ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Defying King Cuomo

Will the shooting start in New York?  New York gun owners have no intention of complying with King Cuomo's attempt to disarm them:
Assault-rifle owners statewide are organizing a mass boycott of Gov. Cuomo’s new law mandating they register their weapons, daring officials to “come and take it away,” The Post has learned.

Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

“I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said Brian Olesen, president of the American Shooters Supply, one of the largest gun dealers in the state.
King Cuomo is violating the Second Amendment and his new law is void on its face, being a clear infringement upon the right to bear arms.  No New Yorker should obey King Cuomo's mandate, no New Yorker should register his weapons, and no New Yorker should permit himself to be disarmed by New York State.

"State officials will be nervously watching the registration figures to see how many gun owners comply, sources said."

I'll bet they're nervous.  Molon labe.

Labels:

705 Comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 705 Newer› Newest»
Anonymous Darth Toolpodicus January 22, 2013 11:57 AM  

@Asher
What your opposition to gun registration reveals is that you lack the fortitude to undertake the necessary actions required to resist gun confiscation. That deficit is profoundly depressing

What your indifference to gun registration reveals is that you lack the wisdom to see the value of exercising civil and political avenues to check the craven incrementalism of our would-be rulers before violence is the only sensible option.

The political parasites will always seek to grasp the levers that are placed within their reach. It should not take much discernment to see that registration of guns moves that particular lever much closer to those covetous paws. There is value in opposing that move peacefully now, rather than wait until gratuitous violence is the only option, and by which time may no longer be sufficient.

One doesn't have to be stone cold or blood-thirsty to have fortitude. Bad men always underestimate what happens when good men decide its time to be bad. I have a family I would rather not see that kind of action unless it is necessary. There are lots of people that will match you skull-for-skull if that's what it takes, but will work hard to make sure it doesn't come to that.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 11:58 AM  

@ Josh

So, per the atheist philosopher Asher, anyone who does not immediately start killing people lacks courage and has no convictions.

You're a retard. I give the specific conditions which would justify mass slaughter: gun confiscation. You are being intellectually dishonest by deliberately ignoring the specific conditions I gave.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 22, 2013 11:59 AM  

Be very careful, gents. Asher, Tad and others might be sitting next to each other in a cubicle in Ft. Meade sharing coffee and chocolate fingers.

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 11:59 AM  

That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

IP address anyone?

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:00 PM  

@ Conan

They do get excited about democide.

Jesus, you're conflating democide and regicide. Killing off the functionaries of an imperial government is not democide.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:00 PM  

You're absolutely right Asher. You're the only one that isn't a coward

Dude, he might go all internet tough guy on your ass. Or in your ass.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 22, 2013 12:03 PM  

Dude, he might go all internet tough guy on your ass. Or in your ass.

I think we are safe. In your ass would require Asher to detach himself from Tad's ass first.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:03 PM  

Jesus, you're conflating democide and regicide. Killing off the functionaries of an imperial government is not democide.

If the government is composed of we the people, the two are the same.

You have aspergers, don't you?

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:04 PM  

@ Mr Pea

What rights are you protecting other than the right to own firearms?

The right to own firearms is not about protection from home invaders but from government tyranny, and that is why it is in its very nature a collective right. Only collectives can enforce rights against tyranny, individuals are incapable of this function.

Collectives are both sufficient and necessary for defense against tyranny. Particular individuals are both unnecessary and insufficient and that is why it is a collective and not an individual right.

Anonymous Darth Toolpodicus January 22, 2013 12:05 PM  

Be very careful, gents. Asher, Tad and others might be sitting next to each other in a cubicle in Ft. Meade sharing coffee and chocolate fingers

Nah...maybe Ft. Belvoir, with the commo being routed through Ft. Meade.

Anonymous Loki of Asgard January 22, 2013 12:06 PM  

[/sigh/ Woman, I swear...]

In the last analysis, yes. Teen boys have shot their brothers over who gets to control the cable remote. In practice, we try to manage ways to avoid getting to the point of lethal bloodshed, but the pure state of nature is lethal bloodshed in resolving all conflicts.

Thankfully, we have the function of human reason that allows us to find ways of living outside a state of pure nature.


I am sure you are thankful. I truly am. This "human reason that allows us to find ways of living outside a state of pure nature" gives a veneer of respectability to your cowardly refusal to enforce your oft-violated rights by the only means you believe you can.

Coward. I call you coward, do you hear? Hide as you will behind this "reason", but you lie down and permit others to tread upon you rather than rising up as you demand others do. You speak hard words but your hands are soft. You command that blood be spilled but refuse to wet your own feet in it.

You are faint of heart, a fellow of big words and small character, preferring to slaughter the elderly, women, and children rather than facing men.

So sit behind the shield of "reason", and comfort yourself that you will take up arms against the innocent should history follow its natural course. When they come for you, and they will, you will die, and the world will not mourn the passing of another child-killer. You will, instead, have given legitimacy to those who say that man was not meant to have weapons.

Now kindly act as you preach, or stop annoying my secretary.

Anonymous Clay January 22, 2013 12:07 PM  

I'm sure Asher would love a Tad's ass burger about now.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:07 PM  

"I think its about time to monitoring some particular IP addresses."

2nded, 3rded, 4thed,etc.

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 12:07 PM  

A possible rationale for registration is public safety.

I'd like an explanation of that, please. This is a general request to anyone posting that is in favor of firearm registration:
How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

Thank you,

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:07 PM  

@ Nate

Registration enables confiscation and is therefore unacceptable.

The ability to do something is not the act of doing it. You are engaging in the same reasoning that gun grabbers use. They have power that you lack, so fighting them on their own rhetorical ground means you're going to lose.

Blogger JDC January 22, 2013 12:08 PM  

Quote from Tad
That said, wouldn't it be marvelous if the gun nuts in NY did start shooting. I mean, for those who understand that sensible gun laws are just that--sensible--it would be a boon to the easy enactment of commonsense laws controlling the use of guns.

Is it your desire to see this play out? The loss of life in order to enact as you state, "commensense" laws controlling the use of guns? You openly state your desire (people killed in order that gun laws can be enacted) and then cry paranoia when people claim this very thing can / will happen.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:09 PM  

You're going to have to refresh my memory, as this thread has gotten long. To what "no" are you referring?

This one:

Hey Tad, do you think all people exercising their rights to political free speech should be required to register every statement--such that their names, home addresses, and copies of their intended statements are accessible through FOIA to anyone and everyone--and have a waiting period before being allowed to publish?

So now we're at "Why not?"

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:10 PM  

Either that or you are actually pulling a quite clever satire of gun owners.

Most gun owners lack the courage of their convictions to enforce gun rights. They mindlessly bleat about registration and this implies that they will do nothing when it comes to confiscation. That is the problem, they lack the willingness to do what is necessary should confiscation come.

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 12:11 PM  

Don't talk liberty here or the means to which it must be acquired!

They might be watching.

And call us liberty terrorists.

Then they'll come for our guns.

But then again, what do you need guns for if you are not willing to use them as per the Founders reasons for creating the 2nd?

Isn't it said that guns are the teeth that protects your liberty?

Who gives a shit that I am a slave, just don't take my guns?

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:11 PM  

"The ability to do something is not the act of doing it. You are engaging in the same reasoning that gun grabbers use."

Where by once again you prove that you do not understand the concept of incrementalism... even though it has been successfully employed against you for 100 years.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:12 PM  

you're conflating democide and regicide. Killing off the functionaries of an imperial government is not democide.

No you maroon, you are failing to comprehend what was written.

Now go incite your ultra-violence on some nazi blog where you might get traction.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:12 PM  

"I think its about time to monitoring some particular IP addresses."

(LoA says he would support your exercising this option, Vox, and so would I.

(Also, we obey all laws at all times, too. Yep.)

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:14 PM  

"Who gives a shit that I am a slave, just don't take my guns?"

Sure thing Agent Mr Pea. You're absolutely right! Go get 'em!

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:14 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:15 PM  

Don't talk liberty here or the means to which it must be acquired!

They might be watching.

And call us liberty terrorists.

Then they'll come for our guns.

But then again, what do you need guns for if you are not willing to use them as per the Founders reasons for creating the 2nd?

Isn't it said that guns are the teeth that protects your liberty?

Who gives a shit that I am a slave, just don't take my guns?


After you, big man.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:15 PM  

Don't talk liberty here or the means to which it must be acquired! They might be watching.And call us liberty terrorists.Then they'll come for our guns.But then again, what do you need guns for if you are not willing to use them as per the Founders reasons for creating the 2nd?Isn't it said that guns are the teeth that protects your liberty?Who gives a shit that I am a slave, just don't take my guns?

You need a better cover, Agent Mr Pea

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:16 PM  

I bet Agent Asher will be right there with you.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:16 PM  

Mr. Pea,

You are a moron who has not been around here long enough to understand anything, if you are in fact the liberty lover you claim to be.

Otherwise, high five Tad and Asher in the cubicle next to you.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:17 PM  

Otherwise, high five Tad and Asher in the cubicle next to you.

Or don't. Who knows what they're doing in there, and brain bleach is getting expensive.

Anonymous scoobius dubious January 22, 2013 12:17 PM  

"As the old Jewish saying goes "silence equals assent"."

No. It's just a saying. For other people, silence is not assent; it is a species of patience and observation, and taking counsel. It can be other things, too.

The word "as" in the way you use it here is functionally meaningless except as naked assertion.

And you were doing so well on the Kant thread.

As the old Rwandan saying goes, "One man's couch is another man's roller skates." Or as the old Old Ones saying goes, "M'phlugu'i R'lyeh Cthulhu ieeyargath," or some such stuff.



Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:18 PM  

I hereby officially grant Mr Pea and Asher the title "Agent".

Do try to use it whenever you refer to them... or respond to them.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:18 PM  

@ Signe

So you want to commit suicide by cop.

Silly girl, the smartest strategy is to convince the cops, boots on the ground, that their real interests coincide with yours and not with the politicians giving the orders.

Yes, that would involve the cops siding with you to kill the politicians. But that relates to your admission that you feel "hinky" in being the position to kill anyone. The real problem is your lack of courage.

it means exactly what I said. I don't like the idea of ending a life, no matter how justified

You're lying to yourself. What you really mean is that you have a deluded view of life you think comes from the bible that each individual soul IN THIS WORLD is precious. They're not. Ashes to ashes and dust to dust. Your lack of courage is a function of your distorted and twisted theology.

Yes, each soul is precious to God, but we are not God and His ways are not our ways. If each soul is supposed to be considered precious to us in this world then why did God command the Israelites to exterminate the Canaanites? Why not just command His People to conquer the heathens and impose His justice in this world?

The target is a person, a fellow creation of God, whom I'm sending to Hell

This theology is a twisting and distorting of scripture. You lack the capacity and competence to determine who is and who is not going to hell.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 22, 2013 12:19 PM  

How about we give them "Get Smart" names. They are KAOS agents.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:23 PM  

And haven't all of the Homeland Sec. Agency arrests (stopping the trrrrrism), every arrest, been trrrists that they themselves goaded on and then supplied the weapons, bombs, and destructive devices to?

Welcome, agent provocateurs.

Anonymous Dan in Tx January 22, 2013 12:24 PM  

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one reading this thinking to themselves, "This must be how those 'foiled terrorist plots' the feds pull off from time to time go down".

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:24 PM  

"This theology is a twisting and distorting of scripture. You lack the capacity and competence to determine who is and who is not going to hell."

Agent Asher... "Hell" means literally the place of the dead. Your biblical knowledge is wanting.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:24 PM  

@ Signe

You ARE a sociopath.

You are confused about what "sociopath" means. A sociopath is someone who shoots a clerk in the commission of robbing a liquor store. Hitler, Pol Pot and Ted Bundy were not sociopaths. Sociopaths do not have causes outside of immediate gratification because causes require empathy, which sociopaths lack.

I've drawn my line, and when they cross it, I'll enforce against the people who cross it.

How? By whining about your rights?

You, on the other hand, will go after people who had nothing to do with it: small children and weak women. Who is the coward?

The Israelites killed women and children. Were they cowards, too? A coward is someone unwilling to do what it takes to implement their convictions. It's about saying one thing and doing another. You claim to oppose tyranny? What are you willing to do to oppose it? Bleating about your rights is not opposing tyranny.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:26 PM  

This theology is a twisting and distorting of scripture. You lack the capacity and competence to determine who is and who is not going to hell.

And you're not God, Agent Asher, so you don't get to issue righteous crusades, fatwas, jihads, or intifadas against politicians.

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 12:26 PM  

I hereby officially grant Mr Pea and Asher the title "Agent".

Do try to use it whenever you refer to them... or respond to them.


How pathetic.

OMG! They are talking "liberty" talk.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure. - Agent Provocateur

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:27 PM  

Well, somebody has to police all those christo-fascistic, cousin-humpin', hickbilly, rednecks clinging to their guns and bibles.

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 12:27 PM  

I have a suspicion that VD and Tad are actually the same person. VD uses the alternate name to stir the pot in the comments section and then he reaps the rewards (entertainment + more comments + more hits to the blog).

Conspiracy!

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 12:28 PM  

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

Anyone?

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 22, 2013 12:28 PM  

Dan,

I am always on the alert for that possibility.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:28 PM  

@ sprach von teu..

You cannot reason with a sociopathic mind...

You are misusing the term sociopath. A sociopath is someone who kills a clerk while robbing a liquor store for free booze. Hitler, Pol Pot and Ted Bundy were not sociopaths (neither is Tad). Sociopaths are driven by immediate gratification not causes. Having a cause requires empathy and sociopaths lack empathy.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:29 PM  

The Israelites killed women and children. Were they cowards, too?

You ain't the Israelites, bub. And God ain't declared you to go killin folk.

Besides, you're an atheist, so what's it to you?

You sound like a damned sport hating feminist trying to lecture nick Saban about how to run the inside zone.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:30 PM  

The internet psychologist is in.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:31 PM  

"How pathetic.

OMG! They are talking "liberty" talk."

No Agent. That talk has been going on for a decade or so around here. But you and Agent Asher show up... and suddenly the tone changes radically. Gee I wonder why that would be?

Say Mr Weaver... why don't ya hold this shotgun for me...

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:31 PM  

@ Signe

If you get the notion I didn't perform to your unstated expectations, you'll kill my grandma.

In civil contracts expectations and enforcements are explicitly stated. If you sign a contract stating that the enforcement mechanism for your failure of performance is me killing your grandma then me killing your grandma would be the appropriate response for your failure to perform. but I highly doubt you'd enter such a contract.

You obviously don't understand contracts.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:32 PM  

Silly girl, the smartest strategy is to convince the cops, boots on the ground, that their real interests coincide with yours and not with the politicians giving the orders.

I think that after the first toddler you mutilate on Youtube, nobody's going to listen to you. Nor should they.

You seem to think that having no moral compunctions or empathy makes you better than everyone, and based on what? Did God tell you personally to go out and kill the infant children of postal workers? Are you a prophet to the nation of Israel?

You are not brave. You're a coward. You want to hurt people who never did anything to you, instead of going after the people who did, because they're softer targets and unable to fight you.

Why not just command His People to conquer the heathens and impose His justice in this world?

I'm thinking the Gospel of Mark had something about that.

Blogger Hamilton January 22, 2013 12:32 PM  

What's the appropriate response when the gun registration list is put into an interactive Web map and published by the press? That could easily make your home a target for criminals looking for weapons or make your non-gun owning neighbors targets because they are unarmed. Registration leads to bad stuff.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:32 PM  

"You sound like a damned sport hating feminist trying to lecture nick Saban about how to run the inside zone."

National Felon's League!!!

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:33 PM  

I have a suspicion that VD and Tad are actually the same person. VD uses the alternate name to stir the pot in the comments section and then he reaps the rewards (entertainment + more comments + more hits to the blog).Conspiracy!

One would think VD's sock puppet would be a little better at being a troll.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:33 PM  

"How pathetic. OMG! They are talking "liberty" talk."

No, we are not going to shoot. We are just here to talk, Mr. Koresh.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:34 PM  

"
One would think VD's sock puppet would be a little better at being a troll."

besides.. the sockpuppet schtick is Outlaw X's.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:34 PM  

In civil contracts expectations and enforcements are explicitly stated. If you sign a contract stating that the enforcement mechanism for your failure of performance is me killing your grandma then me killing your grandma would be the appropriate response for your failure to perform. but I highly doubt you'd enter such a contract.

Okay, so where in the Constitution does it say that "If [insert government agent/employee/elected official here] causes this Constitution to be breached, the lives of every member of his family to the farthest extent is forfeit"?

Oh wait.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:36 PM  

What's the appropriate response when the gun registration list is put into an interactive Web map and published by the press?

Publishing the name and address of every member of the press responsible, and cross-referencing with whether they have registered guns or not.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:37 PM  

"What's the appropriate response when the gun registration list is put into an interactive Web map and published by the press?"

There is no such list available to publish.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:37 PM  

@ Signe

"Public safety" is usually defined by women and effeminate men who think guns are icky and dangerous, you know...

Fine, but that does not mean that it is not a rationale.

Can I sue this guy for the damage my desk did to my forehead?

This statement indicates that you are completely ignorant of the entire history of western political thought. The foundational premise of political liberalism is that the only "human" good is that which is freely chosen by the individual. Things like family, sex, country, etc. are not freely chose, they are given to us externally, therefore they are not truly good in the "human" sense.

Your ignorance of the history of western political thought is no my problem. Yes, this makes Rush Limbaugh a liberal. He IS a liberal.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:37 PM  

National Felon's League!!!

Well in this instance it's the National Criminal Africans Association...

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:37 PM  

There is no such list available to publish.

I think he's thinking of that gun-owners map that NY newspaper did. I know I am.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:39 PM  

@ Josh

So, where are all these conservatives lining up to support collective rights like women's rights, gay right's, minority rights, etc?

Those aren't collective rights, those are individual rights. The right of the people to resist tyranny, on the other hand, is a collective right.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 12:39 PM  

You know, I'm told that crazy people are not only impervious to reason, but they also think they're the only sane ones.

Just a thought.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:40 PM  

besides.. the sockpuppet schtick is Outlaw X's.

Doesn't he get a free pass forever for his confrontation with the gay mustache?

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 12:40 PM  

"How pathetic.

OMG! They are talking "liberty" talk."


No Agent. That talk has been going on for a decade or so around here. But you and Agent Asher show up... and suddenly the tone changes radically. Gee I wonder why that would be?

Say Mr Weaver... why don't ya hold this shotgun for me...


Actually, Mr. Pea did not just show up.

Say Mr. Founder... why don't ya hold this liberty for me...

Right Nate, because I am going to convince you to take your liberty back. Heaven forbid that the "liberty"... er, gun folks, would dream such a thing.

Anonymous kh123 January 22, 2013 12:40 PM  

"If the registration came in the context of a marriage license I'd have no problem at all with that. It would confirm a more enlightened, more ethical, more moral approach to civil rights."

Is that what they're calling those yellow Jude armbands these days.

I'm guessing ARRA will be the new acronym that covers both Arbeitslager and increased eastbound train schedule efficiency. Putting all of those idle gendarmes to work checking off lists!

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 12:41 PM  

I have a suspicion that VD and Tad are actually the same person

You read my attempts to dumb down my column. Do you really think I could successfully pull off a Tad? I can do Guy de Maupassant's style, sure. Not so hot at HP Lovecraft? But syphilis-addled left-wing queer? Color me dubious.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:41 PM  

@ Nate

You're absolutely right Asher. You're the only one that isn't a coward.

Cowardice is the default state of the modern condition.

Anonymous VD January 22, 2013 12:42 PM  

Doesn't he get a free pass forever for his confrontation with the gay mustache?

Pretty much.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 12:44 PM  

But syphilis-addled left-wing queer? Color me dubious.

Vox prefers to drink like the queers, not think like them.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:44 PM  



Lead the way General Pea, Asher can be right hand.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:45 PM  

@ Darth

What your indifference to gun registration reveals is that you lack the wisdom to see the value of exercising civil and political avenues to check the craven incrementalism of our would-be rulers

Would be rulers? Would be rulers? Newsflash, bro, they ARE you're rulers, and you're too blinded by your dogmatic adherence to an abstract notion of "rights" to realize it.

before violence is the only sensible option.

You have three possible options:

A) servility
B) dividing up the US into different countries so the various peoples living under the current american empire have their own governments and constitutions
C) violence

Personally, I'm a big fan of option B, but no one else seems to be, so I am stuck with either A or C

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 12:46 PM  

Outlaw X is EP?

Well, ain't I late to the party.

Hard to keep up with the changes in handles at times.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:48 PM  

@ Darth

One doesn't have to be stone cold or blood-thirsty to have fortitude.

Blood-thirty? Depends on what you mean by that. Stone cold? Yeah, that's a necessary condition for fortitude. When the Spartans defended Thermopylae they were stone cold. When the Revolutionary Army crossed the Delaware they were stone cold.

(I hope everyone gets the hot/cold joke there)

Blogger Giraffe January 22, 2013 12:48 PM  

Vox prefers to drink like the queers, not think like them.

Excellent. I award you 10 internet points.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 12:49 PM  

@Asher

@ Tad

I have no desire to see guns confiscated.

You're lying.


What would be the point of lying??? I don't support confiscation. I support registration, bans on certain weapons. But not confiscation.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 12:49 PM  

"Doesn't he get a free pass forever for his confrontation with the gay mustache?"

Does anyone have the audio of that? if not... Why not? And if so... why isn't it permalinked in the Voxicon under "Awesome Games Redneck Ilk Play"?

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 12:51 PM  

@ Josh

If the government is composed of we the people, the two are the same.

You're kidding right? This particular government ceased long ago to be of, by and for the people. One insurmountable obstacle is that there is no unitary american and the american empire rules many peoples.

You are confusing the rhetoric of 200 years ago with the reality of today.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 12:54 PM  

'Murica. I love how you cunts refuse to surrender who you are. It's okay to be American! It's okay!

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 12:55 PM  

> You have aspergers, don't you?

Well, duh. What was your first clue, Josh?

> Outlaw X is EP?

I believe so, yes.

Blogger Asher Jacobson January 22, 2013 12:55 PM  

@ WinstonWebb

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

The term "rationale" simply means that "one *could* make the argument. It does not mean that it has to definitively demonstrate that the argument produces some sort of "best state" of the world.

There is no absolute measure of rationales, they are subjective and depend on particular perspectives.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 12:56 PM  

@JDC

Is it your desire to see this play out? The loss of life in order to enact as you state, "commensense" laws controlling the use of guns? You openly state your desire (people killed in order that gun laws can be enacted) and then cry paranoia when people claim this very thing can / will happen.

No, I don't desire to see this happen. I'm just noting what would be the impact of the kind of defiance that Vox Day contemplates might result in NY.

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 12:56 PM  

You read my attempts to dumb down my column. Do you really think I could successfully pull off a Tad? I can do Guy de Maupassant's style, sure. Not so hot at HP Lovecraft? But syphilis-addled left-wing queer? Color me dubious.

It's only an infant conspiracy theory at the moment. I think it's within the realm of possibility that you could pull off such a low effort and flaming style of performance art. I believe in you.

Blogger Giraffe January 22, 2013 12:59 PM  

Ain't seen the Mad Aussie around here in a long time. Nate's blogging again. Must be the end times.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 12:59 PM  

> What would be the point of lying???

To achieve your goals.

> I don't support confiscation. I support registration, bans on certain weapons. But not confiscation.

And what is the point of registration, if not to be able to take the guns you register?

Yes, Tad is lying. Though not completely. He only supports partial confiscation. As long as people like him have access to guns, he doesn't have a problem. The rest of use, well, that's another matter.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 12:59 PM  

@Nate

I hereby officially grant Mr Pea and Asher the title "Agent".

Do try to use it whenever you refer to them... or respond to them.


HEY!!! I want a tin badge and coonskin hat too!!!!

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:00 PM  

@ Signe

Excellent question. For government to regulate speech they have to regulate the things that different people are saying. It will be government telling particular people who can and cannot speak, applying the law differently to different people.

The right to resist government tyranny cannot be differentiated. I don't mean that in a normative sense but in a descriptive sense.

The right to free speech can, descriptively, be differentiated, while the right, descriptively, to defend against tyranny cannot.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:01 PM  

> Ain't seen the Mad Aussie around here in a long time.

The Mad Aussie got married last year. He probably has more important things on his mind.

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 1:02 PM  

I don't support confiscation. I support registration, bans on certain weapons. But not confiscation.

Someone kept asking what registration does for public safety and I don't believe Tad ever attempted to answer. If registration wouldn't have stopped Newtoen and does little to assist public safety while vastly improving the ability of authorities to locate and confiscate guns then aren't those who are concerned with incremental gun control perfectly justified?

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:02 PM  

Now we just need Astro, Res, and porcus to chime in.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:04 PM  

@ Nate

Where by once again you prove that you do not understand the concept of incrementalism...

I understand the empirical reality of incrementalism quite well. What you are doing is saying that registration will logically and necessarily lead to confiscation. That is the slippy slope logical fallacy. I am offering a mechanism whereby registration does not lead to confiscation.

Yes, you're just going to say that "no registration, no confiscation" but if registration becomes reality then you're just shit creek without a paddle doing nothing besides powerlessly bleating about your "gun rights".

The correct strategy is not to rhetorically whine about your rights but to implement a mechanism to enforce those rights.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:05 PM  

"HEY!!! I want a tin badge and coonskin hat too!!!!"

Sorry mate... you're likely better at your job than they are. or more likely... you get off on humiliation and seek it out as much as possible... like a... masochistic attention whore.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:05 PM  

The Mad Aussie got married last year. He probably has more important things on his mind.

Plus there's the NBA. And the mourning over Michael Jackson.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein January 22, 2013 1:06 PM  

@Conan:
Lighten up Francis.

Nice reference. My girlfriend, Lennay Kekua (whom I've seen naked/slept with), and I love Stripes!!

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 1:06 PM  

I understand the empirical reality of incrementalism quite well. What you are doing is saying that registration will logically and necessarily lead to confiscation. That is the slippy slope logical fallacy.

Is it really that problematic when major political leaders have said "Mr and Mrs America, turn them all in"?

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 1:07 PM  

Lead the way General Pea, Asher can be right hand.

You wouldn't follow. In fact, there would not have been a revolution if the period was full of today's AmeriKans.

And... if the Founders lived today, you'd call them agent provocateurs.

Patrick Henry's speech was a cool historical piece, but today it is considered a Ft. Huachuca agent provocateur piece.

Sad really.

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 1:07 PM  

Asher Jacobson January 22, 2013 12:55 PM

@ WinstonWebb

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

The term "rationale" simply means that "one *could* make the argument. It does not mean that it has to definitively demonstrate that the argument produces some sort of "best state" of the world.

There is no absolute measure of rationales, they are subjective and depend on particular perspectives.


I was more interested in someone that was actually MAKING the case, but appreciate the response.

Would anyone in favor of registration like to make the case for it on public safety grounds?

Anyone?

Anonymous Stilicho January 22, 2013 1:07 PM  

Damn. I spend some time doing productive work only to return and discover that a couple of would-be provacateurs have been outed, Tad contracted syphilis (do be careful dh), and Nate is awarding titles. The only question remaining is who gets to be the Grand High Poobah of awarding internet points? Giraffe?

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 1:07 PM  

@Vox Day

I have a suspicion that VD and Tad are actually the same person

You read my attempts to dumb down my column. Do you really think I could successfully pull off a Tad? I can do Guy de Maupassant's style, sure. Not so hot at HP Lovecraft? But syphilis-addled left-wing queer? Color me dubious.


It's not just all those reason. You are something of an occasional name-caller. I'm not. Seems a bit childish to me. If you were me, then "Tad" would eventually start calling names. That said, I'm know you can do "queer", if I get your meaning.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:07 PM  

@ Conan

You used the term "democide" in reference to me. Which people am I advocating killing off? Democide is about the government killing off the citizens, those who are ruled by government. What group of those "ruled" do you think I advocate killing off?

The families of the ruling class are part of the ruling class so killing them off would be regicide, not democide.

Anonymous stg58/Animal Mother January 22, 2013 1:08 PM  

Beezle!

Oh how we miss thee.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:08 PM  

"What you are doing is saying that registration will logically and necessarily lead to confiscation. "

No Agent Asher. I am saying that registration is a step on a path. The next step is not a given. It is just the next step. But one cannot get to that step... if it doesn't go through this one first.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:08 PM  

@ Signe

Also, we obey all laws at all times, too. Yep.

If everyone thought like you we'd still be living under the British Crown. Thankfully not everyone exhibits your cowardice.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:11 PM  

"If everyone thought like you we'd still be living under the British Crown. Thankfully not everyone exhibits your cowardice."

The Train is Fine.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 1:11 PM  

@Nate

Sorry mate... you're likely better at your job than they are. or more likely... you get off on humiliation and seek it out as much as possible... like a... masochistic attention whore.

Damnit! I had visions of fondling the badge and hat while sipping on some Bookers.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:12 PM  

@ scoobius doobius

The word "as" in the way you use it here is functionally meaningless except as naked assertion.

It's quite functional. No one is disputing my specific points that are concise and relevant. That means they win by default. If someone else is arguing a position and you fail to respond you have conceded the point. Note that I respond to every contention others make with which I disagree.

If you fail to respond to my argument then my argument has won the debate by default. That's the way the agon works. Them's the rules and have been for over 2500 years; I didn't make 'em up, I just play by 'em

Anonymous Stilicho January 22, 2013 1:14 PM  

HEY!!! I want a tin badge and coonskin hat too!!!!

No doubt to be followed by you running around proclaiming yourself to be "Gravy Schprocket."

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:14 PM  

"Damnit! I had visions of fondling the badge and hat while sipping on some Bookers."

For the record you have excellent taste in whiskey for a cocksucker. I mean generally I don't put much stock in the tastes of those who actually prefer penis.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:14 PM  

> If everyone thought like you we'd still be living under the British Crown. Thankfully not everyone exhibits your cowardice.

I guess the real reason I was never diagnosed with Asperger's was because I sometimes understand sarcasm.

Anonymous Stilicho January 22, 2013 1:16 PM  

If you fail to respond to my argument then my argument has won the debate by default.

Hasenpfeffer

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:17 PM  

> If you fail to respond to my argument then my argument has won the debate by default.

Or, just maybe, we think you're someone who's not worth responding to.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 1:17 PM  

Asher, "why not" was not directed to you, but Tad.

I do, however, have two sets of questions outstanding to you that you have not answered:

Did God tell you personally to go out and kill the infant children of postal workers? Are you a prophet to the nation of Israel?

and

Okay, so where in the Constitution does it say that "If [insert government agent/employee/elected official here] causes this Constitution to be breached, the lives of every member of his family to the farthest extent is forfeit"?

Anonymous George of the Hole January 22, 2013 1:17 PM  

Asher's just an irrational, paranoid aspie atheist. Completely harmless.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:17 PM  

@ scoobius doobius

And you were doing so well on the Kant thread.

It wasn't a Kant thread, although Koanic was trying to hijack it into one. I got Koanic to formulate a postulate for his proof so that the conclusion was contained in his premise, making his proof trivial and meaningless.

I don't blame you for missing this as probably few than one in a hundred thousand in the US possess the raw capable of comprehending what we were talking about.

I won that thread in a walk. It was like the New England Patriots playing the local high school football team. Not even close.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:17 PM  

"If you fail to respond to my argument then my argument has won the debate by default."

So... the retard is in the corner of the room.. crapping his pants... and laughing at the people making funny faces at him.

And because no one bothers to walk over and clean him up... he concludes he's the smartest person in the room.

Agent...

Try again.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 1:18 PM  

@Nate


For the record you have excellent taste in whiskey for a cocksucker. I mean generally I don't put much stock in the tastes of those who actually prefer penis.


It's not that bad and you don't get he fishiness.

Still, I understand the aversion. I have an aversion to women...in a sexual way. Plus, it's much rarer to find a woman who really digs Bourbon.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:19 PM  

For the record you have excellent taste in whiskey for a cocksucker. I mean generally I don't put much stock in the tastes of those who actually prefer penis.

This alone might be proof that Tad is not a VD sock puppet.

Now, he might be a Nate sock puppet, but his spelling is too unoriginal

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:19 PM  

@ scoobius doobius

As the old Rwandan saying goes, "One man's couch is another man's roller skates."

Hmm, taking wisdom from a people with an average IQ of around 70 ... well, if that works for you.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 1:19 PM  

The Mad Aussie got married last year. He probably has more important things on his mind I learnt it's not a big deal, I tell my wife this. Al Bundy was right. Josh my NBA life is hurting. I want to worry about someone who is winning, like Vox.

Anonymous Nah January 22, 2013 1:20 PM  

@ Asher,

the distinction between a "collective" right and an "individual" right is imaginary.

No, the distinction is synthetic and functional. An individual right and a collective right is a very real distinction. Individuals in a state of nature experience an endless war of all against all. But individuals form collectives to mitigate this war, and those collectives are very real things.


No, humans form collectives not to mitigate war but to fight war even more effectively. The purpose of government is large-scale, industrialized killing.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:20 PM  

> Asher's just an irrational, paranoid aspie atheist.

Actually, I would argue over-rational, George. It's a fine distinction to make, I'll admit. But being susceptible to it myself, I think I recognize the symptoms.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:22 PM  

Tad
You remind me of EZP sometimes... though granted... he wasn't nearly as flaming as you are... and hell.. his name was El Zinky Pinky...

as for chicks that dig bourbon... clearly you haven't spent much time in the south.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:23 PM  

I won that thread in a walk. It was like the New England Patriots playing the local high school football team. Not even close.

That thread was the worst circle jerk this blog has ever seen. Two aspies trying to out aspy the other. Congratulations for winning the aspie Olympics.

Anonymous Stilicho January 22, 2013 1:24 PM  

Hmm, taking wisdom from a people with an average IQ of around 70 ... well, if that works for you.

It is quite remarkable how closely the ravings of a would-be provacateur resemble the clueless utterances of a poor aspie who is simply unable to comprehend anything but the literal meaning of the words. There's a lesson in there somewhere...

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:24 PM  

> Hmm, taking wisdom from a people with an average IQ of around 70 ... well, if that works for you.

Whereas ignoring wisdom because you don't like the source works oh so well....

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:25 PM  

"Hmm, taking wisdom from a people with an average IQ of around 70 ... well, if that works for you."

The Train is Fine.

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 1:25 PM  

Would anyone in favor of registration like to make the case for it on public safety grounds?

*crickets*

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:25 PM  

> *crickets*

Ah, Winston, you're not supposed to notice. :)

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:26 PM  

@ Nate

"Hell" means literally the place of the dead. Your biblical knowledge is wanting.

Your conflating the meaning of specific old english terms with what the bible says. Yes, the literal translation is "place of the dead" but when moderns use it it means "lake of eternal fire". I am simply using it in its customary, current usage. How people used it 1000 years ago is irrelevant.

In revelation god casts "hell", i.e. the grave, into the lake of fire. My reference is not about how I interpret the bible but how Signe does, and that was really clear in my comments. Learn to fucking read.

If someone else misuses a term and I address that misuse it does not mean I am misusing the term. Learn to fucking read.

Anonymous WaterBoy January 22, 2013 1:27 PM  

RINO: "I have a suspicion that VD and Tad are actually the same person."

Josh: "One would think VD's sock puppet would be a little better at being a troll."

VD: "Do you really think I could successfully pull off a Tad?"

Blown cover as cover?

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:28 PM  

You remind me of EZP sometimes... though granted... he wasn't nearly as flaming as you are... and hell.. his name was El Zinky Pinky... 

I motion that, henceforth, EZP be named president emerita of the VQPF, and Tad be named president of the VQPF.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 1:28 PM  

Can I say the word 'niggers' in modern America? I can't? I'm gonna say it anyway. Straya.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:29 PM  

"
If someone else misuses a term and I address that misuse it does not mean I am misusing the term. Learn to fucking read."

She wasn't misusing the term you fucking retard. She used it correctly. She would send them to "The Place of the Dead". That is biblically correct.

You then suggested she was rendering judgement. Which she was not. Everyone goes to the place of the dead to await judgement.

So thank you for proving your ignorance beyond a shadow of a doubt... you idiotic moron of a fucktard.

Agent.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:30 PM  

Blown cover as cover?

Say that two more times and you summon dread or whatever he's calling himself these days.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:30 PM  

> Learn to fucking read.

Kid, Nate probably knew how to read before you were born. And I certainly did.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:31 PM  

"I motion that, henceforth, EZP be named president emerita of the VQPF, and Tad be named president of the VQPF."

I don't think EZP would let him in.

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 1:31 PM  

> ...and you summon dread or whatever he's calling...

Isn't he Elmer?

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 1:32 PM  

Either way, Agent Asher, I'm putting a guy past any redemption he might need when I drop the hammer. Justified or not, I don't have to like it and I don't have to be happy about it and I sure as shootin' don't have to seek out the opportunity.

Just because you get your rocks off to the idea of cutting up toddlers doesn't mean it's normal or desirable to be like you.

And you're still stupid.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:32 PM  

@ josh

And you're not God, Agent Asher, so you don't get to issue righteous crusades, fatwas, jihads, or intifadas against politicians.

I am an atheist, but one who has immense respect for the bible. I am simply pointing out where Christians distort scripture. The idea that we are to regard souls in their relation to this earth in the same way that God regards souls in relation to him is a twisting and distorting of scripture.

If god had wanted us to treat souls as he treats them he would not have commanded them to exterminate the Canaanites. No, the bible does not command us to exterminate people, but neither does it prevent us. To claim that it does is to warp scripture

The sole sufficient arbiter of human government is human reason and not the bible, and THAT is the bible's view on it. The NT, the gospel to the gentiles, give only one command viz a viz human government and that is to obey it in that it is there to do us good.

But it is silent on what "good" means so it is clear that we are supposed to use human reason as the arbiter for what that "good" means.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:33 PM  

"I don't think EZP would let him in."

I mean... ummm... figuratively. Obviously.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 1:34 PM  

I go to argue why blacks have never changed, like Frenchies! Food stamps, health care, this is all plantation shit, you behave, you get to go in the house! But how about you don't rely on government and look after yourself? Not hard! Not hard to be free! Still need a master, these cunts, still need a father figure.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:34 PM  

"I am an atheist, but one who has immense respect for the bible."

except for that whole bit about hell. Which apparently you got from Dante.

Agent Asshat.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:34 PM  

"I go to argue why blacks have never changed, like Frenchies! Food stamps, health care, this is all plantation shit, you behave, you get to go in the house! But how about you don't rely on government and look after yourself? Not hard! Not hard to be free! Still need a master, these cunts, still need a father figure."

WTF????

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:35 PM  

@ WinstonWebb

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

they don't have to justify it, they just have to claim that it is plausible. That's what a rationale IS. Rationales don't have to establish absolute truth, just to claim that something is plausible.

Just because a rationale is probably incorrect doesnt mean it is not a rationale.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 1:37 PM  

"WTF????"

Random rant. My aim is to remain offensively true.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 1:38 PM  

I am an atheist, but one who has immense respect for the bible. I am simply pointing out where Christians distort scripture. The idea that we are to regard souls in their relation to this earth in the same way that God regards souls in relation to him is a twisting and distorting of scripture.

The Scripture you claim to respect states that you are not qualified to interpret it for me. Thank you, good day.

Now kindly answer my questions.

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 1:40 PM  

Can I say the word 'niggers' in modern America? I can't? I'm gonna say it anyway. Straya.

That depends, are you black?


This place seems to have gone to hell after the comments reached 300.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:40 PM  

Random rant. My aim is to remain offensively true. 

You're doing well, don't let the man keep you down.

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 1:41 PM  

Asher January 22, 2013 1:35 PM

@ WinstonWebb

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

they don't have to justify it, they just have to claim that it is plausible. That's what a rationale IS. Rationales don't have to establish absolute truth, just to claim that something is plausible.

Just because a rationale is probably incorrect doesnt mean it is not a rationale.


Again, I appreciate the response, but it is not an answer to my question.

One can either make a case for a position, or one can not. Claiming that something is "plausible" without an explanation of the belief or providing an underlying basis is not a rationale. It's make-believe. That said, I have no interest in semantic debates. If you choose to redefine the term "rationale", that's your prerogative.

I'll simply ask the question again:

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:41 PM  

@ josh

You ain't the Israelites, bub. And God ain't declared you to go killin folk.

True. And neither has be said I shouldnt, either. The bible is silent on the topic. Yes the ten commandments mentions it but that is god's covenant with the descendants of abraham and it is not a general guide for human governance.

"Thou shalt not kill" sounds like a warm and fuzzy llaw, right? Well, what does the NT say about that law? That law which was intended to bring life actually brought death. The law of the OT is a law of consequences, the law of sin. We all break that law and there is no differentiation - whoever breaks the law at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it - so, that law cannot be a guide for how humans govern themselves.

God is no more interested in human government than I am in who wins American Idol. If he was then the NT would include a comprehensive guide for how human government.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:43 PM  

This place seems to have gone to hell after the comments reached 300.

By "hell" do you mean "the place of the dead" or "the lake of fire"?

/sperg

Anonymous George of the Hole January 22, 2013 1:43 PM  

@James Dixon

Asher's not irrational about everything, just things which pertain to God, politics, and anything else he latches onto with feverish obsession.

I don't mention it to be insulting. It's simply a rather predictable phenomenon particular to the atheist mind. Better to recognize it as such than to just assume that he's being a completely unreasonable a-hole.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:44 PM  

@ josh

Today's Team Christian is constantly scoring own goals. It doesn't take a football genius to point out that scoring own goals is sorta antithetical to the game; I would think that even a sport hating feminist would have the sense to understand if Nick Saban told his offense to turn around and run the ball in the opposite direction.

That's what today's christians do.

Anonymous RINO January 22, 2013 1:45 PM  

By "hell" do you mean "the place of the dead" or "the lake of fire"?

/sperg


Hah .. well played

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 1:45 PM  

You're doing well, don't let the man keep you down.

I can be even more controversial! Anders Breivik, for example! I was like, "Who did that cunt shoot, lefties? Why? Cause Norway was letting in Muslims? He got sentenced for this?"

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:45 PM  

"Random rant. My aim is to remain offensively true."

Oh... right... on with it then.

Anonymous Noah B. January 22, 2013 1:46 PM  

"That's what today's christians do."

They're making way more sense than you are.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:46 PM  

"By "hell" do you mean "the place of the dead" or "the lake of fire"?"

The Train is Fine.

Anonymous Stilicho January 22, 2013 1:46 PM  


I am an atheist, but one who has immense respect for the bible.


Reform Judaism?

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 1:49 PM  

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

I'll try.

"If we make people register their guns, then dangerous people who want to do crimes won't do so many crimes, because it increases their chances of getting caught! Or people who own guns will be extra extra careful to make sure they don't fall into the wrong hands, because the registration can be used to follow up and sue them for negligence."

Or how about:

"People who own guns are kind of paranoid and crazy. If we know who owns guns, I can keep my kids away from the crazy people because I'll know who they are."

And less humorously:

"It's not actually having the registration. It's the process of registration that's the point. It allows us to narrow down gun ownership to the people we think should be allowed to have them. I mean, anyone who's been diagnosed with a mental disorder* clearly shouldn't have guns, nor should anyone who's committed a felony of any kind**."

* Including past diagnoses of Oppositional Defiant Disorder.
** Including crimes that have no violent element.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 1:51 PM  

"How is public safety increased through firearm registration?"

By passing a law requiring every house to have at least 1 full auto select fire battle rifle... then using the registration to prove compliance.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 1:55 PM  

@ Signe

I think that after the first toddler you mutilate on Youtube, nobody's going to listen to you. Nor should they.

Not if they're already on my side. It will open the floodgates - one will become ten will become ten thousand. Do you think that in 1925 any German would have believed that twenty years later they would have exterminated large portions of the population of central Europe? It's perfectly clear that completely empathic, psychologically normal people can and do wreak death and destruction on other people. The only thing that holds them back is ideology in the form of morality - yes, morality is just a subset of ideology.

Look, we're talking about years down the road when the different sides are already moving to open warfare.

Did God tell you personally to go out and kill

God is completely silent on the matter. The ten commandments addresses killing, but that was only god's covenant with the Jews. It is not a general observation about the world.

infant children of postal workers?

So, the main business of the postal service is gun control. And here I thought it was about delivering mail. The goal is to get the postal workers on our side against the ruling class.

Are you a prophet to the nation of Israel?

I am not, but the entire OT was intended for the Jews and them alone. Yes we partake of that message but only via the message of Jesus. Jesus is silent on killing, in general. Can you please cite me a passage where Jesus scolds "now don't you ever, ever go out and kill anyone"?

Anonymous Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 1:55 PM  

Don't let them take our guns! It is the liberty teeth we use to protect all of our other... liberties! If we let them take our guns, we'll all be slaves!

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 1:56 PM  

Signe January 22, 2013 1:49 PM

How is public safety increased through firearm registration?

I'll try.


Thank you,

"If we make people register their guns, then dangerous people who want to do crimes won't do so many crimes, because it increases their chances of getting caught! Or people who own guns will be extra extra careful to make sure they don't fall into the wrong hands, because the registration can be used to follow up and sue them for negligence."

In the case of the former, criminals don't used registered guns when they commit crimes (well, not registered to THEMSELVES). So that's right out. In the case of the latter, that does nothing to promote public safety as the crime would have already necessarily been committed in order for negligence to be proved.

Net effect on public safety so far?

-0-


(more to come)

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 1:56 PM  

By passing a law requiring every house to have at least 1 full auto select fire battle rifle... then using the registration to prove compliance.

On the state level, it's unconstitutional for the feds to do it.

Anonymous Porky? January 22, 2013 1:57 PM  

"Don't worry. Once the blood and flesh is hosed off of the car you'll be able to ride the train again."




Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 2:00 PM  

"People who own guns are kind of paranoid and crazy. If we know who owns guns, I can keep my kids away from the crazy people because I'll know who they are."

If this were true, there would never be an instance of a repeated sex offense by a registered sex offender.
'Cause, y'know, they're REGISTERED.

Next?

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 2:02 PM  

Asher January 22, 2013 1:07 PM

@ Conan

You used the term "democide" in reference to me. Which people am I advocating killing off? Democide is about the government killing off the citizens, those who are ruled by government. What group of those "ruled" do you think I advocate killing off?

The families of the ruling class are part of the ruling class so killing them off would be regicide, not democide.


No, the road that Tad and yourself are inciting and cajoling, is the road for govt. force to be used in response. Under your path the govt. is legitimatized according to Tad. Time for the govt. to kill, i.e. democide. The demonization then the democide. Idiot.

Agent go Ash yourself.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 2:02 PM  

"On the state level, it's unconstitutional for the feds to do it."

Disagree. This is clearly providing for the common defense.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 2:03 PM  

Some sort of shooting at Lone Star college in north Houston, TX just happened.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:05 PM  

@ Signe

You're a coward

You are woefully confused about what the term "coward" means.

You want to hurt people who never did anything to you

Did the newborns of the Canaanites ever hurt the Israelites? I don't *want* to hurt them but I am perfectly willing should it be required to topple the ruling class.

because they're softer targets and unable to fight you.

There is only one rule of war: win. Did the civilians who were killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki ever fire a gun in WW2?

You seem to think that having no moral compunctions or empathy

I am an incredibly empathic person. What I do not have is uncontrolled, mindless, indiscriminate empathy. That I withhold my empathy where it it is not deserved is not the same as lacking empathy. And this issue of "morals" is wholly misunderstood. "morality" comes from the latin "mores meaning customs, what is customary.

God's does not judge on "moral" terms but on his absolute standard of sin. Human beings cannot access god's absolute judgement so they are stuck using the subject of morality when forming human government.

I'm thinking the Gospel of Mark had something about that.

NO!!! The answer is that the law of the OT was given to rule the Jews, and they alone. It was solely a covenant with that people, and none other. You can't even get chronology straight: the gospel of Mark was written AFTER the Israelites conquered Canaan.

Blogger Jamie-R January 22, 2013 2:05 PM  

Niggers.

I just want to say that. Love them. But. Want to say that. Away from a place where they can shoot and stab me like their shitty fucking neighbourhoods.

Anonymous WinstonWebb January 22, 2013 2:06 PM  

"It's not actually having the registration. It's the process of registration that's the point. It allows us to narrow down gun ownership to the people we think should be allowed to have them. I mean, anyone who's been diagnosed with a mental disorder* clearly shouldn't have guns, nor should anyone who's committed a felony of any kind**."

This presumes that someone with a mental disorder or a felon that is interested in perpetrating a crime will purchase a firearm from Wal-Mart. If that was the case, there are already laws in place to prevent such. These also don't work because criminals (by definition) don't give a damn about the law.

Still a -0- increase in public safety. But I really appreciate you taking the time to post these, Signe.

Thank you,

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 2:08 PM  

> On the state level, it's unconstitutional for the feds to do it.

How does requiring the ownership of a gun infringe the right to keep and bear arms? Enquiring minds want to know.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 2:09 PM  

Mr. Pea January 22, 2013 1:55 PM

Ok Pee,

This army you are outfitting, please provide the follow:

What arms do you have and the total amount of ammo/calibre/etc.

Since muster is with you, what is your address?

And since the revolution is under your command, what is your experience? How many how you counted so far that will muster?

You are ready to provide all these answers, right?
You are ready to revolt,, right?

Ok let's hear all the details and your plan, Mr. Balls.

You aren't really just playing provocateur right?
Prove it. When and where and how many?


Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:10 PM  

@ Signe

Okay, so where in the Constitution does it say that "If [insert government agent/employee/elected official here] causes this Constitution to be breached, the lives of every member of his family to the farthest extent is forfeit"?

This is the difference between civil contracts and social ones. A civil contract has recourse to government as arbter. The only recourse a social contract has is to the law of nature.

And what is the law of nature? Kill or be killed. Unending war. You can sum up the law of nature in one three letter word: war. This is why humans form government, to earn a little respite from war.

At the point in time I am talking of the Constitution will have been long rendered null and void.

BTW, the "contract" usage in the phrase "social contract" is metaphorical not strict. I, personally, didn't sign the constitution that I live under.

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 2:11 PM  

Very welcome, Winston. I don't believe a word of any of those; I just like to help if I can.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:12 PM  

@ Signe

You're clearly quite sane. You're just woefully miseducated, which is worse than uneducated. You have been fed lies and distortions; I don't blame you for this but it is up to you to unburden yourself from them.

Anonymous Rip January 22, 2013 2:13 PM  

@ James Dixon - The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the authority to force you to purchase or otherwise own anything. It's not about infringing on your 2nd Amendment rights.

Anonymous George of the Hole January 22, 2013 2:13 PM  

This is why humans form government, to earn a little respite from war.

LOL!!!

Like saying that humans form football teams to earn a little respite from sports.

ROFL!!

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:14 PM  

@ Tad

What would be the point of lying???

To advance the power of the ruling class of the American Empire, of which you are a member. A new york, gay, jewish lawyer is by definition a member of the ruling class.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:16 PM  

@ Nate

The next step is not a given. It is just the next step.

hahahah. Okay, if I'm going up the stairs then the next step is, BY DEFINITION, a given. That IS what it is.

How do you people manage to miss the most obvious points.

Anonymous Josh January 22, 2013 2:17 PM  

It turns out that it's not only constitutional, it's also constitutional for the government to pay for said arms:

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:19 PM  

@ Nate

The Train is Fine.

the train? I don't get the reference. Is that what you and josh ran on Tad last night?

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 2:20 PM  

Asher, your comment at 2:05 is nothing but a string of self-contradictions.

Let me point this out for you, nice and clear: A man who does not believe in God, i.e. an atheist, is not qualified to explain what God thinks, feels, or expects. You do not know Him, you do not acknowledge His existence, and you are so far from being within His will that He refers to people like you as "dead".

TL;DR version: Buzz off, heathen.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:21 PM  

@ James Dixon

Or, just maybe, we think you're someone who's not worth responding to

Anyone who makes a concise, direct and relevant point is worth responding to. Anyone. In my experience, comments like this are made by people who are intellectually out of their depth.

Anonymous Porky? January 22, 2013 2:22 PM  

It was only a matter of cleaning off the human debris to return the train to it's pristine state."

Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 2:23 PM  

Anyone who makes a concise, direct and relevant point is worth responding to.

That's his point, heathen.

Anonymous scoobius dubious January 22, 2013 2:23 PM  

"It wasn't a Kant thread... I don't blame you for missing this as probably few than one in a hundred thousand in the US possess the raw capable of comprehending what we were talking about."

Well hee f#ckin haw. Does somebody else want to explain to him what he isn't twigging (and is perhaps physically incapable of twigging), or do I have to do everything meself?


Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 2:25 PM  

Scoobius, he may not have the raw.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:25 PM  

@ Signe

God tell you personally to go out and kill

God is completely silent on this one way or the other. "Thou shalt not kill" is in the OT and was intended for the jews and they alone. Further, that god turned around and told them to kill the Canaanites indicates that it only covered fellow jews. If you can find me a passage where Jesus says "now don't you go killin' nobody, evah, evah" I will reconsider my position.

opps i already answered this.

@ signe

If I don't respond immediately it may be that I am considering my answer so please dont ask the same question twice or I might start answering it twice.

If you ask me a direct and relevant question, trust me, I will answer it.

Anonymous Tad January 22, 2013 2:28 PM  

@Josh

I motion that, henceforth, EZP be named president emerita of the VQPF, and Tad be named president of the VQPF

Now hold on. I haven't said I'd serve. What benefits, powers and privileges come with the position?

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:28 PM  

@ Nate

No, humans form collectives not to mitigate war but to fight war even more effectively. The purpose of government is large-scale, industrialized killing.

This implies that if no government existed, at all, the world would be a far better place to live. Hell, by this measure, the Constitution was a mistake from the get-go.

So much for supporting the second amendment.

Anonymous Porky? January 22, 2013 2:29 PM  

Asher: "hahahah. Okay, if I'm going up the stairs then the next step is, BY DEFINITION, a given."

He's got you there, Nate. Everyone knows that one simply must touch every stair - just as all pencils must be parallel and pointing the same direction at all times, and all doorknobs should be disinfected at all times.


Anonymous Signe January 22, 2013 2:33 PM  

God is completely silent on this one way or the other. "Thou shalt not kill" is in the OT and was intended for the jews and they alone... If you can find me a passage where Jesus says "now don't you go killin' nobody, evah, evah" I will reconsider my position.

Sure you will, because you completely believe in it.

You know, for a guy who doesn't believe in God, you sure lean on divine authority a lot.

If I don't respond immediately it may be that I am considering my answer so please dont ask the same question twice or I might start answering it twice.

Sorry, no. My reposting the question was a courtesy, so you wouldn't have to go sorting back through looking for the question.

Of course, I'm strongly disinclined to be courteous to you at this point, so...as my employer says, "I do what I want."

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 2:34 PM  

"This implies that if no government existed, at all, the world would be a far better place to live. Hell, by this measure, the Constitution was a mistake from the get-go."

yeah... that wasn't me. I didn't say that.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 2:34 PM  

Metaphors are hard.

Anonymous Asher January 22, 2013 2:37 PM  

@ Josh, James Dixon

I am about as unaspy as one could possibly get. Look, this entire thread is about rational analysis, and nothing more. That IS what it is. What you're doing is akin to moving your bishop two squares over, seven squares up and claiming you're still playing chess. that is not "overrational" that is playing by the rules of the game.

If you aren't interested in rationally analyzing political philosophy and theory why the hell are you even commenting here?

Also, josh, I use more metaphors than all the rest of the commenters combined. Has that even registered with you? One of the big problems aspys have is that they take everything literally and metaphor is tough for them. You're just ignorant of what an aspy is.

When you call me an aspy what you really mean is that you lack the capacity to contest my position and so you're just going to insult me. That doesn't make me an aspy but it does make you a rude little git.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian, King of Aquilonia January 22, 2013 2:37 PM  

the Constitution was a mistake from the get-go.

That may be the most intelligent statement you have made on this blog.

Blogger Nate January 22, 2013 2:39 PM  

"Now hold on. I haven't said I'd serve. What benefits, powers and privileges come with the position?"

As uncomfortable as I am engaging you in a discussion involving the word "position"... I will endeavor to persevere.

VQPF: Vox's Queer Party Friends. The gay sub-culture here at VP. See... not only is Vox doesn't hate gays at all... but the blog actually has its own group of homosexual readers and commentors. EZP... the creator of the group... is the annointed lifetime president emeritus.

which is why its so amusing to us that idiots like scalzi throw the word 'homophobe' around.

There is no "Scalzi's Queer Party Friends".

Blogger James Dixon January 22, 2013 2:40 PM  

> Anyone who makes a concise, direct and relevant point is worth responding to.

Yeah. Concise and relevant. That's been really descriptive of your posts.

> ...comments like this are made by people who are intellectually out of their depth.

Nice try junior, but you're not in that class.

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 705 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts