What's new
By:

Child firing Uzi at Ariz. shooting range accidentally kills instructor

DutchJazzer said:
when i really need a gun it will be a life threatening situatoion and i might die
Click to expand...

Do you live in some kind of war zone where you have a decent chances of situation like that happening? Seriously... do folks in SLC see roberies and attempted murders on daily basis?
 
The Thriller said:
I just don't get the whole selective libertarian thing...


That 9 year old shouldn't be "playing" with guns. She should be playing four square, tag, basketball, tennis, etc...
Click to expand...

Stoked said:
Define "selective libertarianism"
Click to expand...

I'll take a shot at this...

It means selectively choosing to ignore the issue that this incident occurred because guns were looked upon as entertainment and that this family had the liberty to select this type of entertainment as the highlight of their family vacation.
 
moevillini said:
I'll take a shot at this...

It means selectively choosing to ignore the issue that this incident occurred because guns were looked upon as entertainment and that this family had the liberty to select this type of entertainment as the highlight of their family vacation.
Click to expand...

I think you may be the one that is being selective. You seem to have singled out an activity you don't like. What about this boy?

https://www.startribune.com/local/west/148386075.html
 
moevillini said:
what about it? are you advocating that there be a ban on dirt-biking? what does that have to do with this?
Click to expand...

He's saying you don't like guns, and people die from various things.
The biggest "tragedy" is that we all kill ourselves, cigarettes, lack of diet and exercise, alchahol... Why aren't these things being talked about? Nope a 9 year old with an accident is definitely nationwide must hear news. Nothing more important is going on in the world!
 
moevillini said:
I'll take a shot at this...

It means selectively choosing to ignore the issue that this incident occurred because guns were looked upon as entertainment and that this family had the liberty to select this type of entertainment as the highlight of their family vacation.
Click to expand...

It means declaring oneself a libertarian while being extremely selective about which major portions of the ideology's platform you wish to abide by for convenience.

Again, how many other self proclaimed "libertarians" actually follow their party's platform even 50 percent? So many "Rand Paul Revolution" cheerleaders love his attacks on social safety nets yet demand amendments strictly defining marriage, attack marijuana likes it's the plague, and complain that we're not invading something every 5 seconds a day.

I can't begin to tell you how many "libertarians" on my Facebook complain weekly about gay marriage and how we're not involved more against Russia and ISIS. They're the first ones to jump to comparing guns to cars or Doritos when these types of completely preventable tragedies occur. Is that really libertarianism? Is that really freedom?
 
moevillini said:
what about it? are you advocating that there be a ban on dirt-biking? what does that have to do with this?
Click to expand...

The point is of all the criticisms one could wage against libertarians a lack of consistency is probably the weakest. You use the argument of safety but only when it fits your agenda. When something that you like is singled out as being unsafe for children you will use a liberty/constitutional argument.

Citizens choice vs Government prescription
[table="width: 500"]
[tr]
[td]Issue[/td]
[td]Rep[/td]
[td]Dem[/td]
[td]Lib[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Guns[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Gay marriage[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]gp/cc*[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Abortion[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]drugs[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

* I marked Gay marriage as both for Dems because a clear majority of registered Dems support Gay marriage but the Dem politicians either don't support gay marriage or only pay the issue lip service.
 
Jaymz said:
He's saying you don't like guns, and people die from various things.
The biggest "tragedy" is that we all kill ourselves, cigarettes, lack of diet and exercise, alchahol... Why aren't these things being talked about? Nope a 9 year old with an accident is definitely nationwide must hear news. Nothing more important is going on in the world!
Click to expand...

Actually, did you know that lack of diet and exercise is being talked about? Michele Obama has been blasted for 6 years for her policies for healthy lifestyles. The New York City mayor has been blasted for taking a stand.

But if you want to compare guns and cigs to guns, then by all means let's do it! I will win! How many 9 year olds can walk into a bar and buy some smokes and booze? It should be much harder for a 9 year old to use an Uzi than to buy smokes and booze!

Again, American culture is embarrassingly messed up. We look in horror at gay marriage and weed... Yet have no problem with a 9 year old with an Uzi.

Just what the **** is wrong with this country?
 
heyhey said:
The point is of all the criticisms one could wage against libertarians a lack of consistency is probably the weakest. You use the argument of safety but only when it fits your agenda. ...
Click to expand...

my agenda?
and where did I ever say anything about safety?

do tell...

I'm all ears (or eyes, I suppose since I'm reading this).

Take your best shot.
 
moevillini said:
my agenda?
and where did I ever say anything about safety?

do tell...

I'm all ears (or eyes, I suppose since I'm reading this).

Take your best shot.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I am at a disadvantage. I must have misinterpreted you somewhere along the line or made an improper assumption. I was under the impression that your concern here had more to do with safety than anything else.


moevillini said:
well, from the website of Bullets and Burgers https://bulletsandburgers.com/bachelor-bachelorette-parties



well, at least it's "after shooting" but so much for the separation of booze and bullets


and I imagine for something like this there is a high likelihood that there's been a bit of pre-gaming taking place


Bottom line - how can anyone think that the focus here is on the safe use and handling of firearms?
Click to expand...

If you wish to clarify what the basis for your objection to this activity is then I will accept it without a second thought.

It is not my intention to take a shot at you and I do not think you exclusively have an agenda. We all do. Libertarians certainly do but you accused that agenda of being inconsistent and I disagree with that assertion.
 
heyhey said:
The point is of all the criticisms one could wage against libertarians a lack of consistency is probably the weakest. You use the argument of safety but only when it fits your agenda. When something that you like is singled out as being unsafe for children you will use a liberty/constitutional argument.

Citizens choice vs Government prescription
[table="width: 500"]
[tr]
[td]Issue[/td]
[td]Rep[/td]
[td]Dem[/td]
[td]Lib[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Guns[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Gay marriage[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]gp/cc*[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]Abortion[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[tr]
[td]drugs[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]gp[/td]
[td]cc[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]

* I marked Gay marriage as both for Dems because a clear majority of registered Dems support Gay marriage but the Dem politicians either don't support gay marriage or only pay the issue lip service.
Click to expand...

Do they not teach people to cite sources where you're from? I would love to know the origins of this "survey" you just pasted.

But let's look at what the poster child for the libertarian party is doing:

www.cnn.com/2014/08/12/opinion/cardona-rand-paul/

"(CNN) - Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky is giving people whiplash. In the last month, he has shifted, flip-flopped and pandered so strikingly on a range of positions and statements that it makes you wonder whether he has suddenly developed a deep disregard for his own convictions, or never had any to begin with.

At the Urban League's National Convention in Cincinnati in July, Paul expressed support for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and talked about the necessity of protecting the rights of minorities. Kudos to him for even showing up, not a usual move for Republicans. But we must hold him accountable for his past statements that private businesses had the right to deny service to anyone they wanted, something the Civil Rights Act specifically forbids."

And

"Just a few days ago, in a flip-flop worthy of the International House of Pancakes, a straight faced Paul denied ever saying the United States should stop sending any military aid to Israel. Does he really think that little of American voters?

Let's refresh the senator's memory. In 2011, Paul put forth a budget proposal that would have cut $500 billion from the federal budget and would have ended all foreign aid, including to Israel.

He has since engaged in pretzel-like messaging maneuvers trying to rewrite history to fit reality -- one where a Republican candidate perceived as even the slightest bit anti-Israel can kiss any chance of the Republican presidential nomination good-bye. It gets better. Or at least more cringe-worthy."

And

"That hope fizzled recently when first, Paul decided to go campaign for Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the most anti-immigrant/anti-immigration reform member of Congress. Then, in a grand gesture, a profile in courage, Paul could not have fled faster as Erika Andiola, an undocumented "Dreamer" confronted King at an event, with Paul sitting right next to him.

According to his staff, Paul left so abruptly because he was late for a media interview. Maybe. Or maybe, he didn't have the guts to reconcile his hypocritical pro-immigration reform statements with his support of someone like King."

And btw, he has flip flopped in regards to abortion and contraceptives. Hardly the "live and let live" mantra so touted by libertarian blowhards.

I don't blame you and your ilk for your "Selective Libertarianism." Your own lord and savior flip flops and deceived your own platform too depending on convenience.

Again, from my experience, libertarians are more just pissed off republicans trying to sound "different." They tout freedom from government regulation and social safety nets yet don't hesitate to regulate marriage, marijuana, and demand that Americans stick their noses into other countries' business.
 
The Thriller said:
Do they not teach people to cite sources where you're from? I would love to know the origins of this "survey" you just pasted.

But let's look at what the poster child for the libertarian party is doing:

www.cnn.com/2014/08/12/opinion/cardona-rand-paul/

"(CNN) - Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky is giving people whiplash. In the last month, he has shifted, flip-flopped and pandered so strikingly on a range of positions and statements that it makes you wonder whether he has suddenly developed a deep disregard for his own convictions, or never had any to begin with.

At the Urban League's National Convention in Cincinnati in July, Paul expressed support for the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and talked about the necessity of protecting the rights of minorities. Kudos to him for even showing up, not a usual move for Republicans. But we must hold him accountable for his past statements that private businesses had the right to deny service to anyone they wanted, something the Civil Rights Act specifically forbids."

And

"Just a few days ago, in a flip-flop worthy of the International House of Pancakes, a straight faced Paul denied ever saying the United States should stop sending any military aid to Israel. Does he really think that little of American voters?

Let's refresh the senator's memory. In 2011, Paul put forth a budget proposal that would have cut $500 billion from the federal budget and would have ended all foreign aid, including to Israel.

He has since engaged in pretzel-like messaging maneuvers trying to rewrite history to fit reality -- one where a Republican candidate perceived as even the slightest bit anti-Israel can kiss any chance of the Republican presidential nomination good-bye. It gets better. Or at least more cringe-worthy."

And

"That hope fizzled recently when first, Paul decided to go campaign for Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the most anti-immigrant/anti-immigration reform member of Congress. Then, in a grand gesture, a profile in courage, Paul could not have fled faster as Erika Andiola, an undocumented "Dreamer" confronted King at an event, with Paul sitting right next to him.

According to his staff, Paul left so abruptly because he was late for a media interview. Maybe. Or maybe, he didn't have the guts to reconcile his hypocritical pro-immigration reform statements with his support of someone like King."

And btw, he has flip flopped in regards to abortion and contraceptives. Hardly the "live and let live" mantra so touted by libertarian blowhards.

I don't blame you and your ilk for your "Selective Libertarianism." Your own lord and savior flip flops and deceived your own platform too depending on convenience.

Again, from my experience, libertarians are more just pissed off republicans trying to sound "different." They tout freedom from government regulation and social safety nets yet don't hesitate to regulate marriage, marijuana, and demand that Americans stick their noses into other countries' business.
Click to expand...

Rand Paul is a Republican.

I dispute that he is the poster child of the libertarian party. He is not a member of the Libertarian Party. He has nevr won a libertarian primary or caucus. So you've kinda wasted your breath.

https://www.lp.org/

I never claimed it was a poll. It seems pretty obvi that I constructed the table based on what I thought was the truth. If you dispute my assessment of each of the relative parties positions please point them out.
 
heyhey said:
Rand Paul is a Republican.

I dispute that he is the poster child of the libertarian party. He is not a member of the Libertarian Party. He has nevr won a libertarian primary or caucus. So you've kinda wasted your breath.

https://www.lp.org/

I never claimed it was a poll. It seems pretty obvi that I constructed the table based on what I thought was the truth. If you dispute my assessment of each of the relative parties positions please point them out.
Click to expand...

Well, if what you say is what you believe is the truth then it must be true!

Ps Rand Paul being libertarian lite is exactly what I'm saying. Even the poster hold for their ideology can't consistently be a libertarian.

The libertarian movement sounds cute. But doesn't work in practice.
 
heyhey said:
Do you actually take issue with the table?

I wouldn't want to continue to vote based on a misunderstanding of each parties positions.
Click to expand...

You made up a table of your own opinion, not a survey of sampled population.

Why would anyone take issue with that?
 
The Thriller said:
It means declaring oneself a libertarian while being extremely selective about which major portions of the ideology's platform you wish to abide by for convenience.

Again, how many other self proclaimed "libertarians" actually follow their party's platform even 50 percent? So many "Rand Paul Revolution" cheerleaders love his attacks on social safety nets yet demand amendments strictly defining marriage, attack marijuana likes it's the plague, and complain that we're not invading something every 5 seconds a day.

I can't begin to tell you how many "libertarians" on my Facebook complain weekly about gay marriage and how we're not involved more against Russia and ISIS. They're the first ones to jump to comparing guns to cars or Doritos when these types of completely preventable tragedies occur. Is that really libertarianism? Is that really freedom?
Click to expand...

So in other words toe the party line (like a rabid demo or repub) or your opinions does not matter. Pretty convenient. I haven't met an intellectually honest person yet whose entire belief set completely matches the political platform they most closely identify with. Those who do are mostly caricatures of people, not real people who actually think about individual issues and then decide what they choose to believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top