Originally Posted by
Solo
Spoiler...
Sorry dude you got exposed. You trolled. You interjected politics and I called you on it. I said I would have debated point for point with you and would have until you showed your true colors and now your pulling the victim card like a little bitch because I saw through your bullshit. By all means please keep continuing to be a douchebag. I said previously in the post that we were done here bro. The fact that you couldn't further proves my point
.
Spoiler...
I dont even know what you're talking about, "exposed" as/for what?
A troll? One or two sentences out of what was it? Four paragraphs, that you disliked the "tone" or whatever of, makes it a troll? That's a pathetic cop out and you know it.
You were completely free to ignore that one little thing i mentioned. You didnt. Instead you threw a tantrum where you decided to insist that my entire post and all other points made, were now "tainted" because its all just a troll, and you've exposed my "bullshit" because im a victim card holding little bitch.... right?
Buy a fucking clue.
If you didnt want to address that one topic...those two fucking sentences, you were free to do so and i would have had no issue with that. Instead you do this.
So if you're going through all of this and my post is being addressed as if what was said was longer and more detailed than two sentences and had some political connotation or context i was attempting to sneak in....ohhh scary me... smart you...... well i might as well make it worth it huh?
Lets go ahead and give you what you want.
Here is my "motive" and "trolled" and "victim card", that would never have been written had you been able to simply dignify yourself previously.
_________________________
There are about 20-30% of American's and 10% in the EU (mostly neo-Nazi groups) (about 20-30% Australian's before the 1997 firearm control acts, but now its very very low) that follow political parties that are completely absent of reality. Not simply disillusioned or two sides of the same coin, but completely void of facts and reality.
In America, its the "conservative libertarian", which funny thing, are not conservatives at all and many are not libertarians (they are the Ron Paul, libertarian. 20% libertarian, 80% corporate republican) but that's beside the point. These people like to run around touting that the government taking their guns spells disaster for society. In reality, every other first world nation shows us this is not the case and even in our own country states with better gun laws have lesser gun crimes.
To take this to a further extent we have the nut jobs (all the above described fake conservatives and fake libertarians) that think the world is coming to an end or the gubments gonna take over, and one of the first things that they think will happen is all the guns will be taken away.
So any time they consider a disaster of any proportions this is something they apply as a step one or two.
When in reality, historically speaking, its not. In the history of warfare or military take over, removing weapons before attacking or conquering is like.... less than 1%. These are the idiots that tout the idea that "Hitler took the guns" (When he did take guns from jews, over a very long period. The rest of Germany got looser gun laws), "Stalin took the guns" (When in fact he reduced the legal age of owning a firearm from 16 to 14 for the citizens, but did impose some weird "long rifle" firearm law on his own soldiers.) and of course Mao who did a recall of firearms toward the end of WW2, but people often fail to mention or recognize that because they were at war with Japan, before this, he armed every citizen. So when the war was over with Japan, or coming to an end, he felt no need for private citizens to be running around with guns...... personally i agree... but hell, at this point im nearly quoting Alex Jones and his CNN interview.
If the idea is occupation, sweeping for firearms will eventually happen (We were in Iraq for a year before we started doing group sweeps for firearms.... which we then gave them funds to buy them back) but if its just conquering and/or destruction, it really wont matter. Now, the point i made is that things were happening so quickly and they are so undermanned, that going house to house and sweeping for guns is not at all realistic. And that is even before, we consider that the military and civilians have a common enemy and we will see citizens very quickly, being armed by military.
So there you go.
If i was getting blamed for a "half political rant" on the subject that some how negated every-other-fucking-thing i said, then im at least going to do it.
Reply With Quote
