Do Democrats REALLY Think Americans Will Turn Their Guns In Peacefully If They Pass a Law

[Brian Blackwell]

What do you "know is right"? Do you acknowledge the equality of rights of all individuals, or do some people have rights that others don't have?

I don't see how you're not moved to the anarchist position by logical necessity. If a government only acted defensively on behalf of the people, acting in perfect accord with the rights of individuals, they would be indistinguishable from any individual - so what makes them "government", and you not?

Doesn't "government" imply the right to govern? The right to make laws which others must obey under threat of punishment? Isn't this operating in excess of what the individual has the right to do?

It's possible you don't relate to what I am suggesting because you still think in a "universal" sense as far as what I view as an individual choice.

It doesn't matter what I think about someone else's rights ... Where I am headed doesn't require them to do anything they don't want to do.
I am not a proponent of Anarchy or self governance as a means by which to establish what anyone else is required to do.
That's for goof-balls that like theorizing versus application of concepts borne in principles, that also require adaptation and personal responsibility.

I don't need a government, a law, punishment nor coerced obedience to accomplish my goals.
As far as operating in excess of what I have the right to do ... I ain't asking for permission.
If someone feels the need to try and stop me ... Put an obstacle up in front of me and see if I don't figure out a way around it ...
Or means by which to mitigate it's affect on achieving what I want to do.

To some that may sound intimidating ... But it doesn't mean I haven't failed before.
It only means I don't accept failure as a dead end ... And will keep looking for a way to do what is productive and necessary.

"Can't" ... Never did anything ...
I am practicing self-governance ... And I am not going to sit around waiting for anyone to agree.

.​

Ok, so I take it you do not support government in any way (e.g. leveraging the coercion of the state to your own advantage by voting, etc.)?

Are you saying that you view governmental imposition into your life as just one more hurdle to overcome?

The anarchist does too, they are just trying to "mitigate its effect" by using discourse and argumentation as means to strike at governmental imposition at its source - public support. If I'm understanding your position correctly, you do not acknowledge external authority as valid - governmental or otherwise - and so how are you not an anarchist?

Also, as a matter of curiosity, do you have a personal moral code, or are you merely citing pragmatism as your motivation?

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California wants to ban assault weapons, instate a federal gun buy-back program for those who own them and criminally prosecute those who refuse to hand them over.

The representative wrote an op-ed in USA Today Thursday rolling out what he feels is the gun control policy America should adopt:"



"“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”"

Raise your hand out there if you think this would end peacefully, with law-abiding citizens simply handing over their (until that moment) legally-owned guns to a bunch of Liberals trampling on the Constitution in their continued effort to dis-arm the American people (Because you KNOW the Liberals would not stop there...)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Not going to happen / end well....



Eric Swalwell Unloads Gun Platform Liberals Really Want

Stalwell is a Nazi and dumb as a dog turd.

What the radical left is seeking to do is foment a shooting war. They have already started a civil war, but Stalwell and other leftist scum want bloodshed.

He should be the first to bleed, if he succeeds in starting violence.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I reckon they’re fine whether you turn it in peacefully or not. From your cold, dead hands maybe?

Come take it commie.

You're long on threats but short on action.

Like all commie bastards, you're a blowhard.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

DERP

So you intend to use police officers to fight your revolution for you?

 

[boedicca]

What do you "know is right"? Do you acknowledge the equality of rights of all individuals, or do some people have rights that others don't have?

I don't see how you're not moved to the anarchist position by logical necessity. If a government only acted defensively on behalf of the people, acting in perfect accord with the rights of individuals, they would be indistinguishable from any individual - so what makes them "government", and you not?

Doesn't "government" imply the right to govern? The right to make laws which others must obey under threat of punishment? Isn't this operating in excess of what the individual has the right to do?

It's possible you don't relate to what I am suggesting because you still think in a "universal" sense as far as what I view as an individual choice.

It doesn't matter what I think about someone else's rights ... Where I am headed doesn't require them to do anything they don't want to do.
I am not a proponent of Anarchy or self governance as a means by which to establish what anyone else is required to do.
That's for goof-balls that like theorizing versus application of concepts borne in principles, that also require adaptation and personal responsibility.

I don't need a government, a law, punishment nor coerced obedience to accomplish my goals.
As far as operating in excess of what I have the right to do ... I ain't asking for permission.
If someone feels the need to try and stop me ... Put an obstacle up in front of me and see if I don't figure out a way around it ...
Or means by which to mitigate it's affect on achieving what I want to do.

To some that may sound intimidating ... But it doesn't mean I haven't failed before.
It only means I don't accept failure as a dead end ... And will keep looking for a way to do what is productive and necessary.

"Can't" ... Never did anything ...
I am practicing self-governance ... And I am not going to sit around waiting for anyone to agree.

.​

Ok, so I take it you do not support government in any way (e.g. leveraging the coercion of the state to your own advantage by voting, etc.)?

Are you saying that you view governmental imposition into your life as just one more hurdle to overcome?

The anarchist does too, they are just trying to "mitigate its effect" by using discourse and argumentation as means to strike at governmental imposition at its source - public support. If I'm understanding your position correctly, you do not acknowledge external authority as valid - governmental or otherwise - and so how are you not an anarchist?

Also, as a matter of curiosity, do you have a personal moral code, or are you merely citing pragmatism as your motivation?

As a matter of curiosity, how many strawmen do you plan to burn in this thread?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have to wonder who would be doing the collecting?
The vast majority of police and military are pro 2nd amendment.
Those that aren't would be facing those police,military and millions of armed citizens.
Can you say blood bath?

Well shit, Timmy is going to come take them!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I have to wonder who would be doing the collecting?
The vast majority of police and military are pro 2nd amendment.
Those that aren't would be facing those police,military and millions of armed citizens.
Can you say blood bath?

Well shit, Timmy is going to come take them!

Before or after he fell in the well?

 

[Uncensored2008]

people coming to get your guns will be exactly like building a border wall -

AINT GONNA F'N HAPPEN.

write that ^^^^^^^^^^ down.

DERP

Eric Swalwell calls for mandatory buyback of all ‘military-style semiautomatic’ weapons

Yer a dumb one, 7.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

If need be.
But they'd also be confronted by police and military personnel who wouldnt stand for an attack on the 2nd.
Which would be the majority of them.

Then you are just like ANTIFA groups you bitch about .

Timmy, you pretty well define "dumb," but I'd love to hear what passes for logic in you reaching that bit of idiocy?

 

[Uncensored2008]

RW gun mantra;

whine, cry, be afraid.

Yeah, I mean it's not like Eric Stalwell directly said it or anything, right stupid fuck?

 

[boedicca]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

If need be.
But they'd also be confronted by police and military personnel who wouldnt stand for an attack on the 2nd.
Which would be the majority of them.

Then you are just like ANTIFA groups you bitch about .

Timmy, you pretty well define "dumb," but I'd love to hear what passes for logic in you reaching that bit of idiocy?

I'll guess that what Timmy passes for logic depends on what he ate the day before.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

If need be.
But they'd also be confronted by police and military personnel who wouldnt stand for an attack on the 2nd.
Which would be the majority of them.

Then you are just like ANTIFA groups you bitch about .

Hardly.
I would be defending the Constitution of The United States of America.
While you on the other hand would be shitting on it.

Not just shitting, waging war against it.

Any police officer who attempts to disarm law abiding citizens is engaged in treason and should be treated accordingly.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California wants to ban assault weapons, instate a federal gun buy-back program for those who own them and criminally prosecute those who refuse to hand them over.

The representative wrote an op-ed in USA Today Thursday rolling out what he feels is the gun control policy America should adopt:"



"“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”"

Raise your hand out there if you think this would end peacefully, with law-abiding citizens simply handing over their (until that moment) legally-owned guns to a bunch of Liberals trampling on the Constitution in their continued effort to dis-arm the American people (Because you KNOW the Liberals would not stop there...)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Not going to happen / end well....



Eric Swalwell Unloads Gun Platform Liberals Really Want

Any lawful person would.

Why would any "lawful person" cooperate with treason by you Stalinists?

If you wage war on the Constitution of the United States, my duty as a member of the militia is to shoot you as a traitor and enemy of the nation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California wants to ban assault weapons, instate a federal gun buy-back program for those who own them and criminally prosecute those who refuse to hand them over.

The representative wrote an op-ed in USA Today Thursday rolling out what he feels is the gun control policy America should adopt:"



"“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”"

Raise your hand out there if you think this would end peacefully, with law-abiding citizens simply handing over their (until that moment) legally-owned guns to a bunch of Liberals trampling on the Constitution in their continued effort to dis-arm the American people (Because you KNOW the Liberals would not stop there...)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Not going to happen / end well....



Eric Swalwell Unloads Gun Platform Liberals Really Want

Any lawful person would.

You mean anyone who's willing to shit on the Constitution.
Which among gun owners is a slim margin.

I mean anyone lawful. Gun owners follow machine gun regulations.

Treason is not "lawful" Comrade.

 

[Contumacious]

"Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California wants to ban assault weapons, instate a federal gun buy-back program for those who own them and criminally prosecute those who refuse to hand them over.

The representative wrote an op-ed in USA Today Thursday rolling out what he feels is the gun control policy America should adopt:"



"“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”"

Raise your hand out there if you think this would end peacefully, with law-abiding citizens simply handing over their (until that moment) legally-owned guns to a bunch of Liberals trampling on the Constitution in their continued effort to dis-arm the American people (Because you KNOW the Liberals would not stop there...)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Not going to happen / end well....



Eric Swalwell Unloads Gun Platform Liberals Really Want

Yes, I will.

.


.

 

[9thIDdoc]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

People rightly defend themselves against armed robbers. Most police would refuse to become criminals.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

What do you "know is right"? Do you acknowledge the equality of rights of all individuals, or do some people have rights that others don't have?

I don't see how you're not moved to the anarchist position by logical necessity. If a government only acted defensively on behalf of the people, acting in perfect accord with the rights of individuals, they would be indistinguishable from any individual - so what makes them "government", and you not?

Doesn't "government" imply the right to govern? The right to make laws which others must obey under threat of punishment? Isn't this operating in excess of what the individual has the right to do?

It's possible you don't relate to what I am suggesting because you still think in a "universal" sense as far as what I view as an individual choice.

It doesn't matter what I think about someone else's rights ... Where I am headed doesn't require them to do anything they don't want to do.
I am not a proponent of Anarchy or self governance as a means by which to establish what anyone else is required to do.
That's for goof-balls that like theorizing versus application of concepts borne in principles, that also require adaptation and personal responsibility.

I don't need a government, a law, punishment nor coerced obedience to accomplish my goals.
As far as operating in excess of what I have the right to do ... I ain't asking for permission.
If someone feels the need to try and stop me ... Put an obstacle up in front of me and see if I don't figure out a way around it ...
Or means by which to mitigate it's affect on achieving what I want to do.

To some that may sound intimidating ... But it doesn't mean I haven't failed before.
It only means I don't accept failure as a dead end ... And will keep looking for a way to do what is productive and necessary.

"Can't" ... Never did anything ...
I am practicing self-governance ... And I am not going to sit around waiting for anyone to agree.

.​

Ok, so I take it you do not support government in any way (e.g. leveraging the coercion of the state to your own advantage by voting, etc.)?

Are you saying that you view governmental imposition into your life as just one more hurdle to overcome?

The anarchist does too, they are just trying to "mitigate its effect" by using discourse and argumentation as means to strike at governmental imposition at its source - public support. If I'm understanding your position correctly, you do not acknowledge external authority as valid - governmental or otherwise - and so how are you not an anarchist?

Also, as a matter of curiosity, do you have a personal moral code, or are you merely citing pragmatism as your motivation?

As a matter of curiosity, how many strawmen do you plan to burn in this thread?

What's the problem? I'm trying to figure out what BlackSand is saying.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell of California wants to ban assault weapons, instate a federal gun buy-back program for those who own them and criminally prosecute those who refuse to hand them over.

The representative wrote an op-ed in USA Today Thursday rolling out what he feels is the gun control policy America should adopt:"



"“Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales, but it would not affect weapons already possessed. This would leave millions of assault weapons in our communities for decades to come,” Swalwell wrote.

“Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons.”"

Raise your hand out there if you think this would end peacefully, with law-abiding citizens simply handing over their (until that moment) legally-owned guns to a bunch of Liberals trampling on the Constitution in their continued effort to dis-arm the American people (Because you KNOW the Liberals would not stop there...)?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Not going to happen / end well....



Eric Swalwell Unloads Gun Platform Liberals Really Want

Any lawful person would.

You mean anyone who's willing to shit on the Constitution.
Which among gun owners is a slim margin.

I mean anyone lawful. Gun owners follow machine gun regulations.

Were I you I wouldn't volunteer to be a gun "confiscator".

You suggesting our gun owners are not lawful?

I'm suggesting waging war on the Constitution is an act of treason that deserves a response of any means necessary.

 

[BlackSand]

Ok, so I take it you do not support government in any way (e.g. leveraging the coercion of the state to your own advantage by voting, etc.)?

Are you saying that you view governmental imposition into your life as just one more hurdle to overcome?

The anarchist does too, they are just trying to "mitigate its effect" by using discourse and argumentation as means to strike at governmental imposition at its source - public support. If I'm understanding your position correctly, you do not acknowledge external authority as valid - governmental or otherwise - and so how are you not an anarchist?

Also, as a matter of curiosity, do you have a personal moral code, or are you merely citing pragmatism as your motivation?

Yes ... I am guided by a moral code and principles.
Yes ... In many ways I am pragmatic (when called for).

In some aspects I am required to acknowledge authority and benefit from external controls.
I don't concern myself with aspects of established governance that do not impede my progress.
When elements of established governance impede my progress, I adapt and innovate within the confines of my morals and principles.

Yes ... I see government as a imposition, but I don't necessarily fight the system to defeat the system.
I fight the system only to achieve my goals when necessary.
I set my goals to coincide with what is within the realm of what I can actually effectively influence, and within the confines of my principles.

What I do is like having a task and a toolbox full of tools.
I use the tools I need when I need them, fix the things I know I can fix, build the things I think need to be built ...
And let the rest of world figure out what it is they should be doing.

.​

 

[Brian Blackwell]

So you intend to shoot police officers ?

People rightly defend themselves against armed robbers. Most police would refuse to become criminals.

Well, all police are criminals against natural law, but within the context you're suggesting, I certainly hope you're right, but I'm not so sure. I think things would have to get pretty bad for them to stand up. If their masters said "go round up all the children and bring them to work camps" I believe many would take a stand, but tyranny doesn't usually work like that. It's more of a step-wise, tip-toe effect.

But if they said "Go get their guns, not ALL of them, just those really dangerous ones that they don't need for hunting and stuff" I think these guys will come and take them. My view can be skewed because I'm from NYC, I don't know. I have this notion that cops in more gun-friendly areas would be more likely to stand up, but it's just a guess.