There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

Old subthreads
Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7141

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:54 am

Brive1987 wrote: Jesus fucking Christ. I’ve changed my mind.

Nuke this hell hole.

That's the sentiment in the US, too. They deserve it -- theft, rape, murder. The idea that all SA whites were evil was pounded into the collective conscious with Sun City etc. and Nelson Mandela was a saint sure Winnie got a little overzealous. But the oikophobia/zenophilia among lefties runs deeper and is older than opposition to Apartheid in the 80's. I blame All In The Family.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7142
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7142

Post by MarcusAu » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:31 am

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ...
I blame All In The Family.
Alf Garnet has a lot to answer for.

Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4009
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7143

Post by Bhurzum » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:48 am

Brive1987 wrote: My wife is keen to know why I’m listening to metal music on my iPad. :whistle:
https://img.etsystatic.com/il/fe10e5/13 ... ?version=1

;)

Suet Cardigan
.
.
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:26 am
Location: England, a bastion of barbarism and cluelessness
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7144

Post by Suet Cardigan » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:47 am

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: I need to write a paper on “to what extent was doctrine responsible for the German victory in France in 1940”

I will need to determine exactly at what point this victory occurred, define “doctrine”, address the question of whether there was a formal “blizkreig” protocol, determine whether the strategic Ardennes thrust was more important than the how, evaluate Divisional leadership as a factor and offset against Allied failures in doctrine (such as the failure to concentrate superiority assets) as well as failure in Allied leadership and morale.

Should be pretty easy. :lol:

I put the influence of formal German doctrine at 46%.
You have a copy of Guderian's Achtung Panzer? The Germans themselves never called it "blitzkrieg"; it was a mechanized expansion of their classic 'Sichelschnitt' then 'Kesselschlacht', that had worked on a tactical level at the end of WWI as Stoß infiltration-in-depth. cf. Matthew Cooper, The German Army 1933-1945.

The decisive doctrinal advantage imo was the German flexibility and integration of all arms. The use of close air support stands out. Another example is ability to form Kampfgruppen on the fly. Also the practice of issuing 'objectives' instead of 'orders', letting the local commander adapt to the evolving situation. All this was possible due to the highly-developed general staff, with its practice of giving officers both staff and line experience. cf. Mellenthin, Panzer Battles.

At the divisional level, we see Rommel's (7. Pz??) method of coordinating artillery support: he drew lines along his intended line of advance, & numbered them. All he had to do was call in "9" or "10", or "11", depending on how the day went.

I don't know whether the Allies also had this, but the German concept of the "Schwerpunkt", the critical point where force & energies should be applied, allowed them to tip the balance despite having smaller forces or weaker arms. A PZ II or T-38 can't stand up to a Char-B, but they can clear an infantry position blocking a road just fine. Same for a Stuka.

Additionally, alacrity and the taking of calculated risks were encouraged throughout.

In contrast, the French and British tank theory conceived of armored units as infantry support. Their armored 'kampfgruppe' for the Arras counter-attack was a one-off and only assembled arduously. Air support went from ineffectual (British) to non-existent (French). Indeed, the French Air Force pretty much sat on the ground picking their noses.

I think the grossest Allied failing, one which plagued the Western Allies throughout the war, was their inability to think from the enemy's viewpoint. Had the Germans fought like the French & British, they would have lost in 1940. But the French & British never even tried to imagine possible German strategies. Perhaps because Poland was so weak, the clear signs of the new German strategy & tactics were missed. But they were evident, especially in Blaskowitz' sweep.

PM me if you want to discuss further without boring everyone else.
The French surrendered because they were French. End of debate.

https://starecat.com/content/wp-content ... render.jpg

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7145

Post by Kirbmarc » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:56 am

It's very funny to me that there's this meme of France surrendering immediately when they only did it after Paris had already been taken, while there's no similar meme about Italy, whose leaders gave up after losing just Sicily. Probably it's because France surrendered to the Nazis, while Italy surrendered to the Allies, so the surrender of France is considered more shameful. Although I think that the meme was made relevant again by the necons who were pissed off that France wasn't joining them in the Iraq adventure. The 'Muricans never acknowledged that no matter their motivations the Frenchies were in the right that time. :bjarte:

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7146

Post by Kirbmarc » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:56 am

It's very funny to me that there's this meme of France surrendering immediately when they only did it after Paris had already been taken, while there's no similar meme about Italy, whose leaders gave up after losing just Sicily. Probably it's because France surrendered to the Nazis, while Italy surrendered to the Allies, so the surrender of France is considered more shameful. Although I think that the meme was made relevant again by the necons who were pissed off that France wasn't joining them in the Iraq adventure. The 'Muricans never acknowledged that no matter their motivations the Frenchies were in the right that time. :bjarte:

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7142
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7147

Post by MarcusAu » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:09 am

Maybe we can send out a search party for Phil - so that he can comment on it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01i19qog8Pw

DrokkIt
.
.
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:01 pm
Location: Brit-Cit
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7148

Post by DrokkIt » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:11 am

Kirbmarc wrote: It's very funny to me that there's this meme of France surrendering immediately when they only did it after Paris had already been taken, while there's no similar meme about Italy, whose leaders gave up after losing just Sicily. Probably it's because France surrendered to the Nazis, while Italy surrendered to the Allies, so the surrender of France is considered more shameful. Although I think that the meme was made relevant again by the necons who were pissed off that France wasn't joining them in the Iraq adventure. The 'Muricans never acknowledged that no matter their motivations the Frenchies were in the right that time. :bjarte:
I think it's because the anglosphere doesn't take Italy very seriously.

There is a huge "humorous animosity" between the English and French, constant winding up and piss taking over the different histories. We call 'em frogs, they call us "rosbif". A lot of the teasing over the war comes from this.

Barbie's Boyfriend
.
.
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:29 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7149

Post by Barbie's Boyfriend » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:47 am

DrokkIt wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote: It's very funny to me that there's this meme of France surrendering immediately when they only did it after Paris had already been taken, while there's no similar meme about Italy, whose leaders gave up after losing just Sicily. Probably it's because France surrendered to the Nazis, while Italy surrendered to the Allies, so the surrender of France is considered more shameful. Although I think that the meme was made relevant again by the necons who were pissed off that France wasn't joining them in the Iraq adventure. The 'Muricans never acknowledged that no matter their motivations the Frenchies were in the right that time. :bjarte:
I think it's because the anglosphere doesn't take Italy very seriously.

There is a huge "humorous animosity" between the English and French, constant winding up and piss taking over the different histories. We call 'em frogs, they call us "rosbif". A lot of the teasing over the war comes from this.
And Americans too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUrezmW1EPI

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6460
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7150

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM » Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:48 am

When they were prosecuting after WWII, many Germans tried to claim they were Italians to avoid the harshest penalties. They were easily found out, though. True Italian soldiers had sunburnt armpits.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7151

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:07 am

Once the German thrust through the Ardennes was recognized for what it was, the French and BEF had no choice but to haul ass westward. That made the French cowardly but the Brits heroic for running pell-mell to Dunkirk then flouncing. Heck, Manstein ordered the same sort of desperate retreat in the Donbas in early '43.

If anything, the French don't know when to quit. Their obstinate -- nay, pathological -- refusal to surrender in 1870 led to all sorts of problems. Like WWI. And La Resistance!! in WWII is glorified, but of course it constituted terrorism under the Geneva Convention.

I mean just look at that sketchy broad in CASABLANCA who gets all spazzy when they sing La Marseillaise. Frogs be crazy.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7152

Post by Tigzy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:45 am

Service Dog wrote:
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: If I had that kind of fame at their age, I would have used it responsibly to get laid. A lot.

Confirmed. Reminds me of a Newsweek cover, back in '95. The 2 on the left were my friends. Not bisexual. Just wanted fame, to get laid a lot.

https://i.imgur.com/bVbyMHc.png
Is the one in the middle your mate Fang?

shoutinghorse
.
.
Posts: 2649
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7153

Post by shoutinghorse » Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:48 am

When I were a lad there was an old joke that went .. 'How many gears does an Italian tank have? Answer. Four, three reverse gears and one forward in case they get attacked from the rear'

When I was growing up in the 60's & 70's most of my parents generation considered the eyeties to be more surrender monkeys than the frogs. I've found that people who were around during WWII had the utmost regard for what the French resistance did for the war effort.

My mum had an uncle captured by the Japs, don't get me started on what she thought of them. :x

John D
.
.
Posts: 4606
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7154

Post by John D » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:02 am

shoutinghorse wrote: When I were a lad there was an old joke that went .. 'How many gears does an Italian tank have? Answer. Four, three reverse gears and one forward in case they get attacked from the rear'

When I was growing up in the 60's & 70's most of my parents generation considered the eyeties to be more surrender monkeys than the frogs. I've found that people who were around during WWII had the utmost regard for what the French resistance did for the war effort.

My mum had an uncle captured by the Japs, don't get me started on what she thought of them. :x
I think the idea that the French are cowards in mostly a creation of the British and then we Americans just latched on because it seemed funny. Perhaps there are other factors as well... American's see Monti as a sort of dandy, and that we Yanks were the only way to save Europe. We are stinging from the mess we got into in Vietnam also. When I am talking with someone on the French leaving Vietnam and sticking us with the mess I just say - "Yeah, the French have always been smarter than us." Haha.

shoutinghorse
.
.
Posts: 2649
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7155

Post by shoutinghorse » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:14 am

John D wrote: We are stinging from the mess we got into in Vietnam
Labour governments have done just three great things whilst in power, the introduction of universally free health care (NHS) bringing lasting peace to Northern Ireland and keeping us the hell out of Vietnam.

Shatterface
.
.
Posts: 5898
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7156

Post by Shatterface » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:30 am

shoutinghorse wrote:
John D wrote: We are stinging from the mess we got into in Vietnam
Labour governments have done just three great things whilst in power, the introduction of universally free health care (NHS) bringing lasting peace to Northern Ireland and keeping us the hell out of Vietnam.
The Tories began the NI peace process and while Labour might have kept us out of Vietnam they more than made up for it with Iraq and Afghanistan.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1373
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7157

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:38 am

Brive1987 wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:19 am
Yep. In SA it’s only the poor lost Hottentots that have a case - against the Whites and Bantu.

Shelia here in the vid would no doubt be happy to give away some squatters bush station, just so long as the ‘black fella’ stays clear of her inner city terrace.
That's true of the Southern bits of SA. What these simplistic mugs don't comprehend is that some of the Bantu land was bought, or settled by agreement. It isn't as simple as any white owned land was stolen.

Stankeye
.
.
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:35 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7158

Post by Stankeye » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:58 am

Brive1987 wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:02 am
I keep hearing that “assault rifle” is a made up meaningless word.

I haven’t googled it, but doesn’t that class include shorter barreled weapons, often lighter and with folding stocks, that can fire full or semi auto using full caliber ammunition contained in higher that prev. capacity magazines?

Like the German watsit from the last year of the war. Or even the M1. I thought the line was that the traditional long rifle was never used at its optimum extended effective range. Conscripts couldn’t hit anything too far away. Contacts occurred sub 50 metres as a rule. The 9mm MP40s and Russian Tommy Gun didn’t have even this medium range and didn’t have stopping power.

Ergo “assault rifles” like the AK and M16 while the British remained more old school with the semi auto, 20 round magazine, SLR.
Hopefully someone answered or you googled it, but Assault gun is the meaningless word. AR is as you have described with the addition of select fire, full auto. Since our (USA) semi-auto AR's don't have select fire they are technically not AR's so they came up with the "Assault Gun" ban, which banned various features. Anyways it's one of those silly talking points that comes up when they discuss AR's as the gun enthusiast will declare that it is not an AR since i does not have select fire, and assault guns is a made up word for scary black semi-auto rifle. Don't go down the gun control rabbit hole!

Oglebart
.
.
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 2:25 pm
Location: Ingerland
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7159

Post by Oglebart » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:12 am

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: When they were prosecuting after WWII, many Germans tried to claim they were Italians to avoid the harshest penalties. They were easily found out, though. True Italian soldiers had sunburnt armpits.
This helped form my early opinions on the Italian army.



I guess if Allo Allo was shown on TV in Scotland now then the whole cast and crew would be charged with causing offence?

Suet Cardigan
.
.
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:26 am
Location: England, a bastion of barbarism and cluelessness
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7160

Post by Suet Cardigan » Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:20 pm

Oglebart wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: When they were prosecuting after WWII, many Germans tried to claim they were Italians to avoid the harshest penalties. They were easily found out, though. True Italian soldiers had sunburnt armpits.
This helped form my early opinions on the Italian army.


I guess if Allo Allo was shown on TV in Scotland now then the whole cast and crew would be charged with causing offence?
Minor point: the law that Dankula was charged under applies to the entire UK, not just Scotland:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Act_2003

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16693
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7161

Post by Brive1987 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:21 pm

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:33 am
Brive1987 wrote: I need to write a paper on “to what extent was doctrine responsible for the German victory in France in 1940”

I will need to determine exactly at what point this victory occurred, define “doctrine”, address the question of whether there was a formal “blizkreig” protocol, determine whether the strategic Ardennes thrust was more important than the how, evaluate Divisional leadership as a factor and offset against Allied failures in doctrine (such as the failure to concentrate superiority assets) as well as failure in Allied leadership and morale.

Should be pretty easy. :lol:

I put the influence of formal German doctrine at 46%.
You have a copy of Guderian's Achtung Panzer? The Germans themselves never called it "blitzkrieg"; it was a mechanized expansion of their classic 'Sichelschnitt' then 'Kesselschlacht', that had worked on a tactical level at the end of WWI as Stoß infiltration-in-depth. cf. Matthew Cooper, The German Army 1933-1945.

The decisive doctrinal advantage imo was the German flexibility and integration of all arms. The use of close air support stands out. Another example is ability to form Kampfgruppen on the fly. Also the practice of issuing 'objectives' instead of 'orders', letting the local commander adapt to the evolving situation. All this was possible due to the highly-developed general staff, with its practice of giving officers both staff and line experience. cf. Mellenthin, Panzer Battles.

At the divisional level, we see Rommel's (7. Pz??) method of coordinating artillery support: he drew lines along his intended line of advance, & numbered them. All he had to do was call in "9" or "10", or "11", depending on how the day went.

I don't know whether the Allies also had this, but the German concept of the "Schwerpunkt", the critical point where force & energies should be applied, allowed them to tip the balance despite having smaller forces or weaker arms. A PZ II or T-38 can't stand up to a Char-B, but they can clear an infantry position blocking a road just fine. Same for a Stuka.

Additionally, alacrity and the taking of calculated risks were encouraged throughout.

In contrast, the French and British tank theory conceived of armored units as infantry support. Their armored 'kampfgruppe' for the Arras counter-attack was a one-off and only assembled arduously. Air support went from ineffectual (British) to non-existent (French). Indeed, the French Air Force pretty much sat on the ground picking their noses.

I think the grossest Allied failing, one which plagued the Western Allies throughout the war, was their inability to think from the enemy's viewpoint. Had the Germans fought like the French & British, they would have lost in 1940. But the French & British never even tried to imagine possible German strategies. Perhaps because Poland was so weak, the clear signs of the new German strategy & tactics were missed. But they were evident, especially in Blaskowitz' sweep.

PM me if you want to discuss further without boring everyone else.
That would be good thanks. And thanks for the input here. I will finish my readings over the next couple of days and PM.

The traditional view is that the Germans over balanced themselves by inventing armoured divisions arganised into corps, added mech infantry and topped it off with airborne tactical artillery. A change in kind, not degree from the 1918 Army. This nightmare was designed to effect deep penetration with the flanks held by trad infantry, leading older style armies to instantly collapse.

The counterview is that the German Army was far more traditional and the corps and army commanders were pretty much old school. Poland happened because an over extended and under mobilised army was squished by a succession of lower order Schlieffen style envelopments with horse drawn artillery being king. France happened because of low morale in the French army, poor allied deployments, Hitlers innovative one two approach and out-of-control Divisional commanders, operating in a constrained AO, who did the right thing at the right time. To the initial horror of their commanders.

So tactically, “yes” there was new blood. And yes. Operational doctrine was two steps beyond the allies, as you mentioned. But 1940 was fundamentally a confluence of factors where adhoc lower level doctrine dominated at the expense of standard operating procedure. After 1940 the new Panzer bloods had won Hitler over and Russia turned into a series of ineffectual France 1940s.

:think: :think:

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16693
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7162

Post by Brive1987 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:42 pm

Stankeye wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:02 am
I keep hearing that “assault rifle” is a made up meaningless word.

I haven’t googled it, but doesn’t that class include shorter barreled weapons, often lighter and with folding stocks, that can fire full or semi auto using full caliber ammunition contained in higher that prev. capacity magazines?

Like the German watsit from the last year of the war. Or even the M1. I thought the line was that the traditional long rifle was never used at its optimum extended effective range. Conscripts couldn’t hit anything too far away. Contacts occurred sub 50 metres as a rule. The 9mm MP40s and Russian Tommy Gun didn’t have even this medium range and didn’t have stopping power.

Ergo “assault rifles” like the AK and M16 while the British remained more old school with the semi auto, 20 round magazine, SLR.
Hopefully someone answered or you googled it, but Assault gun is the meaningless word. AR is as you have described with the addition of select fire, full auto. Since our (USA) semi-auto AR's don't have select fire they are technically not AR's so they came up with the "Assault Gun" ban, which banned various features. Anyways it's one of those silly talking points that comes up when they discuss AR's as the gun enthusiast will declare that it is not an AR since i does not have select fire, and assault guns is a made up word for scary black semi-auto rifle. Don't go down the gun control rabbit hole!
The counter argument is that:

AR15s especially ...

+ can be easily concealed due to their compact assault rifle construct
+ are designed to empty their magazines faster than hunting rifles due to an intentionally light trigger pull
+ have had this feature intentionally leveraged via provision of high capacity magazines
+ are designed to be visually attractive to emotionally challenged individuals. The Rambo effect.
+ are consequently fetishised with mods and bump stocks that indicate an unhealthy affectation
+ are not best of breed for either tradional single shot hunting or classic marksmanship due to shorter barrels and lighter ammo

If my son came home with an AR15 I would be asking questions.

I would argue that removing full auto no more diminishes an assault rifle than a woman is less ladylike for not being able to have children.

ButI could be wrong.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7163

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:54 pm

Fuck man, the lights of liberty are going out across the western world. If any of you Canuckians want asylum in the State of Jefferson, I can set up a refugee camp in one of my pastures:

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... privilege/

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10660
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7164

Post by Lsuoma » Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:54 pm

MarcusAu wrote: Maybe we can send out a search party for Phil - so that he can comment on it...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01i19qog8Pw
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3nubDd3c0zA/ ... Lennox.png

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7165

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:07 pm

Brive1987 wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:33 am
Brive1987 wrote: I need to write a paper on “to what extent was doctrine responsible for the German victory in France in 1940”

I will need to determine exactly at what point this victory occurred, define “doctrine”, address the question of whether there was a formal “blizkreig” protocol, determine whether the strategic Ardennes thrust was more important than the how, evaluate Divisional leadership as a factor and offset against Allied failures in doctrine (such as the failure to concentrate superiority assets) as well as failure in Allied leadership and morale.

Should be pretty easy. :lol:

I put the influence of formal German doctrine at 46%.
You have a copy of Guderian's Achtung Panzer? The Germans themselves never called it "blitzkrieg"; it was a mechanized expansion of their classic 'Sichelschnitt' then 'Kesselschlacht', that had worked on a tactical level at the end of WWI as Stoß infiltration-in-depth. cf. Matthew Cooper, The German Army 1933-1945.

The decisive doctrinal advantage imo was the German flexibility and integration of all arms. The use of close air support stands out. Another example is ability to form Kampfgruppen on the fly. Also the practice of issuing 'objectives' instead of 'orders', letting the local commander adapt to the evolving situation. All this was possible due to the highly-developed general staff, with its practice of giving officers both staff and line experience. cf. Mellenthin, Panzer Battles.

At the divisional level, we see Rommel's (7. Pz??) method of coordinating artillery support: he drew lines along his intended line of advance, & numbered them. All he had to do was call in "9" or "10", or "11", depending on how the day went.

I don't know whether the Allies also had this, but the German concept of the "Schwerpunkt", the critical point where force & energies should be applied, allowed them to tip the balance despite having smaller forces or weaker arms. A PZ II or T-38 can't stand up to a Char-B, but they can clear an infantry position blocking a road just fine. Same for a Stuka.

Additionally, alacrity and the taking of calculated risks were encouraged throughout.

In contrast, the French and British tank theory conceived of armored units as infantry support. Their armored 'kampfgruppe' for the Arras counter-attack was a one-off and only assembled arduously. Air support went from ineffectual (British) to non-existent (French). Indeed, the French Air Force pretty much sat on the ground picking their noses.

I think the grossest Allied failing, one which plagued the Western Allies throughout the war, was their inability to think from the enemy's viewpoint. Had the Germans fought like the French & British, they would have lost in 1940. But the French & British never even tried to imagine possible German strategies. Perhaps because Poland was so weak, the clear signs of the new German strategy & tactics were missed. But they were evident, especially in Blaskowitz' sweep.

PM me if you want to discuss further without boring everyone else.
That would be good thanks. And thanks for the input here. I will finish my readings over the next couple of days and PM.

The traditional view is that the Germans over balanced themselves by inventing armoured divisions arganised into corps, added mech infantry and topped it off with airborne tactical artillery. A change in kind, not degree from the 1918 Army. This nightmare was designed to effect deep penetration with the flanks held by trad infantry, leading older style armies to instantly collapse.

The counterview is that the German Army was far more traditional and the corps and army commanders were pretty much old school. Poland happened because an over extended and under mobilised army was squished by a succession of lower order Schlieffen style envelopments with horse drawn artillery being king. France happened because of low morale in the French army, poor allied deployments, Hitlers innovative one two approach and out-of-control Divisional commanders, operating in a constrained AO, who did the right thing at the right time. To the initial horror of their commanders.

So tactically, “yes” there was new blood. And yes. Operational doctrine was two steps beyond the allies, as you mentioned. But 1940 was fundamentally a confluence of factors where adhoc lower level doctrine dominated at the expense of standard operating procedure. After 1940 the new Panzer bloods had won Hitler over and Russia turned into a series of ineffectual France 1940s.

:think: :think:
Yeah, it was amped-up Kesselschlacht doctrine. And it did work well in the East, but Hitler's atrocious grand strategy swamped it. For it to succeed as immensely as it did in France in '40, though, you need your enemy to play old-style. So again, credit the Germans for being able to think like their opponent.

But I wouldn't dismiss the "ad hoc lower level doctrine", as that was intentionally built into the system.

Also, the whole Maginot Line 'false security complex' is overblown. Fact is, the Maginot Line held. The French never expected it to protect them completely, only to secure the right wing and move the main clash to the Low Countries.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7166

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:07 pm

Brive1987 wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:33 am
Brive1987 wrote: I need to write a paper on “to what extent was doctrine responsible for the German victory in France in 1940”

I will need to determine exactly at what point this victory occurred, define “doctrine”, address the question of whether there was a formal “blizkreig” protocol, determine whether the strategic Ardennes thrust was more important than the how, evaluate Divisional leadership as a factor and offset against Allied failures in doctrine (such as the failure to concentrate superiority assets) as well as failure in Allied leadership and morale.

Should be pretty easy. :lol:

I put the influence of formal German doctrine at 46%.
You have a copy of Guderian's Achtung Panzer? The Germans themselves never called it "blitzkrieg"; it was a mechanized expansion of their classic 'Sichelschnitt' then 'Kesselschlacht', that had worked on a tactical level at the end of WWI as Stoß infiltration-in-depth. cf. Matthew Cooper, The German Army 1933-1945.

The decisive doctrinal advantage imo was the German flexibility and integration of all arms. The use of close air support stands out. Another example is ability to form Kampfgruppen on the fly. Also the practice of issuing 'objectives' instead of 'orders', letting the local commander adapt to the evolving situation. All this was possible due to the highly-developed general staff, with its practice of giving officers both staff and line experience. cf. Mellenthin, Panzer Battles.

At the divisional level, we see Rommel's (7. Pz??) method of coordinating artillery support: he drew lines along his intended line of advance, & numbered them. All he had to do was call in "9" or "10", or "11", depending on how the day went.

I don't know whether the Allies also had this, but the German concept of the "Schwerpunkt", the critical point where force & energies should be applied, allowed them to tip the balance despite having smaller forces or weaker arms. A PZ II or T-38 can't stand up to a Char-B, but they can clear an infantry position blocking a road just fine. Same for a Stuka.

Additionally, alacrity and the taking of calculated risks were encouraged throughout.

In contrast, the French and British tank theory conceived of armored units as infantry support. Their armored 'kampfgruppe' for the Arras counter-attack was a one-off and only assembled arduously. Air support went from ineffectual (British) to non-existent (French). Indeed, the French Air Force pretty much sat on the ground picking their noses.

I think the grossest Allied failing, one which plagued the Western Allies throughout the war, was their inability to think from the enemy's viewpoint. Had the Germans fought like the French & British, they would have lost in 1940. But the French & British never even tried to imagine possible German strategies. Perhaps because Poland was so weak, the clear signs of the new German strategy & tactics were missed. But they were evident, especially in Blaskowitz' sweep.

PM me if you want to discuss further without boring everyone else.
That would be good thanks. And thanks for the input here. I will finish my readings over the next couple of days and PM.

The traditional view is that the Germans over balanced themselves by inventing armoured divisions arganised into corps, added mech infantry and topped it off with airborne tactical artillery. A change in kind, not degree from the 1918 Army. This nightmare was designed to effect deep penetration with the flanks held by trad infantry, leading older style armies to instantly collapse.

The counterview is that the German Army was far more traditional and the corps and army commanders were pretty much old school. Poland happened because an over extended and under mobilised army was squished by a succession of lower order Schlieffen style envelopments with horse drawn artillery being king. France happened because of low morale in the French army, poor allied deployments, Hitlers innovative one two approach and out-of-control Divisional commanders, operating in a constrained AO, who did the right thing at the right time. To the initial horror of their commanders.

So tactically, “yes” there was new blood. And yes. Operational doctrine was two steps beyond the allies, as you mentioned. But 1940 was fundamentally a confluence of factors where adhoc lower level doctrine dominated at the expense of standard operating procedure. After 1940 the new Panzer bloods had won Hitler over and Russia turned into a series of ineffectual France 1940s.

:think: :think:
Yeah, it was amped-up Kesselschlacht doctrine. And it did work well in the East, but Hitler's atrocious grand strategy swamped it. For it to succeed as immensely as it did in France in '40, though, you need your enemy to play old-style. So again, credit the Germans for being able to think like their opponent.

But I wouldn't dismiss the "ad hoc lower level doctrine", as that was intentionally built into the system.

Also, the whole Maginot Line 'false security complex' is overblown. Fact is, the Maginot Line held. The French never expected it to protect them completely, only to secure the right wing and move the main clash to the Low Countries.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6339
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7167

Post by Really? » Mon Mar 26, 2018 2:15 pm

Have we talked about the Stephon Clark shooting?

Background, in case you hadn't heard.
What happened?
The deadly encounter occurred Sunday behind the home that relatives said Clark shared with his grandparents and siblings. A 911 caller had reported to police that a man had "busted both my truck windows out, and he's in people's backyards right now." The caller said the man was wearing a black hoodie.

The officers arrived in the neighborhood at 9:13 p.m., the department said. About 9:25 p.m., the sheriff's helicopter spotted a man in a backyard and told police that the suspect had picked up a "toolbar" and broken a window to a home. As the man climbed a fence and entered another yard, the pilot directed officers to his location.

Police say Clark scaled a tall fence and peered into a vehicle before running into his backyard, where officers pursued and shot him.

Clark, it turned out, had no weapon, only a cellphone.

Sacramento police have released video footage from the body cameras worn by the two officers who encountered Clark, as well as from the sheriff's helicopter, showing the shooting after a chaotic nighttime pursuit last weekend.

Shaky body cam footage shows officers running up a dark driveway with flashlights. "Hey! Show me your hands! Stop! Stop!" an officer yells. As the officersrun into a backyard, they turn a corner and spot Clark in the glare of their flashlights. The officers take temporary cover behind the corner and then confront the suspect once more. This time, an officer yells at Clark to show his hands, then begins shouting, "Gun, gun, gun!" Gunfire then erupts.

A total of 20 shots were fired.

A department statement said that "prior to the shooting, the involved officers saw the suspect facing them, advance forward with his arms extended, and holding an object in his hands. At the time of the shooting, the officers believed the suspect was pointing a firearm at them."
Videos inside the link:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-m ... story.html

Here's how The Root describes the encounter:
Clark was never running from the police. He was already running through backyards and hopping fences in his neighborhood headed to his home. The police were not chasing him.

Even as the helicopter guides the two police officers to his location, he is still at his own home, standing on the side of it, and has no way of knowing the police are after him.

When the police begin rushing toward him, he moves.
https://www.theroot.com/why-he-should-h ... 1824007544

I suppose it was just total coincidence that he was hopping fences to get through back yards while the police were tracking someone destroying property in the neighborhood.

Edited video that seems pretty fair:



Another edited video:



dogen
.
.
Posts: 2579
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7169

Post by dogen » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:00 pm

Today, myself and the family visited the National Civil Rights Museum, in Memphis TN. The museum is in the Lorraine Motel, where MLK was shot. Having not grown up in the USA, I was ignorant of many of the details of the civil rights period. The museum filled in these gaps admirably -- so much so, to my embarrassment, that I was brought to tears 2/3 of the way through, and had to leave. :oops:

What a wonderful little museum, testifying to such an ugly phase of US history. I recommend it highly if you're passing through Memphis.

Stankeye
.
.
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:35 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7170

Post by Stankeye » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:21 pm

Brive1987 wrote:
Stankeye wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:02 am
I keep hearing that “assault rifle” is a made up meaningless word.

I haven’t googled it, but doesn’t that class include shorter barreled weapons, often lighter and with folding stocks, that can fire full or semi auto using full caliber ammunition contained in higher that prev. capacity magazines?

Like the German watsit from the last year of the war. Or even the M1. I thought the line was that the traditional long rifle was never used at its optimum extended effective range. Conscripts couldn’t hit anything too far away. Contacts occurred sub 50 metres as a rule. The 9mm MP40s and Russian Tommy Gun didn’t have even this medium range and didn’t have stopping power.

Ergo “assault rifles” like the AK and M16 while the British remained more old school with the semi auto, 20 round magazine, SLR.
Hopefully someone answered or you googled it, but Assault gun is the meaningless word. AR is as you have described with the addition of select fire, full auto. Since our (USA) semi-auto AR's don't have select fire they are technically not AR's so they came up with the "Assault Gun" ban, which banned various features. Anyways it's one of those silly talking points that comes up when they discuss AR's as the gun enthusiast will declare that it is not an AR since i does not have select fire, and assault guns is a made up word for scary black semi-auto rifle. Don't go down the gun control rabbit hole!
The counter argument is that:

AR15s especially ...

+ can be easily concealed due to their compact assault rifle construct
+ are designed to empty their magazines faster than hunting rifles due to an intentionally light trigger pull
+ have had this feature intentionally leveraged via provision of high capacity magazines
+ are designed to be visually attractive to emotionally challenged individuals. The Rambo effect.
+ are consequently fetishised with mods and bump stocks that indicate an unhealthy affectation
+ are not best of breed for either tradional single shot hunting or classic marksmanship due to shorter barrels and lighter ammo

If my son came home with an AR15 I would be asking questions.

I would argue that removing full auto no more diminishes an assault rifle than a woman is less ladylike for not being able to have children.

ButI could be wrong.
A counter argument?

I don't believe I made an argument.
I keep hearing that “assault rifle” is a made up meaningless word.
I just explained what I believe what an AR is and what I usually hear being the made up word of Assault Gun. The issue arises because assault rifles (full auto) are already pretty heavily regulated in the US, hence when they wanted to go after "Military" semi-autos the came up with Assault gun.
but doesn’t that class include shorter barreled weapons, often lighter and with folding stocks, that can fire full or semi auto using full caliber ammunition contained in higher that prev. capacity magazines?
Assault rifles are typically mid range caliber, between pistol and rifle. The rest is just window dressing. Barrel length can vary, weight can vary, stock type can vary, and magazine size can vary.

The rest of your points

+ can be easily concealed due to their compact assault rifle construct - Not traditionally but you could get the size down to sub-machingun size.
+ are designed to empty their magazines faster than hunting rifles due to an intentionally light trigger pull - All weapons can have their triggers lightened or increased.
+ have had this feature intentionally leveraged via provision of high capacity magazines - Yes?
+ are designed to be visually attractive to emotionally challenged individuals. The Rambo effect. - Originally, maybe, for consumers now Yes.
+ are consequently fetishised with mods and bump stocks that indicate an unhealthy affectation - Militarily the mods serve a purpose, aftermarket I would say yes. Just like cars though.
+ are not best of breed for either tradional single shot hunting or classic marksmanship due to shorter barrels and lighter ammo - Yes and no. Depends on the game .223 is fine for lots of hunting and the ranges are good.


The usual argument....
https://bradtaylorbooks.com/wp-content/ ... .54-PM.png

Maybe I'm not understanding what argument you want to make and me to counter. Let me know.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7171

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:32 pm

Brive1987 wrote:
Stankeye wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:02 am
I keep hearing that “assault rifle” is a made up meaningless word.

I haven’t googled it, but doesn’t that class include shorter barreled weapons, often lighter and with folding stocks, that can fire full or semi auto using full caliber ammunition contained in higher that prev. capacity magazines?

Like the German watsit from the last year of the war. Or even the M1. I thought the line was that the traditional long rifle was never used at its optimum extended effective range. Conscripts couldn’t hit anything too far away. Contacts occurred sub 50 metres as a rule. The 9mm MP40s and Russian Tommy Gun didn’t have even this medium range and didn’t have stopping power.

Ergo “assault rifles” like the AK and M16 while the British remained more old school with the semi auto, 20 round magazine, SLR.
Hopefully someone answered or you googled it, but Assault gun is the meaningless word. AR is as you have described with the addition of select fire, full auto. Since our (USA) semi-auto AR's don't have select fire they are technically not AR's so they came up with the "Assault Gun" ban, which banned various features. Anyways it's one of those silly talking points that comes up when they discuss AR's as the gun enthusiast will declare that it is not an AR since i does not have select fire, and assault guns is a made up word for scary black semi-auto rifle. Don't go down the gun control rabbit hole!
The counter argument is that:

AR15s especially ...

+ can be easily concealed due to their compact assault rifle construct
+ are designed to empty their magazines faster than hunting rifles due to an intentionally light trigger pull
+ have had this feature intentionally leveraged via provision of high capacity magazines
+ are designed to be visually attractive to emotionally challenged individuals. The Rambo effect.
+ are consequently fetishised with mods and bump stocks that indicate an unhealthy affectation
+ are not best of breed for either tradional single shot hunting or classic marksmanship due to shorter barrels and lighter ammo

If my son came home with an AR15 I would be asking questions.

I would argue that removing full auto no more diminishes an assault rifle than a woman is less ladylike for not being able to have children.

ButI could be wrong.
You are not wrong. I own assault rifles (properly called carbines) and hunting rifles. The distinctions you made above are good. I do support more stringent restrictions on the ownership of certain weapons. I say this as a gun owner, concealed carry guy and former firearms safety instuctor. Not all gun owners are in lockstep with the NRA. No reason to sell an AR 15 to a person that can't legally get a beer. Especially as they go so well together...(joke)

The real question is whether banning them would do much good. There are millions out there already, and they are relatively easy to manufacture. Gun violence, despite the headlines, is going down in the USA, even as gun ownership rises.
DZJwHDhVMAAxWho.jpeg
(50.42 KiB) Downloaded 170 times
A curious state of affairs.

dogen
.
.
Posts: 2579
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7172

Post by dogen » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:37 pm

Brive1987 wrote: I need to write a paper on “to what extent was doctrine responsible for the German victory in France in 1940”

I will need to determine exactly at what point this victory occurred, define “doctrine”, address the question of whether there was a formal “blizkreig” protocol, determine whether the strategic Ardennes thrust was more important than the how, evaluate Divisional leadership as a factor and offset against Allied failures in doctrine (such as the failure to concentrate superiority assets) as well as failure in Allied leadership and morale.

Should be pretty easy. :lol:

I put the influence of formal German doctrine at 46%.
Make sure that at least 99% of the blame falls on the French leadership and rank-and-file. Having read "Dunkirk", I feel confident that's where it all belongs.

Mr. X, Indeed
.
.
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7173

Post by Mr. X, Indeed » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:38 pm

dogen wrote: Today, myself and the family visited the National Civil Rights Museum, in Memphis TN. The museum is in the Lorraine Motel, where MLK was shot. Having not grown up in the USA, I was ignorant of many of the details of the civil rights period. The museum filled in these gaps admirably -- so much so, to my embarrassment, that I was brought to tears 2/3 of the way through, and had to leave. :oops:

What a wonderful little museum, testifying to such an ugly phase of US history. I recommend it highly if you're passing through Memphis.
Check out the Stax Museum while you're there.

http://staxmuseum.com/

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7174

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:47 pm

Wasn't the weapon Anders Brevik used a "Ranch Gun," the Ruger Mini 14? Which was designed as a military weapon before being remarketed as a ranch rifle? Just because they weren't caught up in the last assault weapon ban doesn't mean that assault weapons can't be defined. It just means they slipped in the last ban. Furthermore, I think it is incredibly unhelpful to try this tack in the gun debate, as it is making it more likely that all semi-automatic rifles will face scrutiny. To the lay person, this nit-picking makes them more likely to oppose all gun ownership.

Guest_d2e60302

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7175

Post by Guest_d2e60302 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:50 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:32 pm
The real question is whether banning them would do much good. There are millions out there already, and they are relatively easy to manufacture. Gun violence, despite the headlines, is going down in the USA, even as gun ownership rises.

A curious state of affairs.
If there are millions out there, why not ban manufacturing and sales of new ones?

My understanding is they are not good for hunting (ammo too small). And I'm not convinced people need them home for home defense. A shotgun and a 45 or 9mm would seem to be better for most self defense uses.

I concede that they are useful against militaries and could help defend against various tyrannies in the US. Still, at this point in time, if there are millions out there, then I don't see a ban on their manufacture or sales of new being a huge hit against our ability to defend ourselves from the feds.

I'd also allow the feds and states to have buy back programs.

Hey is it legal to make guns that are "low observable" to metal detectors? Do they still make plastic glocks? I'd be okay with doing whatever to encourage manufacturers to make guns highly visible to metal detectors and x-ray machines. I don't see how that hurts self-defense, and I don't think it hurts the armed revolution against the dictator very much. But it seems to make it safer to fly and even go to school given some proposals for metal detectors.

Do people need more than say 3 ARs for personal use (two for dual wielding, one for back up?)

It's all about to be rendered moot anyway, within 10 years the new hotness will be semi-autonomous personal HK drones.

dogen
.
.
Posts: 2579
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7176

Post by dogen » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:52 pm

Mr. X, Indeed wrote:
dogen wrote: Today, myself and the family visited the National Civil Rights Museum, in Memphis TN. The museum is in the Lorraine Motel, where MLK was shot. Having not grown up in the USA, I was ignorant of many of the details of the civil rights period. The museum filled in these gaps admirably -- so much so, to my embarrassment, that I was brought to tears 2/3 of the way through, and had to leave. :oops:

What a wonderful little museum, testifying to such an ugly phase of US history. I recommend it highly if you're passing through Memphis.
Check out the Stax Museum while you're there.

http://staxmuseum.com/
Thanks for the rec; but alas, we're only here for the afternoon and nite. Tomorrow, we hit the road for Jackson and then New Orleans (we'll be at the latter for 3 days). Any Pit recs for those?

Barbie's Boyfriend
.
.
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:29 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7177

Post by Barbie's Boyfriend » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:53 pm

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:33 am
Brive1987 wrote:

If Matt was in France in 1940, the French would have surrendered TWICE !!

Guest_d2e60302

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7178

Post by Guest_d2e60302 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:58 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:47 pm
Wasn't the weapon Anders Brevik used a "Ranch Gun," the Ruger Mini 14? Which was designed as a military weapon before being remarketed as a ranch rifle? Just because they weren't caught up in the last assault weapon ban doesn't mean that assault weapons can't be defined. It just means they slipped in the last ban. Furthermore, I think it is incredibly unhelpful to try this tack in the gun debate, as it is making it more likely that all semi-automatic rifles will face scrutiny. To the lay person, this nit-picking makes them more likely to oppose all gun ownership.
Exactly. I'm very sympathetic to 2A defenders, but there are so many just absolutely terrible arguments flying around that now I'm much more like fuck, the only reasonable response to your nonsensical argument is to donate $1,000 to gun control campaigns and send you a receipt as a fuck you.

There are respected libertarians writing for libertarian magazines insisting that kids should be told their fear of mass killings are unreasonable and they should not fear going to school, and they should just stfu and go and then sending memes around mocking kids. Well, if it's all about which fears are reasonable, then the public will certainly taking away your assault rifle because the public believes your fear of the US takeover by a dictator is unreasonable and you should just stfu.

Then there are the bumpstock weenies insisting that bumpstocks should remain legal because it's still just one trigger per round shot and hence not actually an automatic. This is actually an argument I am sympathetic to, because the regulators shouldn't twist the law, Congress should change the law. But they aren't defending rule of law and asking Congress to change the law so much as they are defending bumpstocks because bumpstocks.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7179

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm

Guest_d2e60302 wrote:
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 3:32 pm
The real question is whether banning them would do much good. There are millions out there already, and they are relatively easy to manufacture. Gun violence, despite the headlines, is going down in the USA, even as gun ownership rises.

A curious state of affairs.
If there are millions out there, why not ban manufacturing and sales of new ones?

My understanding is they are not good for hunting (ammo too small). And I'm not convinced people need them home for home defense. A shotgun and a 45 or 9mm would seem to be better for most self defense uses.

I concede that they are useful against militaries and could help defend against various tyrannies in the US. Still, at this point in time, if there are millions out there, then I don't see a ban on their manufacture or sales of new being a huge hit against our ability to defend ourselves from the feds.

I'd also allow the feds and states to have buy back programs.

Hey is it legal to make guns that are "low observable" to metal detectors? Do they still make plastic glocks? I'd be okay with doing whatever to encourage manufacturers to make guns highly visible to metal detectors and x-ray machines. I don't see how that hurts self-defense, and I don't think it hurts the armed revolution against the dictator very much. But it seems to make it safer to fly and even go to school given some proposals for metal detectors.

Do people need more than say 3 ARs for personal use (two for dual wielding, one for back up?)

It's all about to be rendered moot anyway, within 10 years the new hotness will be semi-autonomous personal HK drones.
Because you won't likely stop very much crime while trodding on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It will drive a lot of people insane with paranoia, and remember that gun rights was a strong reason our current oh-so-respectable dear leader got elected. Also, gun violence is on the decline in the USA. If the law had been followed, the last school shooting would not have happened. People dropped the ball.

Glocks are still legal, you can't legally arm drones, etc. What we need to do is release the prohibition on scientific study by the CDC on gun violence, and balance the rights of people under the law with some commonsense safety restrictions.

As to owning multiple weapons, they serve different purposes, they can be a lot of fun, etc. I've loaned most of mine away over the years as I just didn't use them anymore after my injury. But for some people it is a culture, a way of life that is difficult for outsiders to comprehend. As long as they follow the law, they're allowed to have as many as they like.

There are actual cases where guns are used to defend people lawfully and save lives. Again, until we look at this scientifically all we will be doing is raising the resale rates of existing weapons, raising the ire of a very politically active base and not being certain it will do anything but restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.

Mr. X, Indeed
.
.
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7180

Post by Mr. X, Indeed » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:23 pm

dogen wrote:
Mr. X, Indeed wrote:
dogen wrote: Today, myself and the family visited the National Civil Rights Museum, in Memphis TN. The museum is in the Lorraine Motel, where MLK was shot. Having not grown up in the USA, I was ignorant of many of the details of the civil rights period. The museum filled in these gaps admirably -- so much so, to my embarrassment, that I was brought to tears 2/3 of the way through, and had to leave. :oops:

What a wonderful little museum, testifying to such an ugly phase of US history. I recommend it highly if you're passing through Memphis.
Check out the Stax Museum while you're there.

http://staxmuseum.com/
Thanks for the rec; but alas, we're only here for the afternoon and nite. Tomorrow, we hit the road for Jackson and then New Orleans (we'll be at the latter for 3 days). Any Pit recs for those?
Depending on your tastes.

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/

https://louisianastatemuseum.org/

The latter is really several museums.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 4605
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7181

Post by Service Dog » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:26 pm

Tigzy wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:45 am
Is the one in the middle your mate Fang?

Naw, he's a choreographer. Quite a character...


free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10388
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7182

Post by free thoughtpolice » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:32 pm

As for the gun debate goes, I think it is reasonable to regulate clip capacity. 6 or 8 rounds for rifles. Buy back high capacity clips and make them illegal.
In Soviet Canada, it is illegal to make certain modifications to firearms. Bump stocks would be frowned on.

windy
.
.
Posts: 2130
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:41 am
Location: Tom of Finland-land
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7183

Post by windy » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:34 pm

French waiter says firing for rudeness is 'discrimination against my culture'
A French waiter fired for being “aggressive, rude and disrespectful” says his behaviour wasn’t out of line – he’s just French.

Guillaume Rey, who worked at a Vancouver restaurant on Canada’s Pacific coast, filed a complaint with British Columbia’s Human Rights Tribunal against his former employer, claiming “discrimination against my culture”.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7184

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:46 pm

So is the UK government deliberately trying to make things worse or are they just very, very stupid?

Lauren Southern gets lifetime ban from the UK.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/f ... ssion=true

Wasn't there something from Game of Thrones about cutting tongues out of people that might be applicable here?

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 10388
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7185

Post by free thoughtpolice » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:46 pm

windy wrote: French waiter says firing for rudeness is 'discrimination against my culture'
A French waiter fired for being “aggressive, rude and disrespectful” says his behaviour wasn’t out of line – he’s just French.

Guillaume Rey, who worked at a Vancouver restaurant on Canada’s Pacific coast, filed a complaint with British Columbia’s Human Rights Tribunal against his former employer, claiming “discrimination against my culture”.
It is possible I have met this Frnche person. In general quite charming.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7186

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:50 pm

windy wrote: French waiter says firing for rudeness is 'discrimination against my culture'
A French waiter fired for being “aggressive, rude and disrespectful” says his behaviour wasn’t out of line – he’s just French.

Guillaume Rey, who worked at a Vancouver restaurant on Canada’s Pacific coast, filed a complaint with British Columbia’s Human Rights Tribunal against his former employer, claiming “discrimination against my culture”.
Oh, thank you. I had to show my wife twice before she would believe it wasn't from The Onion.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2144
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7187

Post by Old_ones » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:54 pm

Very important post about gun terminology: AR (as in AR-15) does not stand for "Assault Rifle". It stands for "Armalite Rifle" after the company that developed the AR-10, AR-15 and AR-18 platforms. Get it right and stop microaggressing against my gun nut ears, you shitlords.

:snooty:

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7188

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:59 pm

[tweet][/tweet]
I wonder why people aren't taking the social sciences seriously anymore? Or to think they had it in for men? Mysteries...

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7189

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:31 pm

DZO7MM6WkAIMCkz.jpeg
(57.41 KiB) Downloaded 163 times
The far-right has started in on the Nazi thing. The word has lost all meaning, or could be realistically replaced with "poopyhead."

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7190

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:41 pm

Clark's girlfriend, Salena Manni…
http://www.newsweek.com/police-shoot-an ... ing-854910

Clark's fiancee and mother of his two infant sons, Salena Manni…
http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/artic ... rylink=cpy

… the fatal shooting of a young husband and father.
https://heavy.com/news/2018/03/stephon- ... -shooting/

Apparently, he’s gotten engaged and tied the knot since dying in his gramma’s back yard.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1943
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7191

Post by Keating » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:42 pm

See Pinker and his euphemism treadmill. What’s a stronger word than Nazi? Barbarian? Vandals? Steersman?

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6339
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7192

Post by Really? » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:47 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: DZO7MM6WkAIMCkz.jpeg
The far-right has started in on the Nazi thing. The word has lost all meaning, or could be realistically replaced with "poopyhead."
Dumb, but this is the natural conclusion of what the left started. They wanted a culture in which all dissent is equal to genocidal fascism.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7193

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:48 pm

dogen wrote: Thanks for the rec; but alas, we're only here for the afternoon and nite. Tomorrow, we hit the road for Jackson and then New Orleans (we'll be at the latter for 3 days). Any Pit recs for those?
Yeah the Jazz and Mardi Gras museums in the Old Mint on New Orleans are awesome.

Or is the New Mint in Old Orleans, I forget.

Guest_d2e60302

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7194

Post by Guest_d2e60302 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:09 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm

Because you won't likely stop very much crime while trodding on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It will drive a lot of people insane with paranoia, and remember that gun rights was a strong reason our current oh-so-respectable dear leader got elected. Also, gun violence is on the decline in the USA. If the law had been followed, the last school shooting would not have happened. People dropped the ball.

Glocks are still legal, you can't legally arm drones, etc. What we need to do is release the prohibition on scientific study by the CDC on gun violence, and balance the rights of people under the law with some commonsense safety restrictions.
Both paragraphs touch on a confusion I have about a decision long ago made by courts and gun owners, there are already things we can't own or do even with the 2A. No cannons, no F-16s (and there are thousands that could be for sale in the Arizona desert), no armed drones (sez who? and what court decided that?) Everyone seems to agree the 2A is not a blank check, and so what's going on is a discussion of what's included and what's not.

So banning manufacture of new ARs and sales of new ARs would seem to trod on zero rights of anyone, except perhaps the free speech rights of the manufacturers (but Wickard v. Filburn probably closed that loophole) People could still buy and use their ARs, they just wouldn't be able to get one with the new gun smell.

PLUS, they've already been banned once, so it shows that if they can be banned they can be unbanned as well.
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm
As to owning multiple weapons, they serve different purposes, they can be a lot of fun, etc. I've loaned most of mine away over the years as I just didn't use them anymore after my injury. But for some people it is a culture, a way of life that is difficult for outsiders to comprehend. As long as they follow the law, they're allowed to have as many as they like.

There are actual cases where guns are used to defend people lawfully and save lives. Again, until we look at this scientifically all we will be doing is raising the resale rates of existing weapons, raising the ire of a very politically active base and not being certain it will do anything but restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.
I'm not against owning multiple weapons, and I certainly understand how all this stuff is as fun as can be.

I was only remarking about limiting ARs if you don't have some sort of licenese, because they don't seem to be hunting weapons, and if someone wants them for personal defense, they should be able to show why more than 3 ARs is required and not just an unlimited number of shotguns, rifles, and handguns.

Do read this guy:

Pitch:
Proposal: https://thepathforwardonguns.com/

People on twitter seemed to think he has some good ideas.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 10660
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7195

Post by Lsuoma » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:17 pm

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: So is the UK government deliberately trying to make things worse or are they just very, very stupid?

Lauren Southern gets lifetime ban from the UK.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/f ... ssion=true

Wasn't there something from Game of Thrones about cutting tongues out of people that might be applicable here?
Very, very stupid.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6339
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7196

Post by Really? » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:22 pm

Guest_d2e60302 wrote:
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm

Because you won't likely stop very much crime while trodding on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It will drive a lot of people insane with paranoia, and remember that gun rights was a strong reason our current oh-so-respectable dear leader got elected. Also, gun violence is on the decline in the USA. If the law had been followed, the last school shooting would not have happened. People dropped the ball.

Glocks are still legal, you can't legally arm drones, etc. What we need to do is release the prohibition on scientific study by the CDC on gun violence, and balance the rights of people under the law with some commonsense safety restrictions.
Both paragraphs touch on a confusion I have about a decision long ago made by courts and gun owners, there are already things we can't own or do even with the 2A. No cannons, no F-16s (and there are thousands that could be for sale in the Arizona desert), no armed drones (sez who? and what court decided that?) Everyone seems to agree the 2A is not a blank check, and so what's going on is a discussion of what's included and what's not.

So banning manufacture of new ARs and sales of new ARs would seem to trod on zero rights of anyone, except perhaps the free speech rights of the manufacturers (but Wickard v. Filburn probably closed that loophole) People could still buy and use their ARs, they just wouldn't be able to get one with the new gun smell.

PLUS, they've already been banned once, so it shows that if they can be banned they can be unbanned as well.
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm
As to owning multiple weapons, they serve different purposes, they can be a lot of fun, etc. I've loaned most of mine away over the years as I just didn't use them anymore after my injury. But for some people it is a culture, a way of life that is difficult for outsiders to comprehend. As long as they follow the law, they're allowed to have as many as they like.

There are actual cases where guns are used to defend people lawfully and save lives. Again, until we look at this scientifically all we will be doing is raising the resale rates of existing weapons, raising the ire of a very politically active base and not being certain it will do anything but restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.
I'm not against owning multiple weapons, and I certainly understand how all this stuff is as fun as can be.

I was only remarking about limiting ARs if you don't have some sort of licenese, because they don't seem to be hunting weapons, and if someone wants them for personal defense, they should be able to show why more than 3 ARs is required and not just an unlimited number of shotguns, rifles, and handguns.

Do read this guy:

Pitch:
Proposal: https://thepathforwardonguns.com/

People on twitter seemed to think he has some good ideas.
What do we do about sales of the rifles that are functionally the same as an AR-15, but have a different name? Do we ban all semi automatics?

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7197

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:42 pm

Clark mostly worked from home selling things online and winning money through video games
http://www.newsweek.com/police-shoot-an ... ing-854910

What kind of things?

During a neighborhood canvass, investigators identified at least three vehicles with damage that is  believed to have been caused by the suspect.  In addition, an adjacent and occupied residence had a sliding glass door shattered.  Orbiting deputies of the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department’s law enforcement helicopter had witnessed the suspect shatter the door before engaging the SPD officers. 
https://www.sacpd.org/newsroom/releases ... 180319-027

In that 911 call, the male caller reported a man wearing a black hooded sweatshirt and pants with “white stripes or white dots” had broken the windows of his truck and a window of another car. "I heard the noise and came outside and he was standing right alongside my truck."

Police officer body camera footage released by the department showed Clark was wearing a black hooded sweatshirt and dark sweatpants with white stripes.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy

The resident at that house, Bill Wong, 88, Tuesday told The Bee that he was unaware of events as they unfolded Sunday night. He didn't hear or see how the window was broken or hear any gunshots, he said. The sliding door had been patched up by Tuesday morning.
"I came out, the police is here already," he said of the night. "They don't tell me (anything)."
Police said that after seeing Clark break Wong's window, the helicopter deputies observed him running south, where he jumped a fence into his grandparents' yard adjacent to Wong's house. He headed toward the front of the property, along the way looking into another car, police said.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy
Clark had been staying with his grandparents in that home on and off for more than a month,
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy

Family said the front doorbell didn’t work, so guests would knock on the back door and they’d open the garage door with the remote. Did he get lost, knock on the wrong window, breaking it in the process, then jump the fence?

Still is likely he had been out breaking into cars, and was scrambling to get back home after being spotted.
Clark had a juvenile court record dating back to 2012, with offenses that include grand theft, robbery and receiving stolen property.

As an adult, he had been charged in four criminal cases since 2014. In 2014, records show, Clark was arrested and charged with felony armed robbery and assault and endangering the life of a child. Details of that case were unavailable Thursday, but court documents indicate that Clark pleaded no contest and spent a year on a sheriff’s department work project to satisfy his jail term.

In late 2015, Clark was charged with “pimping” after sheriff’s deputies stopped him and a woman while they were driving in a “high prostitution and crime area” in North Highlands. At the time, both Clark and the woman were on probation, records indicate. Clark pleaded no contest to the charge.

In 2016, Clark was charged with domestic violence “resulting in a traumatic condition” to the victim. The incident happened at a residence in Elk Grove. When police arrived, they found the woman “holding a bag of ice to her face,” according to a narrative by Elk Grove police. She had suffered “bruising and swelling to her right eye,” it says, and complained of pain in her right elbow. The woman said Clark had punched her.

Clark’s most recent brush with the law occurred earlier this year, when he again was charged with domestic violence.
http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/artic ... rylink=cpy

He'd been released from jail just a few weeks earlier. He was 22.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 12480
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7198

Post by Matt Cavanaugh » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:42 pm

Clark mostly worked from home selling things online and winning money through video games
http://www.newsweek.com/police-shoot-an ... ing-854910

What kind of things?

During a neighborhood canvass, investigators identified at least three vehicles with damage that is  believed to have been caused by the suspect.  In addition, an adjacent and occupied residence had a sliding glass door shattered.  Orbiting deputies of the Sacramento Sheriff’s Department’s law enforcement helicopter had witnessed the suspect shatter the door before engaging the SPD officers. 
https://www.sacpd.org/newsroom/releases ... 180319-027

In that 911 call, the male caller reported a man wearing a black hooded sweatshirt and pants with “white stripes or white dots” had broken the windows of his truck and a window of another car. "I heard the noise and came outside and he was standing right alongside my truck."

Police officer body camera footage released by the department showed Clark was wearing a black hooded sweatshirt and dark sweatpants with white stripes.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy

The resident at that house, Bill Wong, 88, Tuesday told The Bee that he was unaware of events as they unfolded Sunday night. He didn't hear or see how the window was broken or hear any gunshots, he said. The sliding door had been patched up by Tuesday morning.
"I came out, the police is here already," he said of the night. "They don't tell me (anything)."
Police said that after seeing Clark break Wong's window, the helicopter deputies observed him running south, where he jumped a fence into his grandparents' yard adjacent to Wong's house. He headed toward the front of the property, along the way looking into another car, police said.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy
Clark had been staying with his grandparents in that home on and off for more than a month,
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/crime/ ... rylink=cpy

Family said the front doorbell didn’t work, so guests would knock on the back door and they’d open the garage door with the remote. Did he get lost, knock on the wrong window, breaking it in the process, then jump the fence?

Still is likely he had been out breaking into cars, and was scrambling to get back home after being spotted.
Clark had a juvenile court record dating back to 2012, with offenses that include grand theft, robbery and receiving stolen property.

As an adult, he had been charged in four criminal cases since 2014. In 2014, records show, Clark was arrested and charged with felony armed robbery and assault and endangering the life of a child. Details of that case were unavailable Thursday, but court documents indicate that Clark pleaded no contest and spent a year on a sheriff’s department work project to satisfy his jail term.

In late 2015, Clark was charged with “pimping” after sheriff’s deputies stopped him and a woman while they were driving in a “high prostitution and crime area” in North Highlands. At the time, both Clark and the woman were on probation, records indicate. Clark pleaded no contest to the charge.

In 2016, Clark was charged with domestic violence “resulting in a traumatic condition” to the victim. The incident happened at a residence in Elk Grove. When police arrived, they found the woman “holding a bag of ice to her face,” according to a narrative by Elk Grove police. She had suffered “bruising and swelling to her right eye,” it says, and complained of pain in her right elbow. The woman said Clark had punched her.

Clark’s most recent brush with the law occurred earlier this year, when he again was charged with domestic violence.
http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/artic ... rylink=cpy

He'd been released from jail just a few weeks earlier. He was 22.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7199

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:04 pm

Really? wrote:
Guest_d2e60302 wrote:
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm

Because you won't likely stop very much crime while trodding on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. It will drive a lot of people insane with paranoia, and remember that gun rights was a strong reason our current oh-so-respectable dear leader got elected. Also, gun violence is on the decline in the USA. If the law had been followed, the last school shooting would not have happened. People dropped the ball.

Glocks are still legal, you can't legally arm drones, etc. What we need to do is release the prohibition on scientific study by the CDC on gun violence, and balance the rights of people under the law with some commonsense safety restrictions.
Both paragraphs touch on a confusion I have about a decision long ago made by courts and gun owners, there are already things we can't own or do even with the 2A. No cannons, no F-16s (and there are thousands that could be for sale in the Arizona desert), no armed drones (sez who? and what court decided that?) Everyone seems to agree the 2A is not a blank check, and so what's going on is a discussion of what's included and what's not.

So banning manufacture of new ARs and sales of new ARs would seem to trod on zero rights of anyone, except perhaps the free speech rights of the manufacturers (but Wickard v. Filburn probably closed that loophole) People could still buy and use their ARs, they just wouldn't be able to get one with the new gun smell.

PLUS, they've already been banned once, so it shows that if they can be banned they can be unbanned as well.
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 4:07 pm
As to owning multiple weapons, they serve different purposes, they can be a lot of fun, etc. I've loaned most of mine away over the years as I just didn't use them anymore after my injury. But for some people it is a culture, a way of life that is difficult for outsiders to comprehend. As long as they follow the law, they're allowed to have as many as they like.

There are actual cases where guns are used to defend people lawfully and save lives. Again, until we look at this scientifically all we will be doing is raising the resale rates of existing weapons, raising the ire of a very politically active base and not being certain it will do anything but restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.
I'm not against owning multiple weapons, and I certainly understand how all this stuff is as fun as can be.

I was only remarking about limiting ARs if you don't have some sort of licenese, because they don't seem to be hunting weapons, and if someone wants them for personal defense, they should be able to show why more than 3 ARs is required and not just an unlimited number of shotguns, rifles, and handguns.

Do read this guy:

Pitch:
Proposal: https://thepathforwardonguns.com/

People on twitter seemed to think he has some good ideas.
What do we do about sales of the rifles that are functionally the same as an AR-15, but have a different name? Do we ban all semi automatics?
This, this is why I think the "assault rifles are a meaningless term" will backfire. You will end up having all semi-automatic banned. Don't call attention to it.

Apologies for not sniping.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 16693
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: There are 2018 genders... and a bitch ain't one

#7200

Post by Brive1987 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:04 pm

Damn. Straight down from the Oscarberg





I saw a “how to” on this once.


Locked