of mind is the only way. This is why I think the people who insist “no way out through non-violent means” are either morons, or fantasists, or establishment trolls offering deliberately counter-productive advice. They’re full of shit, or selling a product.

    We are in a mind-war, period. You can’t have a revolution of any kind until the people have a revolutionary mind-set. We don’t have that yet, so we have to build one. The naysayers are just idiots, trolls, or lazy fucks who don’t want to do the grind work.

  149. @Svigor

    “Yeah I’m sure A1 is a quantum leap in armor-piercing tech.”

    As if the unfounded opinion of an ignorant asshole such as yourself should carry any weight.

    “Rest was TL;DR. You’re a dumb fuck.”

    Which is more than enough to show you up, goofball.

  150. Svigor 说:

    For most body armor, no AP is needed. FMJ ammunition in .30 cal or better in a high powered rifle will do. Those ceramic plates aren’t full body coverage, usually just an insert front and back over the heart area. A hit outside the area of the plate will wound or kill.

    Armored vehicles are a different matter, of course.

    How much armor, how many tanks and APCs, etc., did the Irish destroy in whupping the Brits’ ass and sending them packing? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that the answer is “zero.” Armor is irrelevant to the discussion. Fighter jets are irrelevant to the discussion. Carrier groups and nuclear subs are irrelevant to the fucking discussion.

    FFS, learn about 4th generation warfare, people.

  151. peterAUS 说:

    Come on, be specific, stupid, so we can really see how stupid you are. Tell us all about how teh Mytee US gubbmint is gonna use MBTs on US soil against…who? The guy who they say is a terrorist, but who denies it and has no weapons or military equipment in his house? This isn’t Iraq, you moron.

    Well…there is a point there I am afraid.

    MBT is just a tool. In fact, a very versatile and precise tool. Actually, a perfect tool for taking out a serous threat even in MOUT. Takes skills, of course, and careful coordination with other elements, but, tank is the thing for sure.

    How about this (from “overseas” for you):

    A bunch, of say, 20, freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on who’s describing them) attacked a local police station. A local guys from that town, simply got together and whacked the station. A rapid response paramilitary police team got them while retreating with loot. They pinned the police and holed up in a local compound.
    Now, a compound with high stone walls and a couple of stone/concrete buildings, with cellars.
    More police came, made a cordon around. Standoff. Occasional shooting but no moves.
    So…what now?
    Negotiations to surrender won’t work (we aren’t talking about Western justice system here).
    Assault, well, this isn’t Hollywood.
    Waiting them out won’t work either. In fact, while that is going here and focus of the State is here, it is given that the coming night some raid will happen somewhere else.
    Or even get police from behind.
    This needs closing fast. Initiative and such.

    Police chief calls the Army unit close by. The Colonel commanding sets of with two tanks and two APCs (and combat support vehicles, not important).
    A short command brief, quick orders and….tanks roll to point blank range and blast the entrance. Breach done.
    Tanks and APC suppress, with MG fire (with the rest of police/soldiers there) the compound.
    Assault team gets in.
    Tanks get in.
    Another point blank into a house. Assault moves in.
    Another point blank one step ahead of assault. Rinse and repeat.
    完成。

    Well..collateral damage and such, but, that’s it.

    So…it can be done.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  152. @Svigor

    He thinks that mentioning McVeigh in this context is good for his argument.

    Well, McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls and were all obsessed with conspiracy theories, so they would have fitted right in with many posters on this blog. McVeigh apparently made part of his living selling weapons at gun shows.

    Fortier seems to have gone quiet now, McVeigh was executed, and Nichols is still is prison, but if they were around today they would no doubt be posting the same bile under pseudonyms on the Internet.

    • 回复: @Hippopotamusdrome
  153. peterAUS 说:
    @Svigor

    PeterAUS, if we’re dropping nomenclature to put people on the proper research path, the term is “conspiratorial insurgency.” There are no squads, or sections, or platoons, there are cells. In urban areas, anyway.

    哦,我明白了。
    My previous post/comment about “overseas” vs “American” approach to the issue addresses that.

    We are, effectively, talking about two different things here.
    Very, very different.

    To, again, clarify:
    My approach is, a “county level insurrection/whatever”. Emphasize on 所有 该县的。
    Well..at least…at least a decent town with surrounding settlements.
    One decent town and several smaller towns even better. In essence, a self-governing entity.

    Two counties even better. Three …four..more is merrier.
    A state…..perfect. 国民警卫 等等。
    无论如何。

    That entity is on the rise against the State. 所有的, from its leadership to the Council toilet cleaner.

    That’s the premise I start from in my approach to the true purpose of the 2nd.

    My position is that the insurrection of that type, with available “tools”, has a high chance of success.
    With clear political vision (which is the foundation of the insurrection), proper organization, and with at least a week to get ready for a serious confrontation, yes, I believe it would work.
    Of course, there are million variables here, but, that’s the gist.

    Your option, well………haven’t thought much about it.
    随便你怎么做。

  154. Svigor 说:

    Harold, you ignorant fuck, civilians can buy level 3 and level 4 body armor. Towelheads have been running around in the sandbox wearing it.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  155. Svigor 说:

    Well, McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls and were all obsessed with conspiracy theories, so they would have fitted right in with many posters on this blog. McVeigh apparently made part of his living selling weapons at gun shows.

    And Nazis and Commies were all gun-grabbers, so they fit right in with you, you stupid fuck.

  156. Svigor 说:

    Who doesn’t have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren’t tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  157. Svigor 说:

    A bunch, of say, 20, freedom fighters/terrorists (depending on who’s describing them) attacked a local police station. A local guys from that town, simply got together and whacked the station. A rapid response paramilitary police team got them while retreating with loot. They pinned the police and holed up in a local compound.

    So don’t get bogged down with loot, like an idiot. Make better escape plans. Hell, attacking a local police station isn’t even a good idea (especially not in places thick with military forces). Local police aren’t your natural enemies, the goal should be to get them to back off and leave it to you and the central gov’t. Bribes, beatings, that’s how to deal with local PDs.

    But, sure, yes, in that limited scenario, a tank is useful. But once a group of insurgents is surrounded, that’s pretty much it, tank or no tank. The goal is not to get surrounded, ever. It would make no sense for the insurgents to send good men after bad in an attempt to take the tank out.

  158. @Twodees Partain

    I agree that their body armor doesn’t make them invincible. But it’s an advantage they have, and it continues to evolve and improve over time, i.e. more coverage, higher threat level protection and lighter weight. (I’ve seen DOD studies showing that their body armor significantly reduces casualties).

    They also have the new M855A1 and M80A1 ammo which is another advantage. There are a couple of youtubers who got some from gunbroker or somewhere and did some testing. M855A1 seems to be far more “barrier blind” than M855, and leaves a nasty wound channel. I’d really like to get some, but the feds seem to be going out of their way to keep it off the market.

    The ATF tried to ban M855 ammo a few years ago but they failed. I believe they did it not because of M855 per se, but because they were trying to prospectively prevent the introduction of steel (or even tungsten alloy) tipped ammo to the civilian market.

    The law banning AP ammo by its terms bans any bullets with a steel or tungsten heavy alloy (WHA) core, but it doesn’t apply to bullet designs with a steel or WHA tip. And once the army started testing the new bullets and saw how effective they were, the “government” realized that there was a whole class of ammo with a hardened tip which was technically not illegal, so they tried to expand the scope of the ban by a ridiculous construction of the law, but luckily it failed.

  159. Svigor 说:

    The idea of 4th generation warfare is to level the playing field by hiding among the populace (get that? HIDING?), avoiding the enemy’s strength, hitting him where he’s soft, and slowly bleeding him of resources until he says fuck it, I’d rather strike a deal, concede this shithole territory I hate anyway, and leave. Not get in a bunch of stand-up fights that his military was designed for. Hell, I could easily see a successful insurgency targeting infrastructure exclusively, or almost exclusively, reserving attacks on people for only the softest, juiciest targets (assassinations vs. high-value targets, etc.).

  160. @Svigor

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as I already explained to you, standard issue M855A1 or M80A1 ammo will defeat level 3 body armor, and military issue M995 and M993 AP ammo will defeat level 4 body armor, you ignorant fuck. And there are various manufacturers who make saboted WHA ammo which will also defeat level 4 armor, but only cops and military can buy it, you ignorant fuck.

    • 回复: @Thomm
  161. Svigor 说:

    My position is that the insurrection of that type, with available “tools”, has a high chance of success.

    Yeah, I dunno about that, never given it much thought. It seems to me that where there’s a will, there’s a way. Given the current regime, a State could probably secede using only non-violent means, if it was determined enough. Meaning, as determined as the Irish were; the determination of 一个人, not an organization or a subculture or a polity, but 一个人.

  162. @Svigor

    “Who doesn’t have access to explosives? I love that. Like there aren’t tons of chemists in the USA who are perfectly capable of whipping up high explosives. People in this country build drones in their garages FFS.”

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck, as usual, you have no idea what you’re talking about. It’s one thing to make a few pounds of ETN, PETN, RDX, etc., but where will you get it in any quantity?

  163. Wow, just Wow!!!! Mass delusion is rampant in these neck of the woods anymore. Trump is a New Yorker through and through and was openly a Democrat at the turn of the 21st century, then seemed to change as the conservative anger at Obama surged. The guy is the consummate pitch man, especially if he is the product. He got some traction with the birth certificate issue and was the only GOP candidate to actually speak to flyover country’s fears, thus did the impossible. He is a Trojan horse folks, just like GWB was for the most part, as well as Obama. You actually can go back to Bubba as well. Conservatives are frigging losers, because they just want to keep things as they are. Life and history are never static, and that is why radicals usually are the ones that change things(usually for the worse). Question to you. What is actually salvageable with the current political system? All you need is a ton of \$\$\$\$\$\$\$\$ to get elected anymore and have international finance on your side. The waste of space that we voted for really hasn’t done anything and probably for all purposes has destroyed the GOP for good after all is said and done. I was going to abstain from voting back in November 2016, as both candidates were a total embarrassment to this nation, but the specter of HRC called me into action, thus I voted for the orange haired one. I will never cast a vote again. It is a total waste of time with the current setup and the lineup of bums we have to choose from. If Oprah does run in 2020, I think she has a decent shot. At least she comes off as somewhat respectable. The Twitter in Chief is just too much anymore and too dumb to properly defend himself. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t run in 2020.

  164. peterAUS 说:

    Yeah, I dunno about that, never given it much thought.

    Well, that’s very good.
    It means we have a very good exchange of thoughts and ideas here.
    Hail free speech, a?

    It seems to me that where there’s a will, there’s a way.

    可能是真的。
    Still, a careful consideration of all variables and scenarios helps where serious topics are concerned.
    Not much error margin, I am afraid, there.

    I guess as an American you have that optimism and self-confidence other people don’t.
    The catch is to balance it with a heavy dose of reality.

    In such cases, I use the method hammered into me as a young man:
    Play………..the……….scenario.
    Even better, do it with a couple of guys; “red” vs “blue”.

    Given the current regime, a State could probably secede using only non-violent means, if it was determined enough.

    Well…….that is the thing, I guess, “resolved” in 1865 at your place.

    Meaning, as determined as the Irish were; the determination of a people, not an organization or a subculture or a polity, but a people.

    Irish 1916 or Irish 1921…a difference.

    I believe that US approach to the subject would be American.
    It would take a more or less culturally homogeneous territorial entity (say, with a clear majority of one ethnic/cultural group) to do that.

    In plain language, it would be seen as “people insurrection” even by the staunchest of opponents.

    Your option, well, easy to define as a “terrorist” cell.
    Taking into account the power of the state at the moment I wouldn’t give those cells much of a future. Survival, perhaps. Success, no.

    That “territorial entity” would be totally another beast.

    And, here we’ve come to the actual examples of all that.
    The funny part I must say. Sorry about that, but it is funny.

    The perfect real example to look up at would be….. get ready, deep breath:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatist_forces_of_the_war_in_Donbass

    I do know how that sounds for the most of “gun guys” in USA, but, that’s my 2 cents here.

    I am not saying the exact example, of course, but the best real life example with the most quality to learn from.
    At the moment. If/when the regime in Kiev takes them on, even better.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  165. Reg Cæsar 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    There is no need for gun control, just people control, like stopping people who are potentially dangerous from having guns…

    …or voting. Let’s be consistent.

  166. Masintenn 说:

    Don’t despair, Derb! Trump is playing the long game, part of which requires stealing issues from the Dims. Personally, i think it’s genius.

    He offers a dreamer deal….dimms decline.

    He’ll offer some gun control concessions…..dimms will decline. Note that the “take the guns” comment was in relation to mental cases and that law enforcement ALWAYS takes action first then goes to court second.

    At this point, although they don’t realize it, the dimms have lost these issues. Sure, they’ll accuse him of hating alien kids and bowing to the NRA, but the people will see through it.

    Meanwhile, wall prototypes are being built, ICE is stomping on necks, the economy is doing great, we haven’t entered new wars, young conservative judges are being seated, etc.

    And I’m enjoying a hot cup of leftist tears….. all thanks to Donald J Trump!

  167. Dr. X 说:
    @Svigor

    You can buy armor-piercing ammo by the case and have it delivered right to your doorstep. What do you think green tips are? Hollow points?

    You haven’t been paying much attention to the gun-banners, have you? New York and California (60 million residents combined) have completely banned ammo sales outside of licensed retail establishments. We’re not just talking so-called “AP” either (which green tip really is not, unlike, say, .30 cal black tip) — I mean common stuff like .22 LR. Ditto for Washington, D.C., where SWAT will roll and do a no-knock raid for as little as a single 12 gauge shell.

    They’re already implementing ammo bans and magazine bans along with gun bans. You can get seven years in NY for possessing an 11-round magazine.

    A LOT of guys are going to go to bed one night thinking they have Second Amendment rights, and are going to wake up the next morning with nothing but their dicks in their hands if they don’t start paying attention to what’s already been happening.

  168. Just bury your guns out in the middle of nowhere and tell them you sold all of them years ago.
    🙂

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
    , @Truth
  169. Reg Cæsar 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    You’ve never read the 14th amendment, obviously. It establishes birthright citizenship in plain language. It isn’t “questionable” at all.

    How does “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” apply to individuals who implicitly reject that jurisdiction?

    If is right, then 普莱西 must also be. They were supported and dissented to by the same individual justices.

  170. Reg Cæsar 说:
    @Joe Franklin

    第 14 修正案如何威胁枪支权利?

    How do you reconcile “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” with “No free negro or mulatto shall be suffered to possess any firelock…”? How do you get equality between a race that must be armed and one that must not?

    这个圈子可能是完整的,也可能不是完整的,但它永远是不成方形的。

  171. @peterAUS

    Cops with armored vehicles are everywhere these days.

    http://www.ktvz.com/news/officers-in-armored-vehicle-shoot-kill-sherwood-gunman/685242543

    A few weeks ago not far from where I am a poor elderly person couldn’t pay the confiscatory property tax anymore for the house he lived in all his life. So the tax claim bureau sold his house at a tax sale. The elderly person refused to leave the house and wouldn’t/couldn’t pay the new “owner” rent.

    So the cops came with an armored vehicle equipped with a battering ram. As they were approaching the house with the vehicle, the elderly person killed himself.

    But it seems every county now has armored vehicles, and one of the local SWAT team cops showed me the AP ammo he had for his M4. He had several boxes of this stuff:

    https://modernarmsinternational.com/shop/60gr-ap/

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  172. Reg Cæsar 说:
    @anarchyst

    There is NO WAY that a “fertilizer bomb” could wreak the destruction that the building sustained

    The citizens of Bath, Michigan, will politely disagree:

    https://www.biography.com/people/andrew-kehoe-235986

    • 回复: @Hippopotamusdrome
  173. Repeat after me. It doesn’t matter what he says. It matters what he does.

  174. @European-American

    … I quite like it here on Unz. Just in this case I guess I disagree with him and with many of the commenters. I hope that doesn’t lead to my eviction.

    Eviction, hell! If you write too much really stupid stuff here, Ron Unz will get you your own column.
    .
    .

    (I didn’t mean “you” personally, E-A.)

    • 哈哈: European-American, Truth
  175. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    Just to add a bit.

    A scenario. A far fetched, probably, but plausible.

    The Government announces something like this:
    “Blah..blah….buy back of AR-15 type of firearms…blah…blah….3 months….blah…blah….After that period illegal….blah…blah”.

    Well…..taking into account, apparently, that huge number of guys who are willing to oppose that by force or arms (“cold hands” and such), is it plausible that one US town and surroundings, just one, gets taken over by people who would actually try to oppose that?
    One….only. Not more than 50 000 citizens. In all of the USA.

    Plausible or not?

    If yes, well, my “option” (or that “overseas” option) works.
    If not….well…..what’s the point of opposing that move really?
    The huge majority of US citizens doesn’t care then. Hence, those who care are small minority.

    As such minority, going against the full power of USA, is simply suicidal.

    Not only that, but, what exactly those would be willing to fight for? For society that doesn’t exist anymore, I think.
    Hence, what’s their goal then? To overthrow the government, almost impossible (nothing is truly impossible), but then what? Force that very society to remake itself into what they want?
    Well……that sounds a bit……..totalitarian, to say the least.

    I think that the “cell” approach belongs to that category I am afraid.

    Can’t see it differently.

    Now, all that opens the real interesting issue in all this (as mentioned by one of comments here), but there we, or better Americans, are.

  176. Joe Stalin 说:

    You can buy .30 sabots to manufacture your own armor-piercing ammunition using a 5.56mm bullet of your own choice. \$14.95/100

    https://www.eabco.net/Accelerator-Type-Sabots-for-30-Caliber-Cartridges-100_p_13645.html

    A legal AP bullet from the USG standpoint could be one constructed from Molybdenum on a lathe; very hard.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  177. Joe Stalin 说:

    Smokeless powder can be detonated as a high explosive using the appropriate sized detonators and thus is able to be incorporated into a shaped charge.

    http://guns.connect.fi/gow/nitro.html

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  178. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    我知道。

    I’ve been watching, with my own eyes, slowly but steady, militarization of police for quite some time now.
    The ..almost sick….situation is that I, as ex-military, have been having problem with that.
    My “chattering class” acquaintances haven’t even been registering that. And when I pointed to them they simply didn’t care.
    They care for a lost cat. They have masters and PhDs in related matters. And they simply do not register that. The……educated…….elite.

    Besides, one of commentators here already pointed to that: the state will KILL you if you disobey. They’ll follow the line of escalation in fast and smooth line.

    But, it’s all relative.

    The very same police team/vehicle/tactics wouldn’t have worked in different setup.

    Say, that “insurrection” thing.
    Just an isolated farm, concrete walls, cellar. Several persons with firearms.
    It wouldn’t have been any charging with the battering ram then.
    But, yes, they’d call the Army if wanting to take that farm out on their way further into the “insurrection territory”.
    Tanks……….but even with tanks, if people know what they are doing it wouldn’t be a cakewalk. Yes, shell in, assault follows. Who knows what can happen in those 15 seconds on entry? First or second guy down? Both? Precision is a tricky thing.
    Escalate in intense? Frag in with entry on full auto?
    Don’t think so, on US soil. Even that has risks for the assault team.
    Escalate further? Thermobarics, regular or improvised (“house guest” from Falujah). On American soil, against American extended family?
    Then, why stop there? Just drop a bomb/missile and obliterate the place.
    Really don’t think so.

    The point I’ve been trying to make in all this topic is very simple: force the Government to go to war against people. A proper war.
    And, something just tells me it wouldn’t.

  179. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    Proggy logic.

    Evolution stopped 10,000 yrs ago, and there are no significant differences among races. Indeed, races don’t even exist, and we are all the same. We are just like people 10,000 yrs ago, and no amount of divergences in geography, diet, and mating patterns made any difference among humanity. Whether Nigerian, Swede, Russian, Arab, Chinese, Mexican native, or Amazonian Indian, we are all the same.

    For some reason, humanity became immutable and unchangeable since 10,000 yrs ago.

    AND YET…

    you can mutate from a man to a woman if you put on a wig, a dress, and say your penis and balls are female organs.

  180. Only way people will be civilized if we forge back plows into swords, and throw away all nukes and shooting things.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  181. Miro23 说:
    @Svigor

    In the type of insurgency you would get (if Americans were looking to deliver one), the insurgents WANT MBTs rolling through the streets, bulldozing houses, shelling neighborhoods. The insurgency’s ranks would swell by millions in short order.

    That’s true enough – deep states with effective intelligence services are good at propaganda and picking off individual dissidents, but get into trouble when the violence is too visible. The best example is probably Ceaușescu’s Romania.

    证券化:

    In the 1980s, the Securitate (Deep State) launched a massive campaign to stamp out dissent in Romania, manipulating the country’s population with vicious rumors (such as supposed contacts with Western intelligence agencies), machinations, frame-ups, public denunciations, encouraging conflict between segments of the population, public humiliation of dissidents, toughened censorship and the repression of even the smallest gestures of independence by intellectuals. ….. Assassinations were also used to silence dissent.

    以及如何结束:

    As anti-government protesters demonstrated in Timișoara in December 1989, he (Ceaușescu) perceived the demonstrations as a political threat and ordered military forces to open fire on 17 December, causing many deaths and injuries. The revelation that Ceaușescu was responsible resulted in a massive spread of rioting and civil unrest across the country. The demonstrations, which reached Bucharest, became known as the Romanian Revolution—the only violent upheaval of a communist government in the turn of the Revolutions of 1989. Ceaușescu and his wife, Elena, fled the capital in a helicopter, but were captured by the armed forces after the armed forces changed sides. On 25 December, after being tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide, They were immediately executed by firing squad.

    维基百科:“证券化”和“尼古拉·齐奥塞斯库”

    • 回复: @Miro23
    , @Twodees Partain
  182. Thomm 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Svigor, you ignorant fuck,

    Understatement of the week.

    Note that Svigor actually RHYMES with ‘wigger’, which is what he is.

    呵呵呵呵呵

    • 回复: @Truth
  183. @Harold Smith

    I think he had a pretty good idea of what the consequences were. All US presidents kill. It goes with the job. It seems naïve not to acknowledge that. Or a double standard. Are you not aware that US policy has claimed innocent lives every year since the US was founded? It’s a sad, but apparently inevitable fact related to being a powerful nation in a violent world.

    To paraphrase the old joke, we have already established what kind of man a president is. Now we are just haggling over policy choices. It’s too early to tell if Trump’s body count will equal Bush’s or even Obama’s. I hope he is smart and lucky enough that it will be lower.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  184. I agree, in principle, with the concept of dumping Trump; this has been clear to me not long into his presidency. Trump has pretty much cucked on everything he committed to during his election campaign and in his inaugural speech.
    But what is the alternative? Do you know of any national figure who is honest, intelligent AND patriotic who could replace him AND want the job?

    How do we save Trumpism from Trump? Let’s think about this first and in the meantime SPEAK UP.

  185. @Svigor

    Yes, I know Mason’s an idiot; his ‘reasoning’ as such is nonexistent. He’s also a troll, but an earnest troll in the sense that I think he truly believes in the positions he takes. I don’t address him out of anger, hence my lack of vitriol (I rarely get mad on the internet)—but I do enjoy mocking crap reasoning (and syntax) if the person deserves it.

    • 回复: @Jonathan Mason
  186. Its actually getting pretty boring watching the fools injure themselves jumping off the Trumptrain every time our reality TV star president says something to the Fake News cameras. Its almost as if some people refuse to learn anything despite watching the same lesson time after time after time. Try imaging that Trump is the president of the United States, that this is an election year, and that not all voters have the same opinions as you. Then watch Trump tell the cameras that he supports everyone’s position. Wake me up when the Republican controlled Congress puts a gun control bill on Trump’s desk in an election year.

    Also, if Trump’s so dumb, how has he has accomplished so much more than you?

  187. @Altan Goldman

    I’m going to encourage Steve King (Republican House Member from Iowa) to run against Trump in 2020.

    • 回复: @Truth
  188. @redmudhooch

    Yeah, but burying your guns is giving them up. You’re just choosing to give them up to whatever random stranger finds them before you come back, instead of to the “authorities”.

  189. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Oh, you mean like back in the days of Genghis Khan and Attila. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

  190. @Miro23

    Good points, and also the main point stands that Romanians were mostly disarmed. The “armed forces” were made up of Romanians, just as the US military is made up of Americans, for the most part. The hard core SF units will have some psychopaths in their ranks who will welcome “getting some trigger time” at the expense of their fellow Americans, but many, even among the SF, will balk at fighting civilians.

    Just as Congress is somewhat divided over civilian disarmament, so is the military (and police forces) divided over who will be seen as the enemy in a civil war, and likely to a greater extent than the political class.

    • 回复: @Miro23
  191. @Altan Goldman

    True, Altan. If Trump is dumped in the 2020 campaign, there may be a chance at getting someone better. If Trump is removed before his term is up, we’ll end up with Pence, who is as much the AntiTrump as Hillary, just a little different cosmetically.

    Who knows, maybe Trump will convert to Trumpism, though Trumpism is alien to his nature.

    • 不同意: freebird
  192. @Joe Stalin

    I’ve tried that with a .300 Blackout using those sabots from eabco.

    But just using 5.56 mm bullets won’t work any better that say M193 ammo, unless the bullets themselves are “AP”.

    My idea, for a start, was to use maraging steel (which is expensive but has excellent physical properties and is fairly easy to harden with the little induction heater I built).

    But before I tried the lathe-turned steel projectiles, I tried 5.56 mm 55 grain FMJ bullets, just to test the sabots by themselves.

    And that’s where I encountered the first problem. I couldn’t even get on paper at 50 yards.

    I think the problem was the wrong primer and powder combination. I’m going to try again when the weather improves, but it looks like it will not be easy.

  193. @Alden

    I still think that they are all incompetent, and that all of them operate outside their own boundaries. Here’s a really big big problem: these departments and their agencies can issue regulations that have the force of law.

    They aren’t even part of the legislative branch, but they can send federal agents to your house to enforce some regulation that you don’t even know exists. They can make a natural herb that you use instead of an expensive medication illegal with the stroke of a pen and without even announcing the ban.

    That makes them dangerous, especially since they are made up of do-nothing fuckoffs, but they are also led by political appointees who are out to advance their own influence and feather their own nests via salaries and retirement benefits.

    Of course these welfare queen farmers love them some DoA and the checks they get for not planting this or that. That doesn’t make the department competent or even legal under the constitution.

  194. freebird 说:

    Yes by all means if you want to hold onto you’re guns then dump Trump and go with Hillary or Bernie. Or some other left-wing wacko. That would be a very smart move and would prove you’re point. Sort of like saying that Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that man can never learn anything from history.

  195. KenH 说:

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    “A well regulated state and local police force and national guard, being necessary to the monopoly of force over the people by state and federal government, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as long as they are members of said local, state or federal police forces, shall not be infringed. Private ownership of firearms may be exercised subject to strict guidelines set forth by elected representatives in conjunction with the ADL, SPLC, World Jewish Congress, CNN, cat ladies and university SJW’s and may be rescinded at any time for any reason.”

    They also say the second amendment only covers guns in service at the time it was written in the 18th century which means DHS, FBI and all state and local police forces must destroy their high tech weaponry and utilize only muzzle loading long guns and flintock pistols with black powder ball ammo.

    Using this shitlib and Jew logic, only those who exercise freedom of speech using dip pens and iron gall ink on parchment or hemp paper are legally protected under the first amendment since those were tools of writing used at the time the Constitution was ratified. The use of any other tool or medium to express oneself other than those specified are subject to arrest and hate crime charges since you would need a permit from government to express thoughts they may not like.

  196. freebird 说:
    @Altan Goldman

    Well people like you could always demand the Obama run again ——– in you’re la la land he is a viable alternative. And he accomplished oh so much in his almost decade in office on the economy, gun control, illegal immigration etc.

  197. anarchyst 说:
    @European-American

    If you trust ANY mainstream media poll, my friend, you are delusional. The way a question is presented has a direct impact on the polling response. For example, if the question asked is: “Are you against gun violence?” Most people will answer “yes”. The polling organization and its sponsors will then declare that the responses are “proof” that most people favor gun control.
    Polling organizations cannot be trusted.

  198. @Joe Stalin

    I don’t know if the owner of this site would want this discussion to go into very much detail on this subject so I’ll just keep it general.

    I’ve seen several research papers where the velocity of detonation (VOD) of various single and double base smokeless powders was tested under various conditions, e.g., confinement, charge diameter, type of initiator (blasting cap or electric match), etc.

    IIRC, under optimal conditions, most of the powders were in the range of 4 to 5 km/sec, but there was one paper that found a VOD for one particular fast burning double base powder to be in the range of 6 to 7 km/sec, but the test setup the authors used in that paper may have introduced some error.

    Anyway, on the page you linked is shown Vhitavuori N310, a fast burning single based (nitrocellulose) powder. The author claims that it works for shaped charges (and that seems plausible, IMO), but he doesn’t go into much detail, and the devil is in the details. For example if you stick the detonator into the charge too far, the detonation wave may not be a plane wave when it encounters the liner and that will seriously degrade the performance.

    In general it seems that for maximum effectiveness, both jet-producing and EFP type shaped charges require high VOD explosives, good design and high precision in construction (i.e., uniformity of explosive charge density, accurate placement of the liner, etc.).

    I’m certainly no expert on it but there is some discussion between various people experimenting with it over at sciencemadness and from the results of their experiments it seems that it’s not something that you just slap together if you’re after decent performance.

  199. Rbel 说:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer. The term shooter is used by the left to downplay the culpability of the murderer and turn it toward the gun itself. A person target shooting at the range is a shooter.

  200. @KenH

    on parchment or hemp paper

    hemp papers – Check.

  201. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    I am surprised at you Jenn-Erick, I thought you were one of the more intelligent posters here, but perhaps not. I guess when you run with the sheep for long enough you start to think that “two legs bad, four legs good” is a witty comment

    那些不记得过去的人会被谴责重复过去。

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

  202. @Rbel

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    Gunman would be better.

  203. @European-American

    It absolutely doesn’t “go with the job” for any morally competent person. Why is it so hard for some people to differentiate between legitimate self-defense and immoral crimes of aggression?

    If a private person in this society treated other people the way the U.S. “government” treats people in other countries (and increasingly, people in the U.S.), that person would be institutionalized or executed.

    I don’t have any moral right to kill you and steal your wallet, right? If I got together with another person, we wouldn’t have any moral right to rob and kill you. Even if 1000 of us got together we still wouldn’t have any right to use violence against you. So where does the U.S. “government” get the supernatural authority to mass-murder people all over the world?

    • 同意: RadicalCenter
  204. @KenH

    This is what Jonathan Mason and shitlib, inc. see when they read the second amendment:

    Actually what I see is some archaic language written by the in-power politicians of the time as a kind of manifesto, some of which is highly relevant today and other parts of which are not so much.

    It is largely a knockoff of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which was published 2 years earlier.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

    It has always been a struggle to understand exactly what was meant and what the Founders anticipated. For example was birthright citizenship intended to clarify the status of former slaves, or was it intended to encourage birth tourism? What exactly did the Founders think about self-driving stagecoaches?

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Logan
  205. @Jonathan Mason

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    Gunman would be better.

    Yeah, like Timothy McVeigh, right?

  206. @Jonathan Mason

    … but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.

    See, this is what I meant whether I questioned whether you were possibly a woman commenter about a week back. It’s all emotional to you. I! GET! THAT! LADY! [/Carlson]

    Why don’t you stay out of Floridian’s and American’s business about defending the principles that this nation was founded on? “Shall not be infringed”, get it? I told you it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking. You haven’t learned anything, so I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    I think you should take 10 minutes or a couple of hours (if including the comments) to read Mr. Fred Reed’s superb editorial from last week, which gets to the root of the problem. It’s not the guns.

    So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

    The men are looking at the big picture. Your daughters are indeed at some risk, albeit extremely slight, of another nut-case purposely let by any system of mental health shooting or blowing things up at a school*. I’d like to know what you think is a greater risk: What I just wrote, or that of a totalitarian state completing it’s transition, with your daughters and your grandchildren living miserable lives like those lived under 20th-century Communism in Russia, Red China, and E. Bloc counties? BIG PICTURE STUFF – it’s not your mode of thinking, but it’s necessary.

    FUCK YOU, MASON – We’re keeping the guns and we’re proud to say so. Go back to England it you don’t like it. Let the men run things here.

    .
    .

    * Mandatory government 13-year 宣传营 schools are part of the problem too. Have you considered homeschooling?

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  207. @Jonathan Mason

    Amendment 14 was written after the War of Northern Aggression, in the late 1860’s. It was not written by the Founding Fathers.

    I am repeating from lots of great comments here, but what did the Founders think of the internet, Mason – Covered by Amendment I, or not covered? Or, am I being too obtuse for you?

  208. Truth 说:
    @Thomm

    大声笑。

    A “White Nationalist Wigger?”

    (Tillie, Aldey, holla!)

  209. Truth 说:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Oh, so a random nobody senator is receiving the encouragement of the #319,887th rated internet blogger?

    OK, tell his wife to start selecting White House Christmas decorations.

  210. “Macho” Derbyshire is mewling again.

  211. peterAUS 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    …. it’s not about duck hunting, self-defense, or plinking

    对。

    I guess Mr. Twodees Partain and Mr. Svigor are especially right here about not feeding trolls and that.

    He is not a troll. I do appreciate his input here. It is very good.
    He is a perfect example of “chatering class”. The “cosmpolitan literate”. An excellent tool for TPTB.
    I really suggest re-reading :

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    All three were disillusioned former soldiers who were unable to settle down properly in civilian life and spent their time cooking up imaginary grievances against the government, culminating in the blowing up of a government building, and killing 168 people, including 19 children in a daycare center, and maiming numerous others. Nice job, sergeant McVeigh!

    Although much has been made of the fact that 19 children were killed, I don’t think that McVeigh knew (or cared) that he was killing children, but it is worth noting that McVeigh was a prototype and probably an inspiration for the school massacre in Colorado in 1999.

    My own daughter, who is 5 years old has to do regular “school shooter drills” at school that involve hiding under tables and so on, and she knows that there are “bad people” who come into schools and kill children at regular intervals. I really do not want her to have to experience this, but this, you will all tell me is the fair price of living in the US under a corporate hegemony ruled by billionaires and held in check by an imaginary militia that will one day rise, if things ever get bad enough.

    I guess we do have the choice to relocate overseas, but then again we also have the right to stay and try to improve the country we live in.

    I have shot guns myself, and I really have no objection to people having guns for legitimate purposes like hunting, target shooting, and home defence, or even if they want to play soldiers, as long as they do not bother anyone else, but when people who have children want to enact sensible laws to reduce access to weapons to disgruntled teenagers and unstable young adults, this is just a sensible precautionary measure, it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS. No one really wants to take your guns like you think, because you are not that important, but if you come out and block the highways waving your guns, don’t be surprised if they are taken away from you. That is really what you wanted all along, but were afraid to admit to the other gun-sheep. So stick to your guns, play soldiers at weekends, and keep out of other people’s business.

    That is what they really FEEL, think and want. And they’ll go for it all the way they can.

    他们只是不明白。

    They are the product of modern society. And that is the thing here.
    The modern society produces them faster than it produces people into the “2nd”.
    Add immigration and, that’s the game.
    Demographics. Democracy. Elections. LAWS. And the power of the state to effect those laws.
    They don’t mind it. They actually need it.

    They simply do not have 进入他们。

    It takes an extraordinary event/events to change their mindset. No amount of talk or reasoning will do that.

    Know your enemy. Or, at least, know its foot soldiers. The “chattering class”.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  212. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    And…..there is something else.

    Haven’t we noticed a conspicuous absence, in this …ahm…discussion here, the “Team Russia” and ,apart from “Miro23”, people from Asia and the 3rd world in general?
    They do comment all over the place but not on this thread.

    And that is just, how to put it, 欢闹的.

    They, I am sure, just read all this and snicker. Their own “chattering class” that is.
    Because they, in those places, oh, they know exactly this thing inside out.

    It’s only the Western “chattering class”.

    Can anyone imagine an educated Russian urban elite 感觉 along the same lines?
    Or Chinese?
    Or…hahahaha…oh man, this hurts…Balkans people? Like, say, PhDs in humanities from Sarajevo?
    Try, please, to find those types and ask them about the issue. See how it goes.

    And that’s the core of the problem.

    仅仅是一个想法。

  213. JMcG 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    I have a friend whose house was broken into some years ago. He had some guns stolen. The cops who came to investigate had a list of every gun he’d bought through an FFL going back to the 80’s.

  214. @Curle

    “Abolition made a lot of the Eastern Establishment rich, ”

    I think I might agree with you but could you elaborate?

    Happy to oblige, and sorry for oversimplifying, but “abolition” was a pretext to destroy the South so that the money bag crowd could waltz in and buy up what they wanted for pennies on the dollar. The carpetbagger concept if you will.

    I call it the War of the Northern Bankers Against the Southern Planters, and I’m unaware of any source that could explain it in those terms. Unfortunately I have no time to really develop and explain it further. It just seems to fit the patterns of highly capitalized industrial-state sponsored aggression that I think typify the big wars of the last 2 centuries at least.

    If you’re interested, you may want to get a start by reading Thomas DiLorenzo’s opinions of Lincoln and the Civil War and Maybe Albert J. Beveridge’s impressions too. If you care to develop the concept, I’d be interested in what you find. I find the economics of the war fascinating, but find many other things much more fascinating so I’m far from being well informed on the fine points of that particular topic. Wish I could offer more.

    I’d like to see the South rise again, but good luck with that!

  215. @Rbel

    Your request is to:

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    Fine. Okay.

    I see and understand your point, and I agree with you about the Left’s tactics. However:

    Pardon me for making that particular error, but we are talking about “mass shootings,” are we not? It is precisely the forces arrayed against us who would like us to turn away from guns. We will not. How can one begin a comment about a mass shooting without talking about the shooter?

    I thought we here were above being hurt by words. It is the Left that gets all bent out of shape when we call one of their pets something they don’t deem appropriate.

    The murderer shot those people. He didn’t run over them with a truck or stab them, which would have been just as deadly. The topic here is mass shooters, not mass murderers. We are strong enough in our understanding to know that the crime is murder, not shooting.

    Whatever. That “Hispanic” dude 射精 some lead at those kids and gosh darn murdered a mass of ’em.

    If he’d had a father and had grown up in a society that still respected men, he probably wouldn’t have ever wanted to do that. If he hadn’t been coddled by anti-white racist policies, he would’ve had a criminal record and never been able to buy anything to shoot with, um, excuse me, I mean “mass murder” with.

    He probably would have used an axe.

  216. Miro23 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    The hard core SF units will have some psychopaths in their ranks who will welcome “getting some trigger time” at the expense of their fellow Americans, but many, even among the SF, will balk at fighting civilians.
    Just as Congress is somewhat divided over civilian disarmament, so is the military (and police forces) divided over who will be seen as the enemy in a civil war, and likely to a greater extent than the political class.

    Congressmen do what they’re told, and the indicated enemy are the “Deplorables” + Trump supporters in general. The military and Homeland Security are doing it for the money, but there’s a difference between targeting Islamic radicals in Afghanistan and bombing regular Americans like themselves in their own towns.

    OK, they’re going to be really well paid and live separate from the population + be indoctrinated with the “Domestic Terrorism” narrative, but I basically don’t see them having any love for their Zionist/Globalist/SJW leaders, and if they see the tide turning, they’ll probably be the be the first to go AWOL.

    • 同意: Twodees Partain
  217. @Masintenn

    Praise the Lord, finally someone who actually realizes what DT is doing, namely playing the game of “give and take” with the leftists, and thereby keeping them off balance and in a state of malaise, and confusion.
    He values the 2nd to the Nth degree, and he will never give in to the demand that it be abolished or watered-down.
    DT is a shrewd, cunning businessman, the precise type of “deal-maker” which the leftist cannot scrutinize or manipulate : give him the benefit of the doubt, as he will not betray his supporters, however he is compelled to engage in the game of two-steps forward, one step back, which is the perfect tactical method to confuse and consternate the one-dimensional leftist dummies.

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro Jazz musician ( Last gig : This afternoon)

  218. @jacques sheete

    If not for the fact, that most of North and for certain, Pres Lincoln had no intention of advocating for a change in the law to free slaves — the above might actually have some salience.

    But since Pres Lincoln had no intention of freeing slaves, the comment here is false. The North punished the south for inciting and engaging rebellion against their fellow citizens, nearly to a one — were white. The Civil War was begun by the south’s needless attack on Fort Sumter. That attack prompted a military response. And even that response was delayed in the hopes that the South would cease it’s rebellion. There was no initial cabal by the government to divest the south of its slaves by force.

    The above suggestion is incorrect and without merit.

    The Northern banks, and investors were all to happy with profits from slavery and would have approved of it’s maintenance. which explains why they pressed to end the enforcement of civil rights for blacks in the south. if one wants to defend the south fine, but deep core conspiracies by bankers a duplicitous Pres. is beyond stretching bubble gum to make an overpass for one’s hot wheels.

    Note: the South remained armed after the civil war.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  219. @jacques sheete

    I call it the War of the Northern Bankers Against the Southern Planters, and I’m unaware of any source that could explain it in those terms.

    Oswald Spengler explained it in almost exactly those terms, which he included as an aside while explaining the economic role of the Classical slave. In the late Roman world, the concept of the slave was introduced as a form of money. These slaves were most emphatically not for economic production; the vast majority of them did no work whatsoever. But, when the supply of available fine art objects and specie for coins was no longer adequate to cover needs, the systematic enslavement of these “living coins” became necessary as a sort of Classical QE. The Graeco-Roman soul, which was constituted so as to perceive bodily present magnitudes as the essence of the real, was incapable of conceiving “money” in any other way.

    By contrast, the Western soul is dynamically oriented towards concepts of force, tension, and distance. The sugar-and-cotton slavery of the Caribbean rim was a sort of proto industrial revelation, a primitive type of machine industry which was self-evidently organized for 没什么 economic production as conceived by the banks and bourses, and which was destined to be replaced as the technical mastery of the Western engineer brought a more perfected type of “machine” into being.

  220. peterAUS 说:
    @EliteCommInc.

    US Civil War/War of Northern Aggression is none of my, outsider, business, save, perhaps, one crucial element: 分裂

    I mean…any chance that the cause of the war, at its core, was very simple: thou shalt not secede?
    Thou shalt not stop the growth. The expansion. Ever

    The very movement going on as we speak.
    The…constant…expansion.
    Checked, for the moment (or for good) in Ukraine and Syria.

    • 回复: @EliteCommInc.
  221. @Jonathan Mason

    McVeigh, Fortier, and Nichols were all extremely concerned about gun controls

    Yeah, if they hadn’t had access to guns, they wouldn’t have been able to shoot up all those people at the Federal building.

  222. @Rbel

    Please stop using the term “shooter” to describe a mass murderer.

    How about “massacre of the un-armed in a gun-free zone”?

    • 同意: RadicalCenter
  223. @Reg Cæsar

    Is this Zed Man supposed to be a race realist? Doesn’t seem like it.

    Whatever Z-Man is, I had no opinion of him going into this, but after the handful of items Derb has now told me about him, I’m left scratching my head wondering why Derb holds him in such esteem.

    But I’ll head on over to Z-Man’s blog and give him a chance, only because I respect Derb.

  224. @Lemurmaniac

    Well, that’ll never happen. But it’s remarkable that the huge amount of coverage the seventeen victims of the Parkland school shooting got, compared to the amount of coverage we’ve had of the last seventeen victims of run-of-the-mill ghetto violence, fairly screams out that “black lives don’t matter”.

  225. Derb, what’s with this “I’m not giving up my guns”? I never took you for a gun owner, much less the owner of guns plural.

  226. peterAUS 说:

    Let’s try to summarize the blabbing and define the current state of affairs.

    TPTB will, by their very nature, keep squeezing more power and money out of population.
    The population won’t like it; the control is needed. One of the elements of that control is disarming the general populace. Or, better, that part of general populace which could be………bothersome at least.

    The “chattering class” needs the all-powerful State.
    Their number is rising.

    The demographic shift goes into the direction of fragmented populace without shared core values which made US as it is.
    They get their opinion from the State.
    Their number is rising too.

    That’s the “anti-gun” side.

    The “gun-side” now.
    The majority of that side are the people who are NOT into the crux of the 2nd Amendment.
    They are into hunting, self-defense against criminals (maybe other way around, not so sure) and sport.They don’t, really, need “Ar-15 type weapon” to make them content.

    The minority of the “gun-side” are, really, into the core of the 2nd Amendment.

    Now, that minority.
    Majority of that minority are into “we need to fight against the Big Bad Government to preserve US as it’s supposed to be”.
    Minority of that minority are into something as “all we could realistically do is to secede some parts of the current US and live there”.

    So….when one looks at the disposition of forces arrayed………

  227. @Reg Cæsar

    The citizens of Bath, Michigan, will politely disagree

    Two story wood building made in the 1800s. See “three little pigs”.

    Also note the explosives were planted in the basement:

    … he had planted hundreds of pounds of dynamite. An experienced electrician, he had served as the district’s volunteer handyman and had unfettered access to the building. After months of careful planning…

    Bath was an inside job.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  228. @peterAUS

    I am not a fan of tagging ideas and launching a new discussion. My comment was to whether or not the south had in it motives to devalue the south and subsequently disarm her. The north had no such intention and despite an open act of rebellion, re south was permitted to maintain her weapons.

    So the North despite rebellion did not commence to seizing weapons of southerners, save at the immediate end of a conflict. But there was no general disarmament of southern citizens. The concept of personal weapons ownership is so embeddd in the US mind that not even a violent rebellion squashed its protection from a self identified nation of states at war without the US.

  229. @Jonathan Mason

    NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS, GUN OWNERS.

    Well that’s the crux of it, isn’t it? Who’s getting into whose business? I’m sure you, me, and everyone agrees on officially identifying lunatics/criminals like the Parkland killer early on and at least prohibiting them from legal ownership of any gun. But unless I’m misinterpreting your comments on this matter, you advocate further restricting or banning ARs and other semi-auto rifles from legal civilian ownership in general. I disagree.

    Regarding theoretical armed opposition to government authority, there’s no need to fixate on past boogeymen like McVeigh—the relatively recent Bundy standoff is far more germane to analyses of civilians using firearms (ultimately peacefully, in this case) to resist perceived government overreach. I’m no authority on the legalities of the initial land-use dispute, but I do know that a group of armed citizens convinced a group of at least equally heavily-armed federal and local officers to back down and release Cliven Bundy’s cattle.

    维基百科:

    新的 拉斯维加斯评论杂志 reported that tensions reached a “critical level” during the standoff, “with rifles pointing toward each side.” Las Vegas station KLAS-TV also reported that guns were pointed at officers.

    Assistant Sheriff Lombardo recounted that “they were in my face yelling profanities and pointing weapons,” and said, “We were outgunned, outmanned, and there would not have been a good result from it.”

    Las Vegas Metro Deputy Chief Tom Roberts defused the situation by announcing that Bundy’s cattle would be returned within 30 minutes. The BLM announced that it would suspend the mass roundup, citing safety reasons.

    Clark County Sheriff Gillespie mediated the agreement between the Bundy family and the BLM, saying, “[W]hen a group of protesters threaten civil unrest or violence in this county — it is my job to step in and ensure the safety of citizens.”

    BLM Director Neil Kornze said that “Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public.”

    As of this date, Bundy and sons are free and their cattle is still grazing on ‘prohibited’ federal land.

    Best clip on YouTube of the pivotal confrontation:

    • 回复: @Jonathan Mason
  230. Svigor 说:

    Yes, I know Mason’s an idiot; his ‘reasoning’ as such is nonexistent. He’s also a troll, but an earnest troll in the sense that I think he truly believes in the positions he takes. I don’t address him out of anger, hence my lack of vitriol (I rarely get mad on the internet)—but I do enjoy mocking crap reasoning (and syntax) if the person deserves it.

    I’m not mad, but he doesn’t deserve civility. He’s a moron. He’s posted some of the stupidest shit I’ve ever read.

    It has always been a struggle to understand exactly what was meant and what the Founders anticipated. For example was birthright citizenship intended to clarify the status of former slaves, or was it intended to encourage birth tourism? What exactly did the Founders think about self-driving stagecoaches?

    Only a struggle for leftist dumbkopfs like you. Most of 他们 are faking it, though, unlike you.

    No one hear seems to be aware that they are simply echoing the pathetic ideas of the Kingman Trio–McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier who were responsible for the worst terrorist atrocity in US history in 1995, probably too long ago for most of you to recall.

    You’re echoing the pathetic ideas of communists, who were responsible for 100 million deaths in the 20th century. You’re just too stupid to know it, or avoid putting your feet into such obvious rhetorical bear-traps.

  231. Svigor 说:

    But since Pres Lincoln had no intention of freeing slaves, the comment here is false. The North punished the south for inciting and engaging rebellion against their fellow citizens, nearly to a one — were white. The Civil War was begun by the south’s needless attack on Fort Sumter. That attack prompted a military response. And even that response was delayed in the hopes that the South would cease it’s rebellion. There was no initial cabal by the government to divest the south of its slaves by force.

    By needless, you do mean “bloodless,” right? Cuz the only person who died was the Yankee dumbfuck who blew himself up with his own cannon.

    A Holy Cause for Just War, if ever there was one, amirite? The bloodiest war in American history. Good enough, if you’re a Yankee dumbfuck in need of preserving his own pride and stupid historical illusions, though.

    The WBtS was started by the Yankees when they invaded the South. End of story.

  232. peterAUS 说:

    ….The concept of personal weapons ownership is so embeddd in the US mind that not even a violent rebellion squashed its protection….

    Well….my impression is that this

    The concept of personal weapons ownership so embeddd in the US mind that not even a violent rebellion squashed its protection

    has more truth to it.

    Besides…hehe….”they” do not want to take personal weapons from people, oh, no…no….never.
    Just to restrict the access only to those weapons that, in hands of deranged individuals, could make a lot of harm to an average citizen. And her kids.
    Of course that people can keep owning personal weapons. Just not those.

    Till somebody shoots a bunch of people with a pump action shotgun. Kids, in gun free zone.
    Pumps out, of course.

    Then an individual shoots a bunch of people with “high powered sniper rifle”.
    Bolt actions out.

    Then when an individual shoots a bunch of people with semiautomatic handgun.
    Semiauto handguns out.

    And, while going along that line, constantly militarizing the police. More armored vehicles with machineguns, more semauto and full auto rifles, etc.

    The constant shift of firepower away from the citizens towards the State.
    持续的。

    For the citizen good, of course.
    “Trust us”.

  233. Svigor 说:

    Yankees love the “the South started it with Sumter” thing.

    They’re like the husband who beats the shit out of his wife because she slapped him; he thinks he’s justifying himself, but everybody hearing the story thinks “what a fucking piece of shit.”

    Many more idiots fall for the “yeah but she was cheating on him/yeah but slavery” schtick, but that one falls apart on examination, too.

    (if Yankees were really just worried about slavery they’d have 1 ended slavery in territory before they ended it in the South’s, instead of vice-versa, and 2 they’d have granted the South their independence after ensuring that the slaves were freed)

  234. Truth 说:
    @redmudhooch

    I’m no genius Bro, but doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having a gun?

    Scene: Midnight in a beautiful, mayonaise-white suburb:

    Jane: “Honey, 6 men with automatic rifles, wearing ski masks just jumped out of a van with no liscence plate down the block! They’re heading this way! I think it’s a home invasion!”

    John: Oh that’s fine honey, you and the girls just do what they want, I’m going to grab the pickaxe and shovel and drive out to retrieve the cache in the desert. See you in 2 hours…”

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  235. @jacques sheete

    You forgot to add “addiction to bureaucratic control”… It changes the brain as well as the soul.

    Indeed. The only people who trust our currently constituted government to do the right thing are fools.

    Guns don’t kill people, fools do.

  236. @Anon

    In the case of tyranny, don’t you think the rest of the world would be happily obliged to arm American resistance? I could see China and Russia arming us the way we did the Afghans when Russia attacked them. We would get armed in a hurry and with far more useful weapons, like shoulder fired missiles and advanced electronics warfare. The argument against tyranny just doesn’t hold much water anymore.

  237. ATF does the background checks required for all gun purchases, but they are required by law to destroy all the information in 2 years. It came to light a few years ago that, yes, they destroyed the data, but kept a backup. Just in case, you know.

    https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/678091.pdf

    Anybody who trusts the government on almost anything deserves what they get.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  238. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Time to dump Trump?”

    The voters are about to do that themselves.

    “Smart people are saying that the root causes of mass shootings are things like fatherless homes and similar cultural changes.”

    Delusional people say that. Actually smart people look at the weapons used and surmise that if they were less available, there would be fewer mass shootings. Actually smart people look at Australia’s example (one mass shooting lead to gun control and since then no more mass shootings) and Japan’s example (no guns and virtually no gun violence) and conclude that there is enough evidence to say that guns, and not some nebulous nonsense about parents and home life, are the primary enablers of these events.

    “We already have all the gun laws we need, but we are doing everything to prevent ourselves from enforcing them.”

    In Florida, you can buy an AR-15 at age 18 but must not only wait to buy a far less deadly handgun, but you must also be 21. We clearly need some new laws.

    Raising the minimum age to buy a weapon, universal background checks for all weapons, banning devices that modify certain semi-automatic rifles into assault rifles, and removing some classes of weapons from the street entirely is a common sense approach that would, at the very least, lessen the potential for mass casualties. Oh, and a large majority of Americans support all of those things, so good luck in the mid-terms with that kind of nonsense.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-poll-americans-support-assault-weapons-ban-after-florida-shooting-2018-2?op=1

    “1776 will commence again if you try and take our firearms!” Alex Jones to Piers Morgan”

    People say, ‘The government couldn’t carry out the September 11th attack, it’s too big, they’d get caught!’ They DID get caught! They’re just counting on you to be dumb and to go along with it.

    –Alex Jones

    “the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, concerning which there is still debate, fourteen years after the ban expired, as to whether it had any effect at all.”

    I think you’ve lost the forest through the trees. Clearly, banning all guns will have a greater affect on mass shootings than merely banning a smaller subset. You cannot use the results of the latter to discredit the former. Disagree? Check out the affects of Japan’s gun control policies: no mass shootings and virtually no gun violence at all. I see no reason why we can’t replicate at least some of that success here with stricter policies.

    “We have seen this with the FBI bungling in the Florida case”

    The FBI did not bungle anything in this case, so let’s not make them the scapegoat. They interviewed boy and determined that he hadn’t technically broken any serious law that they could prosecute him for. Posting crazy comments on the internet isn’t technically a crime as it is in your home country. They may have known that he was a nut, but that didn’t mean they had the authority to kick down his door and ship him to Guantanamo. But putting that aside for the moment, if we had much stricter gun control policies at the time, it wouldn’t have mattered whether or not the FBI bungled anything. It would seem logical that we should tackle this problem at the source rather than simply trying to manage it downstream.

    “The meeting itself was a lousy idea.”

    No, it wasn’t. A large majority of Americans favor gun control measures such as raising the minimum age to buy a weapon, bans on certain types of weapons, background checks, etc. A competent leader does not sit back after a massacre, and only months before a major election, and do nothing when everyone expects action.

    “Likewise, I want Congress to pass new and better laws on immigration,”

    Likewise, a majority of Americans want Congress to pass new and better gun control laws.

    “I won’t give up my guns.”

    Yes, you will. You already gave up your country, freedoms, and privacy to an all-controlling Deep State – no mass protests, no strikes, no criminal prosecutions to stop them – so you will also give guns up, too. Americans talk a good game, but that’s all it is.

  239. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Guns don’t kill people, fools do.”

    With that logic, neither would bazookas, IEDs, and rocket launchers. Who wants to make those things a common sight on the street?

  240. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Also, if Trump’s so dumb, how has he has accomplished so much more than you?”

    I could appoint my dog as president and he would have about the same number of accomplishments as Trump. Whatever happened to renegotiating NAFTA and getting out of Syria? Is the wall being built yet? Are we making peace with the Russians? I don’t remember asking for tax cuts for the rich and more war.

    Did they close down Free Republic or something? Because some of the comments here are just embarrassing as of late.

  241. peterAUS 说:
    @Truth

    A good exchange.
    Shows something.

    You are both, IMHO, right and wrong.

    For self-defense you are right and he is wrong.

    For the “civilian armed unrest against the State” he is right and you are wrong.

    新的 文化 of having firearms burred around has existed for a long time in certain trouble spots of this world. And it still does.

  242. peterAUS 说:
    @Anon

    一个好帖子。

    Disagree with most of it, but, can’t really disagree with:

    Oh, and a large majority of Americans support all of those things

    A large majority of Americans favor gun control measures such as raising the minimum age to buy a weapon, bans on certain types of weapons, background checks, etc.

    You already gave up your country, freedoms, and privacy to an all-controlling Deep State – no mass protests, no strikes, no criminal prosecutions to stop them – so you will also give guns up, too. Americans talk a good game, but that’s all it is.

    What you are missing is related to:

    I think you’ve lost the forest through the trees.

    The spirit of people there. The foundation of that society.
    Australia was/is not USA; the Queen is still a sovereign, for example. Navy and Air Force are still Royal. Etc. And that’s not just a dressing up. It’s part of the culture.
    Japan, do we really need to compare US and Japanese society? The people who live there?

    Let’s go to the heart of the matter.

    Clearly, banning all guns will have a greater affect on mass shootings than merely banning a smaller subset. You cannot use the results of the latter to discredit the former. Disagree?

    Having armed citizenry is detrimental to the excesses of the State. Disagree?

    You are right. Take all firearms away and, definitely, there will be less mass shootings.

    你确定吗, sure, that TPTBs won’t get harder on that population?
    You already pointed to the Deep State and such.
    What do you think, would they go, harder, faster onto the “deplorables”, “useless eaters” and all those that don’t tow the line? Are you willing to risk that? Because once you do it going back could be….difficult.
    底线, do you trust US politicians?

  243. MarkinLA 说:
    @Svigor

    The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”? What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.

    现代立法仅使歧义成倍增加。 究竟什么才算是“突击步枪”? 谁来决定我的心理健康与否?

    Actually it is not ambiguous. In fact, it is quite simple even if a moron like Scalia thinks that every right has limitations and someone as brilliant as him knows what those limits should be – even as he claims that “strict scruntiny” whatever the hell that means can be defined such that everybody agrees.

    None of the rights in the Bill of Rights is subject to Executive, Legislative or Judicial review. The only limits to our rights are those limitations the people themselves place on them. If you don’t think people should have a class of weapons or be able to say certain things, then amend the Constitution.

    The reason they don’t is the same reason FDR used a silly taxing scheme to control automatic weapons and silencers, because it it too hard and takes too much work. Howere, they did it for alcohol they can do it for privately owned ma dueces if they want.

  244. MarkinLA 说:
    @Truth

    Why they aren’t citizens. They don’t even have green cards.

  245. @Anon

    “Delusional people say that. Actually smart people look at the weapons used and surmise that if they were less available, there would be fewer mass shootings.”

    Smart people would also surmise that if there were fewer cars, and less alcohol, there would be fewer deaths caused by drunk drivers. But smart people also understand that America wasn’t created for the sake of “safety”, but for the sake of preserving “liberty and freedom”. And smart people understand that “liberty and freedom” come with a cost.

    “Raising the minimum age to buy a weapon, universal background checks for all weapons, banning devices that modify certain semi-automatic rifles into assault rifles, and removing some classes of weapons from the street entirely is a common sense approach that would, at the very least, lessen the potential for mass casualties. Oh, and a large majority of Americans support all of those things, so good luck in the mid-terms with that kind of nonsense.”

    That’s the incrementalist approach to trashing the second amendment, and it’s been working well.

    Then the next time there’s a suspicious mass shooting with lots of unanswered questions, we’ll be told that the alleged perpetrator allegedly made his own rifle from an “80% receiver”, and the “common sense approach” advocated by “smart people” would demand the banning of 80% receivers/frames, and on and on ad nauseum, until the second amendment is nothing but a memory in the “minds” of “smart people”.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  246. peterAUS 说:

    I’ll use sort of analogy.

    A light infantry battalion. Deployed, on standby, say, as emergency reaction force for the Corps.

    An info comes from “up”: ONE of your soldiers, we don’t quite know which one, is getting unbalanced and stated he’d commit mass murder in the unit.”

    Well, Commanding Officer has two options:
    “All battalion weapons shall be put into the “object xxx” under the Brigade MP guard. Officers only will keep their sidearm, unloaded, with one magazine in the holster”
    or
    “All troops shall keep vigilance at all times. Personal weapons shall be at reach all the time, loaded but not chambered. Team leaders shall execute utmost care for their men and material in their teams. “Etc.

    哪一个更有可能?

    Dumb soldiers.
    Educated civilians, at the other hand, have better ideas.

    好笑吧?

  247. peterAUS 说:

    还有一件事。
    That “deranged individual”.

    Utter BOLLOCKS.

    Deranged person wouldn’t very carefully pick up the weapon, target, time, and, definitely not, would surrender to police.

    The guy in this example as in all examples of mass non-political/terrorist shootings so far was very calculated.

    When was the last time the deranged person simply walked out of his place where he got “equipped” and started shooting straight from the front door?
    Like…..never?

    He/they got kitted up, sat in a vehicle, drove to the object and executed the mass murder.
    Each and every time.

    They never choose a police station to do that. Or Army barracks. Or a gun club. Or a range. Or a hunting ground. Or some place where “important” people gather. Those with ex-SF bodyguards.
    Always something………….

    There is somebody 其他 deranged in all this but that’s not the shooter/shooters.

  248. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    完全同意。
    特别是:

    …smart people also understand that America wasn’t created for the sake of “safety”, but for the sake of preserving “liberty and freedom”. And smart people understand that “liberty and freedom” come with a cost.

  249. Reg Cæsar 说:
    @Truth

    Might need a constitutional amendment for that one Bro.

    Right. Illegal aliens have a right to keep and bear arms on the land they’re trespassing upon.

    You’ve topped yourself this time, Truth.

  250. @Truth

    Probably closer to young Jerry Lewis, or maybe even Jerry Springer, as I don’t know what you or Anonymous are referring to. Glad you laughed anyway, Truth.

    My line above is a combination of 1984危险的交易*.

    .
    .

    * Though it’s not my favorite line in the movie – “OK, who’s the U-Boat commander?”

    • 回复: @Truth
  251. @Jim Don Bob

    Yep, that’s what I was referring to in my 发表以上. In the same manner as this, any kind of agreement on privacy regarding your “smart” device’s location, search term data, voice data, and messages, between the cell company and the Feral Government means exactly Jack Squat. Whatever ever can be done, for evil purposes, will be.

    While I’m on that – Are modern electronic devices making us gay?

  252. @Hippopotamusdrome

    Bath was an inside job.

    I guess that makes it a lot better when you are lying on the ground 50 ft away with your legs blown off.

  253. @Jonathan Mason

    Look, people actually defend themselves, their families, their homes, their businesses, and their neighbors every day with legally purchased and owned firearms.

    My own sister saved herself from rape and maybe even worse, merely by pulling out her handgun. Against those two “men”, my short and slightly built sister otherwise would have had no chance.

    And I don’t know a single gun rights activist or just gun owner who has ever blocked traffic or threatened anyone in any way aggressively. Neither do you.

    But she and the rest of us must just be “playing soldier” with our numerous guns, right?

    • 回复: @Jonathan Mason
  254. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Well that’s the crux of it, isn’t it? Who’s getting into whose business? I’m sure you, me, and everyone agrees on officially identifying lunatics/criminals like the Parkland killer early on and at least prohibiting them from legal ownership of any gun. But unless I’m misinterpreting your comments on this matter, you advocate further restricting or banning ARs and other semi-auto rifles from legal civilian ownership in general. I disagree.

    Well, yeah, but here in Florida I have to produce ID to show that I am over 21 to buy a bottle of cough medicine in Walmart, and this does not produce apoplexies from the National Cough Medicine Association who are concerned about teenagers with coughs not being blocked from their right to the Pursuit of Happiness. So I don’t think asking for rifle buyers to be over 21, have a criminal and mental health background check that includes any kind of domestic violence, and have to produce a certificate from the local police that they have no objection to him buying a weapon. Minimum.

    It probably it not necessary to ban rifles altogether, but it is good to keep the NRA on the back foot and make them defend what they already have and prevent them from seeking further legislation to promote gun sales/

    I know the members of the NRA flock do not believe this, but the NRA is to a considerable extent a gun industry lobby tool, supported by gun company money, and many supposedly independent members of the NRA are actually people who trade in weapons or make their living to some extent from gun sale related activities, so it is not really about freedom at all, as the members of the flock seem to believe in their woolly heads.

    Anyway, they can come for my cough medicine, but I will be ready for them.

  255. @RadicalCenter

    My own sister saved herself from rape and maybe even worse, merely by pulling out her handgun. Against those two “men”, my short and slightly built sister otherwise would have had no chance.

    Sorry to hear about what happened to your sister. I hope the villains were apprehended.

    I have no objection to her having a handgun–I am just sorry that she needs one.

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
  256. Truth 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You really don’t get the joke here?

    Oceania could really use a guy like you, 石匠.

    I think it has plenty of them.

    https://gnosticwarrior.com/ordo-ab-chao.html

  257. @Jonathan Mason

    Yeah, I share your sentiment there. It is sad that good people need guns. But apparently we do.

  258. @Jonathan Mason

    Approval from the local police to have a gun to defend my family? NO.

    And of course, local police don’t ever discriminate based on race, religion, and plain old personal disagreements. It’s safe to give them the right to decide who may have the ability to protect his own life, his own children. Good idea.

  259. Joe Stalin 说:

    “So I don’t think asking for rifle buyers to be over 21, have a criminal and mental health background check that includes any kind of domestic violence, and have to produce a certificate from the local police that they have no objection to him buying a weapon. Minimum.”

    Funny, not only do people in Illinois have to get an Illinois State Police FOID card, have a mandatory waiting period on firearm purchased, wait over a month for their first FOID card, they have to get the FBI “Instant Check” on each gun, adding to the cost of each gun, but even that’s not enough for the gun controller.

    And to think just 50 years ago, Americans could purchase both rifles and pistols and have them delivered to your door.

    Slippery slope? In spades.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Twodees Partain
  260. peterAUS 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    “Progs” will never stop. Never. They can’t. It’s a deep psychological need.

    It’s not about guns. Never was.
    It’s about power. Power to impose their will over the society. They need that “trip”.

    Look at smokers.
    I am old enough to remember sitting at meetings/briefings/lectures and, being non smoker, having to endure all those fumes. Didn’t like it of course.
    Then, no smoking at meetings->no smoking at workplace->no smoking in restaurants/pubs/bars->the latest is, no smoking in the CBD.
    They won’t stop there, they’ll go for homes, then home gardens. They can’t stop.
    At the same time the same characters jog for miles along the busy streets. Deep breathing……

    Guns wise they’ll go all the Communist way. That’s the ideal I think.
    No guns in citizen hands. Save elite (“all animals are equal….”).
    With heavy militarized police force and surveillance state.

    I really think that at the bottom of it all, the core of that drive, is “beta male” hatred for the “alphas”. Can’t really explain it any other way.

  261. @Jonathan Mason

    So I don’t think asking for rifle buyers to be over 21, have a criminal and mental health background check that includes any kind of domestic violence, and have to produce a certificate from the local police that they have no objection to him buying a weapon. Minimum.

    Do you ever think even a little bit ahead, Mason? How about about read history – do you do any of that at all? Do the phrases “Soviet Union” and “Police State” ring any bells?

    Let’s just think what could be an unintended consquesce of you emoters’ useful idiocy: Could a vindictive ex-wife not just get your weapons taken away on a whim, perhaps? I’m gonna make this personal now, so your emotions can do their thing, Mason. Maybe one of your daughters would get in a typical domestic argument, as is gonna happen, and get so mad that she ends up getting her (future) husband’s self-defense guns taken away. Once they are back together, a home invasion happens, and that husband cannot protect her and your grandchildren now. Nice going, Mason.

    Next, it turns out that someone who has found out Jonathan Mason is an alt-right immigration opponent and has said a few un-PC racial statements wants to get back at you. It turns out this guy works in the FL state government and has his friend bring you in for a small psych exam. Not a problem, you’re fine, but yeah, they did take your guns away.

    Then, as I said before, imagine your grandchildren and what kind of country they may live in. It turns out, because of their granddad and a whole host of other idiots, life is just plain miserable because the government controls everything. It seems, big government is not always benign, and they really HATE HATE HATE little white minority grandchildren. By the time you and your sons-in-laws realized that big government is not always benign, you have not a damn thing to say about that, as there are no guns in the hands of the prole-subjects any longer.

    Sweet dreams, Mason.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  262. @Joe Stalin

    Yes, that’s exactly right. Each incremental step that infringes upon the RKBA is a win for citizen disarmament forces. Trump has announced that his bump stock ban is coming whether legislation is passed or not. He probably intends to issue an EO to the BATFE ordering them to make it a regulation.

    Trump is a typical GOP gungrabber. To view him or any of the GOP congress members as anything else is a mistake. The US government has been putting their incremental plan of total citizen disarmament in place for a long time. Look up the original NRA view on this and it’s readily apparent that they and the GOP have always been onboard for that plan.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
  263. @Achmed E. Newman

    Mason isn’t short sighted or misled. He has no innocent intentions at all. People here who are feeding him are just entertaining themselves in a “look how well I write, mom” fashion.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  264. @Twodees Partain

    People here who are feeding him are just entertaining themselves in a “look how well I write, mom” fashion.

    Whether Mason is a troll in some sense, I don’t know, as he is pretty sensible on most other topics. It doesn’t matter – you can’t leave his bullshit on guns to stand, IMO, just for the sake of other unz readers who may have had no opinion on the topic. That’s what’s making me keep replying.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  265. What a joke! You live in New York! They have an assault weapons ban! Are you going to dump Cuomo?!

    • 回复: @RadicalCenter
  266. freebird 说:
    @utu

    If Dreamers become citizens yes — they aren’t citizens dufus

  267. peterAUS 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    …you can’t leave his bullshit on guns to stand, IMO, just for the sake of other unz readers who may have had no opinion on the topic.

    同意。
    As long as the “conversation” is, reasonably, polite, isn’t that the main purpose of exchange?
    Well, at least for some posters here.

  268. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Twodees Partain

    I understand he issued a directive to DOJ to come up with a method of banning so-called “bump stocks,” but I am uncertain of what power DOJ would have over this. ATF has declared the “bump stock” as not in violation of the law concerning full-auto weapons, defined to be something that shoots more than a single round with every pull of the trigger.

    • 回复: @Twodees Partain
  269. By-tor [又名“杰西·詹姆斯”] 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    You are not gun owner and know very little, because the ATF Form 4473 questionnaire required by federal law at the point of sale asks those questions. The FBI then runs the background check after the form is completed and signed by the buyer. Lying on the Form 4473 is a felony ( it states that in the form’s instructions ), but few nationwide are ever prosecuted. That is a federal enforcement dereliction of duty for which they are now world famous for.

    The NRA is made up the American the public. You are actually addressing individuals who are the members of the organization when you say to keep the NRA on its back foot. Guns do not commit the crimes. Lunatic and abused Americans hooked on Big Pharma’s psychotropic drugs do the acts.

    Forty years ago, none of these types of events happened with any frequency at all. The problem is with American people who are obviously oblivious to reality, increasingly inhumane as a society and hooked on all sorts of different drugs.

  270. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “…smart people also understand that America wasn’t created for the sake of “safety”, but for the sake of preserving “liberty and freedom”. And smart people understand that “liberty and freedom” come with a cost.”

    People deserve a safe society. The two concepts are in no way mutually exclusive. Japan, Australia, most of Western Europe, and South Korea get by in the “liberty and freedom” department just fine without thousands of gun homicides a year. No one should be forced to endure mass shootings as a way of life just to please some gun nut patriotard. A large majority of Americans support common sense gun reforms and, as a democracy (the thing we were founded on), we will eventually get it.

    At no point have these weapons secured any freedom for the American people in the modern era – not a single time. In fact, your freedoms have been steadily eroded, but yet I don’t see the revolution promised by redneck patriotards. Why? It’s almost as if there is no correlation between Cleitus and Bubba owning an AR-15 and civil liberties.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  271. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Look, people actually defend themselves, their families, their homes, their businesses, and their neighbors every day with legally purchased and owned firearms.”

    That’s only because guns are so ubiquitous. If they weren’t, there wouldn’t be any need to have one to defend yourself in most cases. The US had thousands of gun homicides last year. Japan? About 13. Effective gun control can absolutely reduce mass shootings and gun crime. Japan proves that the criminals won’t just get them anyway because they don’t there (and even in Europe, most of their terrorist attacks have involved knives and motor vehicles).

  272. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “The NRA is made up the American the public.”

    A majority of gun owners support gun reforms like expanded background checks and raising the age to buy a weapon.

    “Guns do not commit the crimes. Lunatic and abused Americans hooked on Big Pharma’s psychotropic drugs do the acts.”

    People use guns to commit gun crimes. Without guns, people couldn’t commit any gun crimes. Why does this simple logic escape people?

    Disagree? Then why not allow rocket launchers in the country? After all, rocket launchers don’t kill people, people kill other people.

  273. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Forty years ago, none of these types of events happened with any frequency at all.”

    AR-15s only began mass production and availability for the public after about 1977 when Colt’s patent expired. Dangerous weapons become more ubiquitous with multiple manufactures making them, and then we suddenly get more mass shootings. It is almost as if there is a connection.

    In any case, other countries have proved that gun reforms can lower gun crime and prevent mass shootings. There is no reason to micromanage home life, video games, schools, and the entertainment industry when a few simple gun measures would do the trick nicely.

    • 回复: @Joe Stalin
    , @peterAUS
  274. Joe Stalin 说:
    @Anon

    Are you kidding me? It was way past 1977 that there were any kind of big AR production from non-Colt makers. There was nothing but crap manufactured lower receivers like the Palmetto Armory that was machined from solid billet (yuck) and the ER Sales cast receiver that had occlusions from the casting process. I know; I was always trying to find a decent lower to make a semi-auto M16A1 clone.

  275. Joe Stalin 说:

    ” Then why not allow rocket launchers in the country? After all, rocket launchers don’t kill people, people kill other people.”

    Rocket launchers are legal to possess under Federal law as Class 3 destructive devices with \$200 tax to the US Treasury.

  276. @Anon

    “People deserve a safe society.”

    Far more people die from drunk driving accidents than from bullets fired from an AR-15. Far more people die from a corrupt, inefficient and costly health care system than from bullets fired from an AR-15. I could go on and on. In light of this, who are you to determine what constitutes a “safe society” and what standing do you have to impose it on anyone else?

    The people of the U.S. established a constitution to limit government power. That’s what we agreed to. If the people decide that they want to change their constitution, there’s a process for that.

    But while we’re on the subject, it makes no sense to talk of banning certain types of guns for the sake of “safety”, while Donald Trump, by way of his illegal, immoral and unconstitutional military intervention in Syria, for example, flirts with planetary extinction, does it?

    When Donald Trump recklessly fired those 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase, he didn’t know what the consequences would be. That one war crime could’ve escalated into WW3 for all he knew. And the other branches of government did nothing to admonish him. Instead of impeaching him, they’re egging him on. And this is only one example of how our “government” needlessly puts us all at risk.

    美国政府还在欧洲部署“导弹防御”系统,即所谓的“欧洲分阶段自适应方法”,其唯一明显的目的是促进对俄罗斯的核第一次打击。 根据所安装的软件,该系统中使用的导弹发射器还可以发射核武器(攻击性)巡航导弹。 这是非常不稳定和危险的举动,使我们回到了冷战的最糟糕时期。 随着全球局势的紧张和导弹接近俄罗斯边境,特朗普正在迫使俄罗斯采取“警告启动”的姿态,即使发生“意外”也可能发生核战争。

    美国这种无政府的疯狂行为使我们所有人遭受核战争的死亡的危险要比AR-15的子弹高得多。 换句话说,美国政府在当今世界上正在做的事情就像有人将孩子绑在自己的汽车上,然后以警察的身份在城镇开枪射击。

    很抱歉,但是您和美国的“政府”都没有道德上的立场来决定什么构成“安全社会”并将其强加给任何人。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Miro23
  277. peterAUS 说:
    @Anon

    Oh, you are back.

    没关系

    You haven’t bothered, in all those posts, to address:
    1.您是否以自己的生活以及所关心的人的生活来信任美国精英?
    2. Do you believe that armed citizenry are strong detriment to abuse of power by those very elites?

    Probably not important. To you.
    You can always work for them.

    In meantime, your ideal of transforming US society into modern Japan will have to wait.
    I mean ,shame on Americans, they simply can’t get the benefits of Japanese way of life. Like total obedience to authority, lack of individuality etc. With some other, a bit more exotic, elements too (like sex in public transport, schoolgirl things etc).

    I guess for “progs” that’s the ideal world.

    Emperor…I mean, The President (hopefully an African American woman).
    The anointed wise women and men (in that order) really ruling (“progs”).
    The samurai…I mean heavily armed and militarized police, protecting the elite against the lower strata.
    And the serfs…I mean the commoners. The citizens. They can’t own a sword…I mean, a firearm.

    Perfect a?

  278. @Anon

    That’s only because guns are so ubiquitous. If they weren’t, there wouldn’t be any need to have one to defend yourself in most cases.

    Those mean-ass pit bulls and those cougars that come out of the mountains – they don’t have any guns, though. How about, even more likely, a big guy with a baseball bat or just his fists, when you are a 5′ tall 105 lb. woman? Still no need, huh?

    US had thousands of gun homicides last year. Japan? About 13.

    Uh huh, and how many other types of murders? How many black ghetto thugs live in Japan, BTW. Just wondering …

    Effective gun control can absolutely reduce mass shootings and gun crime.

    At the expense of having a chance of defending yourself against the government. Count me out.

    Japan proves that the criminals won’t just get them anyway because they don’t there (and even in Europe, most of their terrorist attacks have involved knives and motor vehicles).

    Yeah, knives and vans don’t hurt so much.

  279. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Clap….clap…clap……..
    完美。

    保存以备将来参考。
    I’ll, most likely use it, as quote, in future “chats” around related to some topics.

    And, without any wish to add anything really, just a thought.

    In some almost not plausible scenario, armed citizenry could add to a pressure onto those elites in order not to drag us there.

    Like, people start demonstrating to express their will. Something about “stop trying to get us all nuked”.
    The elites deploy police to “manage” protests.
    Well, it’s much easier to do that management when the populace is disarmed, I guess.

    Just a random thought.

  280. Miro23 说:
    @Harold Smith

    This is worth repeating – and it’s at the heart of anti-American US Deep State activity, especially if you consider that it is now being combined with high volume MSM anti-Russian propaganda.

    From an unbiased perspective it actually looks like the same people who did 9/11 now want a US First Strike on Russia.

    美国政府还在欧洲部署“导弹防御”系统,即所谓的“欧洲分阶段自适应方法”,其唯一明显的目的是促进对俄罗斯的核第一次打击。 根据所安装的软件,该系统中使用的导弹发射器还可以发射核武器(攻击性)巡航导弹。 这是非常不稳定和危险的举动,使我们回到了冷战的最糟糕时期。 随着全球局势的紧张和导弹接近俄罗斯边境,特朗普正在迫使俄罗斯采取“警告启动”的姿态,即使发生“意外”也可能发生核战争。

    美国这种无政府的疯狂行为使我们所有人遭受核战争的死亡的危险要比AR-15的子弹高得多。 换句话说,美国政府在当今世界上正在做的事情就像有人将孩子绑在自己的汽车上,然后以警察的身份在城镇开枪射击。

    很抱歉,但是您和美国的“政府”都没有道德上的立场来决定什么构成“安全社会”并将其强加给任何人。

    And maybe not coincidentally, this particular missile “defense” system is in the last stages if installation.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Miro23
  281. peterAUS 说:
    @Miro23

    And maybe not coincidentally, this particular missile “defense” system is in the last stages if installation.

    And Putin speech…..
    With the latest push to disarm the populace where the decision makers are.

    Most likely the pure coincidence.
    信任 我们。”

  282. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Those mean-ass pit bulls and those cougars that come out of the mountains – they don’t have any guns, though.”

    That’s not a problem for 99% of people, so that’s no reason to tolerate mass shootings and endless gun crime. You’re grasping at straws with this cougar thing. Guns cause FAR more deaths and injuries than cougars by an order of magnitude – probably several. In any case, we could at least ban or severely restrict weapons like the AR-15 and accessories such as high capacity magazines. The number of people per capita who have ever used such weapons to fend off a cougar attack is infinitesimal.

    “How about, even more likely, a big guy with a baseball bat or just his fists, when you are a 5′ tall 105 lb. woman? Still no need, huh?”

    Yeah, no need. Fewer guns = less violent crime, provably so. Society should not be bound by the paranoid imaginings of “what if.” What if aliens invade? What if the Russians attack? What if…we distributed rocket launchers in preparation of such a thing? Sounds like a bad idea because it is. Same with allowing a 19 year old to buy an AR-15.

    “Yeah, knives and vans don’t hurt so much.”

    Yeah, that kinda wasn’t the point. I guess not everyone is capable of inferring subtext. Each of the attacks referenced resulted in far fewer casualties than either the Vegas shooting or this latest school shooting because the attackers could only use knives or automobiles. No easy access to guns = fewer casualties because attackers must resort to using less deadly weapons. A knife isn’t in the same league as an AR-15.

    “At the expense of having a chance of defending yourself against the government.”

    Name a single instance in the last 30 years where there was a direct correlation between gun ownership and the preservation of some freedom by the American public. I’m betting that you can’t because there probably isn’t one. As mentioned above (and ignored by yourself because it contradicts your claim), other countries have lots of freedom and liberty without flooding their streets with high-powered semi-automatic assault rifles.

    “Count me out.”

    很高兴。

    “Uh huh, and how many other types of murders?”

    Yeah, huh. You should get out more.

    1. the overall murder rate in Japan is significantly lower across almost all categories when compared with the US.

    2. your statement makes no sense at all unless you are trying to suggest that regulating guns causes an increase in murders in other categories, which it provably did not in Japan, Australia, South Korea, and elsewhere.

    “How many black ghetto thugs live in Japan, BTW. Just wondering …”

    Neither the Vegas shooter nor the recent Florida school shooter were white – same for lots of other mass shooters.

    In any case, your argument doesn’t work unless you are suggesting that we should ONLY disarm blacks, something that 1.) absolutely wouldn’t have prevented a large number of mass shootings over the last few years, including the most recent 2.) is completely illegal, meaning that it is impractical to even consider and only serves as a way of distracting away from real reform. Regardless of crime rates, there is no need whatsoever for anyone of any race, including a 19 year old white kid, to own an AR-15.

  283. Miro23 说:
    @Miro23

    And maybe not coincidentally, this particular missile “defense” system is in the last stages if installation. In Poland.

    The Poles should do some do some rational calculation and 1) immediately stop the installation 2) clear the whole setup out of the country.

    If they can do this, they would earn the true gratitude of Russia – and the hysterical enmity of the US Deep State (but what does that matter – this section of the US has always hated the Poles and Poland).

  284. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Oh, you are back.”

    Lots of different people post under “Anon.”

    “You haven’t bothered, in all those posts, to address:
    1.您是否以自己的生活以及所关心的人的生活来信任美国精英?
    2.您认为武装公民对这些精英阶层滥用权力有重大损害吗?”

    1. The point that you raise is the result of a paranoid persecution complex. That kind of thinking results in people believing that school shooting victims are crisis actors and pizzerias are secret facilities for pedophiles.

    Back here in reality, Japan, South Korea, and Australia are quite “free” and they severely restricted gun ownership decades ago. Irrational fear of the government is no reason to tolerate thousands of gun homicides and endless mass shootings.

    There is no way a few hillbillies with guns can defend themselves against the government, and anyone who thinks otherwise doesn’t know what they are talking about. A corrupt government will do as it pleases regardless of what gun owners think.

    2. No, not at all. Point to one example in the last 30 years when it clearly was.

    Grandma with her Colt Detective Special is no match for thousands of highly trained soldiers armed with deadly automatic and semi-automatic weapons, tanks, helicopters, fighter aircraft, and armoured vehicles.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  285. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “In meantime, your ideal of transforming US society into modern Japan will have to wait.”

    That’s a shame, really. Japan is, on the whole, way better than the US in almost every way.

    “I mean ,shame on Americans, they simply can’t get the benefits of Japanese way of life. Like total obedience to authority, lack of individuality etc.”

    Like virtually no crime, a wonderful and ancient culture, much superior fashion trends, no obesity epidemic, wonderful foods, decent enough music (better than American music these days), cheap healthcare, cheaper university education, lack of radical SJWism/third wave feminism, manners, politeness, respect for parents, no school shootings, virtually no terrorism, no mass shootings, a great public school system, the world’s highest mean IQ of any nation, no social media witch hunts, a great video game industry, a competent government largely devoid of American-style corruption, no involvement in endless foreign wars, and some of the world’s best public transportation.

    Yeah, Japan really sucks compared to the US.

    “With some other, a bit more exotic, elements too (like sex in public transport, schoolgirl things etc).”

    Typical ignorant American. The Japanese public transit system is by FAR and away superior to the US public transit system: people are quiet and polite to each other, few bums, clean vehicles, no racial animus, courteous and generally well-trained, professional staff, etc.

    You need to do a bit of traveling. This country is hole compared to some places; it’s certainly not the peak of high culture or anything.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Anon
  286. peterAUS 说:
    @Anon

    1.您是否以自己的生活以及所关心的人的生活来信任美国精英?
    2.您认为武装公民对这些精英阶层滥用权力有重大损害吗?”

    The point that you raise is the result of a paranoid persecution complex.

    Para…what? You psychiatrist/psychologists?

    Let me guess what’s next.
    I can’t own a firearm->if I do own a firearm it will be taken away from me->if I resist that I will be killed.

    或者,更好:
    People who do not trust US elites with their lives and lives of people they care for are that ..parawhatevr.
    And, people who believe that armed citizenry are strong detriment to abuse of power by those very elites are also that parathing.You got me confused now. I thought that “Founding Fathers” were wise men. And they, apparently, were that parathing.
    Anyway, those people can not own firearms. If they do posses firearms those will be taken away from them. If they resist that taking away they’ll be killed.

    说得通。
    Glad we cleared that bit.

    You sure you are an American?
    You remind me of those Communists before the fall of the Wall. Whoever was against TPTBs got some psycho diagnosis for asylum or worse. Like that “parathing” of yours.

    祝你好运。

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  287. @Anon

    Yes, cougars then pit bulls, then home invaders… I’m going from small risk to larger risk. You can let your wife and kids be victims, but I’m not gonna. You’ve got every right as an American to leave them defenseless – it’s not my business. Count me out, though.

    I wrote about the black ghetto thugs thinking possibly you were on of those increasingly-rare numerate people. I guess not. Japan doesn’t have them – they kill multiple tens of thousands of people each year in America. Have you ever thought of comparing numbers of white murderers and victims to those in the American inner cities, or to those in Western Europe? (possibly Japan would still have us beat, but I don’t know this yet). Guess what, Steve Sailer on unz here loves this kind of stuff, but you’d have to do some searching.

    I’m gonna own an AR-15 whether you like it or not. I have not told you what car you should not drive, say a gas-guzzling 8-banger 5,000 lb. behemouth, which is more likely to run over a pedestrian while you’re on the internet than my AR is to kill anybody (other than someone who deserves it). That’s your business, and I won’t interfere. How about keep out of mine, mmmkay?

  288. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    And, from, say, a “professional” point of view:

    There is no way a few hillbillies with guns can defend themselves against the government, and anyone who thinks otherwise doesn’t know what they are talking about. A corrupt government will do as it pleases regardless of what gun owners think.

    Grandma with her Colt Detective Special is no match for thousands of highly trained soldiers armed with deadly automatic and semi-automatic weapons, tanks, helicopters, fighter aircraft, and armoured vehicles.

    同意,其实。
    A few few hillbillies with guns and Grandma with her Colt Detective Special can’t do much.

    3000 gun owners, in an average city of 50 000 people, with a week to get ready, oh, yes, they can.
    They can indeed.
    他们能 停止 those..haha…

    thousands of highly trained soldiers armed with 致命 automatic and semi-automatic weapons, tanks, helicopters, fighter aircraft, and armoured vehicles.

    That “deadly” cracked me up. You must be one of those “chattering class” specimens around.
    You sure it’s 战斗机 aircraft too? I’ll have to downgrade you to “chattering class early 20s”.
    If you are the example of “opposition” the guys into the 2nd simply can’t lose.

  289. @Anon

    From your other post, but related:

    As mentioned above (and ignored by yourself because it contradicts your claim), other countries have lots of freedom and liberty without flooding their streets with high-powered semi-automatic assault rifles.

    If there were a country out there with the amount of freedom American had even in 1985, I’d have probably bugged out to that location. I’m not happy with this place and what it’s turning into. It’d be much worse already, however, had Americans been disarmed by now. Globalist elites are still afraid to lay down a heavy hand in one fell swoop.

    No, I’ve been all around. I respect the Japanese for not letting their country get immivaded, but it’s not my kind of place. Why don’t you just stay there, and learn some Japanese? It may be easier to bullshit people in Japanese, as it ain’t working too well here.

    Go on, ride the train… knock yourself out.

  290. @Anon

    Each of the attacks referenced resulted in far fewer casualties than either the Vegas shooting or this latest school shooting because the attackers could only use knives or automobiles.

    Now you’re just being daft. There have been knife killings in China in which 50 or more have been killed. Automobiles can kill as many people as are on the sidewalk or street, and bombs have killed many over the centuries sometimes many hundreds at a time.

    I don’t suggest disarming blacks, by the way, as you understood that totally wrong. I am a believer in the US Constitution. My point was, you are comparing apples to oranges when you compare a country with millions of black ghetto thugs to the Japanese who are 99,9% of one race and culture.

    I can’t fight all the stupidity in the world in one night, even with Peter’s and Harold’s help. Good night. Grow up.

  291. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Now you’re just being daft.”

    Flag on the play: name calling because you lost the argument.

    “There have been knife killings in China in which 50 or more have been killed.”

    That’s extremely rare and completely misses the point. In the modern era and in Western countries like ours, that’s not the case. Nearly all of the knife attacks occurring in Europe since gun restrictions were enacted have resulted in significantly fewer casualties than would have been the case had guns been available and used instead. It is absurd to claim otherwise. The US has just 5% of the world’s population but over 30% of mass shooting totaling thousands of deaths. Automobile and knife attacks by madmen and terrorists during the same time period of time don’t even compare with that figure; it’s not remotely close.

    “Automobiles can kill as many people as are on the sidewalk or street, and bombs have killed many over the centuries sometimes many hundreds at a time.”

    Automobile and bomb attacks in Western countries over the last 10 years have killed infinitesimally fewer people than guns. Ban the guns and you get rid of the gun crime and reduce the homicide rate. Japan proves this fact.

    “I don’t suggest disarming blacks, by the way, as you understood that totally wrong.”

    We have already seen that depriving people of guns reduces the gun homicide and mass shooting rate (Australia), so a differential crime rate between racial groups doesn’t matter. If they don’t have the guns, they can’t commit the gun crime, regardless of skin colour.

    “I am a believer in the US Constitution. My point was, you are comparing apples to oranges when you compare a country with millions of black ghetto thugs to the Japanese who are 99,9% of one race and culture.”

    1. Regardless of race, people can’t commit as many gun crimes if they don’t have access to as many guns. Several nations have proved this to be the case. Ban the guns and the gun crimes stop or decrease. Ours might not be as low as Japan’s, but that doesn’t mean we can significantly decrease it – probably by 80% or more.

    2. Several high profile mass shootings in recent memory were not committed by blacks. They wouldn’t have happened had those people not been able to get the weapons in the first place.

    “I can’t fight all the stupidity in the world in one night, even with Peter’s and Harold’s help. Good night. Grow up.”

    I have expertly shredded every argument thrown my way. You guys don’t have any salient points to make. You just repeat talking points.

  292. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “If there were a country out there with the amount of freedom American had even in 1985, I’d have probably bugged out to that location.”

    There are several countries with basically as much freedom as ours. They just don’t define “freedom” as the ability to buy a deadly semi-automatic assault rifle whenever you want.

    “I’m not happy with this place and what it’s turning into.”

    Me neither, but that has nothing to do with gun ownership. America isn’t suddenly a bad place just because we are now having a gun control debate.

    “It’d be much worse already, however, had Americans been disarmed by now. Globalist elites are still afraid to lay down a heavy hand in one fell swoop.”

    As I asked above, name ONE time in modern American history where that has been proved. Name ONE time where the government or “globalists” reversed course and decided not to strip away some freedom under the threat of a violent revolt by gun owners.

  293. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “3000 gun owners, in an average city of 50 000 people, with a week to get ready, oh, yes, they can.”

    Please. 3000 poorly organized, untrained country folks with hunting rifles and handguns verses tens of thousands of trained soldiers, tanks, helicopters, drones, cruise missiles, electronic warfare, special forces, and an unlimited supply of food and ammo to conduct siege warfare…it would be over in a weekend, if it even happened in the first place.

    “That “deadly” cracked me up. You must be one of those “chattering class” specimens around.”

    That moment when “deadly” is considered by someone to be a “big” word.

    “You sure it’s fighter aircraft too? I’ll have to downgrade you to “chattering class early 20s”.

    1. Yeah, pretty sure.

    2. Late 30s, vet. Now, let me guess you: early 50s, non-Stem educated, community college, never served, spends most of your time on Brietbart, not particularly intelligent, faux patriot, wannabe gun collector who owns a few rifles and handguns and thinks he’s a gun expert, overweight, uses medicare despite railing against “big gubment.”

    “If you are the example of “opposition” the guys into the 2nd simply can’t lose.”

    Record numbers of Americans now support gun control. You’ve already lost.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  294. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Yes, cougars then pit bulls, then home invaders… I’m going from small risk to larger risk. You can let your wife and kids be victims, but I’m not gonna. You’ve got every right as an American to leave them defenseless – it’s not my business. Count me out, though.”

    You could just not live around dangerous animals and support taking guns away from potential home invaders, instead.

    “I wrote about the black ghetto thugs thinking possibly you were on of those increasingly-rare numerate people. I guess not. Japan doesn’t have them – they kill multiple tens of thousands of people each year in America.”

    1. The last several mass shooters in the United States have killed around 100 people or more combined, and they weren’t black. That’s comparable to the total number of people killed in all of Japan from gun related crimes over the same period.

    2. The total number of gun-related homicide deaths in the US annually hovers around 1ok, not a multiple of 10k. The number is only a multiple when suicides, etc. are factored in (another argument for some gun control measures).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

    “Have you ever thought of comparing numbers of white murderers and victims to those in the American inner cities, or to those in Western Europe? (possibly Japan would still have us beat, but I don’t know this yet). Guess what, Steve Sailer on unz here loves this kind of stuff, but you’d have to do some searching.”

    I’m not sure what you are trying to suggest. That living around blacks makes whites commit more crime? Even when blacks are removed from the picture, gun-related homicides committed by white Americans are still higher than the white European rate. Even with guns factored out entirely, the white American homicide/violent crime rate in relatively peaceful states like New Hampshire (few blacks) is still higher than their white European counterparts and probably 2-3x the Japanese rate.

    “I’m gonna own an AR-15 whether you like it or not. I have not told you what car you should not drive, say a gas-guzzling 8-banger 5,000 lb. behemouth,”

    Apples to oranges.

    “which is more likely to run over a pedestrian while you’re on the internet than my AR is to kill anybody (other than someone who deserves it). That’s your business, and I won’t interfere. How about keep out of mine, mmmkay?”

    The number of people intentionally killed with AR-15s greatly exceeds the number of people intentionally killed with cars.

  295. Anon • 免责声明 说:

    “Para…what? You psychiatrist/psychologists?”

    “Paranoid” is a big word to these people. Let that sink in.

    “You sure you are an American? You remind me of those Communists before the fall of the Wall.”

    随着 21 世纪的开始,人类进化正处于一个转折点。 自然选择,这个最强壮、最聪明、最快的人比其他人繁殖更多的过程,这个过程曾经有利于人类最高尚的特征,现在开始有利于不同的特征。 当时的大多数科幻小说都预言了一个更文明、更智慧的未来。 但随着时间的推移,事情似乎朝着相反的方向发展。 一个哑口无言。 这怎么发生的? 进化不一定奖励智力。 由于没有天敌来稀释牛群,它开始简单地奖励那些繁殖最多的人,而让聪明的人成为濒临灭绝的物种。

    –Idiocracy

  296. peterAUS 说:
    @Anon

    Oh, you are on the roll here.

    You skip that “parathing” I see.
    Giving online diagnosys isn’t your forte ti appears.

    I have one for you and your ilk.
    Doublespeak, double thought and cognitive dissonance.

    Tell me, how do you manage:

    1.您是否以自己的生活以及所关心的人的生活来信任美国精英?
    2.您认为武装公民对这些精英阶层滥用权力有重大损害吗?”

    The point that you raise is the result of a paranoid persecution complex.

    A corrupt government will do as it pleases regardless of what gun owners think.

    thousands of highly trained soldiers armed with deadly automatic and semi-automatic weapons, tanks, helicopters, fighter aircraft, and armoured vehicles.

    verses tens of thousands of trained soldiers, tanks, helicopters, drones , cruise missiles, electronic warfare, special forces, and an unlimited supply of food and ammo to conduct siege warfare

    How do you that?
    C’mon, tell, us, what’s the technique, the training and discipline that make you being able to do that?
    Is that genetic or you managed to do that through education?

    Please. 3000 poorly organized, untrained country folks with hunting rifles and handguns verses tens of thousands of trained soldiers, tanks, helicopters, drones, cruise missiles, electronic warfare, special forces, and an unlimited supply of food and ammo to conduct siege warfare…it would be over in a weekend, if it even happened in the first place.

    Actually not a bad point. For a chattering class kid.

    I have another:
    是的。
    3000 properly organized and highly motivated, well trained citizens with scoped semiautomatic and bolt/lever rifles, shotguns and night/thermal optics and encrypted comms (among other things, as “works” and “devices”)

    tens of thousands of trained soldiers who don’t feel right about the mission, tanks which can’t use cannon, helicopters which can’t use heavy ordnance, drones which can’t use heavy ordnance either, NOT cruise missiles, electronic warfare, special forces, and a modeate supply of food and ammo to conduct siege warfare…it would last for 3 months, at least.
    With calling international help even more. I mean, “humanitarian disaster” on US soil. I am sure that Russia and China would just love to help. Some towns/cities in Syria last for years.
    With other towns/cities joining even longer. And, with those other towns/cities in the same region, that unlimited ammo and food for besieging forces wouldn’t work anymore.

    US military would not be able to conduct full scale MOUT on US soil, against US citizens, in densely populated urban areas.
    And drone and electronic warfare work both way.

    Politicians would’t order that because they know it could bite them back soon. It could even make some other, maybe many other, towns and cities rebel as well. They didn’t even order full assault on Bundy guys at that farm. Ordering that on a city of 50 000….well…you are an idiot I think. No offense.
    Officers wouldn’t execute that order because they wouldn’t trust politicians not to dump them later on because of “war crimes”. Shelling civilians tend to make that happen. US civilians in particular.
    And enlisted men, company, platoon and squad leaders in particular, would simply refuse to do that because they would feel it’s wrong. Even more, I am positive we’d see desertion on a large scale. And some cases of defection to “rebel” case too.

    As for that social analysis and “idiocracy”, works both ways:
    You are an example of somebody of no related knowledge but very strong opinions.
    Totalitarian streak too. Cognitive dissonance too.
    Loving, needing, to feel superior as:

    I have expertly shredded every argument thrown my way.

    Let me guess you: early 50s, non-Stem educated, community college, never served, spends most of your time on Brietbart, not particularly intelligent, faux patriot, wannabe gun collector who owns a few rifles and handguns and thinks he’s a gun expert, overweight, uses medicare despite railing against “big gubment

    human evolution was at a turning point. Natural selection, the process by which the strongest, the smartest, the fastest, reproduced in greater numbers than the rest, a process which had once favored the noblest traits of man, now began to favor different traits. Most science fiction of the day predicted a future that was more civilized and more intelligent. But as time went on, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction. A dumbing down.

    Oh, yes, a bit thick, actually.
    A smarter man would’ve gone through my post history and got a feeling for a person. You didn’t. Even worse, if you did, well, your perceptive abilities are zero. No surprise there.

    You are not a vet. At least not from combat arms and you have zero understanding of modern combat.

    You are one of those but-hurt “chattering class” people who paid for that very condescending tone and underestimating of an average American by not getting their dear Bitch in the White House.

    And you don’t even get what the fuss is really all about.

    A good “prog”.
    Keep fuming on here. A good learning experience for everybody around.

  297. Flat Cat 说:

    I didn’t vote for Trump, much for the same reasons as I didn’t vote for Obama before him, despite the contempt I felt towards the sitting administration and the (quite psychotic) woman who was running against him for the emperor’s chair. The simple why is that U.S national elections are a farce. There is no real choice, because the American people cannot stomach a real leader.

    A real leader has true conviction, a set of morals and values that inform his world view and help him frame his words and actions. He cannot be a power seeker because those who actively seek power will, always, say or do anything to obtain, keep, and grow that power.

    Trump said a lot of great things in his quest to gain power. So did Obama. Heck, GW has a few good things to say on the campaign trail. But, look at what they wrought.

    Actions, not words. Can a man stand true to his word, and to his values, in the face of vicious attack, slander, and opposition?

    Not if he has no base of principles on which to stand. A blathering weather vein with no foundation will swing its face in which ever way the wind blows, and will eventually be swept away by the storm.

    I always thought Trump was exactly that, though I had hoped I was mistaken. He’s gone back on most of the promises he made. There will be no wall, no serious enforcement of immigration law, no withdrawal from foreign entanglements, no stopping of foreign aid, no real help for the poor and middle class…

    At this point, even the most rabid Trump supporter must have drawn one of two conclusions. One, the man lied about whatever he needed to lie about to gain office. Or, two, the man is so incompetent, egotistical, and spineless that he cannot stand up to the Establishment powers and has allowed them to browbeat him into submission.

    The sad thing about all of this is that the Republicans, and so called conservatives in general, had the opportunity to elect a man of genuine conviction in both 2008 and 2012. They rejected Ron Paul decisively both times primarily due to his stance on foreign policy.

    I suppose the three things I like about Trump are that he has not yet gotten us into a shooting war with Russia (pretty sure that was on Hillary’s to-do list), he brings the circus back to town whenever he’s in the public eye, and he’s giving Republicans and conservatives exactly what they deserve.

    So, long live the king. But I’m keeping my guns too, thank you very much. Things are only going to get more interesting from here on out.

    • 回复: @Authenticjazzman
  298. Anon • 免责声明 说:
    @Anon

    https://stormer-daily.rw/black-living-in-tokyo-whines-that-japs-dont-accept-him-or-his-blasian-daughter/

    Looks like jungle fever has spread to Japan.

    Miss Japan was half black. Japanese runners are half black. All are results of Japanese women dumping Japanese men and going with blacks, and it gets huge international boost from world media.

  299. “I suppose the three things I like about Trump are that he has not yet gotten us into a shooting war with Russia (pretty sure that was on Hillary’s to-do list)…”

    Trump is like an unsupervised child playing with matches in a house filled with highly flammable material. That he has not yet started a major war is not for his lack of trying, IMO. The credit for the fact that a direct military conflict with Russia hasn’t happened YET, must go to Vladimir Putin, in recognition of his supernatural restraint and ability to deal with spoiled children.

    “he brings the circus back to town whenever he’s in the public eye,”

    Let’s face it he does make a great clown. I call him “Orange Clown”.

    “and he’s giving Republicans and conservatives exactly what they deserve.”

    Indeed; he’s exactly the evil clown that they need, want and deserve, IMO. Unfortunately however, the rest of the world doesn’t deserve the nuclear-armed petulant man-child who apparently sees the whole planet as a toy for his amusement.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  300. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    回覆:

    Trump is like an unsupervised child playing with matches in a house filled with highly flammable material. That he has not yet started a major war is not for his lack of trying, IMO. The credit for the fact that a direct military conflict with Russia hasn’t happened YET, must go to Vladimir Putin, in recognition of his supernatural restraint and ability to deal with spoiled children.

    Unfortunately however, the rest of the world doesn’t deserve the nuclear-armed petulant man-child who apparently sees the whole planet as a toy for his amusement.

    Well..I am not quite sure about that, really.
    Yes, does sound plausible, but I believe although it could be popular is also, simplistic and dangerously shallow.

    那里 is a method there.
    Can’t bother finding a link but there is a documented explanation about such behavior re US foreign policy. Something along the lines as “being strong and looking unbalanced”. Any streetwise thug uses it all the time, especially against those coming from “polite company”.

    As for Putin and Kremlin in general, yes, they do that handling right, so far.
    新的 问题 with such approach is that the opponent could, easily, see that as a weakness.
    As, again, any streetwise thug recognizes that in a middle-class passer by he’s intimidating at the moment.

    Sometimes it pays to be equally “unbalanced”. To send a message that one can, also, flip into violence in a second for no obvious reason. Again, any streetwise thug would recognize that in instant, on subconscious level.

    The Empire shall keep pushing.
    The regime in Kremlin shall keep being pushed and will keep stepping back.

    The problem is, sooner or later, we’ll reach the line Kremlin will see as “red” and The Empire will not.

    砰。

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
    , @Joe Stalin
  301. Joe Stalin 说:

    David Kopel’s website is a great source of well-researched pro-gun information:

    http://www.davekopel.com/

    -

    Japan: Gun Control and People Control

    By David B. Kopel

    The American Rifleman, December 1988

    [更多]

    This article is condensed from the law review article Japanese Gun Control, 1993 Asia-Pacific Law Review 26. The law review article is also available in Espa�ol. This article is based on Kopel’s book The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies? (Prometheus Books, 1992). More articles by Kopel on Japanese gun control are available here.

    For gun controllers, Japan is a dream come true. The law is simple: “No-one shall possess a fire-arm or fire-arms or a sword or swords.”

    Japan’s crime rate is very low, and its gun crime rate virtually nil. Anti-gun lobbies tout Japan as the kind of nation that America could be, if only we would ban guns. Handgun Control quotes a Japanese newspaper reporter who writes: “It strikes me as clear that there is a distinct correlation between gun control laws and the rate of violent crime. The fewer the guns, the less the violence.”

    But while Japan may be a gun-banner’s dream, it’s a civil libertarian’s nightmare. Japan’s low crime rate has almost nothing to do with gun control, and everything to do with people control. Americans, used to their own traditions of freedom, would not accept Japan’s system of people controls and gun controls.
    Japanese Firearms Laws

    Besides the police and the military, the only group that is allowed to posses guns is hunters, and that possession is strictly circumscribed. The police even check hunters’ ammunition inventory, to make sure that there are no unaccounted shells or bullets. Hunting licenses themselves are not particularly difficult to obtain. A prospective hunter must take an official safety course; and then pass a test which covers maintenance and inspection of the hunting gun, methods of loading and unloading cartridges, shooting from various positions, and target practice for stationary and moving objects. The hunting license is valid for three years. Total permit fees for hunting rifles and licenses are 15000 (about 125 American dollars). When not hunting, gun owners must store their weapons in a locker.

    Trap and skeet shooting are also tightly restricted.

    Civilians cannot obtain handgun target licenses. Even possession of a starter’s pistol is only allowed under carefully- detailed conditions.

    The section of the gun law which specifies who may be licensed offers no standards, just the vague statement that licenses must be denied “any person (taking into consideration also relatives living with him) who there is reasonable cause to suspect may be dangerous to other persons’ lives or properties or to the public peace.” Thus, the police have broad discretion in rejecting applicants.

    As in Britain, shotguns are far easier to obtain than rifles. In a nation with half the population of the U.S., there are only 27,000 rifle licensees. There about half a million licensed shotguns, although their numbers have declined by about
    20% in this decade.
    犯罪控制

    Japan’s strictly-regulated guns play very little part in crime. In 1985, for example, only 35 crimes, including 10 murders, were committed with hunting guns.

    Although handguns are completely forbidden to civilians, they still figure somewhat more often in crime. Handguns were used in 209 crimes in 1985. About 2/3 of all gun crimes are committed by Boryokudan, organized crime groups.

    As the gun-banners point out, the Japanese crime rate is dramatically lower than the U.S. rate. Tokyo, the world’s safest major city, suffers muggings at the rate of 40 per year per one
    million inhabitants. New York City’s rate is 11,000.

    According to government statistics, Japan has 1.5 homicides per 100,000 citizens each year, and America has 7.9. Actually, the gap between U.S. and Japanese homicide rates is not quite as large as the official statistics indicate. The real Japanese murder rate is about twice the reported rate; unlike the U.S., Japan does not count an attempt to injure, but which accidentally causes death, as a homicide. The F.B.I. also over-counts American murders, by listing the 1,500 – 2,500 legal, self- defense fatal shootings of criminals as illegal homicide. Still, Japan’s actual homicide rate is two to three times lower than the U.S. rate. As for handgun murders, the U.S. rate is 200 times higher than Japan’s.

    Robbery in Japan is about as rare as murder. Japan’s annual robbery rate is 1.8 per 100,000 inhabitants; America’s is 205.4. Do the gun banners have the argument won when they point to these statistics? No, they don’t. A realistic examination of Japanese culture leads to the conclusion that gun control has little, if anything, to do with Japan’s low crime rates. Japan’s lack of crime is more the result of the very extensive powers of the Japanese police, and the distinctive relation of the Japanese citizenry to authority. Further, none of the reasons which have made gun control succeed in Japan (in terms of disarming citizens) exist in the U.S.

    The Japanese criminal justice system bears more heavily on a suspect than any other system in an industrial democratic nation. One American found this out when he was arrested in Okinawa for possessing marijuana: he was interrogated for days without an attorney, and signed a confession written in Japanese that he could not read. He met his lawyer for the first time at his trial, which took 30 minutes.

    Unlike in the United States, where the Miranda rule limits coercive police interrogation techniques, Japanese police and prosecutors may detain a suspect indefinitely until he confesses. (Technically, detentions are only allowed for three days, followed by ten day extensions approved by a judge, but defense attorneys rarely oppose the extension request, for fear of offending the prosecutor.) Bail is denied if it would interfere with interrogation.

    Even after interrogation is completed, pretrial detention may continue on a variety of pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Criminal defense lawyers are the only people allowed to visit a detained suspect, and those meetings are strictly limited.

    Partly as a result of these coercive practices, and partly as a result of the Japanese sense of shame, the confession rate is 95%.

    For those few defendants who dare to go to trial, there is no jury. Since judges almost always defer to the prosecutors’ judgment, the trial conviction rate for violent crime is 99.5%.
    Of those convicted, 98% receive jail time.

    In short, once a Japanese suspect is apprehended, the power of the prosecutor makes it very likely the suspect will go to jail. And the power of the policeman makes it quite likely that a criminal will be apprehended.

    The police routinely ask “suspicious” characters to show what is in their purse or sack. In effect, the police can search almost anyone, almost anytime, because courts only rarely exclude evidence seized by the police — even if the police acted illegally.

    The most important element of police power, though, is not authority to search, but authority in the community. Like school teachers, Japanese policemen rate high in public esteem, especially in the countryside. Community leaders and role models, the police are trained in calligraphy and Haiku composition. In police per capita, Japan far outranks all other major democracies.

    15,000 koban “police boxes” are located throughout the cities. Citizens go to the 24-hour-a-day boxes not only for street directions, but to complain about day-to-day problems, such as noisy neighbors, or to ask advice on how to raise children. Some of the policemen and their families live in the boxes. Police box officers clear 74.6% of all criminal cases cleared. Police box officers also spend time teaching neighborhood youth judo or calligraphy. The officers even hand- write their own newspapers, with information about crime and accidents, “stories about good deeds by children, and opinions of
    居民。”

    The police box system contrasts sharply with the practice in America. Here, most departments adopt a policy of “stranger policing.” To prevent corruption, police are frequently rotated from one neighborhood to another. But as federal judge Charles Silberman writes, “the cure is worse than the disease, for officers develop no sense of identification with their beats, hence no emotional stake in improving the quality of life there.”

    Thus, the U.S. citizenry does not develop a supportive relationship with the police. One poll showed that 60% of police officers believe “it is difficult to persuade people to give patrolmen the information they need.”

    The Japanese police do not spend all their time in the koban boxes. As the Japanese government puts it: “Home visit is one of the most important duties of officers assigned to police boxes.” Making annual visits to each home in their beat, officers keep track of who lives where, and which family member to contact in case of emergency. The police also check on all gun licensees, to make sure no gun has been stolen or misused, that the gun is securely stored, and that the licensees are emotionally stable.

    Gun banners might rejoice at a society where the police keep such a sharp eye on citizens’ guns. But the price is that the police keep an eye on everything.

    Policemen are apt to tell people reading sexually-oriented magazines to read something more worthwhile. Japan’s major official year-end police report includes statistics like “Background and Motives for Girls’ Sexual Misconduct.” In 1985, the police determined that 37.4% of the girls had been seduced, and the rest had had sex “voluntarily.” For the volunteers, 19.6% acted “out of curiosity”, while for 18.1%, the motive was “liked particular boy.” The year-end police report also includes sections on labor demands, and on anti-nuclear or anti-military demonstrations.

    Broad powers, professionalism, and community support combine to help Tokyo police solve 96.5% of murders, and 82.5% of robberies. In America, the police clear 74% of murders, but only a quarter of all robberies. 70% of all Japanese crimes end in a conviction; only 19.8% of American crimes even end in an arrest. A mere 9% of reported American violent crimes end in incarceration. Compared to the Japanese criminal, the American criminal faces only a minuscule risk of jail. Is it any wonder that American criminals commit so many more crimes?

    Additionally, Japan’s tight, conformist social culture does an excellent job of keeping citizens out of crime in the first place. As the head of Tokyo’s Police Department explains, “A man who commits a crime will bring dishonor to his family and his village, so he will think twice about disgracing them.”

    Having lived together for several thousand years without significant immigration, the Japanese have developed the world’s most homogenous and unified society. America’s ethnic diversity causes tensions and crime, as the first or second generations of immigrants sometimes have difficulty adjusting to American ways.

    But even if immigration does cause some crime, our policies certainly seem more humane than the ethnic policies of Japan. When Japan, under severe American pressure, admitted 100 Vietnamese boat people, a leading publication called them “the sword of an alien culture pointed at Japan.”

    Many Korean families have lived in Japan for longer than Michael Dukakis’ family has lived in America. Although born in Japan, the Koreans have “impure” blood, which makes them forever ineligible for Japanese citizenship.

    Partly because the Japanese are so unified and homogenous, they accept and internalize social controls. It is this attitude of obedience and impulse control that matters most in the low Japanese crime rate. Guns or not, the Japanese are simply the
    world’s most law-abiding people.

    Japanese-Americans, who of course have access to firearms, have an even lower violent crime rate than do Japanese in Japan. Likewise, prisoners in jails in Japan and in America prisoners have no guns, but American prisoners commit about a hundred murders annually, and Japanese prisoners none.

    Dr. Paul Blackman of NRA/ILA points out that if gun control were really the major cause of the low Japanese crime rate, it would be impossible to explain why Japan’s non-gun crime rate is so much lower than America’s non-gun crime rate. America’s non-gun robbery rate, for example, is 60 times Japan’s.

    If gun control were really such an important factor in Japan’s low crime, it would also be hard to explain why Japan’s murder rate is higher than Britain’s (a shooter’s paradise compared to Japan). Both Switzerland and Israel have many more guns per capita than even America, and require citizens to own or train with pistols and fully automatic rifles. Yet these countries have less murder and violent crime than Japan, and
    almost no gun crime.

    In short, it is not the presence or absence of physical objects that matters, but how they are treated. In America, scaffolding collapses kill about 2,500 workers over the course of a decade. Japan, though, has not had a single scaffolding fatality in the past decade. Japan has not outlawed scaffolding; rather, the Japanese business culture simply takes workplace safety more seriously than does American culture.
    自杀

    Japan’s experience also indicates that gun control has almost no effect on a nation’s suicide rate. While the Japanese gun suicide rate is one-fiftieth of America’s, the overall
    suicide rate is twice as high as America’s.

    American gun controllers argue that in America, more males die from suicide attempts because males are more likely to choose a gun as a suicide weapon. Yet in Japan, males are still twice
    as likely to die in a suicide attempt as are females.

    Japan suffers from many double or multiple suicides, called shinju. Suicidal parents often kill their children, at the rate of one per day, in oyako-shinju. In fact, 17% of all Japanese homicide victims are children murdered by suicidal parents. Thus, Japan’s tight family structure, which keeps the crime rate low, is not an unalloyed blessing.

    Even America’s leading gun control scholar, Stanford’s Franklin Zimring concedes: “Cultural factors appear to affect the suicide rates far more than the availability and use of firearms. Thus suicide rates would not seem to be readily affected by making firearms less available.”

    Zimring’s observation fits with the evidence in America. All ethnic groups have equal access to firearms, but Jews are less likely to use guns as their suicide method, while Blacks and Southerners are more likely to use guns. Although American Blacks are more likely to use guns in suicide, the black suicide rate is below the American average.
    枪文化

    While Japan’s gun control has been irrelevant to crime control or suicide prevention, it has been successful in another sense: virtually no-one in Japan, except for some carefully- controlled hunters, has a gun. Japan is truly a gun-free society. Most of the Japanese tourists who shoot at the Hawaii
    Gun Club on Oahu have never even seen a gun before.

    Yet it is doubtful that America could imitate even this limited “success” of Japan’s gun control. Americans possess many more guns than the Japanese ever did; and, unlike the Japanese, Americans seem determined to keep their weapons.

    Japan never had a significant stock of non-military guns, so gun control was simple to mandate. But in America, there are already over 100 million long guns, and 60 million handguns. In 1985, the Japanese police seized a record high 1,369 illegal guns. A big-city police force in the U.S. might confiscate that many in a few months.

    An island nation, Japan can more or less seal its borders against illegal gun imports. Yet even if gun manufacture in America vanished, and all present guns were confiscated, illegal imports would quickly rebuild the American gun supply. If the United States imported illegal handguns in the same physical volume it imports marijuana, 20 million handguns would cross our borders every year. (The legal market for handgun purchases is about 2.5 million annually.)

    For the vast majority of Japanese, never seeing a gun is hardly a deprivation, for Japan developed only the most minimal cultural attachment to firearms.

    When Portuguese trading ships arrived in the middle of the 16th century, Japan’s many feudal rulers investigated guns for use in the ongoing civil wars. Long before the “Southern Barbarians” (Western traders) ever arrived, Japan had far outpaced Europe in metallurgy. Within a few decades, the various Japanese armies had more, better-built guns than most European armies.

    A military dictator named Hideyoshi was particularly expert firearms tactics, and Hideoyoshi finally conquered Japan and ended the civil wars. In 1588 Hideyoshi decreed the “Sword Hunt,” and banned possession of swords by the lower classes. The pretext was that all the swords would be melted down to supply nails for a hall containing a huge statue of the Buddha.
    Instead, Hideoyoshi had the swords melted into a statue of himself.

    After Hideoyoshi, the Tokugawa Shogunate took power, and ruled Japan until the late 19th century. The Shogunate used guns extensively in its invasion of Korea. But after the invasion was repelled, Japan turned inward, rejecting all forms of Westernization. Western contact was limited to a single Dutch trading mission, which was required to stay on a small island in Nagasaki harbor.

    The Tokoguwa began the gradual process of eradicating all Western influence from Japan, including the use of firearms. Under the Tokugawa, peasants were assigned to a five-man group, headed by landholders who were responsible for the group’s behavior. The groups arranged marriages, resolved disputes, kept members from traveling or moving without permission, maintained religious orthodoxy, and enforced the rules against peasants carrying firearms or swords.

    The Shogunate’s gun control eventually disarmed not only the peasantry, but also the Samurai warriors. Gun-smiths were restricted in the number of apprentices they could adopt, and eventually sales to anyone besides the military government became illegal.

    The Samurai did not mind, though. While American pioneers considered their guns a symbolic “badge of honor,” the Samurai revered swords as the true symbol of knighthood. For combat, Samurai disdained guns because they allowed fighting from a distance, rather than face to face, and required the combatant to assume an undignified crouching position. Further, there was little practical use for long guns, since there was almost no big
    game to hunt.

    Thus, in the 1850’s, when Commodore Perry re-opened Japan, Japanese were still using primitive matchlock guns similar to the type the Portuguese had introduced over 300 years ago. Led by American manufacturers, the rest of the world had replaced matchlocks with flintlocks. In 1872, the Samurai and the Tokugawas were deposed. The Samurai had used swords to fight against a conscript army, which was armed with rifles. (Although the army now had firearms, villagers still did not.)

    In America, on the other hand, guns were owned by virtually all adult males. In response to the tremendous American demand for guns, America developed the world’s leading firearms companies. Mass production of firearms led America into the Industrial Revolution, and became our first major manufactured
    出口。

    Japan, however, has never had much of a firearms industry. MITI, Japan’s Ministry for Trade, is hardly encouraging Japanese companies to capture the world’s growing market for high-tech plastic/metal alloy guns. Indeed, Japan has only one handgun factory. The manufacturer’s main business is heavy electrical equipment; the guns are just a courtesy for the government.

    Factory spokesmen will not even reveal the factory’s location.

    Without a culture of civilians firearms ownership, the Japanese never saw strict gun control as anything out of the ordinary. And because the crime rate is so extraordinarily low, the Japanese, unlike many Americans, perceive no need to own a gun for individual self-defense.

    Perhaps the most important reason the Japanese voluntarily accept disarmament is that their government does the same. After the disaster of World War II, war was perceived as an unmitigated horror, and the army was abolished.

    The police carry guns, but rarely shoot them, instead using their black belts in judo or police sticks. In an average year, the entire Tokyo police force only fires six shots. Even if guns vanished from America, it is difficult to imagine a big-city American police force firing only six times in an entire year. Likewise, there is obviously a strict gun prohibition in American prisons, but the guards are still armed; the vast majority of Japanese prison guards carry only police sticks.

    In a top-down society such as Japan, when the government disarms itself, it creates a powerful moral climate for citizens to do the same. Needless to say, a disarmed military and police are not likely in the United States, and neither is voluntary compliance with gun control.

    In many American cities where it is nearly impossible to legally carry a gun for self-defense, many people do so anyway. Many more own illegal weapons at home for self-defense. Thus, American gun banners correctly insist that strict gun controls be accompanied by mandatory jail terms. The gun banners recognize that without mandatory sentences, judges and juries would rarely send their fellow citizens to jail for an illegal self-defense gun. Without the certainty of jail, strict controls are often ignored.

    But in Japan, the citizens voluntarily comply with the gun law; accordingly, there is no mandatory minimum penalty for unlicensed firearm possession. If gun ban is readily obeyed in Japan, but is massively resisted wherever it appears in America, isn’t that an indication a gun ban might be acceptable in Japan, but wrong in America?
    Should America Import Gun Laws Made in Japan?

    In the 1910 debate preceding the New York’s Sullivan Law (the first major American gun control law affecting citizens entitled to full civil rights) one writer recommended that New York copy Japan, “where intending purchasers of revolvers must first obtain police permits, and sales must be reported to the police.” In 1987, a letter to the editor of The New Republic announced that Japan has so little crime because “citizens forsake their right to own guns in return for safety,” and that America must do the same.

    Yet these gun controllers who want America to imitate Japan fail to understand that one culture cannot simply adopt another’s laws. Post-war Japan was told to follow American criminal procedure and anti-trust rules, but soon stopped. The rules did not work in a culture used to unlimited police power, and enamored of giant conglomerates.

    The Japanese Constitution, written by the American conquerors, has “rights” language far more sweeping than the American constitution. But because Japan lacks a tradition of individual rights or of judicial activism, the Japanese Supreme Court has been passive, unwilling to enforce the rights provisions of the Constitution. For example, the Japanese constitution, unlike the American one, has strong language guaranteeing equal political, economic, and social rights for women. Yet in practice, American women are far freer than Japanese women, and are given far more legal protection by their own constitution. America made Japan adopt a powerful liberal Constitution, but it could not make Japanese courts think about individual rights the way American courts do.

    Gun banners who rejoice that Japan functions without a right to bear arms should note that Japan functions without other rights as well. Not only the laws regarding protection of criminal suspects, but freedom of speech, of intimate conduct, and of religion are far narrower than in the U.S. Japan even has an official religion, Shinto. The Japanese military recently consecrated a deceased military hero as a Shinto god, although
    the man was a Christian, and his widow objected vehemently. The contrast between the individualist American and the communal Japanese ethos is manifested in everything from behavior at sporting events to industrial labor organization. As a result, pressure to conform, and internalized willingness to do so are much stronger in Japan than in America. This spirit of conformity provides the best explanation for Japan’s low crime rate. It also explains why the Japanese people accept gun control.

    Theoretically, America could adopt a gun ban like Japan’s. But that ban would be completely alien to our society, which for over 300 years has had the world’s freest, most uncontrolled gun culture. Japan’s gun laws are part of an authoritarian philosophy of government that is fundamentally at odds with America’s traditions of liberty. Such laws have no place in our country.

    http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/Japan-Gun-Control-and-People-Control.htm

    • 回复: @Hippopotamusdrome
    , @Bronson
  302. @peterAUS

    “There is a method there.
    Can’t bother finding a link but there is a documented explanation about such behavior re US foreign policy. Something along the lines as “being strong and looking unbalanced”. Any streetwise thug uses it all the time, especially against those coming from ‘polite company’.”

    Perhaps you’re thinking of Richard Nixon’s so-called “madman theory” of foreign policy, where he saw (or thought he saw) some advantage in trying to convince the USSR and North Vietnam that he was impulsive and unpredictable, or something like that?

    So I would say, from the perspective of various interested parties, there *可能* be a “method” there…or as some of us have already concluded, Trump may actually be a madman. For Russia and China, that’s probably “the million dollar question” right now.

    “As for Putin and Kremlin in general, yes, they do that handling right, so far.
    The PROBLEM with such approach is that the opponent could, easily, see that as a weakness.
    As, again, any streetwise thug recognizes that in a middle-class passer by he’s intimidating at the moment.

    Sometimes it pays to be equally “unbalanced”. To send a message that one can, also, flip into violence in a second for no obvious reason. Again, any streetwise thug would recognize that in instant, on subconscious level.”

    With nuclear armed Russia surrounded and backed into a geopolitical corner, the obvious stakes being a potentially world-as-we-know-it-ending-nuclear-war, only an actual madman would pretend to be “madman”, IMO. To put it another way, with life on earth hanging in the balance, for Trump et al. to construe Russian reluctance to escalate with “weakness” is something only the truly deranged would do.

    “The Empire shall keep pushing.
    The regime in Kremlin shall keep being pushed and will keep stepping back.

    The problem is, sooner or later, we’ll reach the line Kremlin will see as “red” and The Empire will not.”

    没错。

    As I see it, as per Putin’s speech, given the state-of-the-art weapon systems that Russia has already fielded, are presently being fielded or will soon be fielded, if the U.S. “government” still persists with provocations and still refuses to sit down with Russia and start negotiating in good faith the issues of missile defense, intermediate range missiles, etc., Russia will take that as a sign that U.S. rulers truly are madmen and will act accordingly.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
    , @Miro23
  303. peterAUS 说:
    @Harold Smith

    Perhaps you’re thinking of Richard Nixon’s so-called “madman theory” of foreign policy, where he saw (or thought he saw) some advantage in trying to convince the USSR and North Vietnam that he was impulsive and unpredictable, or something like that?

    Yes. Actually, I believe he started that mode of thinking but Neocons enhanced on that. Friedman, for example, uses the term, sort of, as a “teenager with exceptional strength”…something like that. Can’t trawl my references now.

    ….or as some of us have already concluded, Trump may actually be a madman.

    Well…I’ve come to conclusion that he simply did not expect to win.
    When he won he wasn’t ready. Not ready at all. And he is still not ready. Maybe he can’t.
    I can elaborate but have already posted along same lines somewhere here before.
    Say, in “military” terms, he got battlefield promotion above his abilities. A talented battalion commander was, out of blue, given command of a Corps. Just before a real operation. Well……

    …For Russia and China, that’s probably “the million dollar question” right now.

    是的。
    I have to admit: that’s the 仅由 question that, at the moment, interests me in the world of politics, power play and what not.
    Russia and China’s reaction, in that order, on something Trump could pull out out of whim at a drop of a hat.
    That cruise missile launch on Syria type.

    I really believe that people don’t appreciate how that shit could spiral out of control in a minute.
    If for no other reason but for the fact that both superpowers nuclear arsenals have, essentially, been neglected since the fall of the Wall. Not only material but men too. Processes and procedures as well.
    I just have a gut feeling that a combination of Trump bullshit and human or technological error could kill us all.

    So, as you say

    With nuclear armed Russia surrounded and backed into a geopolitical corner, the obvious stakes being a potentially world-as-we-know-it-ending-nuclear-war, only an actual madman would pretend to be “madman”, IMO. To put it another way, with life on earth hanging in the balance, for Trump et al. to construe Russian reluctance to escalate with “weakness” is something only the truly deranged would do.

    As I see it, as per Putin’s speech, given the state-of-the-art weapon systems that Russia has already fielded, are presently being fielded or will soon be fielded, if the U.S. “government” still persists with provocations and still refuses to sit down with Russia and start negotiating in good faith the issues of missile defense, intermediate range missiles, etc., Russia will take that as a sign that U.S. rulers truly are madmen and will act accordingly.

    不是真的。
    They can easily keep pushing because they believe he’ll keep being “reasonable”.
    He, or, better, “Team Putin” can start raising the stakes.
    动议 是问题。
    I’ve written about this before somewhere else here.
    The Empire escalates->Team Putin orders “hightened state of readiness”->The Empire does the same->Team Putin does the same->who’s going to blink first-> and then, an over stressed team/hardware/system malfunctions.
    那……错误...故障……is 难题 here. I really can’t emphasize it strong enough.
    Real military isn’t as depicted in public perception. Especially nuclear forces. Well, at least my impression; of course the reality is the top secret, but, I do know something how all that works.
    Anyway…….

    And related to that, re the 2nd..coming below…..
    Something the idiots from the “prog” side simply can’t get.

    • 回复: @peterAUS
  304. peterAUS 说:
    @peterAUS

    What if….if….the only way to make the Deep State understand the will of the people is armed insurrection?

    “Stop….getting….us…into……confrontation….!!!”.

    You don’t listen to polls, you don’t listen to a ballot box…fine….how about you listen to Free Introduction?

    This being an open rebellion by several towns/cities/counties in USA against D.C?
    Made possible by people there having access to proper weaponry. Nothing fancy….semiautos, bolts, shotguns. For each range, taking care of dismounted infantry, if it comes to that.

    And I am sure it would not. The bastards in D.C. would not have guts for that.
    More importantly, the troops wouldn’t do it.

    Just a though.

  305. Joe Stalin 说:
    @peterAUS

    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/movies/truth-stranger-than-strangelove.html

    “In 1957 Robert Sprague, the director of a top-secret panel, warned General LeMay that the entire fleet of B-52 bombers was vulnerable to attack. General LeMay was unfazed. “If I see that the Russians are amassing their planes for an attack,” he said, “I’m going to knock the [expletive] out of them before they take off the ground.”

    “But General LeMay,” Mr. Sprague replied, “that’s not national policy.” “I don’t care,” General LeMay said. “It’s my policy. That’s what I’m going to do.”

    “Mr. Kubrick probably was unaware of this exchange. (Mr. Sprague told me about it in 1981, when I interviewed him for a book on nuclear history.) But General LeMay’s distrust of civilian authorities, including presidents, was well known among insiders, several of whom Mr. Kubrick interviewed.

    • 回复: @Joel Walbert
  306. Miro23 说:
    @Harold Smith

    “The Empire shall keep pushing.
    The regime in Kremlin shall keep being pushed and will keep stepping back.

    The problem is, sooner or later, we’ll reach the line Kremlin will see as “red” and The Empire will not.”

    没错。

    As I see it, as per Putin’s speech, given the state-of-the-art weapon systems that Russia has already fielded, are presently being fielded or will soon be fielded, if the U.S. “government” still persists with provocations and still refuses to sit down with Russia and start negotiating in good faith the issues of missile defense, intermediate range missiles, etc., Russia will take that as a sign that U.S. rulers truly are madmen and will act accordingly.

    … if the U.S. “government” still persists with provocations and still refuses to sit down with Russia and start negotiating in good faith the issues of missile defense, intermediate range missiles, etc.,

    They’re not going to sit down with Russia and start negotiating in good faith. Madmen or not, we’re seeing the same complex preparations that went into 9/11, with the technical, political and media aspects, in that case, taking years and aimed at launching ME wars. Since 2014 the same process has been underway with regard to Russia, and it’s now climaxing with a high volume coordinated US-EU media barrage against Russia. The climax is not “sitting down with Russia and start negotiating”, it’s some 9/11 style event with subsequent chaos aimed at 1) neutralizing Russia – now looking like a US nuclear first strike 2) Zionists using the chaos to gain absolute power in the US and hunt down and liquidate their domestic opponents.

    • 回复: @Harold Smith
  307. @Miro23

    My statement was rhetorical; of course they won’t consider acting like reasonable people. They’re “demon-possessed”.

  308. @Joe Stalin

    Apparently, Trump doesn’t understand how the executive can exercise his authority. The DOJ is the wrong agency to pull off this particular boner. He needs to order the BATF to come up with another of their regulations. Of course, as you stated, the ATF has already declared that bump stocks are OK. Maybe that threw Trump and he had to run to Jeff Sessions hoping for an idea.

    The accepted means of ruling by executive order has him flummoxed because past presidents, idiots all, have used the EO to issue orders to the citizenry. That causes an uproar of protest that the president is legislating from the White house.

    The proper use of an EO is to give an order to one of the executive branch’s departments to issue a regulation. All of this is unconstitutional, as are the departments themselves, but any stable genius should know how to run his game as “leader of the free world” without getting any of his base pissed off at him.

    I suppose it’s a good thing that Trump is so ineffectual.

  309. @Flat Cat

    ” At this point , even the most rabid Trump supporter must have drawn one of two conclusions.”

    The one most observant conclusion that I have drawn is that DT is a dyed-in-the-wool hero, a down to earth straight forward guy, a guy who actually loves his fellow man,who loves the folks who rise at five in the morning and break their backs to insure that the country survives and prospers, as opposed to the leftist scoundrels with their petty hatred for the common man and no understanding or empathy for his woes and tribulations.

    In other words the type of individual who has not occupied the white house more than three or four times in US history.

    DT is walking a tightrope and juggling a dozen apples, while dodging cannon fire and flack, with no cover from his party , while enduring the most hideous slander and depravity from the dissolute leftist scumbags 24/7.

    The other conclusion that I have arrived at is that simple-minded, one-dimensional fools such as yourself and the lot of leftists are not endowed with the mental capacity to see things as they really are.

    1973年以来一直是Authenticjazzman“ Mensa”的资格,经过机师培训的美国陆军兽医和专业爵士音乐家。

  310. “The very foundation of our gun rights, the Second Amendment to our Constitution, is ambiguous. What is “a well-regulated militia”? What exactly is included among the arms that the people have a right “to keep and bear”? Hand grenades? Howitzers? Nuclear weapons? The Framers didn’t specify.”

    Not a single thing is ambiguous. Maybe to today’s dumbed down simpletons it is, but I shall clear a few things up.

    1) What is the militia? For that answer, we shall check in with somebody who may have a better take on the issue than anybody alive today:

    “请问,先生,什么是民兵? 是全体人民,除了少数公职人员。”
    — George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788

    2) What does ‘well-regulated’ mean? We cannot go by today’s understanding of these words. In the context of the time period the Constitution was written. Properly equipped and trained, but not through governmental means. Self-regulated. .

    3) As for what is included in the term ‘arms’? Simple answer… SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

    • 回复: @Bronson
  311. Bronson 说:
    @El Dato

    Read “Deadly Secrets” by David Paul Hammer. Hammer was on Death Row with McVeigh.

    OK city was a government op – McVeigh, like Oswald, was set up as a patsy – hence the “convenient accident” of Highway Patrol finding him drugged, sitting in a car on the side of the road … with machine guns in his trunk. McVeigh was perfect – he LOOKED the part of a neo-Nazi – the perfect guy to pin the crime on, and pump up COINTELPRO funding.

  312. Bronson 说:
    @Joel Walbert

    To add to your comment, a bit more about the word “Regulate”:

    At the time of the writing of the Constitution, “regulate” meant “to make regular” – or in other words to ensure it’s smooth functioning – a very far cry from the Statist definition we’re suffering with today which means, “To use the State’s monopoly of violence to control and extort as much money as possible from all things.”

    In other words, in the past, “regulation” was a positive thing. Just one small, but toxic, example of how the idea of a “Living Language” is a very, very bad thing.

    • 回复: @Joel Walbert
  313. Bronson 说:
    @Joe Stalin

    Another great gun 事实 (not emotions) site: http://www.gunfacts.info/

    It’s truly sad – TRULY sad – how many Useful Idiots there are walking around. How do they function if 真相正确 are things they simply do NOT allow to sway their decision process?

  314. @Bronson

    @布朗森

    Yup, the good ol days when adults were trusted to regulate their own lives.

    To quote Emilio Estevez as Billy the Kid in Young Guns:

    ‘Regulators, mount up.’

    Perfect example of a real militia.

  315. @Joe Stalin

    @乔·斯大林

    Coincidentally just watched that movie for the first time 2 days ago. Great flick, and one that should be watched by all now considering the current state of affairs.

  316. An excellent article. Thank you. Be strong and of a good courage; fear not neither be afraid of them and continue to use the mighty pen. There are lot more of “us” than you may think and many are praying. Know that we are ready to stand shoulder -to -shoulder with you should “they” come to get our guns. And, we need the truth that you write to help encourage and even rally us all.

  317. @Lemurmaniac

    No, gun control actually takes guns away from criminals and leaves them in the hands of honest citizens. At least that is my experience in Switzerland and Austria. Most criminals are too stupid and/or too disorganized to acquire a gun in a society where gun ownership is licensed.

    Look at the UK. The knife crime and acid splashing is bad enough, but if guns were easier to obtain they would be facing US levels of violence.

  318. @Anon

    ” Too many kids grow up crazy”

    They are usually sane to start with and then they are driven crazy by school psychologists, social-workers and leftist nut-case teachers, add to this the various psycho-drugs which are forced on them by teachers who do not understand the phenomena of energetic but healthy minded kids.

    Plus a totally unaddressed issue of todays freaky society and that being girls being incited and trained to tantalize and torment young boys who writhing in the throes of their hormonal induced sex obcessions.

    And sadly enough condemning “Twerking” would be construed as a most “racist” offense, twerking being a “Black thing”

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” qualified since 1973, airborne trained US army vet, and pro jazz artist (last gig yesterday evening)

  319. @jacques sheete

    Much of the South and Southwest will indeed rise again – as a bilingually illiterate, Mexican-dominated Republica del Norte.

    But how high it will rise, well, there seem to be some limitations….

  320. @Anon

    If we are raising the age to own a gun, let’s also raise the voting age accordingly.

  321. Plus the fact that all of these culprits: teachers, perfessers,shrinks, socialogists, admistrators, etc, they are, all of them, without exception, : Democrats.

    AJM

    • 回复: @Michael1919
  322. @John Q Public

    I think you’ll find that the Derb wisely has never voted for either of the Cuomos, father or son. So how is his gun-rights opinion strange?

  323. AP 说:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    No, gun control actually takes guns away from criminals and leaves them in the hands of honest citizens. At least that is my experience in Switzerland and Austria. Most criminals are too stupid and/or too disorganized to acquire a gun in a society where gun ownership is licensed.

    OK, but what about a place such as the USA that is swimming in guns already? Maybe in 20-30 years they will slowly be removed from the streets but in the meantime you’ll have a generation during which criminals will remain well-armed and law-abiding citizens will be disarmed.

  324. @Peter Akuleyev

    Glad to hear if that’s the experience in Oesterreich.

    Here in California, though, that doesn’t seem to be the case overall. There are continuous prosecutions of people caught possessing firearms, who are already legally barred from possessing them due to a prior felony conviction.

    Our convicted felons apparently are sharp enough to get their hands on firearms consistently, at least a “shared” gang gun. (I’m so proud.). Because they’re daily caught carrying those guns when they commit murder, robbery, burglary, and coke/heroin/meth dealing.

    I agree that people convicted of violent felonies should lose their right to possess a firearm, if not all non-violent felonies. We should maintain that prohibition even though a goodly number of felons get around it (for a while). Just using this as an example of many serious criminals getting firearms despite tough laws against it.

  325. JMcG 说:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Mr. Mason is the epitome of an immigrant who moves to a new community with the explicit idea of changing it. If he prefers to live in a disarmed society I’m sure he’d be welcomed back to the UK. Then he could warmly applaud men and women such as those who imprisoned Tony Martin for defending himself and his property.
    Mr. Mason is, in the words of C.S. Lewis, a man without a chest.

    • 回复: @Achmed E. Newman
  326. @Buzz Mohawk

    Kid was mercilessly bullied to but since he was white the sick worthless teacher did nothing lol metzios are white now like arabs? Lol the (((media)))) thought they struck gold when they first heard George Zimmermans name kept saying he was white

  327. @Peter Akuleyev

    Lol African American gentleman acquire guns easily gun control is to demoralize the normies frankly it the only thing that’s keeping it from turning into Haiti and your a liar why dont you go visit your local Mosque that’s built like a fortress and ask to purchase a gun

  328. @Authenticjazzman

    I can tell you at least in my experience teachers are in on the bullying this has been going on for decades

  329. @JMcG

    Mr. Mason knows what’s wrong with the UK, from what I’ve read, and will not move back. (I remember his writing recently that he was going to visit soon, though.)

    As an anti-gun nut in northern Florida, he’s got to be as annoying to his neighbors as those Californians that move to Idaho for the cheap housing and low taxes, and then vote in all sorts of new spending programs.

    I remember the Tony Martin case, BTW. What a way to have to live! Not only that, but it was back in the day when formerly-great formerly-Britain was a whole lot whiter than now. Good luck, Brits.

  330. Stogumber 说:

    When Austrian philosopher Karl Popper spoke the first time before a British society (of philosophers) he was impressed by the applause he got. As a biographer later commented, Popper didn’t know that this kind of acclamation was the normal reaction such a society spent to every speaker whatever he said.
    May not Trump’s behaviour be a variant of these manners?
    There’s a well-known anecdote about Frederick II. of Prussia who told two adversaries one after another “You are right” – and when his minister objected that they couldn’t be right both, he answered: “Well, in this you are right, too.” Notwithstanding, Frederick was quite able to take his decisions. So, Trump’s behaviour may not be without a historical model.

  331. JamesinNM 说:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Root cause is governments at every level worldwide leading by example, indiscriminately killing people whenever they want to for whatever reason they deem warrants it. Disarm them and give all the weapons to the ordinary nationals to protect themselves from the governments. Nation states killed more than 250,000,000 people in the 20th century. Evil f’rs they are.

  332. mike_55 说:

    Home defense is always an ultimate case. All too common post catastrophic events – major hurricanes, earthquakes and especially riots come to mind.

    Post Hurricane Katerina definitely showed the gun grabbers illegally at work against survivors. Maybe next time the neighborhoods’ militias will assert their Constitutional rights against rogue entities suffering from a lead deficiency.

  333. Logan 说:
    @niteranger

    You’ll need a weapon that can deliver a lot of shots in a short period of time.

    I doubt it. This implies that once the shooting starts they won’t run away at high speed. I kind of doubt these types are that brave.

  334. Logan 说:
    @Jonathan Mason

    It is largely a knockoff of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen which was published 2 years earlier.

    Ahh, but the Bill of Rights was introduced into Congress in spring or early summer of 1789 and sent to the states on September 25. The Declaration of the Rights of Man was passed in August of the same year.

    The Bill of Rights was clearly not a ripoff of the French thing.

    The B of R didn’t go into effect till 1791 because it had to go through the process of being ratified by the states. Of foreign influences it owes most to the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Which of course the Founders didn’t think of as foreign at all.

  335. Logan 说:
    @Peter Akuleyev

    Most criminals are too stupid and/or too disorganized to acquire a gun in a society where gun ownership is licensed.

    No, they find it difficult to acquire a gun in a society where there are very few of them around and they are hard to find. The scarcity is the biggest constraint, not the license.

    Licensing gun ownership in a society where there are hundreds of million of them around would have very little effect. Except probably to get a lot of hardcore gun rights types and cops killed trying to enforce those laws.

  336. c matt 说:
    @Jenner Ickham Errican

    a weapon that could fire large numbers of bullets at high speed

    Given his phrasing, he either does not have much experience with firearms, or is ESL.

    As far as I know, there are very few weapons that fire a large number of bullets. Most fire one at a time. Perhaps he meant fire bullets in rapid succession. Even a bolt action rifle can fire a large number of bullets – in the number of 1000s if not tens of thousands over its lifespan, although likely in slower succession. Firearms themselves are not the main factor of bullet speed, unless you are referring to caliber. But the firearm is designed for the caliber of bullet, not really the other way. The bullet’s characteristics (gunpowder load, caliber, weight, shape) has the most impact. In fact, bullets of varying characteristics fired from the same firearm will have varying speeds.

    Of course a slow bullet kind of defeats its utility. Might as well throw rocks.

    All this is to say those who demonstrate a lack of knowledge of firearms really should not be involved in regulating them.

当前评论者
说:

发表评论-对超过两周的文章发表评论,将在质量和语气上进行更严格的判断


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有John Derbyshire的评论