Re: as an anarchist, i'm pretty disappointed with guns nuts ...

On 8/16/2026 11:33 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 13:37:43 -0400, Wilson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/16/2026 1:58 AM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 8/15/26 9:25 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 8/14/2026 5:34 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>> On 8/14/26 9:38 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/13/2026 8:49 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/13/26 1:52 PM, Wilson wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/13/2026 4:42 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i'm not voting for anyone who doesn't think gun rights are
>>>>>>>>> universal you stupid anti-freedom turd
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How is it that you understand self-defense (which is the basis of
>>>>>>>> gun rights) is a universal right but somehow /property/ does not
>>>>>>>> rise to the same level?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> because they aren't the same thing, and do not have the same
>>>>>>> properties
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> self-defense is inherently self-limiting to to oneself. unlike
>>>>>>> property rights it does not expand arbitrarily. the unbounded
>>>>>>> expansions of property rights, on the other hand, then can
>>>>>>> interfere with the basic freedoms of others, whereas defense of
>>>>>>> one's actual self does not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> nvm the fact that gun rights aren't even about self-defense like
>>>>>>> cons endlessly bleat on about ???, that is best left to a legal/
>>>>>>> policing system. gun rights are fundamentally about democratizing /
>>>>>>> common defense/ against tyranny (both internally and externally),
>>>>>>> not "self- defense"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Defending against a tyrannical government is just self defense.
>>>>>
>>>>> except it's not /just/ self-defense because tyranny functions at the
>>>>> collective level rather than just the interpersonal one.
>>>>>
>>>>> i get that u don't acknowledge the existence of collective dynamics.
>>>>
>>>> Whether is a bunch of people or a single individual the principle is
>>>> the same.
>>>
>>> except they aren't cause you can't use orgs like the police to deal with
>>> common defense against internal tyranny since they would be the agents
>>> of tyranny...
>>>
>>> u can you use orgs like the police to deal with mere criminals, and it
>>> is in fact a better paradigm than wantonly dumping a bunch of guns in
>>> society like brain dead americunts who can't accept basic facts measured
>>> across various societies insist we keep doing
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you even ever think about the reality that guns are in fact
>>>>>>>> property?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gun ownership is very much not zero-sum, unlike the kinds of
>>>>>>> property ownership that can then interfere with the freedoms of others
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Your belief system is a bundle of contradictions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> u don't have something worthy of being called "a belief system", as
>>>>>>> it's not established upon principles that u actually uphold generally
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you see guns as being a special kind of property.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What if someone can't afford a gun? In that case it's pretty clear
>>>>>> your ethics would require you to redistribute partial ownership of
>>>>>> your gun to him. He can't afford to get one of his own so you need
>>>>>> to share.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should be glad to do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> i do advocate for _free_ guns u moron, so yes i do think we should
>>>>> actively train and arm the population (to some high percentage). and
>>>>> i think we should do so on the taxpayers dime because it's
>>>>> advantageous for the preservation of liberty, to have a distributed
>>>>> the common defense against tyranny. we have than enough gun
>>>>> production to achieve this
>>>>
>>>> And who would be paying for the "free" guns and that training?
>>>
>>> progressive taxes, like how we pay for the military already dud
>> So you're counting on the government to fund the thing that will stop
>> the government if they get too despotic and authoritarian.
> 
> So you think guns for citizens will stop government if they get too
> despotic.
> 
> Ok, good luck with that.
 >
Who do you think has the most guns?