Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'GMD Social Forum' started by Jimmy... Dead., Jun 19, 2014.
But they do title them Redneck:
I will eventually buy some sort of firearm for home use, but I'm not in a hurry or anything. I don't think stockpiling tons of guns or ammo is really necessary either.
The term 'stockpile' is ambiguous. What is an amount of ammunition or firearms that you would consider 'stockpiling'?
For some people, 500 extra rounds is stockpiling. For others, that is how many rounds they use each time they go to the range.
The average American gun owner has 7 firearms. How many is too many? What if they have different applications?
The rational perspective here is that we don't have enough information to believe either persons account of what did or did not happen. I saw a poll stating that 36% of people believe Ford and 30% believe Kavanaugh. So 66% of people are making decisions based on what? Politics?
I never said there couldn't be proof. There could be something, but I'm at a loss for something that would have last this many years. It's true that rape and sexual assault victims have been historically denied sufficient access to justice, but that doesn't mean we ignore the possibility of more past and future Crystal Mangums. Specifically now in this "MeToo Moment", we are beginning to see more and more claims about public figures. If it works, it will continue to happen. It hasn't worked until recently so we didn't see much of it. Bill Clinton is still allowed to leer at young women in full view of the public.
On a completely separate line of thought: Should you be judged for your fitness to do anything in middle age based on drunken teenage behavior?
Like all of the handwringing about the DECLINE OF DEMOCRACY we've been blasted with for the last two years?
7 is too many IMO. And unless you're prepping for a shooting war, I don't see a need to own that many firearms.
A shooting war wouldn't require that many firearms. Very few persons in the military are issued more than two. Having that many is either about fun or function. IE: The weapon you carry daily is going to be different than your deer hunting rifle which is going to be different from your bird hunting shotgun which is going to be different from your varmint shooter which is going to be different from your full size pistol you enjoy shooting which is different from your AR you have because this is MURKA.
Very good--so let me ask this: Why should we default to "Well, there's not enough proof either way, so we might as well move ahead with the nomination" rather than "Well, there's not enough proof either way, so we might as well find someone else"?
Why is our default to proceed as though nothing happened?
The alternative being that Bill Clinton should be... what, locked away?
Again, I'm not saying there's proof to imprison Kavanaugh.
...Yes. Yes, you should--particularly when it's fitness to the "highest court in the land."
I got drunk plenty of times as a young high-schooler/undergrad. I never pinned a girl to a bed or forcibly held anyone down. For that matter, I never assaulted anyone, got a drunk driving arrest, or even fucking trespassed.
It is possible to be a decent human being and still get drunk. The problem here is that Kavanaugh is quite clearly not a decent human being.
It's not a decline of democracy. Democracy worked just fine. (see this blog, second paragraph)
We haven't declined into anything; this is just a resurgence of the same old American greatness. It's been around for centuries.
With this logic, there's no sense to own more than one car because you can't drive more than one at a time, you don't need different baseball bats because you only hit with one at a time, you don't need 5 sets of golf clubs because you're only allowed one set of 14 in official play, etc.
It's like anything dealing with hobbies. Why do you only have one of what you like doing? I own two drum kits. Surely I only need one because I can't play both at the same time. What if they break? What if i crack cymbals? Then those extra sets I have come in handy, don't they?
He said he didn't get a drunk driving arrest
rapists aren't bad because they got caught...
I'm sorry, let me rephrase for you: I never got bombed and then tried to drive a fucking car.
Based on what? All I've seen is that he engaged in underaged drinking and pre-marital sex while a high school sports stud. I don't think that disqualifies him from anything. More witnesses have come out in support of Kavanaugh than over the accusers.
Well, if he physically assaulted more people than he's been nice to over the years, I doubt he'd have made it this far.
Unless you're saying that more people have come out in support of him than have in support of the accusers. But I'm sure a lot of people do believe he's a good guy. Not sure how convincing that is of anything.
I'm not talking about people that only knew Kavanaugh as a judge. People at Ford's party, beyond the accused, said it never happened. One person at Ramirez's party said it happened, though several more said it didn't. There is clearly evidence that Kavanaugh liked to party as a high school jock, and while I'm certainly aware that athletes are given more leeway to rape than non-athletes, that's hardly damning evidence and we may as well dig into the pasts of every single politician that was ever a high school or college athlete and known to attend parties.
I don't think it's necessary unless an accuser comes forward. Or accusers.
People at the party say it didn't happen because they probably don't remember. And Kavanaugh probably doesn't either, based on his accuser's testimony.
What isn't necessary?
That's a possibility but not any kind of hard evidence. Some people at the party have explicitly said they believe the Yale flashing/penis touch thing didn't happen because it would have been a memorable and shocking thing, and not something that they would have forgotten.
I'm not off the mark. Nobody refers to people who collect baseball cards or LEGO as a "nut" but people call others who engage in their 2nd amendment right "nuts" for literally no reason other than a political bias they have. It's a retarded propagandist piece of rhetoric. Same with this new label that has popped up "free speech extremist."
The conflation is definitely there and it is amplified by retarded leftist scum saying the NRA are to blame for dead kids.
lmao wrong. Many left-wing groups practice open carry at rallies. The ignorance of the right-wing is that they think the whole left-wing want to get rid of muh guns, they've clearly never met hardcore socialists and communists who also own many guns.
Somewhat untrue. Google guerilla warfare, you don't need much more than dedication, small arms and explosives to resist a military or a state.
Digging into everyone's past.
There's no hard evidence either way. I'll ask again: why is the default to disregard the accusation altogether rather than refrain from nominating a highly questionable candidate? It's not like there aren't other conservative asshats to choose from.