One type of tactic/strategy that the left is pursuing is to create no-win situations, such that there is no way to win, only ways to lose. I suspect this is one of them:
Either you do nothing, you are demoralized, your side is murdered, people lose faith in your side to protect them even if you are (re-)elected, and you lose.
Or you do something (and there are multiple kinds of "somethings"), things go hay-wire and/or the media spins everything to a ludicrously extreme degree, people that should be on the same team go against each other, etc. etc. etc., you lose.
As far as I can see, that this specific kind of situation can happen is because a number of fundamental parts are (extremely and completely) unsustainable. One approach to hopefully create a chance of a possibility of making things at least a little bit sustainable in some ways is the following (and I don't know if there are any meaningful alternatives):
Deport all "latin-American" illegal invaders, revoke citizenship of and deport all those illegal invaders that have gotten citizenship wrongly (such as with Ronald Reagan's amnesty act). Swift trials and execution for MS-13 members and similar for other related gangs and organized crime organizations. Deport and revoke citizenship for the close families of "latin-American" gang members.
Revoke-citizenship & deport all African-American criminal gang members and their families to Sub-Saharan Africa.
Revoke-citizenship & deport Democrat politicians and Antifa members and their families to the worst possible place on Earth (maybe a communist Sub-Saharan country?).
Execute Antifa terrorists and child rapists.
Revoke-citizenship & deport all Muslims. Muslims aren't a big problem currently (relatively speaking), but they are growing very quickly in scope.
That should help make it much, much, much, much more feasible and possible to hopefully make things at least a little bit sustainable for everyone, including legal immigrants and non-criminal Sub-Saharan Africans. Legal immigration will also have to be incredibly, extremely lowered, or shut down all-together. The bitter thing is that these initiatives are by no means guaranteed to work, but they seem strictly necessary to at least in theory have a chance of making things at least a little bit sustainable. But even this would require millions upon millions to be deported (and how many would have to have citizenship revoked? If millions of illegal invaders were granted citizenship under Ronald Reagan........ and with 13/52 (or 13/52?)........). So I have no idea whether even this is possible.
The thing about FA-FO is it doesn't have to be the law of the land. Better by judged by 12 than carried by 6 is human nature. They can do their damnedest to criminalize self-defense & FA-FO. Communism always loses to human nature in the end.
I don't see how that could possibly be successful or feasible in any way whatsoever. How would you possibly achieve 2, "A legal system that fully supports "fuck around and find out", as things currently are? With the absolutely extreme, ludicrously insane amounts of evil and corruption there is currently present? And what about people that just look the other way? And all other kinds of system-wise properties? The current laws are not even being upheld, or twisted into insane mockeries. And who decides what "fuck around and find out" means? The child rapists (and worse) that have had great success with infiltrating and subverting the USA?
How would you even get anywhere near what you propose without what I propose?
Now, this is funny. You call this guy out for asking for self-defense laws after giving your wish list? How do you think any part of your revoke and deport ideas are even possible? Your bullet list is your wet dream, not anything resembling reality.
Now, this is funny. You call this guy out for asking for self-defense laws after giving your wish list? How do you think any part of your revoke and deport ideas are even possible?
I am not at all against self-defense laws, nor did I argue against them. And I didn't focus on or address his first point, 1 (which I am not necessarily against). I directly and specifically referred to his second point, 2.
Your bullet list [...] not anything resembling reality.
I raised that concern as well. And my argument was that the proposal I give seem much, much, much more realistic (and would help enable his second point, 2) than his second point, 2, as I argued for.
And notice this part from my first comment:
So I have no idea whether even this is possible.
EDIT: I apologize if I was unclear in my comment that I focused on the second point, 2. I notice now that for the first sentence, I put in a dot instead of a comma or similar before making it clear what I referred to.
Strip qualified immunity from DA's. So if a DA refuses to prosecute a criminal, than said criminal goes out and commits another violent act, the DA can be sued civilly. Use civil courts to change behavior. The ACLU has done that for decades and changed the entire country for the worse in the proccess
To be honest, that seems like very, very small stuff, and while potentially (very?) good in itself (I have not considered or thought through it in depth), it seems like it would require much, much more than that. And without the proposals I wrote about... I don't know how much of a chance that road would work. The situation is different than some decades before, dramatically so in a number of very/extremely important regards, some for the (extreme) better, some for the (extreme) worse. That said, president Donald Trump is incredibly gifted, driven, caring, hard-working and capable (among other aspects), so if someone can help bring about such a road and make things work out well for everyone in practice at least a little bit, it seems like he would be the guy to do it. But at this point in time and the given situation, it seems incredibly difficult or impossible, even for miracle makers. Dealing with 13/50, BLM, Antifa, burning country, millions upon millions of illegal invaders, extremely corrupted and infiltrated systems (including various churches, evangelicals as well as the Catholic (anti-?)pope, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
The right to keep and bear arms means we can have them on us locked and loaded at all times. Open carried or concealed. Long gun or pistol. Gustave recoilless rifle or lmg. Doesn't matter.
You can't really strip african americans of citizenship and deport them. That would cause so many problems. Have you considered we can't force people into countries that we don't control. You can't just saying I banish you to a land faraway. If the target country doesn't want them, they don't need to take them.
That's a problem that can be solved with money. I'm sure there's an African country that would be willing to receive people in return for continued/increased aid.
First off, it wouldn't be just any African-Americans, it would be criminal gang members and their families. And prisoners can definitely be expelled, such as reg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convicts_in_Australia . And there is historical precedents for expulsions, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Moriscos . You are right that various Sub-Saharan African countries would be unlikely to be interested in that, but it ought to be possible to figure something or another out. Liberia was tried out, after all, though that was definitely not a success, given the cannibal warlords in Liberia (see some interviews with former cannibal warlords of Liberia as part of a documentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRuSS0iiFyo ).
In a sane world this would be an absolutely reasonable response. 1980s Americans largely would've actually supported such an idea. It's hardly even controversial.
If certain parts of the country had been aware of how things were and are, possibly. But it was still in the late 1980s that amnesty was given to millions of illegal invaders under Ronald Reagan. The corruption and infiltration has been going on for very many decades. And Democrats wanted slaves. I think it is far, far, far better for Sub-Saharan African criminal gang members to go to Sub-Saharan Africa and live there instead of becoming slaves through the prison labour system that the Democrats has sought to set up, and likewise far, far, far better than them abetting (intentionally or not) in the destruction of the USA.
I also fear that a considerable number of 1980s Democrats would have merely feigned support for such an idea and/or sought to sabotage it or twist it into something (extremely) wretched and evil.
How do you handle 13/50? BLM? Millions of illegal invaders (whatever their ethnicity is)? Are Muslims a "race"? And is Antifa about "race"? The question is then where to deport Antifa to, which is one I give a proposal regarding. There aren't really any "free spaces" left on Earth, and space travel & colonization is at far, far, far too early stages.
But I did forget to mention deporting the communist Chinese. Not the non-communist, patriotic, anti-communist Chinese, among with other non-communist East Asians, which tend to do very well. See for instance roof Koreans. At this point in time, I wonder whether it would make more sense to limit immigration only to rich East Asian countries and stop all immigration from European countries (I do not personally trust even Poland). Though I don't know whether the USA would get their best - as far as I know, Japan and South Korea is definitely not getting the best from the USA or Europe, especially reg. anime-fans and the like (certain anime is OK, some is crap or worse, but, the kind of people that go to Japan or South Korea due to anime are generally............), which is not at all fair to Japan or South Korea.
EDIT: Also look at various statistics. Are things the slightest bit sustainable in any way whatsoever? The country burning?
New strategy, fuck em' all to death! No free spaces required!
Ehhhhhh... deportation seems far, far, far better than that. And it also helps encourage them to fix their things and improve, as well as let their ways and approaches be tested. Especially Antifa and the communists reg. the latter point.
One type of tactic/strategy that the left is pursuing is to create no-win situations, such that there is no way to win, only ways to lose. I suspect this is one of them:
As far as I can see, that this specific kind of situation can happen is because a number of fundamental parts are (extremely and completely) unsustainable. One approach to hopefully create a chance of a possibility of making things at least a little bit sustainable in some ways is the following (and I don't know if there are any meaningful alternatives):
That should help make it much, much, much, much more feasible and possible to hopefully make things at least a little bit sustainable for everyone, including legal immigrants and non-criminal Sub-Saharan Africans. Legal immigration will also have to be incredibly, extremely lowered, or shut down all-together. The bitter thing is that these initiatives are by no means guaranteed to work, but they seem strictly necessary to at least in theory have a chance of making things at least a little bit sustainable. But even this would require millions upon millions to be deported (and how many would have to have citizenship revoked? If millions of illegal invaders were granted citizenship under Ronald Reagan........ and with 13/52 (or 13/52?)........). So I have no idea whether even this is possible.
Appreciate the thought that went into what you said, but all we really need is:
Universal CCW as the 2A says there should be
A legal system that fully supports "fuck around and find out"
Random criminality will effectively end within the same week.
The thing about FA-FO is it doesn't have to be the law of the land. Better by judged by 12 than carried by 6 is human nature. They can do their damnedest to criminalize self-defense & FA-FO. Communism always loses to human nature in the end.
I don't see how that could possibly be successful or feasible in any way whatsoever. How would you possibly achieve 2, "A legal system that fully supports "fuck around and find out", as things currently are? With the absolutely extreme, ludicrously insane amounts of evil and corruption there is currently present? And what about people that just look the other way? And all other kinds of system-wise properties? The current laws are not even being upheld, or twisted into insane mockeries. And who decides what "fuck around and find out" means? The child rapists (and worse) that have had great success with infiltrating and subverting the USA?
How would you even get anywhere near what you propose without what I propose?
Now, this is funny. You call this guy out for asking for self-defense laws after giving your wish list? How do you think any part of your revoke and deport ideas are even possible? Your bullet list is your wet dream, not anything resembling reality.
I am not at all against self-defense laws, nor did I argue against them. And I didn't focus on or address his first point, 1 (which I am not necessarily against). I directly and specifically referred to his second point, 2.
I raised that concern as well. And my argument was that the proposal I give seem much, much, much more realistic (and would help enable his second point, 2) than his second point, 2, as I argued for.
And notice this part from my first comment:
EDIT: I apologize if I was unclear in my comment that I focused on the second point, 2. I notice now that for the first sentence, I put in a dot instead of a comma or similar before making it clear what I referred to.
Strip qualified immunity from DA's. So if a DA refuses to prosecute a criminal, than said criminal goes out and commits another violent act, the DA can be sued civilly. Use civil courts to change behavior. The ACLU has done that for decades and changed the entire country for the worse in the proccess
To be honest, that seems like very, very small stuff, and while potentially (very?) good in itself (I have not considered or thought through it in depth), it seems like it would require much, much more than that. And without the proposals I wrote about... I don't know how much of a chance that road would work. The situation is different than some decades before, dramatically so in a number of very/extremely important regards, some for the (extreme) better, some for the (extreme) worse. That said, president Donald Trump is incredibly gifted, driven, caring, hard-working and capable (among other aspects), so if someone can help bring about such a road and make things work out well for everyone in practice at least a little bit, it seems like he would be the guy to do it. But at this point in time and the given situation, it seems incredibly difficult or impossible, even for miracle makers. Dealing with 13/50, BLM, Antifa, burning country, millions upon millions of illegal invaders, extremely corrupted and infiltrated systems (including various churches, evangelicals as well as the Catholic (anti-?)pope, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
The right to keep and bear arms means we can have them on us locked and loaded at all times. Open carried or concealed. Long gun or pistol. Gustave recoilless rifle or lmg. Doesn't matter.
You can't really strip african americans of citizenship and deport them. That would cause so many problems. Have you considered we can't force people into countries that we don't control. You can't just saying I banish you to a land faraway. If the target country doesn't want them, they don't need to take them.
That's a problem that can be solved with money. I'm sure there's an African country that would be willing to receive people in return for continued/increased aid.
First off, it wouldn't be just any African-Americans, it would be criminal gang members and their families. And prisoners can definitely be expelled, such as reg. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convicts_in_Australia . And there is historical precedents for expulsions, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expulsion_of_the_Moriscos . You are right that various Sub-Saharan African countries would be unlikely to be interested in that, but it ought to be possible to figure something or another out. Liberia was tried out, after all, though that was definitely not a success, given the cannibal warlords in Liberia (see some interviews with former cannibal warlords of Liberia as part of a documentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRuSS0iiFyo ).
Should be easier if they’re sent to failed states like Somalia, Ethiopia.
They can’t do much to prevent it and would probably agree if paid a bit for each one.
It’s worth a try anyway.
That is an excellent point :) .
In a sane world this would be an absolutely reasonable response. 1980s Americans largely would've actually supported such an idea. It's hardly even controversial.
If certain parts of the country had been aware of how things were and are, possibly. But it was still in the late 1980s that amnesty was given to millions of illegal invaders under Ronald Reagan. The corruption and infiltration has been going on for very many decades. And Democrats wanted slaves. I think it is far, far, far better for Sub-Saharan African criminal gang members to go to Sub-Saharan Africa and live there instead of becoming slaves through the prison labour system that the Democrats has sought to set up, and likewise far, far, far better than them abetting (intentionally or not) in the destruction of the USA.
I also fear that a considerable number of 1980s Democrats would have merely feigned support for such an idea and/or sought to sabotage it or twist it into something (extremely) wretched and evil.
Idk what race has to do with any of these. Much more palpable to leave that part to the imagination yeah?
These knock out game type attacks are 100% black assailants and white or Jewish victims.
100% and this is a great Redpill.
"Show me a video of this happening the other direction!" I'll say. Since we're a bunch of nazis there should be plenty. Right?
How do you handle 13/50? BLM? Millions of illegal invaders (whatever their ethnicity is)? Are Muslims a "race"? And is Antifa about "race"? The question is then where to deport Antifa to, which is one I give a proposal regarding. There aren't really any "free spaces" left on Earth, and space travel & colonization is at far, far, far too early stages.
But I did forget to mention deporting the communist Chinese. Not the non-communist, patriotic, anti-communist Chinese, among with other non-communist East Asians, which tend to do very well. See for instance roof Koreans. At this point in time, I wonder whether it would make more sense to limit immigration only to rich East Asian countries and stop all immigration from European countries (I do not personally trust even Poland). Though I don't know whether the USA would get their best - as far as I know, Japan and South Korea is definitely not getting the best from the USA or Europe, especially reg. anime-fans and the like (certain anime is OK, some is crap or worse, but, the kind of people that go to Japan or South Korea due to anime are generally............), which is not at all fair to Japan or South Korea.
EDIT: Also look at various statistics. Are things the slightest bit sustainable in any way whatsoever? The country burning?
If so, Kyle Rittenhouse got a head-start on deportation with this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20200827203225/https://inmatedatasearch.azcorrections.gov/PrintInmate.aspx?ID=172556
Well, we just halfed legal immigration and are making significant progress on the wall.
New strategy, fuck em' all to death! No free spaces required!
Ehhhhhh... deportation seems far, far, far better than that. And it also helps encourage them to fix their things and improve, as well as let their ways and approaches be tested. Especially Antifa and the communists reg. the latter point.