I want to know the definition of hate speech, since people in this thread have been accused of it twice.
People with guns are not being denied the rights of others and are making a definite and deliberate choice- unlike sexuality, disability and race, gun ownership is a choice, and thus totally open to all the criticism and ridicule people feel like throwing.
It doesn't even equate to religion, unless you're going to say that the right to own a gun is just as important as the right to spiritual fulfilment without lynching.

So what's the hate speech you've accused Saya and myself of? We insulted you, criticising your views. We are not advocating violence against you/ gun-owners, or segregation, or mass extermination, or trying to deny you employment, marriage reproductive rights. That would be hate speech.

(this is totally and utterly seperate from my actual arguments about whether or not someone should have guns, and why they should or should not. This is a genuine request for clarification on a single term)

To bring things back to topic in a way...

Remember when I mentioned the X-REP tazer system that can be launched from a 12 gauge shotgun?


http://www.prisonplanet.com/long-ran...ty-debate.html

The first cartoon in saya's post was one depicting the relocation or wish to have gun owners relocated to a violent third world country.

That is a good idea.

All gun nuts should be relocated to violent third world Muslim countries, while all the freethinkers/Atheists from those countries should relocate in the other direction.

It'd be fun to watch you morons shoot/blow each other up.

I guess that makes me a facist, but |'m OK with that.

Really? Are we looking at the same cartoon? The cartoon that just made the joke that by the way you talk you'd be happier in a country with no laws and lots of guns? The joke that..never mind, I'll let you work it out.

That cartoon was wrong anyway. The guy should be wearing a shirt with the Confederate flag, not the American flag. The so called "rebel" flag.

The concept of the cartoon is based on your particular ideals regarding gun ownership and law enforcement. It is a parody, drawing a comparison between your desire for gun freedom and strong individualism rather than government interference, and the particular turmoil of nations which have just that combination. It does not advocate the death of gun owners, and it's not even really suggesting relocation- only that the particular circumstances they claim to favour already exist in other places and have nor worked well for the people in those places.

We are not advocating shipping you off en masse to be killed by violent militia with guns in wartorn African states.

They do have a strong gun culture but,the place is ruled by different tribesmen, not by Constitutional laws that apply to all citizens.

The spot depicted in the cartoon is a result of Anarchy unchecked,not liberty.

What's the difference?

Under Constitutional Law you have the choice of being armed or unarmed.

With unchecked Anarchy you would need a firearm,and there wouldn't be a choice in the matter.

That's the difference.

You didn't say Constitutional Law, you said liberty, those two are far from interchangeable.


Of course there would be a choice, there are plenty of people in places like Somalia who remain unarmed, not to mention the fact that anarchy is not inherently violent.

Somalia's is. But here I'm working with Somalia's anarchy, not my own terms of anarchism.
You raised perfectly the counterarguments I was going to say, so I'll wait for them to be addressed.

There is my answer.


U.S. Constitutional Law is Liberty.

Wow. How fucking idiotic.
It is solely U.S. Constitutional Law that is Liberty, huh?
There are no shortcomings, nor anything that could be cut out. IT IS FUCKING PERFECT!

That's more idiotic than most Christians' opinions on their holy text. Your level of stupidity gets bigger and bigger as time passes by.

For me it is,seeing as how I live in the U.S. and all.

Somalians don't, and yet you idiotically say that they're not living in liberty because liberty is U.S Constitutional Law.

My answer...

Notice I said "For ME it is" I never said it was the only kind of Liberty.

It is (most likely) just what you have grown up with as normal, and accept it as the "default setting".

There are some huge flaws with the way we have things set up here, and some nearly incomprehensible viewpoints that average people seem to have.

Stop fucking try to bullshit your way around it.

You JUST FUCKING SAID right here (I quoted you, try to bullshit now) that they're not in a state of liberty. Not even you were fucking talking about 'your liberty' you fucking idiot.

*pokes head in this thread and runs away*

dang, I was here when this thread started.....in May or something?

In my opinion they aren't living in a state of liberty,but that's my opinion on the matter.


So go fuck yourself.

I remember Alan saying before how the "Thats you're opinion" and variations of pisses him off, ever since I felt bad for him every time someone says it to him. It happens fairly often, it seems.

Jillian... why are YOU wasting your time with DMW?

And according to your logic they aren't living in liberty because they don't live specifically under U.S. Constitutional Law.

Are you seriously that fucking stupid you can't follow YOUR OWN statements?