And that's before you stop thinking real life and start thinking playstation =P

@KaiserDoom A meme is worth a thousand words.

I love stonetoss

Damn they're right. We need gatlin guns to deal with the auto muskets

So I heard something today that I think is a good thought.

We had them in the Civil War

Clearly, we dont' care what the rounders think

*founders

Because we gave non landing owning non white people rights and citizenship

We care what the Founders think when it aligns with what we think

@Marushia Dark Nah, I think people make it up

Honestly, the Founders are just an appeal to authority fallacy

Speaking of which, did y'all watch the Hamilton vs. Satoshi debate?

Who vs Who?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaMJi1_1tkA

That doesn't answer my question lol

Alex.... Okayu, I was going to make a joke but

Well

Alexander Hamilton vs the guy who invented Bitcoin

There we go lol

It's done by the guys who make Epic Rap Battles of History and it's really good

listening now lol

That was actually pretty good

I'm not positive, but I think EpicLloyd leans libertarian, since they do many bits that dump on communism, making capitalism look good in contrast. They really stealman the opposition in their raps

Another good one is Keyenes vs. Hayek

@Jack of Trades

Yeah, I'm not sure about the AR-15 _in particular,_ but the weapons and ammunition _most effective_ at taking life should _at least_ have _some_ regulation, is my point. I never said I necessarily agreed with Beto's policy to the letter, or even at all, just that it's not a good idea to let any wackadoodle legitimately get weapons that are _solely_ designed for taking human lives en masse. Think of it this way: it is illegal for anyone to drive a car without a license 'cuz it's dangerous if they don't know what they're doing. Well, if you want a dangerous weapon capable of killing hundreds of innocent people in mere minutes, let's make sure you have the sufficient knowledge and understanding to use it safely, as well as the lack of any desire to _deliberately_ start killing people. And if there are so many rocket launchers out there that they're cheaper than oreos for criminals, maybe trying to reduce their availability in order to at least make them more expensive on the black market isn't the worst idea in the world and is at least as worth considering at the debate table as
Also, been typing very slowly for all this time because I am multitasking. If you've been hyping this up, sorry, but you're gonna be disappointed. My point essentially boils down to this:
Your right to arms is not so absolute that debate over the most excessive weapons designed solely for war and how accessible they should be to the general public is equivalent to authoritarianism. I mean, for gods' sake, gay people's right to not be sent against their will to straight camp or trans people's right to exist are defended with less passion than any ol' wackadoodle's right to bullets that explode inside the people they hit. I _get_ that there is a debate to be had here, but my lord, people who argue in favor of restrictions you disagree with are _not_ authoritarians; that's like calling the most moderate conservative a Nazi.

@Goodwood of Dank™ Yeah I saw.

Kek.

@Eirshy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

@Hylia Why not take the ones that kill the most people overall?

Also @Hylia AR15s weren't designed for war

But good on you for trying.

Again, I don't give a fuck about the AR-15 in particular. Honestly, I agree that it's gotten a bad rap.

@Hylia "designed for war" Technology evolves. At one point, muskets were the forefront of military-grade weaponry and they barely worked half the time

I'll reply in pm since I know others will reply here

and a lot of your comments stem from again not understanding guns at all

Yeah, kind of a shitty standard. @Hylia If someone is trying to bust into my house, I am going to use overwhelming force to protect me and mine. I'm an under no obligation to do anything else and should not be obligated to.

But then again, the exploding bullets that the shooter with the AR-15 used probably aren't regulated enough themselves.

Instead of targeting the object or people en mass, why not profile for high-risk targets and apply injunctions on them instead?

@Jack of Trades Of course, but I never said you couldn't.