North Carolina, a voting rights hellhole.

It didn't used to make sense why that's in any form a controversial point, but it does make sense in the context of people like you, who are excessively r-selected mentally.
Take heart, K man. The mountains you climb can't always be seen by an audience.
 
That can't really be a "right," though. But the whole idea of rights presumes a liberal framework, which I thought you rejected. Do you just mean that ensuring physical security is the most-important function of gov't?

Unless you're a nihlist, your right to defend yourself is just as assertable as your right to free speech or due process.

Ultimately though, its the only one that nihlist respect anyways.

Thus your fundamental right....
 
This whole thing started when I said the right to vote was the most important part of a free society. As in, you can't really have a free society without the right to vote lol. But i'm sure we can look around the globe and find a bunch of places with no voting rights that qualify as free.
Our reactionary friend of course chomped at the bit.

Greoric's position is transparently stupid. If you don't have say in your own governance, by definition you're not free. Guns are just a tool.
 
Because that's not specific to your self defense.

As an AA, you of all people should appreciate the argument here. Afterall do you think your ancestor's would have been kept under the boot of state sponsored slavery for as long as they did if the 2A applied to them?

Nukes are absolutely specific to my self defense. If I can't nuke backwoods Mississippi for being hazardous to my health, i'm not safe. Shit is literally the most important right in a free society, the choice of how I defend myself.
 
Unless you're a nihlist, your right to defend yourself is just as assertable as your right to free speech or due process.

Ultimately though, its the only one that nihlist respect anyways.

Thus your fundamental right....

This is what I was responding to:

"What's the most important right in a free society then?"

"Your physical security."

Your physical security cannot be a right. In your rush to mindlessly repeat propaganda, you lost sight of the track the discussion was moving on.
 
Greoric's position is transparently stupid. If you don't have say in your own governance, by definition you're not free. Guns are just a tool.

No in fact that's a transparently and verifiably a stupid assertion, because it necessarily only prevents someone from having a say in how confiscated resources are distributed.
 
Maybe "thing" should stand in for "right" in this case.

"The most important thing to me, when I ponder black people's right to vote in North Carolina, is my gun collection."
 
No in fact that's a transparently and verifiably a stupid assertion, because it necessarily only prevents someone from having a say in how confiscated resources are distributed.

Again, you're not reading well.
 
Nukes are absolutely specific to my self defense. If I can't nuke backwoods Mississippi for being hazardous to my health, i'm not safe. Shit is literally the most important right in a free society, the choice of how I defend myself.

Yeah that does not follow. Sorry guy. Area ordinance isn't specific to your self defense, and neither is backwoods Missippii "hazardous to your health" (whatever the fuck that means). Try again.
 
Yeah that does not follow. Sorry guy. Area ordinance isn't specific to your self defense, and neither is backwoods Missippii "hazardous to your health" (whatever the fuck that means). Try again.


Defense against the government.

They may try and eminent domain me if I have a hand gun but with a Nuke?
 
Defense against the government.

They me try and eminent domain me if I have a hand gun but with a Nuke?

You don't have a right to collateral damage. Prudently that's a poor WoC in that kind of conflict anyway.
 
You don't have a right to collateral damage. Prudently that's a poor WoC in that kind of conflict anyway.

You can cause collateral damage with a gun and it's more likely to be used than a nuke because of MAD
 
Not an argument.

Right. Just telling you that your post doesn't address mine. Not every useful comment is an argument. You're again parroting something from your guru (Molyneux) without thinking it through.
 
The part of this I find fascinating is that corrective redistricting is likely to cost N.C. both of is current black congressmen. Taken nationally, you would see a similar effect. It just so happens that a significant percentage of the country’s most gerrymandered districts were deliberately stacked with AA’s, and correcting those districts is likely to dilute those votes causing those voters to lose their current representative. Will be interesting to see how people’s attitudes on this unfold once they realize this will be one of the effects
 
Right. Just telling you that your post doesn't address mine. Not every useful comment is an argument. You're again parroting something from your guru (Molyneux) without thinking it through.
Come on, he said he doesn't follow her
 
This is the 3rd time the NC GOP got caught Gerrymandering. Happened in 2011 and 2016. At least the NC GOP is consistent.
I don't know why the GOP hates democracy so much. (I am doing this right, with the dudes that throw at the same blanket statement but use the word Democrats and not GOP)
 
Back
Top