Cars > Guns

[ll74]

View attachment 2340691

How did Orwell know you were here?

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[wizzard426]

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[ll74]

View attachment 2340696

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[wizzard426]

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

so tell us, how many coins do you need?

 

[ll74]

so tell us, how many coins do you need?

View attachment 2340701

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[wizzard426]

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

I knew it, another bot!

 

[ll74]

I knew it, another bot!

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[wizzard426]

 

[ll74]

View attachment 2340715

[Random non sequitur meme in response]

 

[Rightguide]

The government shouldn’t be encouraging people to own cars.

It shouldn't be up to the government if people own cars or not.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

A quick inventory reveals that Wat owns more firearms than motor vehicles.


So, guns > cars, I reckon.

 

[wizzard426]

A quick inventory reveals that Wat owns more firearms than motor vehicles.


So, guns > cars, I reckon.

Actually cars = guns

You can carry guns with cars and you can obtain LIARberals cars with guns

It's like sacrificing politicians to the sun god for a good harvest. Regardless of end result there is no downside

 

[Wat_Tyler]

As long as the dead died reeeeeeeeeeal slow . . . .


And in a great deal of pain. More is better!!!

 

[HisArpy]

The government shouldn’t be encouraging people to own cars.

This is just self centeredness speaking.

 

[HisArpy]

It's a subsidy without a crisis. A better option is to let people save their money without taxes. They will earn more on it than Social Security can provide.

Again, this isn't the purview of government. Government is there to protect the general welfare, not mandate that the general population do so or else.

 

[HisArpy]

Our government doesn't have any of those things. Regulations=/= ownership

Your entire post reeks of communist fantasies

Lol, sure buddy, tell it to California's aquaduct system, every municipal airport, every mass transit system, EVERY FREAKING COUNTY HOSPITAL!, and all the rest.

 

[wizzard426]

True Truth. "Mad Max" premiered at the local drive in on a Friday night, LoL, the place was packed full at 4p with a line down the road

The bill was "pippi longstocking" and then Mad Max, LoL, we were all lit up

After the show they had several Cops hoping to cut down on the yahooishness, we tore out of there going every which direction with the Gestapo not knowing whether to shit or go blind

I remarked at the irony then......if all Max has is that piddlin little shotgun he's fucked!

 

[wizzard426]

Lol, sure buddy, tell it to California's aquaduct system, every municipal airport, every mass transit system, EVERY FREAKING COUNTY HOSPITAL!, and all the rest.

And now you know why we call it COMMIEFORNIA

 

[HisArpy]

And now you know why we call it COMMIEFORNIA

These things also exist outside the bubble of California. Nor would their existence being only in California nullify the concept that without government we'd all be starving to death as we fend off those who want to beat us to death and take our empty larders for themselves.

 

[wizzard426]

Railroads exist, but, they aren't owned by a government. They are private incorporated businesses that charge fees for use.

Nevermind that o learned to solo at a privately owned airstrip on private land

The local water company......."well".......there isn't one.

Power company is private of which I'm a stock holder

Maybe Commiefornia could improve it's infrastructure by improving it's business model

 

[IrezumiKiss]

A quick inventory reveals that Wat owns more firearms than motor vehicles.


So, guns > cars, I reckon.

If God appeared before you and put in front of you:

- your dream gun

- your dream car (or motorcycle)

- your dream big-haired, big-titted woman

and told you that you could only choose one to spend eternity with and you had to choose in sixty seconds or lose all three and have nothing, which one would you choose?

 

[jomar]

Social Security? Ahahahahahaha I opted out of that theft scheme in 1984 when you could do that if you ha a government pension plan. My uncle set us up as firefighters in a small town, we each put in 5 bucks toward the town employee pension plan

In 4 years it starts paying me money.........................

No, I can't get anything fro the SS, nor do I want anything from them. I have this aversion to mediocrity

Quoted for irony

 

[Wat_Tyler]

If God appeared before you and put in front of you:

- your dream gun

- your dream car (or motorcycle)

- your dream big-haired, big-titted woman

and told you that you could only choose one to spend eternity with and you had to choose in sixty seconds or lose all three and have nothing, which one would you choose?

Who????


Allah wouldn't do me like that.

 

[desecration]

Again, this isn't the purview of government. Government is there to protect the general welfare, not mandate that the general population do so or else.

Giving government the power of social engineering is a bad idea.

 

[HisArpy]

Giving government the power of social engineering is a bad idea.

Government has always had that power. Or do you not believe government had the power to make private possession of gold unlawful? Or that government could take us off the gold standard altogether? This changed the way we look at money and finance.

Both of those things caused social change. As did food safety, health and safety regs in hospitals and pharmacies/bio labs, and more. These things led to people bathing daily and washing their hands often as well home and workplace cleanliness changes through the way society views itself.

Another way government helps with social change is in home ownership. Prior to the 1929 stock market crash there wasn't any such thing as a mortgage as we know it today. Instead people borrowed money on interest only notes which were carried by the bank for (usually) about 5 years. The home owner had to convince the bank to roll the note over at the time it came due or pay the full amount of the loan. After the market crash fully amortized mortgages became the norm for home loans. Government stepped in to regulate that market and create lending standards to avoid discrimination and red lining (let's not start with the "they're still redlining bullshit, ok? It's bullshit from soup to nuts.) and that changed social patterns in where people could live and work.

So the idea that government shouldn't be granted the power to effect social change is just ridiculous. It's always had that power, it's just that in the past the use of that power wasn't as nakedly transparent as it is today because government didn't feel the need to FORCE people to obey mandates. This coincides with the rise of the modern democrat party and its platform and the use of force to effect social change has been growing ever since. That's not to say both parties don't do things this way, it's that the origin is rooted in the idea that people must obey the government or else. Which is a tenet of socialism/communism/or any of the other "isms" which are the same style of government.