Victim disarmament zones

[hatelore]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I didn't prove shit, and you most certainly didn't. I have just demonstrated how ineffective a law is without a concerted effort. Guns would be harder to get in Chicago if Illinois and neighboring states actually banned hand guns as well. Then if a person wanted a gun, they'd really have to fucking want it because they'd have a hell of a road trip on their hands to go get one. In fact, if they were banned nationally, which is what is proposed, they'd have some smuggling to do. Also, more enforcement would be necessary, rather than just confiscating guns after they have been used to commit crimes. Asserting that Chicago is a microcosm for what America would be with bans is a stupid argument.

Are you seriously that dense to think the American Government would do an outright ban on hand guns? Lol. Can you please pass that badass shit you are smoking good sir?

[hatelore]

I got five on it.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Occupy and Tea Party stuff were not revolutions. Do you understand what a protest is? Occupy was a worldwide protests, they had people at St. Paul's in London too, and it wasn't even all aimed at governments, it was also aimed at corporatism.

The rest of what you said is too retarded and irrelevant for me to even waste my time talking about the American revolution.

Actually, I'm pretty sure most of the occupy movement was just dudes looking to pick up chicks.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by aowen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I have extensive knowledge of the American revolution. I know the British were there to take their weapons supplies. That doesn't mean it has anything to do with what is going on now, or has even 1 iota of validity as a comparison.

Past history of taking guns away has no validity when discussing the possibility of taking guns away? You have a strange notion of validity.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It is a paradox that computers need maintenance so often, since they are meant to save people time.

It is a paradox that liberals want to use jackbooted armed thugs to take my guns

A paradox is something that is impossible. Your examples are just irony.

[runlvlzero]

The chances of ridding American civilians of all guns. Is very close to zero. There is no where in the world like that. I bet people still find ways to smuggle guns into NK. Especially from the Chinese border.

[runlvlzero]

Still validating that it is close enough to zero to be effectively impossible.

Its certainly not possible any time this decade without massive amounts of bloodshed.

Still close to impossible to do in a ethical or moral way.

[r00t]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A paradox is something that is impossible. Your examples are just irony.

Not according to Merriam & Webster

[r00t]

420th reply

[Elmarnieh]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Marx was basically just showing that capitalism is not 100% perfect. Just another of his brilliant insights. Certainly nobody knew men could make mistakes before Marx came along, right?



Technology does put people out of work. However, people have this knack for figuring out new types of work. The destruction of jobs has been one of the great. I'm sure happy that we don't need 90% of the population to be farmers anymore. I don't think Steve Jobs would have made a very good farmer, but he was pretty good with electronics.

I don't care about Marx's intent. I care that a logical fallacy was presented as not only a reason to support an economic system but as a law. If you knew both of these laws to be untrue then don't post them and certainly don't present them as laws.