We did it reddit

We did it reddit

Attached: download (11).png (191x264, 12.23K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/PKkUG1F2JiI?t=5
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Real talk.

Why is it so hard for Americans to just ban the fucking guns like every other modern country in the world?

Attached: 1653507911415.jpg (1080x1350, 203.74K)

We have mass shootings dailies, usually black on black gang related. All that's changed is they're reporting on them more.

>Why is it so hard for Americans to just ban the fucking guns like every other modern country in the world?
Because our firearm rights do not come from the government therefore the government cannot take our firearm rights away.

>download (11).png
The American people's inherent firearm rights are not subject to firearm deaths.

>modern country
npc speech

Attached: 404 i.jpg (500x359, 28.04K)

>All that's changed is
The definition of mass shooting.

>modern country

Attached: 1651678318922.jpg (398x376, 21.57K)

No, the truth of the matter is that, paradoxically, a armed population is easier to control in the long term. A armed populace feels safe, they feel like they can rebel at anytime they want, which makes them complacent. Hence the mentality of "well, I won't attack the government, but if they come for my guns I'll kill anyone coming for mine!" That you commonly see in conservative, and libertarian circles. It's a defensive mentality, a mentality that is no threat to a establishment that has no intention of sending SWAT teams to kill every hillbilly with a rifle. A armed population of otherwise fat, useless, lemmings is more tolerant of tyranny because they feel if it feels get "real bad" they can change things, though of-course they always change their position on what's "real bad" when it inevitably does get to that level, out of cowardice, and need to avoid conflict. A disarmed population feels trapped, and powerless, they are more alert to signs of tyranny as they understand how vulnerable they truly are, and are more likely to rebel over what they perceive as a shackling of liberty. Machiavelli wrote about this phenomena hundreds of years ago. European states are incompetent, and face more real opposition from their civilian populations due to this. No one in power cares about the constitution, they care about power.

I'm more talking about the fact that firearms are an inherent right and less about the fact that the people are gigantic, cowardly hypocrites.

I know conservatives and libertarians are sheep that are giving up their rights left and right. That doesn't mean that their inherent firearm rights don't exist mind you.

And yes, I know one could argue that "a right not defended is a right that doesn't exist etc" but I subscribe to the belief that our rights come from God and God supersedes all other avenues of belief.

Ahh I understand where you're coming from, personally, I'm an atheist so I don't believe in metaphysical rights.

>Ahh I understand where you're coming from, personally, I'm an atheist so I don't believe in metaphysical rights.
Natural rights then?

If you believe rights are inherent they must come from somewhere untouchable otherwise anyone could advocate for anything to be legal/illegal.

friendly reminder "we did it reddit!" originated in reddit's hunt for the Boston bomber.
reddit tracked the suspicious bag to three glowies, forcing feds to rush out with blaming those kids and a pressure cooker.

Attached: 1632011143147.jpg (750x829, 634.76K)

Dumbest thing i ever read. God you fucking retard

Nah, I don't believe in rights, I believe in interests. I want my people to be sovereign, and free, but I don't believe that we have inherent rights. I don't believe that there's any higher authority that can guarantee such things, and so the only way to secure our interests is through power, not documents, or belief. Laws are based on the interests of states and peoples, not rights.

>Nah, I don't believe in rights
yikes. good luck with being a slave and all that.

>Laws are based on the interests of states and peoples, not rights.
double yikes.

Machiavelli was such a retard, I mean, who could believe one of the most important political theorists of all time?

Attached: quote-when-you-disarm-the-people-you-commence-to-offend-them-and-show-that-you-distrust-them-niccolo-machiavelli-18-29-11.jpg (850x400, 66.83K)

youtu.be/PKkUG1F2JiI?t=5

they're coming for you next

Attached: 1502410720872.gif (657x527, 241.54K)

Even if you believe in metaphysical rights, you still need to use power in the real world in order to secure them. What you and I want isn't too different I imagine. If anything, believing in inherent rights makes you complacent, the only thing stopping people from taking away your "rights" if its in their best interests to do so is the power of your community. Your belief in God will not stop the jackboot from stomping you down.

You vastly overestimate your own intellect you dumb nigger

Attached: 246629c6ad6cf4ed1a7916a748a66e08--rules-for-radicals-history-quotes.jpg (736x753, 178.68K)

if all you need to control the people is healthcare then what is the point of the other stuff?
I bet this was written by dumb boomers.

Yes, there are retarded leftists in the government who have drank their own koolaid, and actually want to disarm the population. Most of the time, they're held back by more moderate elements who understand how this shit works, but not all the time. Them actually going through with disarming the people will only harm the interests of the state in the long run however. You could very well could see a real revolutionary force in this country down the line stemming from that. We'll see the leftists have their way. though I doubt it.

you need to form real militias and be serious about killing politicians and their minions.
calling everyone a fed and running in the woods won't save you.

If you own a gun, but refuse to use it. You're more useless to the cause of liberty than someone who is unarmed but ready to tear apart the government.

It was theorized by Saul Alinsky