Times like these...

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is what you call culture?



deciding who is a part of what cultures based off the color of their skin?

Im sorry but this is yet another thread where the same racist scumbags all gang up on anyone who disagrees with them.

I wonder how many of you even play on p99.

I could've worded my opinion better, but essentially what I was saying is this: you believe white rednecks glorify violence and as a result increase it. I was saying blacks and Hispanics glorify violence AND that that result is borne by statistics, since they are, factually speaking, disproportionately represented in the numbers of those committing violent crimes.

I don't hate all Muslims. I grew up with them. But I have observed over the course of my life that compared to other peoples, they are notoriously thin skinned, unsuccessful, superstitious, and ready to subvert their mental faculties to blind, unthinking fanaticism. It's the same thing. I suppose if you're a cultural relativist who pretends that Switzerland are Somalia are actually the same, just with different circumstances, you'd disagree with both of the value judgments I'm making. However, a simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

[Pringles]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In an era where mass shootings are at a ridiculously all time high, this community things its appropriate to shoot machine guns off of trucks and post videos on the internet to glorify them.

Community is trash.

The more you post, the more ignorant I realize you actually are.

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I could've worded my opinion better, but essentially what I was saying is this: you believe white rednecks glorify violence and as a result increase it.

no, maybe you are missunderstanding me becuse I could have worded it better. ANYONE be they redneck or not ( you are assuming I am saying rednecks, when I never have ) when ANYONE glorifies gun ownership are at fault for reasons that I described in many posts prior to this one that people cant seem to read or understand or make out any thing but BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA IM A LIBERAL BOOGA BOOGA IM GOING TO TAKE YOUR GUNS BOOGA BOOGA...

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

a simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

a simple google search for the definition of specious reasoning will give you an answer as to why you think whites are less violent than Hispanics.

Hmm these statistics say that crime is actually far less in mexico than it is in america :/ I Might be reading it wrong. http://www.nationmaster.com/country-...d-States/Crime

But by your logic, since these are Mexicans compared to white people, they should all be devouring each other.

Maybe you can clear it up.

anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Got rid of cable TV in 2007, nice try though.

What does the Cardassians have to do with a magazine declaring him woman of the year? I'm confused at what you even googled.

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

He ain't white ya moran

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

He ain't white ya moran

Again, where did you get in the post that I called him white? You should see a doctor, you see words that do not exist.

At no point did I say that he was white, never. He did very clearly say that whites were less violant than at the very least, people of darker skin color:

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

White rednecks aren't the people committing violent crime in America. The day I hear a liberal call out Melanin-Americans for being disproportionately violent, uneducated, and irresponsible is the day I will sell my shotgun.

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A simple google search will show that nonhispanic whites in America commit way fewer crimes than you'd expect given their proportion of the population. Oh, and I've owned guns my entire life and never committed a violent crime.

and for good measure, to show that he isnt just racist against hispanics, here is his random out of nowhere stance on Muslims:

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I have observed over the course of my life that compared to other peoples, they are notoriously thin skinned, unsuccessful, superstitious, and ready to subvert their mental faculties to blind, unthinking fanaticism.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Again, where did you get in the post that I called him white? You should see a doctor, you see words that do not exist.

At no point did I say that he was white, never. He did very clearly say that whites were less violant than at the very least, people of darker skin color:

As a white, male, intersectional feminist, ally, you aren't allowed to minimize the experience of a person of color. You know this.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

anyways I digress.. please, go on tell me more about how white people are better than other races and how you are not a biased racist?

That's not what we are saying.

White people aren't better than other races. Our culture is better than other cultures at running a stable, prosperous civilization. Many blacks are part of this culture. Unfortunately, many more aren't. The culture they are a part of tends to be toxic and dysfunctional. This is documented fact; members of this culture commit disproportionately high amounts of crime, and generally fail to reach positive outcomes in our society.

Consider the monstrous racism Chinese in California were exposed to historically, which was no better than blacks were treated in the South. (It included segregation, deportations, confiscation of property, draconian laws, lynchings, etc) Nevertheless, Chinese and most Asian diaspora have extremely good outcomes in our society. Why? Because their culture is very conducive to achievement, valuing family bonds, networking, hard work, educational attainment, and the rule of law. And of course the Jews (a culture that spans multiple "races") who, in spite of over 5,000 years of being a near-universally mistreated minority, managed to come out on top pretty much everywhere they settled.

Is culture 100% responsible for their position? No, obviously institutional racism and poverty play some role, but I don't see how you can reconcile the fact that different cultures so reliably demonstrate different outcomes, even within the same/similar race (Hmong vs. Han Chinese, Jewish vs. Non-Jewish, Sicilian vs. Lombard, Mexican vs. Cuban)

[iruinedyourday]

Look guys. I just cant have this type of conversation here. I think its not only way to loaded, but I think that there is way too much bias to have any real meaningful conversations.

Nearly everything I say is taken in the wrong context or miss interpreted into something else.

Go ahead and continue debating about it among yourselves. But Ill just have to settle with compared to all of you, I am ignorant and wrong.

Im fine with that, im wrong, you guys are right.

Take this as a victory or whatever you want. I'll post some star wars stuff here or some other game stuff maybe later on.

But I cant have these types of conversations because I dont have the energy to ask that you take what I say one way when its always taken another way.

I think lune that you and I agree about a lot of things, but when it comes to race, the way its coming off now, perhaps its because Im not fully understanding what it is that you're saying, is just too biased and you're painting much to large a stroke on stuff that you are trying to speak about in specific detail.

If I had to say one thing in reply to your post, based on your rules american culture is not better than other cultures (of the same socio-economic standing) at running a stable prosperous civilization.

Honestly the fact that a gun thread turned into a conversation about race proves that THIS community is definitely not prosperous OR stable.

And before you say that I brought race into it, I specifically said people that love guns and open carry and attack and threaten anyone that disagrees with them promotes a culture of violence. I at no point was talking about any race/region or religion. Anyone from any of those can be a part of that "community" and I think that community is negative and violent and irresponsible.

That's all. Sorry we all couldn't be pals. Enjoy your gaming.

[Lurikeen]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh yea, how could I miss that point you weren't making until now?

Where did I say I didn't want an armed public? I don't want armed criminals and lunatics. Obviously, they will still find guns. I just want to make it more difficult. Currently, as I've demonstrated, it is not very difficult.

Actually, I was making the same point earlier. Your point over not wanting "armed criminals and lunatics" is a red herring. Nobody posting in this thread has advocated arming "criminals and lunatics."

You say, "I just want to make it more difficult" and the point I made earlier is that it is already pretty difficult. Did you miss that post I made about how one has to fill out forms and go through a NICS check at a bare minimum, just to buy a gun? As a gun owner you should know that, but your retort was some generalization that it is so easy to by pass the system and get a gun. Your extreme example simply proves the rule by exception. More often than not the system works. So why would anyone want to make it more difficult?

The anti-gun lobby wants to make it more difficult because they want to disarm everyone. Because like you, they don't think gun ownership is a right. As you said, "Then stop thinking about gun ownership as a right instead of a privilege. It isn't 1783 anymore and a musket is not an assault rifle."

No. I will continue to think of gun ownership as a right because notwithstanding the claim of gun owning liberals such as yourself, gun ownership is our right. It goes along with property ownership and being in a position to protect ones property, family, and neighbors.

What is also telling in your claim I quote above is that you are a missing the significance of the fact that when the American Revolution was fought, many of the guns used were privately owned. The Brits would have loved it if they could have fought an unarmed population. This gets to the heart of the second amendment and the point that gun ownership is not a "privilege" as you say. Our founding fathers had the common sense to understand that an assembly of citizen soldiers might be needed in the future to fight off another tyrannical government rising up against the people. Where do you think such a "militia" is going to get their guns, if they already don't own them or possess them?

Gun ownership is a right and the regulations the federal government have in place today, restricting gun ownership, are plenty. We don't need any more.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Lurikeen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Actually, I was making the same point earlier. Your point over not wanting "armed criminals and lunatics" is a red herring. Nobody posting in this thread has advocated arming "criminals and lunatics."

The claim isn't that they are advocating arming criminals and lunatics, but that they are resisting the implementation of barriers against that.

Originally Posted by Lurikeen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You say, "I just want to make it more difficult" and the point I made earlier is that it is already pretty difficult. Did you miss that post I made about how one has to fill out forms and go through a NICS check at a bare minimum, just to buy a gun? As a gun owner you should know that, but your retort was some generalization that it is so easy to by pass the system and get a gun. Your extreme example simply proves the rule by exception. More often than not the system works. So why would anyone want to make it more difficult?

In some states NICS is the only form of background check and does not apply to sales between private individuals, creating a massive private sale loophole. (Ie, one gun nut to another). That the system works is a patent falsehood. Everyone here in Northern California knows what a joke it is to get around our laws; you just go to Nevada or buy from a private party. Guy I knew from high school was the center of the largest drug bust in our county's history-- he now owns an AK47. I know many more similar examples, and it's a well-recognized issue, with 96% of Americans in support of universal background checks.

Originally Posted by Lurikeen [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The anti-gun lobby wants to make it more difficult because they want to disarm everyone. Because like you, they don't think gun ownership is a right. As you said, "Then stop thinking about gun ownership as a right instead of a privilege. It isn't 1783 anymore and a musket is not an assault rifle."

No. I will continue to think of gun ownership as a right because notwithstanding the claim of gun owning liberals such as yourself, gun ownership is our right. It goes along with property ownership and being in a position to protect ones property, family, and neighbors.

What is also telling in your claim I quote above is that you are a missing the significance of the fact that when the American Revolution was fought, many of the guns used were privately owned. The Brits would have loved it if they could have fought an unarmed population. This gets to the heart of the second amendment and the point that gun ownership is not a "privilege" as you say. Our founding fathers had the common sense to understand that an assembly of citizen soldiers might be needed in the future to fight off another tyrannical government rising up against the people. Where do you think such a "militia" is going to get their guns, if they already don't own them or possess them?

Gun ownership is a right and the regulations the federal government have in place today, restricting gun ownership, are plenty. We don't need any more.

I don't find this reasoning compelling. In the 1700's, there was far more parity between an armed populace and the federal government. If you think a bunch of obese rednecks with firearms will ever be the only thing standing between the most sophisticated military machine that has ever existed, and tyranny, I don't think you're being realistic. If a tyrannical government ever rises against the people in the USA, it will be silent and nonviolent, and due to voter apathy... as is currently occurring. (Most of our representatives literally do not even represent the interests of their constituents.) What are you going to do, go down to DC and shoot a corrupt politician?

If you really cared about keeping the government in line, and weren't just exploiting the notion to defend your guns, you wouldn't be so quick to simply abstain from voting and let it all go to hell. That attitude is 10x more dangerous than the populace not having guns. Instead, you're content to sit in your room and wait for the Feds to come in so you can blast them, because I guess you think that's a better way to defend your liberty?

Also note I don't even want to take your guns away. In spite of your slippery slope fallacy, making our joke regulations actually function isn't some ploy to eventually take everyone's guns. It may be that way for anti gun liberals, but not for me. What I'm in favor of wouldn't even affect you, and you wouldn't care if you weren't a radical.