BizarroJerry wrote:This argument that more guns in the hands of civilians is absurd. That's always their answer. Give people more guns and let the better shooter win.
And yet we're seeing major US cities where their mayor's are pulling the police back and letting violent rioters rule. It's a great irony that the left is against private gun ownership yet act in a manner that promotes private gun ownership. Gun manufacturers are seeing record sales amidst the violent unrest.
While I don't buy into the conspiracy theories being presented here, I do think current events make an excellent case for being armed
And there we are... LEFT... RIGHT!
Does anybody think that the protestors in Portland or wherever really speak/represent for the vast majority of "left" leaning or even "non-right" thinking people?
The vast majority? No. The vast majority that have a very public voice? Yes. We have Dem mayors that are pulling the police back and letting the violence go unanswered and then proclaiming Trump a fascist for defending Federal buildings. You have national media and Dems in Congress pretending all the rioting was a myth until just the past couple days when that narrative was no longer tenable.
So no, I don't believe most Democrat voters feel represented by the rioters, but you wouldn't know that by what our media presents. It will be interesting come November when moderate Americans go to vote faced with a choice between the party of Trump, and the party of rioting, looting, and arson. And yes, the Democrats have embraced the violence by not speaking out against it. You can support the peaceful protest of the awful Floyd murder and be vocal in opposition to the violence running rampant in many cities, but they've chosen to remain silent.
Finally, back on topic (which is admittedly off-topic for the thread LOL), am I wrong to suggest the combination of the violence and leadership in many cities that will not oppose it is a justification for many American's feeling like gun ownership is more important now than in recent times?
AbeVigodaLive wrote:It's definitely ok to believe that the higher powers in this country are duplicitous, shady, self-serving and manipulative. It might even be wise to question what we're told... or seek out alternative forms of information.
But when we go from there to "mostly fake"... things get dicey. And I start cracking wise about bunkers and tinfoil and crackpots.
I don't want to live a life where I'm spending most of my day finding like-minded sources for information online... or looking over my shoulder for shady government agents and propaganda... or holding onto my gun in its holster in anticipation of hostile threats or potential confrontations.
Am I a rube? Sane? Or, simply trying to enjoy this crazy world as much as possible?
That is the typical response as I stated above. You only "know" what you think you know. If you haven't done research into other potential options you certainly won't "know" anything else. It's pretty basic. If you only ever believed what the TV said then that is your perception of the world.
Like I said, if you ever care to know the truth, why things works the way they do you certainly can. I'm not trying to demean you or say you are an idiot. I was that way too many years ago. I thought the News was legitimate and the GOV was good, in my best interest. It's emotionally traumatizing to think any different. I wish they were on my side, in my best interest! I truly do!
I may not be the droid you're looking for... I literally wrote that it's ok to question news and to seek out other sources.
Beyond that, you're speaking with too much hyperbole (e.g., "mostly fake")... and absolutes and a general air of feigned superiority for me to take too seriously.
I don't even know what "mostly fake" refers to... is the story of the Buxton returning to the lineup fake? Is the Strib story of the man who shot his girlfriend fake? I also see the YMCA closed some more facilities today. Should I assume that's fake and just show up for my workout this evening?
BizarroJerry wrote:This argument that more guns in the hands of civilians is absurd. That's always their answer. Give people more guns and let the better shooter win.
And yet we're seeing major US cities where their mayor's are pulling the police back and letting violent rioters rule. It's a great irony that the left is against private gun ownership yet act in a manner that promotes private gun ownership. Gun manufacturers are seeing record sales amidst the violent unrest.
While I don't buy into the conspiracy theories being presented here, I do think current events make an excellent case for being armed
And there we are... LEFT... RIGHT!
Does anybody think that the protestors in Portland or wherever really speak/represent for the vast majority of "left" leaning or even "non-right" thinking people?
The vast majority? No. The vast majority that have a very public voice? Yes. We have Dem mayors that are pulling the police back and letting the violence go unanswered and then proclaiming Trump a fascist for defending Federal buildings. You have national media and Dems in Congress pretending all the rioting was a myth until just the past couple days when that narrative was no longer tenable.
So no, I don't believe most Democrat voters feel represented by the rioters, but you wouldn't know that by what our media presents. It will be interesting come November when moderate Americans go to vote faced with a choice between the party of Trump, and the party of rioting, looting, and arson. And yes, the Democrats have embraced the violence by not speaking out against it. You can support the peaceful protest of the awful Floyd murder and be vocal in opposition to the violence running rampant in many cities, but they've chosen to remain silent.
Finally, back on topic (which is admittedly off-topic for the thread LOL), am I wrong to suggest the combination of the violence and leadership in many cities that will not oppose it is a justification for many American's feeling like gun ownership is more important now than in recent times?
I've said it before... the leftist side... and the far right side have gained more and more and more of a voice.
And sadly, that's normalized a great many bad things for the vast majority of people that realized life is actually lived in the margins with wide swaths of gray.
Those on the far left are 100% sure of their convictions. And those on the other side are just as sure of theirs. Sadly, I believe the only salvation is for us to realize our similarities more than our differences.
But that doesn't sell in the media. And it doesn't work online. And it's harder than simply playing to an ideology or finding like-minded sources to strengthen existing ideas in our heads.
BizarroJerry wrote:This argument that more guns in the hands of civilians is absurd. That's always their answer. Give people more guns and let the better shooter win.
And yet we're seeing major US cities where their mayor's are pulling the police back and letting violent rioters rule. It's a great irony that the left is against private gun ownership yet act in a manner that promotes private gun ownership. Gun manufacturers are seeing record sales amidst the violent unrest.
While I don't buy into the conspiracy theories being presented here, I do think current events make an excellent case for being armed
And there we are... LEFT... RIGHT!
Does anybody think that the protestors in Portland or wherever really speak/represent for the vast majority of "left" leaning or even "non-right" thinking people?
The vast majority? No. The vast majority that have a very public voice? Yes. We have Dem mayors that are pulling the police back and letting the violence go unanswered and then proclaiming Trump a fascist for defending Federal buildings. You have national media and Dems in Congress pretending all the rioting was a myth until just the past couple days when that narrative was no longer tenable.
So no, I don't believe most Democrat voters feel represented by the rioters, but you wouldn't know that by what our media presents. It will be interesting come November when moderate Americans go to vote faced with a choice between the party of Trump, and the party of rioting, looting, and arson. And yes, the Democrats have embraced the violence by not speaking out against it. You can support the peaceful protest of the awful Floyd murder and be vocal in opposition to the violence running rampant in many cities, but they've chosen to remain silent.
Finally, back on topic (which is admittedly off-topic for the thread LOL), am I wrong to suggest the combination of the violence and leadership in many cities that will not oppose it is a justification for many American's feeling like gun ownership is more important now than in recent times?
I've said it before... the leftist side... and the far right side have gained more and more and more of a voice.
And sadly, that's normalized a great many bad things for the vast majority of people that realized life is actually lived in the margins with wide swaths of gray.
Those on the far left are 100% sure of their convictions. And those on the other side are just as sure of theirs. Sadly, I believe the only salvation is for us to realize our similarities more than our differences.
But that doesn't sell in the media. And it doesn't work online. And it's harder than simply playing to an ideology or finding like-minded sources to strengthen existing ideas in our heads.
I agree 100% with that, but I'm still not sure how my original post falls outside such thinking.
BizarroJerry wrote:This argument that more guns in the hands of civilians is absurd. That's always their answer. Give people more guns and let the better shooter win.
And yet we're seeing major US cities where their mayor's are pulling the police back and letting violent rioters rule. It's a great irony that the left is against private gun ownership yet act in a manner that promotes private gun ownership. Gun manufacturers are seeing record sales amidst the violent unrest.
While I don't buy into the conspiracy theories being presented here, I do think current events make an excellent case for being armed
And there we are... LEFT... RIGHT!
Does anybody think that the protestors in Portland or wherever really speak/represent for the vast majority of "left" leaning or even "non-right" thinking people?
The vast majority? No. The vast majority that have a very public voice? Yes. We have Dem mayors that are pulling the police back and letting the violence go unanswered and then proclaiming Trump a fascist for defending Federal buildings. You have national media and Dems in Congress pretending all the rioting was a myth until just the past couple days when that narrative was no longer tenable.
So no, I don't believe most Democrat voters feel represented by the rioters, but you wouldn't know that by what our media presents. It will be interesting come November when moderate Americans go to vote faced with a choice between the party of Trump, and the party of rioting, looting, and arson. And yes, the Democrats have embraced the violence by not speaking out against it. You can support the peaceful protest of the awful Floyd murder and be vocal in opposition to the violence running rampant in many cities, but they've chosen to remain silent.
Finally, back on topic (which is admittedly off-topic for the thread LOL), am I wrong to suggest the combination of the violence and leadership in many cities that will not oppose it is a justification for many American's feeling like gun ownership is more important now than in recent times?
I've said it before... the leftist side... and the far right side have gained more and more and more of a voice.
And sadly, that's normalized a great many bad things for the vast majority of people that realized life is actually lived in the margins with wide swaths of gray.
Those on the far left are 100% sure of their convictions. And those on the other side are just as sure of theirs. Sadly, I believe the only salvation is for us to realize our similarities more than our differences.
But that doesn't sell in the media. And it doesn't work online. And it's harder than simply playing to an ideology or finding like-minded sources to strengthen existing ideas in our heads.
I agree 100% with that, but I'm still not sure how my original post falls outside such thinking.
I think the part about extremes comes from the inherent choice you presented:
- The party of Trump
vs.
- The party of rioting, looting and arson
Although one quibble I have with that is that I'm quite certain the vast majority of Democrats are not advocates of rioting and arson and the destruction of cities. Are the same number of Republicans frustrated and alarmed at being grouped in with "the party of Trump?"
AbeVigodaLive wrote:It's definitely ok to believe that the higher powers in this country are duplicitous, shady, self-serving and manipulative. It might even be wise to question what we're told... or seek out alternative forms of information.
But when we go from there to "mostly fake"... things get dicey. And I start cracking wise about bunkers and tinfoil and crackpots.
I don't want to live a life where I'm spending most of my day finding like-minded sources for information online... or looking over my shoulder for shady government agents and propaganda... or holding onto my gun in its holster in anticipation of hostile threats or potential confrontations.
Am I a rube? Sane? Or, simply trying to enjoy this crazy world as much as possible?
That is the typical response as I stated above. You only "know" what you think you know. If you haven't done research into other potential options you certainly won't "know" anything else. It's pretty basic. If you only ever believed what the TV said then that is your perception of the world.
Like I said, if you ever care to know the truth, why things works the way they do you certainly can. I'm not trying to demean you or say you are an idiot. I was that way too many years ago. I thought the News was legitimate and the GOV was good, in my best interest. It's emotionally traumatizing to think any different. I wish they were on my side, in my best interest! I truly do!
I may not be the droid you're looking for... I literally wrote that it's ok to question news and to seek out other sources.
Beyond that, you're speaking with too much hyperbole (e.g., "mostly fake")... and absolutes and a general air of feigned superiority for me to take too seriously.
I don't even know what "mostly fake" refers to... is the story of the Buxton returning to the lineup fake? Is the Strib story of the man who shot his girlfriend fake? I also see the YMCA closed some more facilities today. Should I assume that's fake and just show up for my workout this evening?
I don't know how to say the news is fake without writing like a know it all, or with an air of superiority. Sorry about that.
No of course minor events are true, you can verify them right? They have no bearing on controlling your actions like gun control, excessive gov power, etc. When I say mostly fake I am talking about major events that are pushed by the MSM. I can't list them without you thinking I am tinfoil crazy or a conspiracy theorist. I am in a no win position. I did list the declassified Operation Northwoods which was rejected by JFK. Which does prove that the GOV will kill and create false flag events to further it's power. Wether recent mass shootings are psychological operations or not, you would have to decide that for yourself or wait 50 years (or whatever) when it's declassified and nobody that is alive is around to care or pay for the events.
See where those absolute statements can lead us down a dangerous path? Where decrying all or most news as fake... even when verified, sourced and proven true?
Left versus Right doesn't matter. Two sides of the same coin. Nothing changes except the spin the media puts on things no matter who is in power.
Why didn't Obama and the Democrats NOT decriminalize marijuana (schedule 1 drug along with heroin) when they had full control in the first two years? They had the House and Senate. Instead they pass a health care insurance mandate (scam).
Why does the military continue to grow and grow? The US has been at War for 222 out of 239 years of it's existence. It doesn't matter who is in power. More War, more expansion of power. They spend 3000 dollars a year for every man woman and child (US citizen) to fight and kill people in other countries.
Why during my indoctrination process did they coerce me into saying the Pledge of Allegiance to a silly flag everyday? Patriotism, what a crock.
Check out former Major General Smedley Butlers book War is a Racket.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:So most "news" is not mostly fake?
See where those absolute statements can lead us down a dangerous path? Where decrying ALL news as fake... even when verified, sourced and proven true?
I never said all news, I said mostly and I do think it is mostly fake. The things that matter anyways. Who cares about half of the nonsense they talk about anyways. Sure is sports real. Yeah. Weather, yeah. Mass shooting at Sandy Hook, no. First two don't really matter though.
WolvesFan21 wrote:Left versus Right doesn't matter. Two sides of the same coin. Nothing changes except the spin the media puts on things no matter who is in power.
Why didn't Obama and the Democrats NOT decriminalize marijuana (schedule 1 drug along with heroin) when they had full control in the first two years? They had the House and Senate. Instead they pass a health care insurance mandate (scam).
Why does the military continue to grow and grow? The US has been at War for 222 out of 239 years of it's existence. It doesn't matter who is in power. More War, more expansion of power. They spend 3000 dollars a year for every man woman and child (US citizen) to fight and kill people in other countries.
Why during my indoctrination process did they coerce me into saying the Pledge of Allegiance to a silly flag everyday? Patriotism, what a crock.
Check out former Major General Smedley Butlers book War is a Racket.
Why anything? Money and power. I think it always comes back to that. A select few self proclaimed elites have it and us simpleton avg Joes don't.
Left and Right does matter.
If the plebs fight and bicker over what they're told to fight over... they're distracted from any crackpot or legitimate shenanigans going on by the powers-that-be.
