PoliticalAgitator @ PoliticalAgitator @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

793

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well then you'll know what to do when your guns are taken away won't you?

When you've finished building it (and the home made ammo to go in it), don't forget to post a picture of your new baby to all the pro-gun communities.

I'm sure they'll all be very jealous of your dogshit "pipe and nail" gun.

Or by legal gun owners, who are responsible for a massive percentage of gun violence, (for example, 80% of all mass shootings).

You know, the same legal gun owners who let their guns get stolen or staunchly oppose closing gun show loopholes or making straw-purchasing more difficult.

Classic pro-gun community, rushing to brigade a gun-related post with pre-prepared talking points.

"Why bother fixing gun laws that clearly fail to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people when you can just 3D print a gun?"

someone makes a move to stop dangerous people 3D printing guns

"Why bother preventing dangerous people 3D printing guns when you can just buy a bit of pipe at the hardware store?"

Criminals and domestic terrorists overwhelmingly just go to a store and buy a gun. The pro-gun community is fine with this.

For the minority that can't, straw purchases, gun show loopholes and poorly secured firearms give them much better access to safer, more reliable guns than 3D printing does. The pro-gun community is fine with this too.

A tiny fraction of crimes involve 3D printed gun parts and I'm not aware of any domestic terrorism to use any. Nevertheless, somebody could in theory print parts for a fully automatic weapon that would potentially be reliable enough for a mass shooting.

So how many crimes are being comitted with a piece of old pipe?

I know self-absorbed, gun-owning, 300lbs men pretending they'd be useful in a militia want to angrily hammer out a comment along the lines of "WHAT ABOUT THAT ASSASSINATION IN JAPAN YOU CUCK".

But the one example you can cite without googling, from every single country with gun control was clearly dogshit barely worked.

It would be a massive improvement if American criminals were forced to use home made firearms that significantly increased the price, difficulty to obtain and the danger to themselves using it.

But the pro-gun community objects by walking down a list of bullshit excuses because they can't just say "I'd rather people were shot than I was inconvienced".

Bigotry.

Then it sounds like everyone is being compensated just fine.

Do the Google engineers work for free?

Every bomb they drop was manufactured and sold for profit.

The ones that were largely left to fail during COVID?

Apparently it's how you kill people that matters.

Gunning down innocent people (including children)? Unacceptable and genocide justifying.

Exploding innocent people (including children) from a distance using bombs manufactured and sold for profit? No problem, carry on, we won't even report it.

I guess the real crime was "not spending enough money" and not all the murder.

Their ideal solution would be to kill every Palestinian and grind their buildings into dust.

International attention prevents them from doing so. Although far too many countries are far too chummy with Israel, they wouldn't be able to maintain that in the face of open genocide.

So instead they take what they can take. Bulldoze a few houses, execute a few people at the border, the usual stuff they get away with.

But Hamas handed them an excuse on a silver platter and there has never been a better time for them to get what they want. It's clear they've decided on at least half the city and any civilians who get in the way.

Your suggestion has been tried repeatedly and the moment the right-wing have the power needed to tear it down, that's what they do.

They know. The whole "progressives are the real racists" shtick is just a way for them to chew up values and spit them back in peoples faces.

They're not actually concerned about genuine racism and routinely tolerate it, if not outright support it.

Sure it is, it just hasn't had as long to mature.

But it's working on it. One pre-roll ad became two. Skippable ads became unskippable. Mid-roll ads were introduced. The algorithm was created to keep people watching, even if it set them on a path to domestic terrorism.

Now they're fighting ad blockers. Then they'll creep up the price of their paid tiers. Then they'll introduce ads into the paid tiers.

But don't worry, they promise it will only ever be a single, skippable, pre-roll ad, until it isn't.

You could hand over every cent you earn each week and they'll still show you ads and sell your data, because that's how greed works. If there is a penny to take, they'll take it.

The only thing we can do to defend ourselves from this practise is to make it clear that it will lose them more than it will gain.

The exact thing you're trying to shame people out of doing.

That's the way greed creeps.

You could build a successful service that brought in $1 million a month from happy users treated ethically, but there will always be an insatiable psycopath whispering "if we sold our user data, we could make a extra $100k each month".

So one ad becomes two. Users are tracked and the information sold. Algorithms are created to make services as addictive as possible, because "one more video" turns into "4 more ads".

However many apologists may post about poor, destitute Google being unable to feed their children because people aren't watching enough ads, we're absolutely correct to oppose that endless creeping.

There is always another sleazy way to manipulate people out of money. Companies need to learn to accept that their tens of millions of dollars profit are enough.

Meanwhile, at expensive private schools across the world, budding young neoliberals are being taught there is nothing more reprehensible than not milking every possible person of every possible penny.

Not even child slavery.

There's plenty of ways to address the problem -- none of which the Liberal Party will ever implement or the "No" campaign will ever support.

You can feign all the indignation you want but at the end of the day, we know you won't support any of those changes, just like you didn't support the voice, nor even a token apology on behalf of the government for the inhumane things their predecessors did.

Want to prove you actually care? Campaign for a solution that isn't "let's just ignore the problem since it doesn't impact me", perhaps with the financial support of all of those "vote no" organisations that don't exist at their registered addresses.

We both know there's not a chance of that happening. You'll just continue to pretend you have some standard that isn't being met, rather than admitting that nothing ever will because you simply don't want it to happen.

Sure: it's already happening and he voted 'no' to something that could begin to address it.

Not exactly rocket science.

Sounds like gun control works then. Thanks for the support!

So we can expect the 10 of millions of dollars that bankrolled the "no" groups will now go directly to "poor people" now?

Sounds like you're fine with it happening, you're just not fine with it being written down.

But sure. Tell us how a yes vote would have meant "different laws for people with different skin color" and what color your skin is.