Random Politics & Religion #06

First he comes in with incorrect information attempting to play on high ground.


Then after it's poitned out automatic weapons were functionally banned decades ago he changes tactics, again without actual knowledge and trying to play the high ground.


Again I point out where he's severely misinformed.

Now anyone seeking rational discussion would take a huge step back and reassess their position as that position is obviously based on misinformation. Does he do this? Nope doubles down and continues, now attempting emotional manipulation.


Then attempts group shaming and bullying tactics



I point out that the progressive leaders in the USA have openly stated support for mass disbarment and full bans.

He now continues shaming tactics and an attempt to paint me as the bad guy even though he's demonstrated ignorance and misinformation several times now.


And it continues from there, very amateurish trolling attempt.

This person doesn't desire a rational conversation, he desires to emotionally manipulate the 3rd party observer into agreeing with his agenda. That agenda being "We need to put even more restrictions then already exist to effectively ban guns". He (or she) doesn't own a firearm nor has ever purchased one for him(her) self. Doing so would of demonstrated the already large amount of paperwork required.


Wouldn't matter, they are trying to use a tragedy caused by a Muslim terrorist as a political soap box to push banning and confiscation.

Nobody in the history of this thread has EVER suggested that ALL Muslims are terrorists.

Implying that was even the stance of every antigun person. Sorry but you don't win anything not from me at least.

Except it is not the definition we are discussing here, it's the tools used to inflict damage or death in those countries. I've spent many years between the UK and New Zealand so I feel qualified to comment on those two figures. Knife crime in UK cities, especially in those with socio-economic depression is *** astronomical. The below chart does not show that rates have risen 14% in 2015/2016.


New Zealand has a similar issue in that it has a shocking rate of violent crime. It also has an appalling rate of domestic homicide with people using household appliances to murder their partners and/or children. These figures are in need of a review but a 2014 police report to the government summarizes it. It's also worth noting that gun ownership is legal in New Zealand but gun crime pales in comparison to other forms of crime.

The point I am making here, as are some others here, is that banning guns is *** stupid because people will just find other means to kill each other. The issue of gun control is what liberals like to kick around during their practice of appealing to emotion and appealing to the crowd, without ever really taking a hard look at statistics. The real issue is the difficulty involved with accessing mental healthcare, but its easier to focus on guns rather than tackle a real issue.

I had a similiar message and shared it with my friends and family.

Not all Muslims are terrorists. The vast majority of terrorists are Muslim only because that faith has yet to undergo a reformation movement to divorce it from those seeking to use religion as a controlling force to motivate others to do evil acts. Most Muslims are not extremists or terrorists but their refusal to standup to the ones that are cause the perception that they support them.

Attempting to ban or isolate people of the Muslim faith only attempts to treat a symptom of a problem instead of seeking to cure the problem itself. Of course liberals attempting to use political correctness to silence opposition only served to pour gasoline on a smoldering fire.

As for the laughable "gun control", well that's been unmasked for what it is for years now, wholesale confiscation and disarmament. More progressive states are now going full steam ahead.

Cool so just family members can contact police

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/dec/29/california-gun-violence-restraining-order-law-goin/

Wait .. nope now it's anyone, coworkers, fellow students, college professors, anyone who's in contact with someone. Oh and the process is secret, the Police just show up and demand you hand over your weapons. The same weapons that you registered cause they promised the registry wouldn't be used to make a list for later confiscation.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/04/27/ca-democrat-pushes-secret-gun-seizures-based-co-worker-complaints/

This is an expansion of the previous law.

http://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/eyewitness-news-investigates-flaws-within-californias-gun-confiscation-program

Yep a medical nurse incorrectly documented a patient and now *BAM* weapons confiscated.

So tell us again how the progressives "don't want to take anyone's guns away".

Well, I mean, yeah. It's all well and good to say this, but terrorists aren't really known for their rational view of free speech and discussion of the issues.

Generally they take over by superior firepower and if you dissent...they use the firepower.

But that's why problems are problems. If everything were solved as simply as "ban guns" or "outlaw religion," -- as if those are even simple things -- we'd have world peace in a heartbeat.

what more can I say, ppl spouting hatred < this video.

FFS try to open your mind to either side. it's amazing 1 person can be so diluted to reality.

Which is why there needs to be a reformation movement that takes the establishes a new center for the Islamic faith or decentralizes it's power base. Before the protestant reformation movement the Catholic church had near absolute power in Europe and frequently used it. To disobey the Church was tantamount to a death sentence. If the Church's own people didn't kill you, someone else would as being excommunicated made you outside the protection of the law (source of the term Outlaw btw) and thus nobody would get in trouble for murdering you. And this doesn't' even touch on the mass murders the Catholic Church would sanction.

That all stopped when Catholic Christians started questioning the Pope's right to rule the Church and started organizing their own religious interpretations of cannon material. Eventually this spread and created a path by which Christians could be separated from the corrupt church's power.

Right now the Islamic faith is lead by clerics who are from or reside in the Middle East. One of them makes an edict and all followers are required to enact it. Failure to do so means that person is viewed as a bad / faithless Muslim. As long as those radical clerics are viewed positively and not challenged by openly moderate Muslims, then the extremism will continue. Islam, like other Abrahamic faiths has some pretty harsh teachings that if taken literally would result in mass violence and death. There needs to be a interpretation that doesn't call for the deaths of all non-believers.

More insults and personal attacks.

It's not about you, and it's clear to me that message will never get through

For those curious about it, there actually is a kinda moderate version of Islam floating out there. It's predominately in Indonesia but is spreading amongst the modern Islamic nations.

Nahdlatul Ulama, it's got some problems but it's a pretty good start. Hopefully they can spread and act as a counter to the radical "kill in my name" version.

That's a wrap for this episode of RP&R.

Join us again (or please don't) on Monday.