Larry King interviews Ron Paul

[nikcers]

You can't yell fire or bomb in a crowded building in order to incite a riot omg free speech control, people are against free speech.

 

[Occam's Banana]

We have legalized propaghanda in this country. That was something Obama gave us. Its not speech control to make state sponsored propaghanda illegal is it? People who are dangerous or commit crimes already don't have access to guns. We don't let people in jail have guns do we?

It is speech control to make any kind of propaganda illegal.

And if the propaganda is "state sponsored," then what in the ever-loving hell makes you think for even a moment that the very same state that is sponsoring that propaganda in the first place is ever going to make it illegal, let alone enforce any laws against it? (I mean, I've come across some startlingly stupid things on RPFs, but this one is right up there ...)

People who are determined to be a danger to themselves or others don't have gun rights OMG GUN CONTROL.

Yes, that is exactly what it is. It is "Red Flag" "Pre-Crime" gun control.

And you are a gun grabber for supporting it.

You can't yell fire or bomb in a crowded building in order to incite a riot omg free speech control, people are against free speech.

Forbidding people from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater has nothing whatsoever to do with free speech.

Forbidding people from reporting about mass shootings is speech control.

And you are a speech banner for supporting it.

IOW: You are a speech-banning gun-grabber. (Or would you prefer to be called a gun-grabbing speech banner?)

 

[nikcers]

It is speech control to make any kind of propaganda illegal.

And if the propaganda is "state sponsored," then what in the ever-loving hell makes you think for even a moment that the very same state that is sponsoring the propaganda in the first place is ever going to make it illegal, let alone enforce any laws against it? (I mean, I've heard some startlingly stupid things on RPFs, but this one is right up there ...)



Yes, that is exactly what it is. It is "Red Flag" "Pre-Crime" gun control.

And you are a gun grabber for supporting it.



Forbidding people from shouting "fire" in a crowded theater has nothing whatsoever to do with free speech.

Forbidding people from reporting about mass shootings is speech control.

And you are a speech banner for supporting it.

IOW: You are a speech-banning gun-grabber. (Or would you prefer to be called a gun-grabbing speech banner?)

I for one like the idea of merging gun control with ideas like getting rid of legalized propaghanda and going against the medical industrial complex/ mental health lobbyists that are more funded than the NRA and gun industry so that it won't have a chance of passing because of all of the opposition.

 

[Occam's Banana]

I for one like the idea of merging gun control with ideas like getting rid of legalized propaghanda and going against the medical industrial complex/ mental health lobbyists that are more funded than the NRA and gun industry so that it won't have a chance of passing because of all of the opposition.

Yes, you've already said that you like the idea. That's what makes you a speech-banning gun grabber.

(And to hell with the NRA. The NRA is a Judas goat. From it's very inception, it has worked to "normalize" gun control.)

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Ooooo. Heads gwanna 'splode over Liberty Forest since Ron is supporting Tulsi.

The jury is out for me. But been watching her closely as the best the Dems have to offer. Which isn't saying much.

I didn’t use the title they used, as they used the word “support”, and it was not used by Larry King or Ron Paul.

Ron Paul said “yeah” after King asked if he still thought she was the best candidate. Ron later said he “roots for” her, and she is a valuable candidate, but he specifically talked about her positions on foreign policy and some civil rights.

And what was unsaid is that she is his favorite in the Democrat primary. IIRC, he has specified that in the past.

RT is a propaganda outlet. No need to trust them any more or less than CNN.

 

[nikcers]

Yes, you've already said that you like the idea. That's what makes you a speech-banning gun grabber.

(And to hell with the NRA. The NRA is a Judas goat. From it's very inception, it has worked to "normalize" gun control.)

I said it was a trojan horse to make the gun control grab fail and use the power of the medical industrial complex and the MSM industrial complex and free speech advocates as a poison pill to defeat their idea. I never said the NRA would stop this, I said the medical industrial complex would. Mass shooters are often on drugs and get free propaghanda from the msm to promote their political agenda.

 

[5Points]

Larry didnt understand that people who are on medications that have side effects that could make you go crazy shouldn't have guns or access to guns. Even the el paso shooter's mom told people about her son being crazy and his dad was a mental health person and that still happened. That's not a gun problem thats a mental health problem.

People who are anti-state are also viewed as "mentally unstable" by the elites.

So by that standard, you can wave bye bye to the right of self defense.

The elites want the people disarmed.

 

[Occam's Banana]

And what was unsaid is that she is his favorite in the Democrat primary.

I wonder who his favorite in the Republican primary is ...

 

[Occam's Banana]

People who are anti-state are also viewed as "mentally unstable" by the elites.

So by that standard, you can wave bye bye to the right of self defense.

The elites want the people disarmed.

Exactly. +rep for an excellent first post.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I wonder who his favorite in the Republican primary is ...

Speaking of which, did Mark Sanford ever throw his hat in the ring? Not that he is a viable candidate anymore, the guy can’t help but shoot himself in the feet over and over.

 

[Stratovarious]

People who are determined to be a danger to themselves or others don't have gun rights OMG GUN CONTROL.

If they are truly a danger to themselves and others they need to be off the street perhaps, taking their
guns won't make them 'safer' to society.


When the guns are gone it will go to car bombs.

 

[Stratovarious]

Exactly. +rep for an excellent first post.

I repd too...

 

[Occam's Banana]

I said it was a trojan horse to make the gun control grab fail and use the power of the medical industrial complex and the MSM industrial complex and free speech advocates as a poison pill to defeat their idea. I never said the NRA would stop this, I said the medical industrial complex would. Mass shooters are often on drugs and get free propaghanda from the msm to promote their political agenda.

I don't care what kind of horse you think it is.

They want gun control. They want speech control.

You want gun control. You want speech control.

You can explain all you like about how your excuses for being a speech-banning gun grabber are different from their excuses for being speech-banning gun grabbers.

But it makes no difference. You are all still a bunch of speech-banning gun grabbers.

 

[nikcers]

I don't care what kind of horse you think it is.

They want gun control. They want speech control.

You want gun control. You want speech control.

You can explain all you like about how your excuses for being a speech-banning gun grabber are different from their excuses for being speech-banning gun grabbers.

But it makes no difference. You are all still a bunch of speech-banning gun grabbers.

You can't bring a knife to a gun fight. Right now they are not being honest actors with their agenda, we have to use their power against them. Its what Trump has done all along. While everyone else was getting censored by social media and the mainstream media Trump wasn't because he fights fire with fire.

 

[nikcers]

If they are truly a danger to themselves and others they need to be off the street perhaps, taking their
guns won't make them 'safer' to society.


When the guns are gone it will go to car bombs.

I'm Irish and car bombs are racist.

 

[Occam's Banana]

If they are truly a danger to themselves and others they need to be off the street perhaps, taking their
guns won't make them 'safer' to society.

When the guns are gone it will go to car bombs.

Also, there is no way of telling if they are "truly" a danger to themselves and others until they actually do something "dangerous" to themselves or others.

That is not to say that there cannot be reasonable "warning signs" of impending disaster - but you may rest assured that any "official" list of "warning signs" that might be used to identify someone who may be about to "go postal" will be gradually (or even not so gradually) expanded to include more and increasingly dubious "warning signs" that are not so reasonable at all.

 

[Occam's Banana]

You can't bring a knife to a gun fight. Right now they are not being honest actors with their agenda, we have to use their power against them. Its what Trump has done all along. While everyone else was getting censored by social media and the mainstream media Trump wasn't because he fights fire with fire.

You can explain all you like about how your excuses for being a speech-banning gun grabber are different from their excuses for being speech-banning gun grabbers.

But it makes no difference. You are all still a bunch of speech-banning gun grabbers.

//

 

[nikcers]

Also, there is no way of telling if they are "truly" a danger to themselves and others until they actually do something "dangerous" to themselves or others.

That is not to say that there cannot be reasonable "warning signs" of impending disaster - but you rest assured than any "official" list of "warning signs" that might be used to identify someone who may be about to "go postal" will be gradually (or even not so gradually) expanded to include more and increasingly dubious "warning signs" that are not so reasonable at all.

Its all nefarious plot for Trump to institutionalize all of the democrats and ban free speech. Therefore we can't solve the true cause of the mass shootings or ban guns and have gun control.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Its all nefarious plot for Trump to institutionalize all of the democrats and ban free speech. Therefore we can't solve the true cause of the mass shootings or ban guns and have gun control.

You can explain all you like about how your excuses for being a speech-banning gun grabber are different from their excuses for being speech-banning gun grabbers.

But it makes no difference. You are all still a bunch of speech-banning gun grabbers.

//

 

[Schifference]

Also, there is no way of telling if they are "truly" a danger to themselves and others until they actually do something "dangerous" to themselves or others.

That is not to say that there cannot be reasonable "warning signs" of impending disaster - but you may rest assured that any "official" list of "warning signs" that might be used to identify someone who may be about to "go postal" will be gradually (or even not so gradually) expanded to include more and increasingly dubious "warning signs" that are not so reasonable at all.

So what should be done if a person is suspected of being a threat is the person should be surveilled. Wire Tap warrants, surveillance old school kind of detective work not preemptive, stereotyping, gun grabbing, speech stifling, laws.