The Truth about Republicans, Democrats, and 2A...?

Post Reply New Topic

No it isn't. You are much more likely to be murdered in the US than in the UK or Australia, or indeed France.

Generally a solid route is to start with Wikipedia and see what sources they cite.

Here is the UN's global study on homicide: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and ... icide.html


You already live in a society where the government has a monopoly on violence. You live in a society where all the police carry guns, and where you can be arrested for crossing the road in the wrong place. You have a society without a truly independent judiciary - judges are often elected, or appointed on a partisan basis, which means your justice system is a tool of politicians. And you have very little control over your politicians because you have a voting system which seeks to make votes matter as little as possible, a political system that is utterly dependent upon rich people to fund election campaigns, and widespread disenfranchisement. Finally, a large part of your population is extremely superstitious and seek to impose their superstitions upon others; your crappy political system even grants these people disproportionate political power. You only have one serious political party, and even that is increasingly infiltrated by communists.

You have very strange ideas about life in Europe.

The US has some advantages, such as the most liberal abortion laws in the world and some of the most liberal gun laws too. But it's generally a much more repressed place than somewhere like the Netherlands or Sweden or even the UK. You don't enjoy the same quality of life as people in the free world. People in this country don't need to worry that they're going to be shot to death because a policeman doesn't like the look of them, or that they're going to have their rights taken away by some religious nut who wants to ban abortion.

It just says the Americas. I am having difficulty navigating that website, can you bring me the link where it says USA America and not the Americas?


Nobody ever gets arrested for jaywalking except maybe in California where they have draconian cops.


They also have juries of 12 peers. Although yes you are correct the justice system is too biased.


This is true, but how are European politicians better?


The constitution says separation of church and state. The modern right are not real americans. The real original americans believed in pot and various other freedoms. They were usurped by early 1900s puritans, feminists, and capitalists to create the Prohibition movement and other movements. Now america is ran by corporations and traitors.


The left are not real communists, Marx believed in gun ownership. "Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary." Marx said that.






Liberal abortion laws are barbaric. The only legal abortion should be before CNS development, otherwise there would have to be some kind of extenuating legal circumstance such as she got kidnapped or something and was unable to obtain an early abortion.


Abortion is murder, has nothing to do with religion. The bible says nothing whatsoever about abortion. The reason religious people are anti-abortion is because murder is against their religion.


Also, gun control is just a psyop pushed by Big Tech. For instance I was searching for something that litterally had nothing to do with guns whatsoever, none of the keywords were about guns or violence whatsoever, on a supposedly private search engine. And while Im scrolling the search results it gives me a bunch of URLs about mass shootings. It feels like some Clockwork Orange psyop to get people to banguns so Big Tech can enslave everyone with microchips.

https://dataunodc.un.org/dp-intentional ... de-victims

2019 (pre-pandemic)
United States of America: 5.07 murders per 100,000
France: 1.32 murders per 100,000
Austraia: 0.89 murders per 100,000

2020 (pandemic)
United States of America: 6.52 murders per 100,000
France: 1.35 murders per 100,000
Australia: 0.87 murders per 100,000

No data from the UK for those years, but you can compare 2018 or earlier to the US and see a similar gap there.

The only "European" country with a murder rate higher than the US is Russia.


Well that's OK, if you only get a ticket then that's fine.

Crossing the road, driving while black, drinking aged 20, all things you're not allowed to do in the US.

Juries are mostly only in criminal law (and some very select civil law cases), and then only when guilt is contested.

We have rigorous political spending controls, we (mostly) have better electoral systems that force politicians to represent the people, and in general we have lower levels of corruption.


Erm, be that as it may (the famous alliance of puritans, feminists, and capitalists!), that's not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Land of the Free.

Weirdly it seems you have a worse image of Europe but also a worse image of the US.

Marx supporting gun ownership doesn't mean that all communists have to support gun ownership, although many do!


Given your stated opposition to fishing, this is the first time I've seen a genuine and consistent opposition to abortion.

That being said, it seems strange to talk up the US as this land of freedom while also criticising the freedom it is most famous for.


You think British people have no rights? We have loads, thanks to laws ranging from the Magna Carta to the Human Rights Act 1998.


Erm... forgive me if I find this rather difficult to believe, lol.

I suspect there's a confusion here over the meaning of the word "corporation." This word usually means "officially recognized business entity," but also has a more general meaning, to refer to any officially recognized organization of any kind, including governments. For example, a municipal corporation, according to dictionary.com, is "a city, town, village, etc., that operates under a corporate charter granted by the state." (The word "incorporated" is derived from Latin and literally means "embodied.")

So it wouldn't be surprising if there are some official documents, somewhere, that refer to the U.S. government as a "corporation." The "sovereign citizen" crowd makes a big deal about this word (e.g. saying that the U.S.A. "is not a country, it's a corporation!"). But all it means is that the U.S. government is an officially recognized organized body of people, which obviously it is.

As for the claim that we are living under martial law: That's obviously not true at the present time, although there are times in our history when it was true in at least some parts of the country, such as during the Civil War.

Debunking the "Sovereign Citizen" Movement

 Link to PDF Document 

All these filings accomplish is to waste taxpayers' money, and the time and effort of the clerks involved in the filings.  The "Sovereign Citizen" movement promotes harassment of government officials (in this case, government clerks), and nothing more.

I do not strongly support the sovereign citizen movement. There are still laws people have to obey under a republic, even if they are original members of the Republic instead of the Corporation, it would not be a total anarchy like sovereign citizens imply. My original post was trying to imply that the Democrat vs Republican feud was part of the feud between the New Corporation and Original Republic, not that there is a strong legal basis to all of the sovereign citizen claims.



Gun control does not have strong empirical evidence in its favor:


Paul Harrel's take on the cause of mass shootings:


I do not have a political agenda other than being pro-gun and pro-constitution. That is, I hold in contempt both the Republican and Democrat parties and do not have true allegiance to either, so in that sense I do not have a "conventional" political agenda. As shown in the video both left and right are all anti-constitution, anti-gun traitors that do not deserve my vote. My vote has usually been for that of the lesser evil, not out of a sense of genuine comradery towards my compatriots.

To understand mass shootings one must look at the unified Ted Kaczynski mentality that they all share.

Though not all shooters are the same, they all start with the Ted mentality and then deviate from there. That is, my opinion is that mass shootings are primarily caused from a feeling of being cornered, and not from guns themselves.
As shown in the video, it is a fact that guns are harder to purchase than ever before, and less easily available than ever before, with more gun control than ever before, and yet there are more mass shootings than ever before.

Fact: It is harder to legally obtain guns in the 2000s than the 70s and 60s.
There are more mass shootings in the 2000s than 70s and 60s.

Conclusion: Mass shootings are primarily caused by cultural and psychological attitudes.

In a dystopian culture people develop bad psychological attitudes. There is no one singular cause of mass shootings and every shooter has a different psychology. Earlier I said they have the same Ted mentality but that is all, each shooter is unique other than having the same underlaying Ted mentality.

The type of culture is dystopian and leads to shootings. For instance, kids are raised on Iphones and exposed to degeneracy instead of having wholesome upbringings. Even if Iphones were forced to only have Y7 type content, the actual act of using the Iphone itself instead of having a real childhood is a problem. There is also a lack of familial cohesion, there are divorces, single parenthood, arguing parents, or growing up in poverty. Then there are schools, schools are tool of oppression, for example Native Americans were forced to go to white schools. Schools also oppress whites, by feeding them junk food at the cafeteria and also giving them junk education. Schools are anti-human and oppressive. And the overall culture is low quality, its a low quality of life dystopia that leads to mass shootings. So the main cause of mass shootings is that there is a low quality of life.

One thing many or most of these shootings have in common is they target liberal areas where victims cannot defend themselves, for example large areas where guns are not allowed.

Other than that they are different. Here are some differences between mass shooters and their motivations:

Grade school shooters: If adult: They are worthless subhumans and I don't know what their problem is. If child: Probably from a broken home.

High school shooters: They could be a victim of bullies or a bully themselves. Also, psychiatric drugs often increase the chance of shootings, for instance in the Columbine they on purpose took psychiatric drugs because the drug had a psychological side effect of increasingly their ability to do a mass shooting. Another overlooked thing is the toxic high school atmosphere itself, there is a degenerate, uncomfortable and clique atmosphere that could result in angst and mass shootings.

Church shooters: They could be an atheist that views religion as oppressive, or they could be Muslims that hate Trump.

Incel shooters: They might view society as a draconian dystopia where they will be forever alone, and because prostitution is illegal they have too much angsty sexual hormones. So they go on a shooting to make others suffer.

Trans shooters: Denied hormones and feels society is Ben Shapiros and terfs out to keep them down.

Body count shooters: They may feel they are in a dystopia where they don't have a voice, so they try to get a body count to become famous. Or they view all humans as bad because of global warming, so they want to reduce overpopulation. Could also be Disney movies that sometimes portray humans as evil beings and human social behavoirs that the world would be better off without.

One thing the shootings seem to have in common though is they often occur at places of oppression. For instance schools, religious areas, theaters that show R rated movies, or large shopping areas owned by greedy capitalists. There could be a feeling of revenge and wanting to dismantle what they view as buildings of systemic oppression.

I think traffic jams are also a factor, pollution also. Toxic work and school atmosphere also. Another reason could be people couped up in a city, all domesticated, they didn't get to hunt deer enough so they hunt humans instead. Not all shooters are the same, maybe some mass shooters hunted deer while others did not.

How to stop mass shootings? You could have a draconian robot police force that is sent as security guards to liberal areas. For instance if someone buys a bunch of guns and a lot of ammo and then goes on Google earth for gun-free areas that have no relevance to their recent search terms. This would not be a Minority Report pre-crime situation, because no crime would be committed by cops or the villain. But they just put armed robot security at the areas the algorithm believes there will be a shooting at. If they get out of there car and have two M4s and 3 hand grenades and a bucket of ammo they are a mass shooter, there is almost no reason to have more than 1 magazine for self-defense when travelling casually except if they are California compliant 10 round magazines.

"just ban guns and call cops to stop crimes"
In the mass shootings cops just stood there and did nothing. So we need armed robot cops since human cops won't do their jobs. And we definitely don't want to disarm citizens and expect human security guards will just arrive and save the day.

Last edited by Lecia_Wynter on 10 Mar 2023, 11:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

That website has insufficient data. When you filter it to only show data for interpersonal homicide, Western Europe only has 2 countries availiable for data.



Russia has strict gun control. We can deduce that both the USA and Russia have a murderous type of culture which results in more murders in both countries.


White people get (unjustly) shot by cops too. Police brutality is bad, but it is not actually illegal to drive while black, the problem is that many cops are poorly trained and simply don't know or care to know the laws. Some of the problems people have with law enforcement are not actually the laws, but that the law enforcement doesn't actually follow the laws. And that isn't to say that all laws are just and that law enforcement ought to enforce injust laws (such as injust marijuana laws for instance.)

As for drinking, people shouldn't drink much anyway, its an inferior drug to pot and other drugs, and is toxic, booze is a safety hazard too. I'd choose prohibition over gun control any day.



Democracy isn't great anyway, if the majority votes the way you don't want.


Famous for? First I heard of it. In the history books I don't recall them mentioning abortion in 1776. USA was famous for rebelling against the oppressive British government that was causing too much taxes and shooting people in cold blood.


Don't the British still have less rights than Americans though? Police brutality doesn't count because the police and justice system are actually acting illegally in those circumstances.


Marx knew this in advance and that is why he was pro-gun. Oppressive capatalist governments always try to disarm the public so they can do whatever they want. For example like what they tried with the war on drugs, which was unAmerican btw.

Side note, I think I am getting a glimpse of both left and right psychology now, there seems to be some mechanism of "balance". I am not talking about you specifically, but left and right wing humans in general. I noticed that many leftists give advice of "just run away" if there is some kind of criminal confrontation, but that leftists also seem to want many humanist kind of reforms. I think this is sort of like a "balance effect", because of their lack of darwinian instinct in some areas of politics, so they automatically (unconsciously) may try to balance it out by being more darwinian in other ways, for instance suggesting things like "just run away" during a crime (a stark contrast to their fat acceptance politics.)

Why is that relevant? Most countries simply don't bother to classify homicides as "interpersonal". The question is how safe the countries are. If I'm going to be murdered then frankly I don't care what the motive is, who my killer is, what the weapon is, and so forth, I just care that I'm dead.


Russia has very liberal gun laws - almost anyone can own a gun. I do happen to agree that the murder rate is not really affected by gun laws, although I am not sure I would jump straight to "murderous culture".


Drawing a parallel to what I said earlier - if you're being arrested, you're being arrested, regardless of whether that's because you broke a law or because a cop doesn't like the look of you. Regardless of whether "the law is the problem" or "enforcement of the law is the problem", the US has the highest prison population in the world, much higher than you would expect given demography.


The point of democracy is that it should be for the people to decide what the right thing is, not for the self-appointed.


Most people outside of the US couldn't tell you anything about what happened in 1776, it's just another year to us.

The US is famous for easy access to guns, easy access to abortion


No, I wouldn't have said so. Things have got a bit worse in the last few years, but we don't have quite the same issues as the US, and our government has willingly signed up to international oversight like the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Court of Justice.

Marx knew this in advance and that is why he was pro-gun. Oppressive capatalist governments always try to disarm the public so they can do whatever they want. For example like what they tried with the war on drugs, which was unAmerican btw.[/quote]
Again, not sure this is true (I'm also not sure it's especially relevant to the story about search engines randomly pushing gun control). I don't really see any correlation between how oppressive or capitalist a nation is and its gun laws. Some liberal countries like the Netherlands and New Zealand have restrictive gun laws, some oppressive countries like El Salvador have liberal laws - I don't really think it's possible to draw a conclusion.

What is their definition of each of the classifications on that website?


Russia's gun laws are classified as "restrictive". Though it might be less draconian than the UK so maybe that's why you have that opinion.

Some of the laws seem bigoted such as denying guns to people with -5 vision (I don't know what -5 vision is though, I typed it in the search engine and it had 0 relevant results.) People who need glasses are obviously going to use guns only when wearing glasses anyway so I don't see what the point of that is. Another ridiculous law I found is that its federally prohibited to use firearms against women (insert El Risitas meme here.) So if a woman has hostages at gunpoint or has a knife to someone's throat you aren't allowed to shoot them I guess lol.


The prison system is also unconstitutional as it violates several rules in the constitution. For instance it deprives people of dignity.


The UK ended up with restricted gun laws so democracy does not work. And besides gun laws you know several examples of how democracy can end in failure, for instance what if the majority believes in a false ideology and votes always in favor of that.



Netherlands are cryptocapatalists masquerading as commies.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Anarcho_Capita ... g_out_and/
"I am no expert but pretty sure this is going to lead to more imports from countries that have no moral obligation to the environment in any way. Basically directly disenfranchising the most efficient farmers on earth in favor of the ones burning the Amazon. People really need to open those peepers."

"Its mostly aimed at Cattle farmers, not only that but we expor around 60%. So import cheap meat and export premium.

So yeah it sucks for these farmers, but its hard to blame the left - Since the rulling party has been in power for 4 terms now and they are a center-right party.

Also the country is fairly small (habitable space) with currently 900k++ looking for a house... With a population of around 17mil."

I am all for reducing meat production but it sounds like they are just going to import it from unscrupulous countries instead.

Haven't looked up New Zealand yet because I'm just assuming its going to be more of the same.

Gun control is just a means to oppress the poor, the rich can always get guns. In Mexico and Russia (and probably most places) that is the way it is.