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

On Tue, 18 Aug 2026 12:33:47 -0700, Dude <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 8/17/2026 11:53 AM, Noah Sombrero wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 10:46:52 -0700, Dude <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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?
>> 
>> I am more concerned about who has the least.  That is me.  That way, I
>> can be pretty sure I won't kill anybody.  Because, you know what, I
>> don't want to be living with that the rest of my life.
>>
>Apparently, you're very secure, but others also deserve the same.
>
>Self defense is more than just being armed - it's really a way to react 
>to stress in a dangerous or challenging situation.

A perceived need for self defense does not grant a sense of security.
It does the opposite actually.

>In any sel defense it's important to be aware of your own strengths as 
>well as your weaknesses, not only physically, but mentally. Don't panic 
>and make mistakes.
>
>Nick is a case in point.
> >
>
>> And yes, I have known guys who came back from a war zone troubled that
>> they killed people, even if it was their job to do that and even if it
>> was self defense.
-- 
Noah Sombrero mustachioed villain
Don't get political with me young man
or I'll tie you to a railroad track and
<<<talk>>> to <<<YOOooooo>>>
Who dares to talk to El Sombrero?
dares: Ned
does not dare: Julian  shrinks in horror and warns others away