Of course we can criticize him for that. Only person who could argue otherwise is stuck in the partisan system. I have plenty of guns, and don't think we should ban Muslims.
Not quite. The term had an original meaning, and it was even used in my Computer Science class in 1993. It seems to have been generalized since then, but not 60 years ago.
I was thinking of arguments I've heard for why the 2nd Amendment applies to legal non-citizens. People have stated that if you're here on a visa, you should still have the right to bear arms as it is an inalienable natural right. And yes, they legally can possess and even carry.
I guess that went over your head. They called me a Clinton supporter (which I am not) so I called them a Clinton supporter. But don't bother actually reading.
One has tempered their responses, while the other has not, and actually seems to garner extra support from their followers by being outlandish. Most people could have drawn these conclusions without much research.
I mostly agree. I dislike almost any form of censorship short of things related to the screaming "fire" in a crowded theater concept, or inciting mob violence, etc.
Sorry, I'm currently working in a deployed location at a command center. I have a bit of time to play around on Slashdot, but not enough time for such research. I'm just a lazy ass fuck I suppose.
I definitely don't disagree with you, but a libertarian leaning Democrat would, for instance, be against forcing someone to bake a cake that had a message they disagree with, being that voluntarism is a big part of the deal. A libertarian leaning Democrat is against gun control because it is controlling and removes choice, just as you said, a libertarian leaning Republican could be pro-choice as it allows you to make your own decisions.
I'm learning that is a definition abandoned over the last couple of decades because of plebes on the internet generalizing its definition, so I concede now.
Based on that, we should forbid anyone in a city with heavy gun control from leaving the city limits. Those areas have the highest violent crime rates, so why let "those people" into the rest of the country?
What you seem to be identifying is the difference in authoritarian and libertarian philosophies. You can be left/libertarian, left/authoritarian (like most Democrats), right/libertarian (like most Libertarians), and right/authoritarian (like most Republicans). And you can also be anywhere in-between as well.
Slashdot Mirror
And you still couldn't even pick that up with elementary level reading comprehension. Says it all, really.
Of course we can criticize him for that. Only person who could argue otherwise is stuck in the partisan system. I have plenty of guns, and don't think we should ban Muslims.
Not quite. The term had an original meaning, and it was even used in my Computer Science class in 1993. It seems to have been generalized since then, but not 60 years ago.
Yeah, I'll buy that. It's far too Idiocracy-like in some ways, but not quite.
no? lol. That's some creative extrapolation.
I was thinking of arguments I've heard for why the 2nd Amendment applies to legal non-citizens. People have stated that if you're here on a visa, you should still have the right to bear arms as it is an inalienable natural right. And yes, they legally can possess and even carry.
Ah, I wish I could mod you up.
I guess that went over your head. They called me a Clinton supporter (which I am not) so I called them a Clinton supporter. But don't bother actually reading.
One has tempered their responses, while the other has not, and actually seems to garner extra support from their followers by being outlandish. Most people could have drawn these conclusions without much research.
I mostly agree. I dislike almost any form of censorship short of things related to the screaming "fire" in a crowded theater concept, or inciting mob violence, etc.
I'd mod you up if I could!
Sorry, I'm currently working in a deployed location at a command center. I have a bit of time to play around on Slashdot, but not enough time for such research. I'm just a lazy ass fuck I suppose.
I didn't realize you were a Clinton supporter. I'll try to provide you with a better safe space in the future.
I have seen proof that there are more claims it is Russian.
Thank you.
That's not a citation. Thanks for playing.
I definitely don't disagree with you, but a libertarian leaning Democrat would, for instance, be against forcing someone to bake a cake that had a message they disagree with, being that voluntarism is a big part of the deal. A libertarian leaning Democrat is against gun control because it is controlling and removes choice, just as you said, a libertarian leaning Republican could be pro-choice as it allows you to make your own decisions.
Citation needed.
I'm learning that is a definition abandoned over the last couple of decades because of plebes on the internet generalizing its definition, so I concede now.
Based on that, we should forbid anyone in a city with heavy gun control from leaving the city limits. Those areas have the highest violent crime rates, so why let "those people" into the rest of the country?
I clearly didn't cry racism. Go to your safe space if you can't handle adult discussion.
I definitely wasn't arguing for censorship, as can be seen by the fact that I did not argue for censorship.
Oh I completely agree. Hillary what people call a neocon.
I got my info from a different article about this, my apologies. http://gizmodo.com/facebook-em...
What you seem to be identifying is the difference in authoritarian and libertarian philosophies. You can be left/libertarian, left/authoritarian (like most Democrats), right/libertarian (like most Libertarians), and right/authoritarian (like most Republicans). And you can also be anywhere in-between as well.