5 ms·

That tells you to how well your system of law is functioning. It's rather moot if it's not premised on equal protection. There is nothing more fundamental than

That tells you to how well your system of law is functioning. It's rather moot if it's not premised on equal protection. There is nothing more fundamental than preserving life. Whether a person, independent of social class, has the same rights to defend life and property is a hard dependency. The Freedmen are discussed in the audio file I linked above.

kristopolous 7y ago
A collective well organized police state backed by public sentiment against someone with a 3D printed gun is no assurance of liberty. I'm not anti gun but it's just salesmen hiding behind a noble sentiment. The only thing the NRA ever bans are generic after market add-ons which make cheap guns work like more expensive ones A technology that reduces the profit margins of gun manufacturers, that's the quickly banned object. People can buy what they want, whatever. The thing I actually don't like is marketers underhandedly trying to sell me things by waving a flag in my face. Then people act like consuming a product somehow counteracts system upheaval, give me a break. Any strategic despot would get the gun owners to work for him through packing and cracking the party support and spin the tyranny as protecting liberty. Many gun owners would need very little convincing that they're "liberty defending foot soldiers". That's how this game plays out.
- jakeogh 7y ago
  Making cheap guns work as well as expensive ones is unambigiously a good thing (you agree if I am reading your comment correctly). GOA is a better org btw.
  - kristopolous 7y ago
    Sure. The important difference between us is I believe guns start and end as consumer goods. All of the other things they serve are better handled through institutions and organizing. The combinations of the two, organizations with guns, that becomes a much more plausible threat to peace and liberty because it affords an opportunity to exploit a power dynamic which could lead to tyranny. Yielding to the wisdom of crowds with weapons mean that fear and threat become larger tools of society building than reflection, collaboration, listening, and creativity.
    - jakeogh 7y ago
      So ask the attacker to please pause 5+ min while you wait for the police? No, you want individuals to own effective weapons. Right? It seems like you are pro-gun ownership, I'm not sure what your point is. If you survey history, bad things are often preceeded by a segment of the population being disarmed.

kristopolous 7y ago

A collective well organized police state backed by public sentiment against someone with a 3D printed gun is no assurance of liberty. I'm not anti gun but it's just salesmen hiding behind a noble sentiment. The only thing the NRA ever bans are generic after market add-ons which make cheap guns work like more expensive ones A technology that reduces the profit margins of gun manufacturers, that's the quickly banned object. People can buy what they want, whatever. The thing I actually don't like is marketers underhandedly trying to sell me things by waving a flag in my face. Then people act like consuming a product somehow counteracts system upheaval, give me a break. Any strategic despot would get the gun owners to work for him through packing and cracking the party support and spin the tyranny as protecting liberty. Many gun owners would need very little convincing that they're "liberty defending foot soldiers". That's how this game plays out.

jakeogh 7y ago
Making cheap guns work as well as expensive ones is unambigiously a good thing (you agree if I am reading your comment correctly). GOA is a better org btw.
- kristopolous 7y ago
  Sure. The important difference between us is I believe guns start and end as consumer goods. All of the other things they serve are better handled through institutions and organizing. The combinations of the two, organizations with guns, that becomes a much more plausible threat to peace and liberty because it affords an opportunity to exploit a power dynamic which could lead to tyranny. Yielding to the wisdom of crowds with weapons mean that fear and threat become larger tools of society building than reflection, collaboration, listening, and creativity.
  - jakeogh 7y ago
    So ask the attacker to please pause 5+ min while you wait for the police? No, you want individuals to own effective weapons. Right? It seems like you are pro-gun ownership, I'm not sure what your point is. If you survey history, bad things are often preceeded by a segment of the population being disarmed.