The General US Politics Thread

Just to add, the reason for that is because Savages response to nearly every conflict is lethal force.

Barkey took JROTC and he's a cop?

Execution!

I specifically stated that I did not take JROTC. I made fun of those kids.

If everyone had a gun I'd be afraid to go outside. And I'd triple lock all my doors at all time.

No thanks.

Don't lock your doors, then you'll be trapped when they try to get inside. What you need to to is line your house with bags of sawdust.

I dont get it.

And seriously, I AM paranoid. I was on my own for 3 days, parents on vacation, and the whole time I had my doors locked (my parents will leave the back door unlocked if they are home for example. They go in and out of it all the time however.)

I live in a nice little suburb too, I watch too much TV. But dammit I'm not taking that risk.

Sawdust will prevent the stray bullets from getting inside your home.

As an added bonus, they'll serve as effective insulation.

@Barkey: I think I've got the when to use lethal force test covered. Had to sleep through a class for my own CCW. They also make you take the keep you finger off the trigger unless you wanna shoot, and don't point your gun at nothing you're unwilling to shoot at drill.

• Someone's robbing your house or your place'o'business, you can shoot'em.
• Someone physically assaults you and he poses an actual threat to life and limb, you can shoot'em.
• Somebody draws on you and threatens you with a weapon, you can shoot them.
• Somebody attempts to rape you, you can shoot them.
• Some nutter opens fire on a crowd you're in, you can shoot them.

Those are the basics. Otherwise, I'd assume you generally can't.

Then there's the whole you can't, but a jury probably wouldn't convict you spectrum. Say, you catch a guy raping a woman, who is screaming for help. I'm not sure on whether you can Just Shoot Him, but I'd assume any lawyer worth his salt would get you off scot-free for putting him down.

edited 12th Jul '11 4:08:25 PM by SavageHeathen

I'm more talking about people coming in to kill me.

Also this is grossly out of topic. Someone make a thread instead about carry or guns or something instead.

edited 12th Jul '11 4:05:24 PM by Thorn14

Oh, about you triple locking your door? We've got slugs for that.

But back on topic; I'm looking forward to hearing more from Bachmaan.

Well, Ron Paul is apparently not running for his House seat this term.

He must believe he's a good shot for um...something.

Well, he does have a very dedicated fanbase, that's enough to make anyone think they have a shot. Too bad no one else really likes hims.

Paul running with a moderate Republican (like Brown from MA) might cut it.

He wouldn't survive with the moderates.

A link I'm putting in the Pakistan thread, but also here, for those following Rick Perry's potential bid.

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/07/perry-meets-with-fromer-pakist.html

He could pull off a small government, low taxes, cut spending, restore civil liberties agenda:

Y'know, tone down the conspiracy theory thing, push for transparency in spending and an audit of the Fed, across-the-board-cuts, tax cuts for the middle class, and utterly hammer Obama on the taxes/spending/nanny state angle.

Joe Republican would buy it: You put a pro-life but libertarian-ish Republican with a pro-choice moderate in a ticket and focus on fighting the nanny State, nobody in the GOP could call that divisive.

edited 12th Jul '11 6:49:30 PM by SavageHeathen

That pro-life part is a bit of a sticking point for me.

Oh sure, he sounds plausible at first. But then you dig down and see all the crazy crap he has endorsed.

Also taxes have been their lowest under Obama. But I guess if you repeat something long enough people believe it.

edited 12th Jul '11 6:58:02 PM by Thorn14

I'm pro-choice, too. But I don't think a Republican ticket with *two* pro-choice candidates could either win or survive primaries. So they won't run that kinda ticket.

I'm not saying that Ron Paul is not crazy... He's batshit insane! He's got three good ideas: Legalize Weed, Shut Down Military Bases, Kill Gun Control Dead. On everything else, he's a nutter.

I'm not saying that Paul's candidacy would be honest. I'm saying that the Republicans would buy a low taxes platform.

edited 12th Jul '11 7:03:42 PM by SavageHeathen

What is a nanny state anyway? Is the implication that we're too soft on the poor or something?

I assume it's a government ruled by Nanny from Muppet Babies.

Its a trigger phrase meant to make people think of an over-protective and coddling state, where the government sets overly-protective safeties on everything and makes welfare for all so they don't have to work.

Its the derogatory term for when the government has the nerve to help people.

When I hear Nanny State I think of putting tons of laws in place that prevent the majority from doing something because a small minority of morons fucked it up for everyone by either not doing something safely or abusing something.

Such as if one person went crazy and shot someone with a gun they bought, and thus no guns for anyone. Not necessarily speaking specifically, but that's the type of issues that I think of.

edited 12th Jul '11 7:08:44 PM by Barkey

I don't think that's what he meant though. I keep imagining a giant old lady named Mrs. Public Sector scolding the United States.