NRA Supports Bump Stock Regulation

[Kutnupe14]

Fascism. He was a whackjob but clearly had fascist/socialist ideology, which is obviously left wing. "Bernie Sanders was the President I wanted" said no right wing person ever.

No, its not obvious. It wasn't left wing in Germany, it not left-wing in the United States. As Alpo stated earlier, left-wing ideologies oppose the ruling classes and the status quo.

 

[Liberty1916]

There's no need to try and refute your analysis because it's not an honest look at the issue. Everything that is considered right-wing violence, you simply ignore. A guy runs over people in Charlottesville - that's not right-wing violence. Some guys plan to blow up an apartment building full of Somalis -that's not right wing violence. A guy stabs Muslims and voices his support of America Patriotism and Donald Trump -that's not right wing violence. A person attacks a planned parenthood location -that's not right wing violence. Guy shoots up Shik temple -that's not right wing violence either.
It always the same... whenever there actually is right-wing violence, people try dismiss it as "left-wing," or they say the views aren't consistent with right-wing ideology. It's plainly intellectually dishonest. Here's the better question, can you name an instance of what you would consider right-wing violence?

You were proven wrong on Portland. The guy was a leftist. Not admitting that prevents you from labeling anyone "intellectually dishonest".

To your question though, most of your examples are dismissed because you have no proof of any "right wing" political motives. The three specific examples you gave were easily disproved and as noted above, one of them turned out to actually be an example of left wing violence.

I think the problem you're having is that you're conflating racial violence and political violence and making the assumption that racism is "right wing". Again, as your Portland example shows, there are plenty of left wing racists, so the premise under which you view things as "right wing" is false.

Now, to your other question, sure find an analogous example of a shooter who is a registered republican or attends Tea Party rallies etc. and I'll agree it's right wing violence. And, I'm not saying it doesn't exist. The original point was the VAST majority of political violence is left wing. You can't refute that.

 

[Liberty1916]

No, its not obvious. It wasn't left wing in Germany, it not left-wing in the United States. As Alpo stated earlier, left-wing ideologies oppose the ruling classes and the status quo.

Maybe that's where we're having a disconnect. You seem to have bought into the false narrative that fascism is "right wing". Sure, it's to the right of communism, but it's still on the left side of the political spectrum. If you truly believe fascism is right wing, then we're never going to have a reasonable discussion about politics. You're simply wrong on that point.

 

[Kutnupe14]

You were proven wrong on Portland. The guy was a leftist. Not admitting that prevents you from labeling anyone "intellectually dishonest".

To your question though, most of your examples are dismissed because you have no proof of any "right wing" political motives. The three specific examples you gave were easily disproved and as noted above, one of them turned out to actually be an example of left wing violence.

I think the problem you're having is that you're conflating racial violence and political violence and making the assumption that racism is "right wing". Again, as your Portland example shows, there are plenty of left wing racists, so the premise under which you view things as "right wing" is false.

Now, to your other question, sure find an analogous example of a shooter who is a registered republican or attends Tea Party rallies etc. and I'll agree it's right wing violence. And, I'm not saying it doesn't exist. The original point was the VAST majority of political violence is left wing. You can't refute that.

I'm not talking about examples. I'm asking you to name a REAL life example of right-wing violence.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Maybe that's where we're having a disconnect. You seem to have bought into the false narrative that fascism is "right wing". Sure, it's to the right of communism, but it's still on the left side of the political spectrum. If you truly believe fascism is right wing, then we're never going to have a reasonable discussion about politics. You're simply wrong on that point.

So just so I'm getting this straight. You saying that a country founded with a socialist structure is left-wing, and the parties within that nation which oppose it, are right-wing? Right-wing, and left wing are dependent on locale. For instance, our founding fathers, in their opposition to the Crown, would clearly be considered left-wing.

 

[Liberty1916]

So just so I'm getting this straight. You saying that a country founded with a socialist structure is left-wing, and the parties within that nation which oppose it, are right-wing? Right-wing, and left wing are dependent on locale. For instance, our founding fathers, in their opposition to the Crown, would clearly be considered left-wing.

I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say here. I get the impression you think "opposition to government" is left wing. I think you need to clearly define some basic "left wing" and "right wing" political core principles to determine who's left or right. I don't think it's defined by "opposition to government". By that definition, the Bundy standoff was left wing.

Anyway, I think we're on the verge of hijacking the thread, if we haven't done so already. You can have the last word. I won't be posting further in the thread unless it's directly related to bump stock regulation.

 

[jamil]

Was would you call it then?




[/FONT][/COLOR]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/05/30/portland-train-stabbing-suspect/353963001/
Police investigating MAX stabbing suspect's 'extremist ideology' | KGW.com

I’d call it confused. If you think he’s right wing you haven’t read enough of his posts, or, like most of the media, you’re being selective. Crazy.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I’d call it confused. If you think he’s right wing you haven’t read enough of his posts, or, like most of the media, you’re being selective. Crazy.

I'm inclined to follow Liberty's lead, and not hijack this thread any further... but I would still like him to cite me a real life example of right-wing violence.

 

[jamil]

Fascism isn’t left or right.

 

[jamil]

No, its not obvious. It wasn't left wing in Germany, it not left-wing in the United States. As Alpo stated earlier, left-wing ideologies oppose the ruling classes and the status quo.

The soviet union was every bit as fascist as nazi Germany.

 

[churchmouse]

Should we start another thread.

 

[BugI02]

Okay. I have to admit. I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm still trying to figure out what Michelle's INGO screen name is.

NotQuiteSoBigBoxaJunk (forgive me, brother)

 

[BugI02]

dual post

 

[BugI02]

.


In all honesty I'm more of a shotgun guy for self-defense. But make no mistake I understand what the AR is for. Also I have something like that posted in the picture. It would've been nice if LEO were on rooftops with those before the shooting even started.

Or the set-up Mr Joshua used to take out Hunsacker in LW (helo and all)

 

[BugI02]

For some events, perhaps for now. This would be quite costly as it requires multiple trained sniper teams which don't come cheap. Impossible for linear venue events like the Boston Marathon. IMHO the likelihood of a copycat being able to pull off a premeditated and well-planned repeat is near zero. For a rank amateur, it was brilliantly planned resulting in the sheriff holding firmly to a belief he had assistance of some kind. It even took into account his skill limitations and that of the weapons when continuously used at 400 plus rounds per minute. It may turn out that he did have assistance that knew something nefarious was afoot (e.g. a Michael and/or Lori Fortier), but I have serious doubts. Perhaps someone may attempt it. A gaping hole ripe for exploitation that, to my knowledge, hasn't been plugged is the use of a drone to deliver a bomb. I would worry more about that than a copycat. It's the one you don't see coming that gets you.

John

Not the most scholarly source, but had good pictures

https://www.popsci.com/isis-is-dropping-bombs-with-drones-in-iraq

ISIS is dropping bombs with drones in Iraq
The quadcopter menace

 

[BugI02]

The Charlottesville car ramming, the stabbing of Tim Caughman, and the Portland Train Attack. You owe me 300 counterexamples to make you 99% claim true. Since I don't want you to work endlessly trying to find something there is a high likelihood of you NOT finding, I will accept 25 individual instances since Jan 1st.

Total of 3 dead. I would say you owe Liberty1916 around 55 MORE examples just to equal LV

 

[BugI02]

I equate Pelosi's remark to gender identity. There exists on this planet a group...a fairly large group actually with approximately 3.5 billion members and 2 'X' chromosomes in slot 23...that MUST have the last word.


my wife just texted: "that's not true!"

I hope your wife doesn't know your screen name

 

[BugI02]

I equate Pelosi's remark to gender identity. There exists on this planet a group...a fairly large group actually with approximately 3.5 billion members and 2 'X' chromosomes in slot 23...that MUST have the last word.


my wife just texted: "that's not true!"

I hope your wife doesn't know your screen name

ETA: Oops, busted

 

[BugI02]

Not all "slippery slope" arguments are fallacies. The thing that makes it a fallacy is that you can't show a causal relationship in your argument. So, if a law is vague enough, is it reasonable to suspect that how it's interpreted will depend on who is interpreting it, including their personal biases. Courts are stacked for a reason. If you're going to agree that "This will never pass the litmus test. Any good attorney would have a hay day with this," then you've already conceded a causal relationship for concern about a slippery slope.

You mean like ... say, the 16th Amendment?

 

[JAL]

Not the most scholarly source, but had good pictures

https://www.popsci.com/isis-is-dropping-bombs-with-drones-in-iraq

ISIS is dropping bombs with drones in Iraq
The quadcopter menace

The one best depicted is small. For a few thousand $ you can get one with considerable greater payload capacity. The enormous problem becomes how to deal with one to take it down. Jamming is one method, but you've still got a live warhead that could be rigged to deploy if control is lost. EOD personnel cannot fly out to it to disarm it. Shoot something at it and you have to worry about (1) where it comes down if you hit it and what it does, and (2) what happens to whatever you shoot at it if you miss and what that potentially does. The target is small and can be erratic, jinking to avoid being taken down. It's not a simple problem. Jamming poses other issues such as interference with legitimate devices that could be critical to other systems with unintended consequences that may not be trivial . . . or potential misuse to deliberately disrupt other systems.

John