Jump to content
LOTROCommunity
LasraelLarson

Have you voted? ;)

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Almagnus1 said:

Well yeah...

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." - Mao Zedong

That's the entire point of gun control laws, to disempower a segment of the population so that the government is more powerful - when it really should be the average citizen that holds the power, NOT some parasitic entity.

That and gun control laws empower those that ignore the laws...

Guns would work really well against the drones that the government has and uses.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, cossieuk said:

Guns would work really well against the drones that the government has and uses.  

When the US manages to actually win a war against an enemy that engages in guerrilla tactics, drones might certainly be a difficulty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 9:49 AM, FundinStrongarm said:

Check out the the rant of this one, justifying violent protests.

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/02/07/check-privilege-speaking-protests/

I'll give you one guess as to which party her Fb page says she's a minor functionary in. (Hint: not the GOP.)

Yes, she doesn't represent the party. But her wing of the party is growing, driving average voters away.

And yeah, there's probably equally dispicable people within the GOP. They don't make as big a splash in the news I guess.

 

On ‎2‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 10:22 AM, Doro said:

There should be a list of buzzwords made available to tell whether or not a person is of sound mind or a fucking nutjob. Anytime these phrases appear, a big claxon should go off. I see it all the time.

"We need to have these conversations". The most patronising phrase I see, as if a bunch of SJWs in a room all having a circle-jerk will help improve anything. You want a conversation, try actually talking to the other side for once, instead of screaming at them or trying to shut them down. Take turns and have some damn class.

"Check your privilege". What privilege? Not all white people are the same. Nor do we all get some sort of easy-road in life. They should come see the sort of people that live in the council estates I was brought up on, and then tell us that we have some magical aura of good fortune. Don't blame your failures on the colour of yours or anyone else's skin.

"White guilt/privilege/males". The current opinion of the extreme left that white people just don't get a say any more, because nothing bad ever happens to them. Used to dismiss people based on their race, which is ironically the same racism they claim to oppose. And heaven help if you're also straight and have a penis.

"Racist/sexist/homophobic". There's a frustrating sense of ignorance from these people when they just throw these words out there, without any reason or any evidence. It's like Tourette's now, with them just blurting it out because they vaguely know a person doesn't agree with everything they do.

I could go on, but it would become unwieldy. The extreme left has gone so far now that's joining up with the extreme right, only under the mistaken belief they're doing it from a place of moral superiority. Hence the fascist attempts to control speech in academic circles.

I thought this was cute: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/rex-murphy-exploring-the-new-meaning-of-words-with-our-post-fact-post-truth-activist-warriors

Quote

What was more “post-fact” than that Berkeley riot/protest last week, when the black-suited, masked protestors “argued” their vandalisms and assaults were speech, and the (aborted) speech of Milo Yiannopoulos was violence? 

Haha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, fittybolger said:

The worst part is that it's true. We're at a stage now where a proponent of free speech is labelled a fascist by people who want to smother free-speech using fascist tactics. A man who smokes loads of "dark wood" in his bedroom is labelled a white-supremacist by people who are so obsessed with race that they decide who someone is based on their skin-colour. A man gayer than a rainbow is labelled a bigot by people who think every "sexuality" is to be celebrated, excluding heterosexuality because that's inferior to them.

This might be why I take so much more of an issue with the left than the right; the right might do/say stupid things but they're at least honest about it and know what they stand for, but the left live in a delusional world of hypocrisy and show no signs of rising from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Doro said:

Speaking as someone from a nation where that's the case, I say it's not a nice situation to be in. We can't even carry knives around, so laws are basically there to prevent us from protecting our own lives from criminals. It's like a constant feeling of being cattle, where we rely on others for our safety instead of ourselves.

I live in the south east of England and work in London and I don't recognise this country that you describe at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Laurinaohtar said:

I live in the south east of England and work in London and I don't recognise this country that you describe at all

Awareness of surroundings is certainly a requisite. Since you're basically in the same place as me (since I'm in Essex and work in London), you should be able to see all the armed police units in train stations, the gangs hanging around the side streets, the CCTV all over that's there to capture attackers after the fact instead of preventing them, the lack of bins in public spaces and the signs about suspicious packages on public transport, the "knife bins" dotted around for people to give up what little protection we have left, and the police sirens going off on a regular basis.

Unless, of course, you believe you can carry weapons to defend yourself? Not sure why, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Doro said:

Awareness of surroundings is certainly a requisite. Since you're basically in the same place as me (since I'm in Essex and work in London), you should be able to see all the armed police units in train stations, the gangs hanging around the side streets, the CCTV all over that's there to capture attackers after the fact instead of preventing them, the lack of bins in public spaces and the signs about suspicious packages on public transport, the "knife bins" dotted around for people to give up what little protection we have left, and the police sirens going off on a regular basis.

Unless, of course, you believe you can carry weapons to defend yourself? Not sure why, though.

My first night in Turkey, a bomb went off in my hotel.  The first night.  Trust me, London and/or Essex is Disneyland in comparison.  But what you described in your initial post is a state of being (you used the word constant) where you feel like you are always at risk and unable to defend yourself--and that's just not London or Essex--no matter how much you try to convince others (and yourself) otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Papi said:

My first night in Turkey, a bomb went off in my hotel.  The first night.  Trust me, London and/or Essex is Disneyland in comparison.  But what you described in your initial post is a state of being (you used the word constant) where you feel like you are always at risk and unable to defend yourself--and that's just not London or Essex--no matter how much you try to convince others (and yourself) otherwise.

Who cares, really? Turkey has no bearing on this so it's completely irrelevant to even bring it up.

And yeah, it is a constant feeling of being cattle. I've already given examples as to why. Repeated insistence I'm wrong changes nothing, especially when you give nothing that counters what I've said (precisely because it's all true).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Doro said:

Awareness of surroundings is certainly a requisite. Since you're basically in the same place as me (since I'm in Essex and work in London), you should be able to see all the armed police units in train stations, the gangs hanging around the side streets, the CCTV all over that's there to capture attackers after the fact instead of preventing them, the lack of bins in public spaces and the signs about suspicious packages on public transport, the "knife bins" dotted around for people to give up what little protection we have left, and the police sirens going off on a regular basis.

Unless, of course, you believe you can carry weapons to defend yourself? Not sure why, though.

The lack of bins thing, other than the tube, isn't really true. I somehow managed to successfully deposit my coffee cup in a bin on the strand Friday without too much of a problem. The other stuff such as armed police exists, as it does for many cities, but would that be any different with less strict gun laws? 

I'm kind of grateful that in a world where the threat of terrorism is high that London transport do remind people to be aware of suspicious packages and we have a visible armed police presence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Laurinaohtar said:

The lack of bins thing, other than the tube, isn't really true. I somehow managed to successfully deposit my coffee cup in a bin on the strand Friday without too much of a problem. The other stuff such as armed police exists, as it does for many cities, but would that be any different with less strict gun laws? 

I'm kind of greatfull that in a world where the threat of terrorism is high that London transport do remind people to be aware of suspicious packages and we have a visible armed police presence. 

Oh, don't get me wrong, it's certainly nice to have some things. But they don't make up for a lack of self-defence for me. I don't see all these things and go "how safe we are", I think "why the fuck am I walking around with nowt when they're tooled up". I don't like that they've decided that our lives or deaths are dependent on them alone, and relying on someone else for my safety isn't something I'm comfortable with. The phrase "nanny state" gets thrown around a lot, but that's certainly apt for how our society runs when it comes to defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doro said:

Who cares, really? Turkey has no bearing on this so it's completely irrelevant to even bring it up.

And yeah, it is a constant feeling of being cattle. I've already given examples as to why. Repeated insistence I'm wrong changes nothing, especially when you give nothing that counters what I've said (precisely because it's all true).

I see I've touched a nerve.  I was trying to offer perspective, my apologies.

I'm not sure who "they" are in your statement "they're tooled up", but if you are referring to the police being armed to protect...well then yes, I would rather a trained professional be armed whose job is to serve and protect than a civilian who could do more harm than good.  The answer to violence should never be "give everyone weapons!".  

But carry on feeling like cattle, if you insist.  But in the end, that is on you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Papi said:

I see I've touched a nerve.  I was trying to offer perspective, my apologies.

I'm not sure who "they" are in your statement "they're tooled up", but if you are referring to the police being armed to protect...well then yes, I would rather a trained professional be armed whose job is to serve and protect than a civilian who could do more harm than good.  The answer to violence should never be "give everyone weapons!".  

But carry on feeling like cattle, if you insist.  But in the end, that is on you.

No nerves touched at all. It's just irrelevant.

They are police, obviously. But now you're throwing out strawmen. At no point have I said that civilians should be untrained. Nor did I say everyone should have weapons. I think I've made it clear I'm about gun laws that allow for licenced and trained responsible civilians (and by responsible, I mean clean background checks, mental health tests, etc) to carry weapons. Is it a requirement for you to intentionally misrepresent what others say, or are you just too eager to disagree that you imagine the argument instead?

Not really on me, either. It's on the law. The only difference here is that I'm aware of the cowshed, and you're not. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Doro said:

 

2 hours ago, Doro said:

Awareness of surroundings is certainly a requisite. Since you're basically in the same place as me (since I'm in Essex and work in London), you should be able to see all the armed police units in train stations, the gangs hanging around the side streets, the CCTV all over that's there to capture attackers after the fact instead of preventing them, the lack of bins in public spaces and the signs about suspicious packages on public transport, the "knife bins" dotted around for people to give up what little protection we have left, and the police sirens going off on a regular basis.

Unless, of course, you believe you can carry weapons to defend yourself? Not sure why, though.

 

24 minutes ago, Doro said:

No nerves touched at all. It's just irrelevant.

They are police, obviously. But now you're throwing out strawmen. At no point have I said that civilians should be untrained. Nor did I say everyone should have weapons. I think I've made it clear I'm about gun laws that allow for licenced and trained responsible civilians (and by responsible, I mean clean background checks, mental health tests, etc) to carry weapons. Is it a requirement for you to intentionally misrepresent what others say, or are you just too eager to disagree that you imagine the argument instead?

Not really on me, either. It's on the law. The only difference here is that I'm aware of the cowshed, and you're not. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

It is relevant when you make it sound like working/living in London is a war zone, with phrases like "give up what little protection we have left" and "capture attackers after the fact" and "police sirens going off on a regular basis"--while other cities around the world have it far worse.  My point is, I think you're being overly dramatic.

Ok, so you just wanted to be armed then...hence your statement, "why the fuck am I walking around with nowt?"  So who do you need protecting from, exactly?  What has you filled with this constant feeling of being cattle, that the only way to feel at ease would be if you were allowed to carry some type of weapon??

And if you genuinely...truly...feel this way, why the fuck do you still live in the UK?

/shrug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Papi said:

It is relevant when you make it sound like working/living in London is a war zone, with phrases like "give up what little protection we have left" and "capture attackers after the fact" and "police sirens going off on a regular basis"--while other cities around the world have it far worse.  My point is, I think you're being overly dramatic.

Ok, so you just wanted to be armed then...hence your statement, "why the fuck am I walking around with nowt?"  So who do you need protecting from, exactly?  What has you filled with this constant feeling of being cattle, that the only way to feel at ease would be if you were allowed to carry some type of weapon??

And if you genuinely...truly...feel this way, why the fuck do you still live in the UK?

/shrug

It's entirely irrelevant because it's nothing to do with how other countries are. The point is how this country is, and if you want to dismiss it based on some weird attempt to justify danger because other places are worse, go ahead. It still has no bearing on what I'm saying, and you can argue with yourself if you like.

I'll be armed if I happen to pass the tests. The people I'd need protecting from are criminals (shit, are we playing "state the obvious" now, just for you?). The constant feeling of being cattle is the laws of the state putting less responsibility on the individual and more on the state itself (which results in rights taken away from the individual in the process). Why I'd feel at ease would be that I'd no longer be unarmed in a country where criminals are armed, and the only thing between us is a few cops (who can't cover everyone at once) and some CCTV (that will at least capture my unarmed death if it were to occur). This is all very obvious stuff.

And I still live in the UK because of family, friends, work, I don't speak other languages, etc. Besides that, why should I abandon everything I have and get driven out by scum? That's not an option I'd take, though it seems some prefer to run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Doro said:

1. It's entirely irrelevant because it's nothing to do with how other countries are. The point is how this country is, and if you want to dismiss it based on some weird attempt to justify danger because other places are worse, go ahead. It still has no bearing on what I'm saying, and you can argue with yourself if you like.

2. Why I'd feel at ease would be that I'd no longer be unarmed in a country where criminals are armed, and the only thing between us is a few cops (who can't cover everyone at once) and some CCTV (that will at least capture my unarmed death if it were to occur). 

3. Besides that, why should I abandon everything I have and get driven out by scum? That's not an option I'd take, though it seems some prefer to run.

1. LOL, I'm not dismissing anything.  Every city has crime.  Again, the picture you paint of London is clearly not shared by others.  But according to you, it's because we don't have some super spidey sense that makes us keenly "aware of the cowshed".  Sure...ok.

2. I don't think you could have crammed more hyperbole into that sentence if you tried.  

3. Implying that I'm somehow a coward because I question the logic of a person who acts like they work/live in a war-zone (when they clearly don't) is a poor attempt of trolling.  If this is how the conversation is going to continue to go, I think I'll just leave you to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Papi said:

1. LOL, I'm not dismissing anything.  Every city has crime.  Again, the picture you paint of London is clearly not shared by others.  But according to you, it's because we don't have some super spidey sense that makes us keenly "aware of the cowshed".  Sure...ok.

2. I don't think you could have crammed more hyperbole into that sentence if you tried.  

3. Implying that I'm somehow a coward because I question the logic of a person who acts like they work/live in a war-zone (when they clearly don't) is a poor attempt of trolling.  If this is how the conversation is going to continue to go, I think I'll just leave you to it.

1. No spidey sense needed. Just basic observation. Not surprising the two are on the same level for you, really.

2. You asked for answers, I gave them. Now you're dismissing them because you don't like the answer. There's nothing hyperbolic about what I said, either. In fact, there's been nothing untrue about what I've said, you just seem to dislike the notion of it.

3. No, I'm not implying you're a coward, I'm outright saying you are IF (and I capitalise because you miss these things) you believe the only solution to a problem is running away. Neither am I acting like I live in a war-zone (again, that's you making up an argument in your head instead of dealing with what's there). But please, do feel free to stop responding. In fact, you can stop with all responses to me, since it always ends up with you acting like this. I'd rather not waste my time any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is pretty tame now but once Trump gets rolling on illegals? Currently the numbers are in the hundreds but when it becomes thousands? Tens of thousands? There are estimated to be well over 10 million illegals in the USA and Canada is a very, very soft target with an immigration system somewhat less tough than jello on a warm day.

Headline "Is Trump’s refugee crackdown threat pushing asylum seekers into Canada?" https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/02/10/is-trumps-refugee-crackdown-threat-pushing-asylum-seekers-into-canada.html

Headline: "U.S. needs to be 'much more vigilant' to stem flow of asylum seekers" http://www.cbc.ca/news/refugees-border-security-patrol-rcmp-1.3976536

MSM and politicians lol... After they have savaged Trump for "the wall" and the travel ban they say the USA needs to do more to keep more from coming to Canada. Now that Trump has started to close the USA porous borders in the USA the porous border to get out of the USA is becoming more appealing... Canadians are already losing some of their self righteous indignation towards Trump policies and this is just the smallest tip of the iceberg.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, fittybolger said:

Below is pretty tame now but once Trump gets rolling on illegals? Currently the numbers are in the hundreds but when it becomes thousands? Tens of thousands? There are estimated to be well over 10 million illegals in the USA and Canada is a very, very soft target with an immigration system somewhat less tough than jello on a warm day.

Headline "Is Trump’s refugee crackdown threat pushing asylum seekers into Canada?" https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/02/10/is-trumps-refugee-crackdown-threat-pushing-asylum-seekers-into-canada.html

Headline: "U.S. needs to be 'much more vigilant' to stem flow of asylum seekers" http://www.cbc.ca/news/refugees-border-security-patrol-rcmp-1.3976536

MSM and politicians lol... After they have savaged Trump for "the wall" and the travel ban they say the USA needs to do more to keep more from coming to Canada. Now that Trump has started to close the USA porous borders in the USA the porous border to get out of the USA is becoming more appealing... Canadians are already losing some of their self righteous indignation towards Trump policies and this is just the smallest tip of the iceberg.

Well, at least you guys will be able to get really cheap snow-shovellers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, fittybolger said:

Below is pretty tame now but once Trump gets rolling on illegals? Currently the numbers are in the hundreds but when it becomes thousands? Tens of thousands? There are estimated to be well over 10 million illegals in the USA and Canada is a very, very soft target with an immigration system somewhat less tough than jello on a warm day.

Headline "Is Trump’s refugee crackdown threat pushing asylum seekers into Canada?" https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/02/10/is-trumps-refugee-crackdown-threat-pushing-asylum-seekers-into-canada.html

Headline: "U.S. needs to be 'much more vigilant' to stem flow of asylum seekers" http://www.cbc.ca/news/refugees-border-security-patrol-rcmp-1.3976536

MSM and politicians lol... After they have savaged Trump for "the wall" and the travel ban they say the USA needs to do more to keep more from coming to Canada. Now that Trump has started to close the USA porous borders in the USA the porous border to get out of the USA is becoming more appealing... Canadians are already losing some of their self righteous indignation towards Trump policies and this is just the smallest tip of the iceberg.

 

Asylum seekers are an entirely different matter compared to people entering illegally and keeping away from the government.

I don't see any of this week's action going against asylum seekers. What it says is that if a person feels they are a legitimate candidate for asylum in a western country then it would sound unwise to plan for the U.S. as a destination. It is nice to say they should go to Canada instead - but from where? Greenland persecuted politicos?

Latin America has its fair share of conditions that qualify people for asylum under Western rules, however going to Canada needs to be done by air or maybe ship, and then you can as well go to Europe.

Canada's immigration policies are also a lot less welcome than European countries. Not sure where the Canada bashing in this respect is coming from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Darmokk said:

Greenland persecuted politicos?

Yes, because the environmentalists are getting kicked out by the Greenland farmers who are able to farm for the first time in a thousand years.

8 minutes ago, Darmokk said:

Latin America has its fair share of conditions that qualify people for asylum under Western rules, however going to Canada needs to be done by air or maybe ship, and then you can as well go to Europe.

The great tragedy of Latin America is that the US helped to contribute to most of those issues >.>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Doro said:

But please, do feel free to stop responding...

 

 

 

Made me think of the last e-mail here ;)

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Papi said:

 

 

 

and where is the evidence for Russian hacking?  because so far, nothing...  aside from an influence claim, they have confirmed no tampering with actual votes.

& in the one state recount (as previously pointed to in this thread) Detroit turned up significant anomalies in favor of Democrat votes (more votes than actual registrations.)

eat crow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, LasraelLarson said:

 

and where is the evidence for Russian hacking?  because so far, nothing...  aside from an influence claim, they have confirmed no tampering with actual votes.

& in the one state recount (as previously pointed to in this thread) Detroit turned up significant anomalies in favor of Democrat votes (more votes than actual registrations.)

eat crow.

no democrat (that I can remember) has seriously claimed there was tampering with the actual votes.  strange, that the influence claim isn't enough to warrant concern?

in what universe does "significant anomalies" = 3 to 5 million illegal voters?

but let's continue to deflect and ignore that this latest White Wouse mouthpiece is saying Trump should never be questioned, Sean Spicer is always 100% correct, and wide-spread voter fraud is real (without giving any evidence to back it up) and the media will not deny it!

I can't wait to see who parodies this nut-job on SNL next weekend...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×