Why do USA liberal and conservatives party seem to share the same cognitive dissonances? For instance, liberals think you can ban guns, but you cant ban people. Conservatives think you cant ban guns, but you can ban people.
>both of these positions are retarded, right?
The redpill is a couter-culture bluepill. Whats the real redpill?
>>77255599
>implying you can't ban people
The United States government has banned specific groups of people who posed a danger to the general public throughout its history and there are laws on the books that give the POTUS the unilateral authority to do just that.
>>77255599
Guns can ban people really quickly, Cletus. Our comfortable modern life may have made you forget that but in times, you'll see.
Your talking about objects and individuals, to which the same actionable policies would not reasonably apply. You're oversimplifying to a logical and realistic fault.
Faggot.
>>77255599
The left needs the people with guns. The right needs the left's distrust of the corporations. The two party system is designed to keep both sides fighting each other. That way both sides don't cooperate to take down the real enemies threatening America.
>>77255883
But thats actually not true. The wapanese were interned. Not banned. And it was found to be against the law
>>77256340
So are you saying people are easier or harder to ban than guns?
>>77255599
Guns can't shoot themselves.
>>77256475
How the fuck do I know more about US history than you, you troglodyte moron?
Incoming immigration from foreign threats is banned, not already legal US citizens.
What was unlawful and inconstitutional was interning Japanese US citizens.
Guns are protected under the constitution
Immigration from anywhere by anyone at any time is not.
Real redpill? You're a jew.
>>77256475
Are you serious right now?
>>77255599
Honestly, liberals need to stop talking about gun control. Talking about control could lead towards gun owners becoming radicalized and going on mass shooting sprees.
It's the same reason Malala Yousafzai gave when she said "The more you speak about Islam and against all Muslims, the more terrorists we create."
So for the sake of moderate gun owners everywhere, we need to stop speaking out against the NRA and we must stop using the term "gun control." Remember, gun owners are a people of peace and should not be defined or discriminated against due to the actions of a few radicals. #NotAllGunOwners.
>>77256783
>how do I know more about US history than you
You dont. The law for the chinese was only for laborers. Shop owners, etc, could still enter if they were chinese
>>77256558
Considering one is a constitutionally protected right and the other is just regulating the influx of undesirables into our country, I'd say the ban on immigration from terrorist hotbeds is easier than banning all guns.
But you're intentionally misinterpreting the argument because you're a Correct the Record shill so I don't expect this to make sense to you in your following posts.
>>77255599
Everyone knows that the only gun violence comes from basketball americans. and mudslimes are on the rise. Our founding fathers gave us the right to arm ourselves.
>>77255599
The real redpill is that life isn't black and white. It's ignorant to focus on a singular variable while not giving other variables their due attention. You gave a really good example OP.
It's not necessarily the people that needed banned, it's their religion. Islam is trash. AND AT THE SAME TIME there NEEDS to be more strict gun regulations. Stricter background checks. Background checks of associated close friends and family too. It shouldn't be so easy for anyone to get a gun, that's just a humane fact. But guns are necessary for so many real reasons, so we absolutely shouldn't ban them outright. Plus tens of millions of people are ALREADY gun owners soooo...
Islam is a different story. Islam is a conquerors ideology and religion. It's not peaceful, it's domineering and intolerant to those who do not submit. Guns don't brain wash people, but they certainly can defend against brainwashed people.
>>77256558
In this situation, people are easier to ban. There's a legal precedent for it and no constitutional amendment explicitly stating it can't happen, which is more than can be said about guns.
>>77255599
banning certain groups of people is a constitutional power granted to the executive branch
banning guns is specifically mentioned to NOT be legal
>>77255599
It's legal to ban people from entering the United States and illegal to ban ownership of firearms in the United States.
Pretty simple.
>>77255599
Sauce
Also nice full house.
>>77255599
not taking guns away from citizens, everything except that.
>>77256475
You are a fucking retard. Please stop posting.
>>77257273
>there needs to be more regulations
stopped reading
back to plebbit
thicc
Also SHALL NOT BE INFRANGED
>>77257079
>>77257079
The thing is, your actually not completely wrong. I think the anti gun rhetoric is a small slice of the pie. The other aspects are probably extended virginity in a hypersexualized area, and being told your "privilege," when in reality, your still eating tendies in your moms basement
>>77255599
>implying you can't ban people
Nobody here is a cuckservative. Go back to whatever shithole you came from, newfaggot.
>>77255599
You can ban both guns and people, those are both very possible things. Banning Muslims would be easy to do and would have less costs than not banning them. Banning guns would have more costs than more costs than not banning them.
>>77256475
You're an idiot, stop trying to act like you know what you're talking about. Look at https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182. This authority has never been deemed illegal or unconstitutional, and there is no logical reason as to why it would ever be as the U.S. constitution does not apply to citizens of foreign nations living abroad. Hell, even Jimmy Carter used this authority by banning immigration from Iran during the hostage crisis.
>>77257162
>correct the record shill
kek. Whatever fits your narrative
>>77257273
Sounds fair. As an atheist, I dont understand why all the faggots are rushing to defend any religion--let alone islam
>>77257289
I actually disagree. I think they are both equally impossible to ban
>>77257353
>executive can ban groups of people
Can you reference some times its been done? Everything I've found so far makes your type of poster seem like your reaaaaaaally stretching the truth
>>77257405
Thanks
>>77257440
You are a fucking retard. Please stop posting.
>>77255599
Islam
>>77256475
Anarchists were BANNED from entering the US for 72 years until 1990.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1918#Impact
>>77258117
Banning certain immigration for a time is entirely easier than banning guns. One will result in protests while the other will mean actual war.
>>77258117
What fits my narrative is you answering the fucking points I made in my post.
>>77257741
So since no one here is a conservative, we cant talk about them? Why so defensive all of a sudden?
>>77257898
>the bans were effective
Just like Australias gun ban, right?
>>77255599
So what do you suggest we do, if both positions are "shared cognitive dissonances"?
>>77258117
Just stop.
>8 USC §1182
>“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
Obama himself has used it.
>>77255599
That's called false equivalency.
A gun on its own is harmless.
People on their own are not harmless.
>>77258254
Wow. I'm sure all the anarchists checked "anarchist" and followed the rules (like we know anarchists do) and got in the country just fine
>>77258385
What point? You think the bans worked?
>>77255599
Shh. More butts.
>>77255599
>liberals think you can ban guns
The rightwing conservatives are planting the extreme false narrative that liberals want to ban ALL guns. We can ban assault rifles.
>Conservatives think you cant ban guns, but you can ban people
They love Trump for his vicious minority hate. They salivate when they hear the dog whistle.
>>77258415
I'm not talking about guns you fucking moron. I'm talking about immigration. And yes, Jimmy Carter's efforts to prevent Iranian citizens from entering the United States WAS effective.
>>77258507
>just stop
Okay, Hilary, Ill delete this account
>laws
And did it totally worked, and we have no asians or anarchists or mexicans, right?
You are conflating passing a law with actually doing something. Common mistake, but I usually expect that one from liberals, no /pol/
>>77258689
The point where I said banning certain groups of undesirables from entering our country is easier than infringing on US citizen's Constitutionally guaranteed natural born rights. Now stop purposely being obtuse.
>>77258756
LOW TEST
>>77258756
Shh. Only ass now
>>77258924
assault rifles are already basically banned though?
>>77258947
He didn't just prevent Iranian citizens from entering. He prevented any Shi'ite Muslims from entering and required a register of all Shi'ites already in the USA.
But that's okay because he was a Democrat and therefore above criticism.
>>77259013
Im not being obtuse. Sure, the ban on immigration may use less political capital to create. But that doesn't mean it worked...
>>77258924
nah fuck off, all military weapons are for the public.
>>77258689
Are you really this dense? If they checked the box, they committed perjury, since it's signed under oath. That gives grounds to immediately detain and deport them.
>What point? You think the bans worked?
I see you're now accepting the fact they actually existed. Baby steps.
>>77258924
Mah nigga, "assault weapons" are already banned. Its illegal to produce or own a firearm for private use in the US that can fire fully automatic or be modified to do so
Liberal definition of "assault rifle" is just a tacticool .223 plinking gun
>>77258974
I was simply correcting the ignorance you predicated this thread upon. Have a nice day. :)
>>77259096
fuck off with these low T skelly girls, here's a real woman
>>77255599
There is no constitutional amendment protecting foreign people's rights to enter our country.
There is a constitutional right to protect citizens gun rights.
Congrats on being too stupid to see the difference.
>>77259444
>they committed perjury
Is there a box to check for committing perjury too, or are you really that "dense"
>>77258924
>rifles are responsible for less than 1% of gun homicides
>WE MUST BAN THEM
>>77259570
You know what, you changed my mind. I see that you can now ban both guns and people easily, and that governments laws work.
Thank you so much
>>77255599
Let's do both. Ban guns, ban people, and give the world an ultimatum: Unconditional surrender or the apocalypse.
>>77255599
100% OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ARE CRIMINALS
>>77259341
>But that doesn't mean it worked...
This wasn't the topic of discussion. What was the topic of discussion is that banning groups of undesirables from entering our country will be easier than banning guns, which you admitted here:
>Sure, the ban on immigration may use less political capital to create.
Now go away. Your thread is shit.
>>77259524
>Its illegal to produce or own a firearm for private use in the US that can fire fully automatic or be modified to do so
This is false. You just need a license to own one and like $20 grand and a willing seller who has an automatic weapon made before 1986.
>>77259635
Okay but both "ISIS" shooters were US born
How do we ban them
>mfw you guys
The real redpill is anti-Internet.
The whole Internet needs to be shut down as it's the biggest public health crisis in existence right now.
4chan and internet anonymity is degenerate by nature, the Internet needs to either be removed from private use, or controlled with real identity just like public life. It allows degeneracy without shaming. This is the root of most modern problems.
>>77259329
>He prevented any Shi'ite Muslims from entering and required a register of all Shi'ites already in the USA
Wow, didn't even know that. This is considered a minor footnote in the progressive legacy of Jimmy Carter, if progressives even know about it at all. The hypocrisy of the left is painful.
>>77255599
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>implying objects are the problem no the people pulling the trigger.
>>77260081
Here you go fucking up the argument again. It isn't banning muslims. It's banning immigration from terrorist hotbeds. Stop being obtuse.
>>77255599
Guns don't need to eat or drink or breathe or shit, people do.
That makes it far easier to hide a gun than a person.
>>77260081
You kill them dummy!
>>77255599
Because it's easy to hide a gun, but rather hard to hide a human bean.
>>77255599
False dichotemy, gun rights are a constitutional right. Immigration and massive welfare and catering to terrorists and Mexican nationals is not.
The left's groups want to reduce constititional rights in many forms. The second amendment is just one of them.
We are consistent with our nation's policies and laws the left wants to sacrifice those things to make us third world so that they can feel good for being egalitarian.
>>77259982
never, death befo0re disarm.
>>77260081
If people like the ones here didn't obsess over Internet "Freedom" this guy would have been stopped a long time ago. His dad would have been found posting radical stuff
>>77260108
but not t.v right?
>>77260081
Easy. Don't let his immigrant parents in.
>>77260076
The ban on immigration *uses less political capital to create the law.* That=/=easier
>go away
Yes Hilary
>>77255599
ok you little turd. It seems to me that you dont understand what our constitution is. Our constitution is based in the basis of Classical Liberalism, in which you have three basic rights that belong to you and no one can remove them from you: 1st The Right to Life, 2nd The Right of Property, And the 3rd the Right of Liberty. The right to bear arms is to protect all of the 3 basic Human Rights that people like to preach so much, and if people wants to destroy your basic principles, you have the absolute right to defend them and no one will question you. If Muslims are a threat to our basic Human Rights, you must ban them because once your rights are removed, you will never get them back.
>>77260081
The Islamist terrorist who have carried out attacks in the U.S. have almost always been the children of immigrants from the same countries that Trump wishes to ban immigration from. This is a phenomena found throughout Western countries with large Muslim populations. It's almost always the children of immigrants who become radicalized. Had Trump's policy been in effect, these people would not have been allowed entry into the country and thus their children would never have been born here.
>>77260370
That vagina is so fat it could be crushed balls.
>>77260339
His dad encouraged him. His dad is also a radical Islamic terrorist sympathizer.
>>77260412
TV too.
The problem is that these days most "redpilled" people realize that TV is mind control (hell even many liberals say this) yet they don't realize the Internet isn't "Freedom" from TV, it's worse in every way. It's the next stage of control.
>>77260370
>post disgusting skelly girl with horse ass and pussy
>calls me gross
Hang yourself my man
>>77260221
>used obtuse 5 times ITT
Did you just learn that word today?
>isnt banning muslims, its banning immigration
Explain how that would have helped in the San Bernadino example, for instance
>>77255599
People commit the crimes, not the guns.
>>77255599
lol it's pretty funny that's for sure but there's a presupposition underlying these arguments i.e. that the liberal position presented in the op is morally equivalent with the conservative position stated in the op.
that's completely and utterly fallacious because guns abd people are two totally different beings/things. they're literally different.
a position that advocates for humans will always be morally superior. so, in this instance, it's clear that the liberal position does not share the same stuff.
>>77257108
pretty sure carter or reagan banned Iranian immigrants during the hostage crisis
>>77255599
those bunnies
>>77260692
I really appreciate the wonderful aesthetics of this beauty.
>>77260735
>Explain how that would have helped in the San Bernadino example, for instance
Ah, this is a bait thread. Well played OP.
Why is it then that American citizens keep massacring Americans? With guns they bought legally as is their American right?
How about if we added an amendment that made it so anyone who wants to purchase a gun, must have a thorough psychological evaluation at least 3 days prior to purchasing?
Does this sound reasonable?
>inb4 of course not. The mentally unstable are entitled to their guns too.
>>77256475
American education, ladies and gentlemen.
>>77260906
>>77260619
What about like all the non muslim terrorists. I mean, you got plenty of white boys shooting up schools and niggers shooting up playgrounds
I really do believe the amount of this shit done *in the US* by snackbars is exaggerated
>>77260984
nikyee heaton is a dumb slut
>>77255599
you can't ban guns because there'd be a mass insurgence with 60% of the population involved and half of the remaining people will support the insurgence after seeing the government brutalities.
you can ban religion of peace'rs, they're a disorganized rape mob and barely 2% of the us pop, it would damage us public relations but it's possible.
>>77261050
>>77260929
Are we posting our latina masterrace gfs itt or what?
>>77260692
There are many booties, but this one is mine.
>>77260962
Anyone who uses the Internet for the majority of their day should be barred from gun ownership.
>>77261244
>>77260450
>using less resources to pass a law doesn't make it easier
Wew
>>77260735
Because they were here on easily exploitable immigration visas, you stupid god damn faggot.
I keep calling you obtuse because that is exactly what you are being.
>>77255599
>but you can ban people
It's pretty easy, cut welfare, stop supporting them in anyway, foster a toxic environment for them. They'll leave on their own.
>>77261294
It's dark in the picture
>>77255599
You can ban people
>>77261421
It's apparently called "mood lighting"
>>77261413
The majority of people on welfare are white Americans.
>>77261361
>thinks talking is a resource
Lad
>obtuse
Dude, if you say it one more time, its gonna lose meaning. But, you know, theres no way they could have just...idk, walked across the border, right?
You guys are silly. If gun laws are so easy to circumnavigate, why not immigration?
>>77255599
Tina?
>>77261540
The light has to be enough to be able to see her curves or only daylight, I can't fuck with the lights on.
>>77261540
gotta activate the flash my man
take >>77261244
as an example
>>77261773
Lurkmoar faggot
>>77261572
Considering that majority of people are white that is perfectly fine. Now why don't you cite percentages, you dishonest nigger?
>>77261909
OP here
Srs question
How do use flash when your not supposed to be taking pics of girl ur fucking
>>77255599
But you CAN ban people. It's been proven effective for thousands of years of human history. Gun bans are an idea that is 60 years old and has never worked.
>>77261294
it looks like your arm is kinda coming from the bottom right of the pic and working up to your hand kek
>>77261572
The majority of Americans are white
>>77260985
>I really do believe the amount of this shit done *in the US* by snackbars is exaggerated
Then you're a delusional cuck. According to the Brookings Institute 77% of domestic terrorism incidents are inspired by Islamic extremism. According to the FBI, over 90% of deaths resulting from terrorism since 1980 have been at the hands of Islamic terrorists.
>>77257079
>"The more you speak about Islam and against all Muslims, the more terrorists we create."
>>77260156
Don't forget OBAMA banned Iraqi refugees from entering for 6 months in 2011. That's the biggest hypocrisy, because Obama is harshly criticizing Trump for wanting to do the EXACT SAME THING.
There is no pill, just edgy kids on /pol/
>>77261635
>>thinks talking is a resource
I never once said that, that is a strawman argument.
Banning immigration of undesirables in terrorist hotbeds is easier than infringing upon the Constitutional natural born rights of law abiding citizens. This was the point at hand and you have provided zero evidence to the contrary.
>But, you know, theres no way they could have just...idk, walked across the border, right?
Right. They flew here from halfway around the world and had their paperwork checked every step of the way. Mexico sure as fuck wouldn't have let them fly into there so they couldn't just waltz over here.
>If gun laws are so easy to circumnavigate, why not immigration?
Gee I dunno, if only we could construct some sort of large physical barrier keeping undesirable illegals out of our country?
>>77262236
The more you show weakness and don't take them seriously, the more bold and aggressive they get. This is the same appeasement bullshit that allowed Hitler to take over mainland Europe. YOU CAN'T APPEASE PEOPLE LIKE THIS
>>77262032
you have to be extremely confident and make it seem like it's a very normal thing to do. and show her if she asks
>>77262343
wow, this post made me a #LGBTQESCVSSZAFAGR1SDFSG
>>77255599
>if you are against banning guns, then it logically follows that you must be against banning everything else, including certain people
Fuck off back to your safe space, leftard.
When you see a picture like in OP first post, you feel blessed when you remember that your wife is foot fetishist too. God bless her.
>>77255599
There is no redpill.
>>77262251
FUCK that is infuriating. I didn't even know about that either! The dishonesty of the media never fucking ceases to amaze me.
As for OP topic(internally struggle to wait for femdom time with wifey), you can become more hardline like European nationalist parties - demand revocation of citizenship of immigrants and their descendants.
>>77256825
we are not talking legality we are talking practicality
you can't really expect a ban on a group of people with an ideology, they will always find ways to get in. what we have to do is keep as close of a watch on them as we can and yes, stop putting a PC wall in front of any action we can take
>>77255599
>catching on to the fact that the left-right dichotomy is a complete waste of time
Conservatives always lose to liberals, because of their very nature. Society is a constant war of conservatives steadily giving ground to liberals, even in societies that try to wipe out liberalism. You can't wipe out people discontent with the status quo, and you can't ban an interest in change.
/pol/'s vaunted redpill tries to hide this simple truth, and like the bluepill, frames the endless battle of left vs. right as something that can be "won" against "the true enemies." The true redpill, as you try to define it, is to create a system wherein the endless battle is contained, controlled, and the gaining and loss of ground by both sides doesn't significantly harm anyone.
Unfortunately, this is getting less and less possible in the modern age. The internet has made it so you no longer have to abide people disagreeing with you about anything, and people now want real life to work the same way.
Eventually, peace and order will be threatened, and it will be your duty to protect it from out of control ideologues.
>>77262373
>mexico sure wouldnt let them over here
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
>>77255599
The issue isn't that we think guns can't be banned, we think beyond that and address the issues that would arise if we were to completely stop people from owning firearms.
If we ban guns the only people who suffer from it is law abiding citizens. Crminals who purchase guns on the black market aren't going to follow the law and turn their firearms in. This endangers the common goodfolk instead of securing peace for them, ergo making the law completely worthless.
>>77265262
Strawmanning again, faggot. I never said that. I said Mexico wouldn't let them into their country so they wouldn't be able to waltz across our southern border. Learn to read dumb fuck.
>>77257108
You're a fucking idiot
