Sic vis pacem para bellum....

thearmednovelist:

So, Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) comes up with this gem. The bill is a mere two-pages long and even if it doesn’t pass, the title of it should give you a good idea of what it will accomplish anyway — ahead of the 2014 Midterm Elections. Now, don’t bust out in a fit of joyous giggles and start bouncing up and down in your seat yet. There’s clarification to be had here. The first, and currently only, news source to have coverage on it can be found here and I will let it explain.

While reading it, you may find yourself thinking that it’s written by an anti-gunner. However, it’s an article written from the middle ground to view both sides equally; while also using both sides slanderous sayings and whatnot. I did thoroughly enjoy it. That said, if I’m wrong and if it is a true anti-gunner who wrote this, then he did so favorably in our favor. Thanks, buddy.

What this bill is, whether or not intended by the pro-gun Congressman from Texas, is a test. It is a test to discern who among the United States Congress, and the United States Senate, are potential proponents of gun registration in the United States. It feels out who is for and who is against gun confiscation in the United States.

If this bill passes committee and comes to a vote, it has the potential to put every politician in the House on record for being pro-registration or anti-registration, right before the 2014 elections, and in plenty of time for the 2016 cycle. Americans will simply look at the title of the bill, they will look at who is sponsoring it, and who is opposing it, and they will have a clear picture as to who in Congress supports their right to bear arms, and who in Congress is seeking to subvert that right.

This bill is a win-win for the Republicans, and a terrible losing situation for the Democrats.

For the Republicans, the result of this bill can only end up gaining them political traction. If it passes, they get to go to their constituents to say how they fought for their right to bear arms, how they fought against a leviathan, overreaching government who was coming for their guns. They get to enjoy the favor of the gun lobby, they get to put this victory under their belt, a stamp on the side of their legislative fighter jet, and they get to enjoy the spoils of their triumph.

If it fails to pass, they get to point to every single nay vote in the room and paint them as vehemently anti-gun. They get to beg the gun lobby for more money to help oust the gun grabbers in Congress, and they get to whip American gun owners up into a frenzy, they get to turn the 2014 elections into a gun-centric debate, and if the Republicans take the majority of the victories, they get to say it is a referendum on gun rights.

For the Democrats, this bill backs them right up into a corner. By opposing this bill, which most of them will, it puts their name down in history as politicians who opposed legislation essentially preventing the registration and confiscation of firearms in the United States of America. We have heard for years during the recent gun-control debates that Liberal anti-gun politicians are not out to take away our guns, they are not coming for our right to bear arms, and that Conservative pundits and redneck voters are just paranoid.

This puts the cards on the table.

freexcitizen:

whiskeyontheocean:

Tens of thousands of New Yorkers woke up as felons today. No compliance.

Good luck to my home state

freexcitizen:

whiskeyontheocean:

Tens of thousands of New Yorkers woke up as felons today. No compliance.

Good luck to my home state

notsuperstitious:

The bottom line with gun control in America is this:

What is more important to you: Owning guns or keeping people safe?

I would rather nobody own any guns if it meant there wouldn’t be another Sandy Hook.

The bottom line with this post is this:

You clearly do not see the irony in your own words.

Additionally, you seem to be unaware of a vast amount of the facts surrounding firearms, gun control, violence, crime, and history.  If you want an explanation, I’ll be happy to give it, but be prepared to read a lot.

vhillheim:

I can’t believe they outlawed alcohol in the U.S but oh no GUNS we need that shit everyone should have them.

Is this a joke?  It is a joke, right?  Yeah, alcohol was outlawed, but it didn’t work.  Ever heard of Al Capone?  When prohibition of alcohol started, it didn’t work.  It drove the alcohol business underground.  The US government even tried to stop it by poisoning alcohol and putting it back out in the black market, killing its own people.  Prohibition was a massive failure.  That’s why it was repealed, and alcohol was made legal again.  Unfortunately, the same has happened with the war on drugs in the US, which has cost taxpayers over a TRILLION DOLLARS.  After more than 40 years and all that money, it has done nothing.  (Imagine that!)  So, what do you think would happen if guns were suddenly outlawed?  I’ll give you a hint: it wouldn’t end well for the government (or anyone, for that matter).  Really, try rubbing a couple of brain cells together sometime.  It’ll do you some good.

cerebralzero:

anarcho-bootyist:

cerebralzero:

Boston Metro SWAT guarding the parking garage in the Boston common after the Marathon Bombing

this dude looks like an airsofter

I know right? He looks like he has no idea what he is doing. I wonder how he got that job.

How does he look like he has no idea what he’s doing?  What’s he supposed to look like in order to look like he does know what he’s doing?  And what does him being an “airsofter” have to do with it?

cerebralzero:

anarcho-bootyist:

cerebralzero:

Boston Metro SWAT guarding the parking garage in the Boston common after the Marathon Bombing

this dude looks like an airsofter

I know right? He looks like he has no idea what he is doing. I wonder how he got that job.

How does he look like he has no idea what he’s doing?  What’s he supposed to look like in order to look like he does know what he’s doing?  And what does him being an “airsofter” have to do with it?

Hostility

thearmednovelist:

You tell us what firearms I can and can’t own.
You tell women what they can and can’t do with their bodies.
You tell my friends they can’t marry anyone of the same sex.
You do not stand for freedom. You are why I’m so hostile.

I wrote this as a Facebook status a few days ago, promising a friend I would expand and explain what it means.

With politics these days, you see a lot of what I will call “private life interventionism”. Wherein, someone somewhere doesn’t like you for a particular political lifestyle choice. Today, the main hits on the mainstream are firearms, marijuana, gay marriage and abortion.

I don’t exactly know how many people out there who are like me. Wherein, I don’t think your life choices are any of my concern. A lot of the people who talk about defending one “freedom” tend to walk on a separate freedom. I, actually, see it heavily in the gun community (not necessarily on Tumblr or Gunblr — calm down — I mean in general). A lot of gun owners, particularly in the South or who are very religious, defend their right to bear arms and they will not tolerate anybody who asks them hateful questions or comes looking for a piece of the “cake”, as it was so eloquently illustrated here.

However… when it comes to topics like gay marriage or abortion, they vehemently attack it — inside of researching the topic and talking to people who are supporters of those said topics or are involved in some way shape or form. And, then… claim that they are “protecting a basic freedom” by supporting the Second Amendment.

I don’t know about you, but that is absolutely infuriating to me. Why is it any of your business who has sex or marries whomever and how is it any of your business if a woman has to abort a child or chooses to do so regardless of the reason? You just said that it was nobody elses business regarding what guns you buy, or how many, or why you need/want them.

I’m not just bashing one side over the other here, either. I have seen the exact same thing from gun control proponents. I’ve seen a plethora of them who, however, support gay rights. They’re just as hostile as the pro-gunners who fight against whatever other political talking point. And, I don’t understand it. There’s no reason why you have to hate a basic human right just because it offends your sensibilities. There’s absolutely no reason for the hypocrisy of defending your right and not theirs, either.

And, I’ll say it. All of those people who claim that “they are fighting for freedom” while supporting their right and bashing another person’s? They’re not. They’re an enemy to individual sovereignty.

I will stand here, before you all and say that I will truly defend your individual rights. I will promise you that private non-interventionism. I don’t necessarily agree with all abortion reasons, and I sometimes feel uncomfortable on the topic of homosexuality (no, I can’t tell you why), and I’m not one bit devoted to any one religion or am even religious at all, but I will defend you and those rights of yours like I do my right to bear arms. There’s only one clause. You can’t spread hate or inspire fear or promote violence of another person or groups of people.

Fundamental human rights are not rights given to us by forefathers or written on paper and approved by Congressional votes. You’re here, that’s your right. All restrictions after that are infringements. Your right isn’t more important than mine and mine is not more important than yours. I will defend it.

There are, however, people who will protest. They will declare this call-out of hypocrisy as hypocrisy. I did mention a restriction. I will clarify on that. I will not support you in what you are if you spread hate or inspire fear or promote violence. Like how I will not support Westboro Baptist members when they use religion as a shield to attack gay people. Call it being a walking contradiction, but I will not defend hate. I’m trying to eliminate that here and now.

So, that is where my hostility comes from. Before you protest something like gun rights or gay marriage, you think about one of your rights that you support and then, instead of presenting hostility, go out and understand what your hate or fear.

For those who claim they fight or argue for freedom, but don’t support a particular freedom. You don’t. You don’t fight for freedom. You are fighting and arguing for your brand of freedom, instead of humanity’s brand of freedom. You do not fight for Individual Sovereignty. When you keep on doing that, fighting and arguing for certain freedoms, there’s a high chance of bringing out the hostility in people like me.

Why? Because who you are, if you’re gay, is none of my business. If you’ve had or are thinking about having an abortion, it’s none of my business. If you own enough guns to properly outfit a company of Marines, it’s none of my business. If you chose to defend your home and family with a firearm, it’s none of my business. If you see fit to grow marijuana in your home, it’s none of my business. If you go to church or believe in a deity, it’s none of my business. What you do with your body, for your home, on your property is solely and expressively your business. So, don’t attack other people and their rights because you wouldn’t want the sentiment returned.

And, if there’s anybody out there who needs help or needs somebody to stand with them. I will do it. I will stand with you and support your right and defend it you if need be. Just remember to reciprocate the support for anybody who you encounter that needs it too.

That’s all I have to say.

This is exactly how I feel about freedom - to a fucking ‘T’.  I defend everyone’s rights equally; but the moment you start attacking someone else’s rights, you are an enemy of freedom and an enemy of mankind.

ted:

Adrianne Haslet-Davis dances again for the first time since the Boston terrorist attack last year. 

When the bombs went off at the Boston Marathon finish line, Adrianne Haslet-Davis lost the lower half of her left leg in the explosion. She’s a ballroom dance teacher, and she assumed she would never dance again. With most prosthetics, she wouldn’t.

But Hugh Herr, of the MIT Media Lab, wanted to find a way to help her. He created a bionic limb specifically for dancers, studying the way they move and adapting the limb to fit their motion. (He explains how he did it here.)

At TED2014, Adrianne danced for the first time since the attack, wearing the bionic limb that Hugh created for her.  

Hugh says, “It was 3.5 seconds between the bomb blasts in the Boston terrorist attack. In 3.5 seconds, the criminals and cowards took Adrianne off the dance floor. In 200 days, we put her back. We will not be intimidated, brought down, diminished, conquered or stopped by acts of violence.”

Amen to that, Hugh. 

Watch the full talk and performance here »

Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristocratic forms. No government in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, government tends more and more to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class — whether that class be hereditary royalty, oligarchs of financial empires, or entrenched bureaucracy.
Frank Herbert, Children of Dune (via anarchei)
Why are people so damn happy when they get their tax return back?

laborstrifeandgrit:

THAT WAS YOUR DAMN MONEY YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD IN THE FIRST PLACE.
image

sailorhater:

cutebabe:

misandry-mermaid:

misandry-mermaid:

please put this shit on blast. his twitter name is @swerveodactyl and he’s being a complete asshole when called out on that tweet. His name is Beau Miller, he’s a junior at some high school in Washington state, I couldn’t figure out which but I’m sure you guys can help. Thank you so much!
[Submission]

An update:  Beau Miller posted this on 4/10 at 4:09pm


MEN ARE FUCKING SCUM 2K14

"or getting flirty eyes from a fat chick" literally die in a fire pLS

Was gonna send an angry message to this asshole, but it seems that his account has been suspended.  Good riddance….

sailorhater:

cutebabe:

misandry-mermaid:

misandry-mermaid:

please put this shit on blast. his twitter name is @swerveodactyl and he’s being a complete asshole when called out on that tweet. His name is Beau Miller, he’s a junior at some high school in Washington state, I couldn’t figure out which but I’m sure you guys can help. Thank you so much!

[Submission]

An update:  Beau Miller posted this on 4/10 at 4:09pm

image

MEN ARE FUCKING SCUM 2K14

"or getting flirty eyes from a fat chick" literally die in a fire pLS

Was gonna send an angry message to this asshole, but it seems that his account has been suspended.  Good riddance….

vandigo:

redsuns-n-orangemoons:

shybairnsget-nowt:

americas-liberty:

Students Fed Up With Michelle Obama’s School Lunch Overhaul — Menu-Item Snapshots Spell Out Why

Wow that is depressing. 

okay but is that michelle’s fault for pushing for healtheir lunches or is it school districts’ faults for cutting corner by cutting calories but not making lunch any healthier?

let’s look into it.

Yes, thank you. Because yes she is pushing for a healthier lunch, but the schools still value football over feeding their students, which means that instead of providing enough healthy food to keep their students from starving, they are cutting down the amount of food available to fit within the caloric requirements … while then taking the money they saved to re-sod the football field for the third year in a row. Maybe new uniforms.

notablipintime:

animalityopera:

seraphknights:

cultureshift:

This is the Memorial to the Missing and contains over 50,000,000 pennies to represent the lives of each American child abandoned to abortion by a society and a culture that has embraced their destruction. We must prevent the need to add to this memorial. Take a stand. Get involved.
 ”How we treat the least of us defines us.”

"should I use this $500k to help struggling parents and pregnant people or should I put it in a glass box"


But guys. That’s not even the point.50 000 000 children. That’s literally 16% of the population of the US. Given that 18% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, let’s say that we’re actually talking 41 000 000 children. That’s about 13% of the current population of the US. The most common reason a woman aborts is because she cannot afford a baby. Up to 69% of abortions are by women who are at less than 200% of the poverty line for a family of the size they currently have. Making food security and housing stability serious issues. Making it so that, if these children had been born, up to an additional 30 000 000, NOT counting the women in question or their other children, NOT counting additional women who would lose their jobs if they had a baby, would be thrust into low income or poverty.Where is the money going to come from for an additional 10% of the US population to be on public assistance? Who is going to look after the children whose mothers literally cannot look after them?I once did the math. If there was no more abortion in the US, up to 10 000 000 additional children would be in foster care within 18 years.How the fuck is a country that can’t even help the people who are already living in poverty in their country, whose foster children are already underserviced, going to deal with this?You can’t. ALL conservatives, especially the fiscal ones, should wake up every morning and thank whatever higher power they believe in that abortion is legal, and every damn one of them should be working to ensure that it’s widely available and actually safe for the emotional and physical health of the pregnant person.

Not only that, but there are women who NEED to have abortions or risk dying, themselves.  And how about we consider how overpopulated we already are?  There are people, including a friend of mine, who think that we need to adopt and enforce a “one child policy” in the US.  I don’t want to have to do that to people.  Do you?

notablipintime:

animalityopera:

seraphknights:

cultureshift:

This is the Memorial to the Missing and contains over 50,000,000 pennies to represent the lives of each American child abandoned to abortion by a society and a culture that has embraced their destruction. We must prevent the need to add to this memorial. Take a stand. Get involved.

 ”How we treat the least of us defines us.”

"should I use this $500k to help struggling parents and pregnant people or should I put it in a glass box"

But guys. That’s not even the point.

50 000 000 children. That’s literally 16% of the population of the US. Given that 18% of pregnancies end in miscarriage, let’s say that we’re actually talking 41 000 000 children. That’s about 13% of the current population of the US.

The most common reason a woman aborts is because she cannot afford a baby. Up to 69% of abortions are by women who are at less than 200% of the poverty line for a family of the size they currently have. Making food security and housing stability serious issues. Making it so that, if these children had been born, up to an additional 30 000 000, NOT counting the women in question or their other children, NOT counting additional women who would lose their jobs if they had a baby, would be thrust into low income or poverty.

Where is the money going to come from for an additional 10% of the US population to be on public assistance? Who is going to look after the children whose mothers literally cannot look after them?

I once did the math. If there was no more abortion in the US, up to 10 000 000 additional children would be in foster care within 18 years.

How the fuck is a country that can’t even help the people who are already living in poverty in their country, whose foster children are already underserviced, going to deal with this?

You can’t. ALL conservatives, especially the fiscal ones, should wake up every morning and thank whatever higher power they believe in that abortion is legal, and every damn one of them should be working to ensure that it’s widely available and actually safe for the emotional and physical health of the pregnant person.

Not only that, but there are women who NEED to have abortions or risk dying, themselves.  And how about we consider how overpopulated we already are?  There are people, including a friend of mine, who think that we need to adopt and enforce a “one child policy” in the US.  I don’t want to have to do that to people.  Do you?

youreworththesacrifice:

bowariella:

yungswaqq:

F*ck reblogging half naked girls, this is beautiful

for all the people who think they wont find someone to love them, flaws and all…

I can never not reblog this.

On Gun Culture

wheellock:

lesbarianrage:

I’m not here this evening to discuss whether widespread gun ownership by civilians is a good thing. (It isn’t. There’s no debate to be had there, unless you’re a complete gobshite.)

No, this post is about gun CULTURE. Specifically gun culture in ‘Murrica, where I have had the utter disgust to reside for a while.

There’s this thing wherein a civvy, particularly a rural civvy, will own a gun, or multiple guns, and think they’re a hardass.

Oh yes, you can lift a three-pound object and pull a trigger with a draw of all of a coupla grammes. Clearly you are a gorram folk hero, with your mighty accomplishments.

FUCK YOU.

Fuck you in the ass with a rail spike covered in lemon juice.

Owning a gun without a reason doesn’t make you a badass, it makes you a gorram pansy. You want to prove you’re hardcore? How about you drop your overcompensating phallic substitute and see if you’re as confident empty-handed. I know I am.

1: You’re right, there is no debate if you’ve actually seen the statistics or have the reasoning capacity of someone over 9 years old. An armed populace is absolutely important, the CDC places defensive uses of firearms in the US at roughly 700,000 annually compared to approximately 9,000 homicides (FBI murder stats). Women in the US prevent sexual assault with a firearm roughly 200,000 times per year (Kleck and Gertz, Armed Resistance to Crime). An armed populace is also crucial to protect citizens from their government (see: Ukraine, Venezuela, Brazil, etc.)

2: “Gun culture” is not some alien group of strange shut ins and delusionals. “Gun culture” is the understanding that self defense is a basic human right, that you cannot decide what other people need without being in their shoes, and that gun control has and never will work. You do understand that nearly half of the households in the US contain a gun, right? Gun owners are people of all races, sexualities, political affiliations, and ages. The American gun community is perhaps the most diverse group in the nation.

3: You are angrily swearing with a made-up curse word from a space western. Repeatedly. Why? Are you too good for real curse words just like you’re too good for research?

4: Stop inventing straw men. Most people don’t buy guns to feel like “folk heroes” as you put it; they buy them to use them, to feed their family, to survive in a rough neighborhood. Stop stereotyping a group of people you clearly do not understand or interact with.

5: Please do not threaten to rape other people, that is something people own guns to prevent.

6: If someone owns a gun, they own it for a reason. The reason could be that they want to protect themselves or their family, to hunt for food, or because they just want it. You do not get to decide what someone should own based on your perception of them or your belief of what they “need.”

7: Cool, you call firearms a “phallic substitute for pansies”. Clearly the one in five women who carry are just wishing they had a dick, not trying to defend themselves. Clearly organizations like the Pink Pistols who encourage LGBTQA+ people to own firearms to protect their lives from those who are less accepting are just full of “pansies.”

8: Wow, you’re saying you want to defend yourself in all scenarios with your bare hands. I bet if someone comes at you with a knife that’ll just bounce off your skin. I bet illegally obtained or homemade firearms have no effect on your confidence and hardcore attitude. Maybe if you just continue to spit angry nonsense and Firefly references at them with no sense of irony they’ll just get scared and run off. It’s really impressive how you just assume that everyone is built like you and therefor have no physical differences from their attacker. When that 5’6” girl walking home gets assaulted by a man half a foot taller than her she’ll be glad she took your advice and was confident to keep him at bay without any “phallic substitute”.

9: I’m glad your stay in our lovely country has filled you with “utter disgust.” I’m sure you’d much rather be somewhere like Britain, a place with very few legal guns and approximately four times the violent crime rate of the US (Eurostat).

Wow, the burn here is so strong it’s palpable.  Too bad the bigoted dumbass deleted their account or whatever.  I’m sure there’s quite a few more people who’d like to give this person something to think about (or just ignore, like they apparently do with any facts).