Gun Control

they'll eventually act in their best interest and want socialism tho

yeah that's what I told yui when he said that to me kek

...

sdob drying do dage my gunz :DDD
I will shood the gumbind :DDD

Sure, cool enough. But the people, being fresh off of the revolution and still not properly educated, can't have a reactionary revolt with hamburgers unless it's some sort of food fight situation. Guns on the other hand do make that possible, which we don't want to have.

No, because the average person doesn't know what's best for them outside of the workplace they utilize. They need leaders and organized politics to help them realize their own potential.

And what if they choose to take their guns and side with some neo-nazis and bourgs? Should we still support their right for armaments then? Seems kind of silly to think that someone should still have the right to own a gun when they're using it against socialism.

Hamburgers have a direct link to reactionary ideology.

Haven't you seen the current state of America?

If you are proposing this as a thought exercise, or just playing devil's advocate, then OK, but if you seriously think this is a good idea then I must say your intellect has dropped dramatically since last time I posted here.

What happened?

Oh I'm not saying we oughtn't be selective. We afford no rights for our enemies. But the worker's vanguard needs to be compromised of armed militias.

If you can inform me as to why this isn't a good idea, go ahead! I'm open to changing my mind on the subject.

Armed militias are totally fine, we need a nascent socialist society to be defended at all costs. I just don't see why every wizened grandpa and naive 18 year old should be owning a gun right after the revolution succeeds. If we arm everyone in a society, that also means we'd be arming our enemies. I don't see what's wrong with keeping the arms exclusive to trained and disciplined militias of workers instead.

what does that say, I speak no Greek. Is it written by Zizekian?

Yes but in that case why would you hand out guns during the revolution since that too would be arming our enemies during a period where they pose a far greater danger.

That's a risk we'd have to take, during a revolutionary period we'd have to do anything in order to secure ourselves against the system we're revolting against. But I don't see why we'd take that risk after we win.

Yup.

Jesus christ, this thread is proving my point.

Holla Forums does not support private gun ownership.

But surely giving out guns to potential enemies during the revolution is far worse than after the revolution?

who cares
americans need to fuck off with their shitty fetishes

Refer to poll.
Why are you so silly?

You're literally just trying to think of it in any way you can to say leftypol is anti-gun.

harder to revolt without guns

if we are talking about workers as they are now, then I second Yui, however

I'd speculate that if there was some sort of workers' revolution involving some armed section of the proles, they would need class consciousness or some sort of revolutionary ideology beforehand.

Also, a revolution would be a zero-point event, I just can't entertain the ideas of workers going full reactionary after gunning down porky. (international capitalist counterrevolution maybe)

What is this?

- Nuclear and bio- weapons in private ownership should be banned.
- Attack helicopters, jet fighters, battle tanks and so on should be registered in local council and local militia headquarters.
- Military-grade weapons require licences.
- Hunting weapons require ID and hunting permit (16+ y.o. and mostly sane).
Does this count as weapon ban?

Is this bait? For some reason I want to shoot some counter-revolutionary shitposters.

What about air rifles?
I had an air rifle since I was 15 or so. Surely you wouldn't take it away :(

we need a gulag for ten comrades
they're easy targets too, they don't have guns

I'll send you to Siberia. Hunting gun ownership is legal there from 14 years.

But recommend you to upgrade from air rifle. I've heard there are bears.

So you want a red army

Is there anyone who doesn't want a Red Army?

I need just a few battalions, btw.

Kek

That definitely sounds like a ban fam.

It is though, look at the posters here.

Even shit like "hunting rifle needing ID and permit" is going to be laughed at in /k/.

just look at the poll results.

If you disarm workers you empower criminal elements and counter-revolutionaries. You leave the provision of arms to those who can illegally import and sell them. Congrats, you've created a black market. Are criminals, lumpens, likely to be sympathetic to the revolution? Of course not. What's more, foreign fighters smuggled in with foreign arms can stage attacks on workers and vanish before militias can coalesce to fight the threat. Security forces today are well known for being as, if not more, dangerous than the terrorists during attacks; that's because they don't know the terrain, either in a human sense or the local environment. Locals know locals; they'll be less likely to shoot them by mistake.

There's nothing to suggest that you can't have workers' militias alongside general ownership of firearms. Should the ownership of firearms be regulated? Of course. Have citizens train alongside militias as a requirement for them to own their firearms. Require them to bring them to ranges regularly for inspection and shooting trials. Guns aren't for assholes to jerk off over; they're meant to be used in dire circumstances. If they fail the trials or fail to maintain and secure their arms, they're revoked. And of course, it won't be mandatory for people to own arms; it will remain a choice outside of a militia. Not everyone will choose to arm themselves. Part and parcel of the revolution will be creating a culture where firearms are respected in living practice, and those who do not respect their arms will not be able to hide behind their bourgeois "rights".

Workers aren't the system. Some might take the side of counter-revolutionaries, but that will occur very early on in the revolution. What you're suggesting is that those who rise up alongside us are automatically suspect; they're potentially counter-revolutionaries, not comrades. That's bullshit. It's a suspicion without basis. The kind Western armies make towards the populations they brutalize abroad – an automatic assumption that a local is either a passive or active supporter of terrorism. Yours is the same, only with counter-revolution.

Man that's one "black or white" poll.

Where's the "I don't want people with actual psychiatric issues to be able to freely get guns"?

With niggers like these>>821040

I support the pro-gunners on Holla Forums are the same as democrats.

Read the FAQ.

No, you're just finding an excuse to confirm your own biases about leftypol.

It's simply reality.

Holla Forums just doesn't support guns as much as /k/ or Holla Forums does.

What's your problem? Do you want to sell machine guns to toddlers?

I mean, I don't mind, but I'd like to see it implemented first in some non-medieval country first.

Nah, just thinking that hunting rifle requiring permit and license is tad too restrictive.

And this is bad because…?

This guy has a point actually, mostly because the issue isn't black & white.

Take and for example.
For different people those may bee either gun-totting lunatics or freedom-hating big brothers.
That's because saying you're pro or anti gun is excessively simplistic.

Where did I wrote anything about licence for hunting weapons?

And I've told about permit (i.e. hunter's association membership card, to be precize) - 16 years and not obviously insane.

If that's too restrictive, I'd like you to verbalize your discomfort.

In the states, we have private sales for AR15.

For

For a party all about freedom, you sure don't have enough freedom compared to the average right wing nut.

I hope you realize how stupid you sound, especially acting like this is some kind of competence.

I'm tired of you Holla Forumstards coming to talk about your own board here.

EVERY TIME I SEE ONE OF THESE THREADS UNTIL YOU ALL AGREE WITH ME

FREE GUNS AND TRAINING FOR EVERYONE

OPEN CARRY EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES

FULL WILD WESTISM WHEN

Anyone who wants to ban guns should kill themselves.

something something Harry Turtledove

An ideological buzzword. Americans are free to go to prison if they use their guns against SWAT teams making a no-knock raid against the wrong house. If they survive the experience, that is. They're free to go to work provided they don't shoot the boss. They're free to stay the fuck away from their elected "representatives" if they carry a gun, because the representative might get shot for being a lying piece of shit. Et cetera.

We're not a party. It's a fucking imageboard filled with shitposting. You people are delusional.

...

What about a gun control poll? Everyone knows banning things never work.

It works in the UK. It lowers gun violence there. Although it seems to depend on the country. It works in some and not in others. Im not sure what factors are involved i what makes it work or not though.

If most of the country is mentally ill i.e. USA

That would be private sales. And you still have to see ID to confirm that you are not selling weapons 13 year old kid, do you not?

Average right-wing nut doesn't actually have to deal with full-on Civil War. It's retarded to refuse to disarm your enemies.

Well, the question is not about selling gun to your neighbour, but permit for worker militia to loot counter-revolutionaries and take their weapons away.

I'm not going to pretend that it is somehow pretty or civilized. But it keeps people alive.

Where's the "I don't care" option?

Gun control is a pointless pursuit because the future of home printing will eventually make it impossible.

Is not happening.

Not to mention, no government will ever let you have a fucking weapon factory. You might arm communist rebels. DRONE STRIKE

Great dichotomy, nigger

U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security recognizes 3D printing as a threat:

"Significant advances in three-dimensional (3D) printing capabilities, availability of free digital 3D printer files for firearms components, and difficulty regulating file sharing may present public safety risks from unqualified gun seekers who obtain or manufacture 3D printed guns," and that "proposed legislation to ban 3D printing of weapons may deter, but cannot completely prevent their production. Even if the practice is prohibited by new legislation, online distribution of these digital files will be as difficult to control as any other illegally traded music, movie or software files."
foxnews.com/us/2013/05/23/govt-memo-warns-3d-printed-guns-may-be-impossible-to-stop.html

But Stalinposter on Holla Forums said it's not happening, so everything's going to be okay!

That's industrial printers. You can print a gun (not as durable, though) there, no problem. Except it's metal only, hideously expensive and very big. And don't ask me how much power does the laser need.

tl;dr: that's not home printing.

I've done some thinking. The shitposting of Yui is actually correct. Not to the point of actually being correct in restricting guns, of course. And counter-revolutionary element still needs to be shot.

In theory, /k/ expects to live eternally pre-revolution (when you want to reduce gun control to the absolute minimum) and is absolutely correct in this.

However, Holla Forums (well, at least me, but I guess some other people too) is thinking post-revolution, when you actually can trust (your imaginary and perfect) government a bit more then the counter-revolutionary gangster/terrorist from across the street.

Hence (relatively) gun-banny approach.

Healthcare that covers mental health is a type of gun control. Also if you give a minimum sentence for crimes that involve a gun that also works.

It's legal to make your own guns in the US.

Sauce?

...

15 people should be gulaged

I can't pick either option.

In an ideal world nobody would have guns, but that cat got out of the bag a long time ago. Banning guns now would be pointless, especially with the current rate of advancement of home manufacturing technologies. Within 20 years it will be cheap to buy a desktop machine that can fabricate all the required parts of a gun.

Where's the "banning guns is futile and pointless" option?

Also, why is everyone obsessed with printing?
It's much easier to start with a block of metal and just cut away the bits you don't want. A desktop CNC router is entirely feasible, albeit quite expensive at the moment.

Yui, when are you going to just realize that your heyday on Holla Forums is over and kill yourself?

Because socialism is a permanent and continuedWhy not let people have all the guns during the revolution, and then after the revolution you can take them away so the people don't have the capacity to revolt against socialism? revolt against power. Because it is not socialism if it does not allow revolution and because if people feel it would please them more to rebel against it they should.
That is why.

I bet at least ten of them are Holla Forums false flags.

Holy shit, what happened to my post?

Because CNC, milling machines, and lathes are very expensive and require quite a bit of skill and knowledge to operate. 3d printers make it easy enough for laymen. Making guns out of plastic is pretty dumb though. It would only really good for making "liberators" (a gun used only to kill someone with a better gun)

You don't have to register it or be licensed even
criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-guns-are-they-legal-must-they-be-registered.

Look up 80% builds.

...

What you want will come true in a very limited sense eventually.

There will come a time when the current state-of-the-art in personal weaponry will not be comprehensible by any human mind. Even Einstein would be capable of neither building such a weapon, nor using it effectively. It would be like giving a fighter jet to a monkey.

At the same time, any weapons comprehensible by human minds will be so simple that even the passive, pervasive automated safety systems in every civilized habitat will be able to reliably prevent them from being used to cause harm.

If you want to hurt someone, you'll have to ask an AI very nicely to do it for you.

You DO need to stamp certain information on the reciever though. I think your name, address, and a serial number, even if it's just 0001.

And you're not allowed to sell it.

They only require specialized knowledge at the moment because AI technology hasn't been advanced enough.

It would be expensive, sure, but it wouldn't be impossible to automate every step of the process from 3D scanning and correctly positioning a chunk of steel to machining it into the desired shape based on a 3D CAD file.

This

Kys tankie

Guns still need to be assembled by hand though, and often parts will need to be filed/sanded and hand fitted. Custom firearms will always need to be hand fitted by competent gunsmiths.

It's hardly widespread. I'm talking about situation equivalent to your microwave being able to brew C4 with detonators without any additional investments. Just press a few buttons and - voila!

But I don't. Meat is still cheaper now.

That's the point, actually. First you get revolution, then the price of labour goes up, and only after will we get proper automation. Even then I wouldn't expect weapon-capable 3d-printing to become a home appliance within 20-30 years.

Advertising. People like fake progress. Regular autho-lathe has been around for decades (and it's much better for producing weapons, btw). You can't make it fashionable. It lacks glamour of "new technologies".

Quite expensive, but not impossibly so.

Not anymore. They can eat CAD-files now. Not a "total noob" level, but doable within a week by most users.

*smokes pipe*
It's the struggle of the either/or which puts us into anxiety, the dizziness of freedom. One *must* choose either way, or will be chosen for by cultural conditioning.

Now that's just silly, unless you agree that a machine can be a competent gunsmith.

There's always another option.

Eh? Sartre agreed with that, that's kind of the point of radical freedom. That one must always choose for one's self.

Well I mean Sartre is a pervert revisionist I guess so he also fucked it up by not properly understanding the either/or but at least he understood the concept of anxiety

There are more options for policy positions than "ban all guns" and "everyone should have guns". As for the poll, there's the simple option of not answering.
It really isn't an either/or choice.

We should demilitarize the police before we even think about putting regulations on guns.
but that'll never happen

We shouldn't regulate guns period.

agreed. But you can't not let people debate their points.

>>>Holla Forums6920805

I like guns a lot. I think that a revolutionary society requires heavy gun use. Gun bans will not help stop crimes, the entire point of reaching socialism is to deal with the economic and social conditions that lead to people committing violence in the first place.
Then again I also think that street racing so long as it's not around cars that do not want to be involved should be legal because fuck, it's fun, so I'm just a weird fucker.

boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/83085686

Can we make competitive tank-fighting a sport too?

Hell yeah, if you like dying more than living you deserve to at least go out doing something cool. Either that or we can use those silly lasertag setups the military uses.

Not Holla Forumsack here but, why would you want to allow guns in a fascist state where most workers are fascist or classcucked? They will be used against you. Shouldn't you educate population first? Otherwise you'll end up with a reactionary uprising.

If we're in a fascist state, we have no control over whether people have guns or not. And if we do, reactionaries that could be convinced to agree with our ideas could see us as direct threats to their livelihood rather than a people with differing opinions.

...

You are supposed to represent an ideology yes?

Either way, you're twisting the issue. Supporting the right of your brown paras to storm my house and shoot me isn't the same as supporting the right of all citizens to own guns.

I oppose everything you're trying to accomplish. Do I get to stay armed if you take over?

It is.

If the lolbergs and the fascists do allow commies to own guns, you should in response allow them to own guns.

If you want to ban that shit, they are logically reactive to ban your shit.

I support RKBA. When Trump wins in November I'm not going to lobby him to disarm Holla Forums users. (Not that any of you own guns)

I'm not sure what you mean, we support -all- people to have guns. Get your fucking head out of your ass you piece of beta trash.

So there are two options here.

1. You're being honest and you're like no commie that has ever existed historically.

2. You're putting on a show for the same reasons you say nigger and faggot. i.e. Guns are cool and you want to sound hip and edgy.

aw hell yeah.

its wasteful as fuck though dude. Probably wouldn't be popular in a post consumerist society

We shoot reactionaries, nothing dishonest about it.

There you go! Give this nigga a gold star. At least he's honest about it.

You'd shoot me for my opinions/if I tried to implement them, why shouldn't I do the same?

I don't care what opinions you have as long as you're white and you leave me alone. If you're not white I still don't care as long as you have them over there somewhere.

That's the problem.

I'm for all of these things. That's why I'm voting Trump. The real question is how you can claim the same while voting in a machiavellian globalist who wants to flood the US with unskilled browns to destroy the value of our labor.

You already fucked up. You don't need a gun to kill people. If I'm a radical nazi/communist I can kill just as many if not more folks with a freight truck, a pressure cooker, a few house hold chemicals and other things that are a lot easier to get my hands on than a gun. Hell, if I'm /fit/ enough I can do quite a bit of damage with a knife…or perhaps a hammer and sickle (kek).

If your ideology is so shit that a few rebels innawoods can wreck it your system is already screwed. Create a system where no one wants to rebel and you quell the rebel problem without firing a shot. At that point it doesn't matter if you have guns or not. Don't blame the gun, blame the man who pulls the trigger.

Yes, pressure coockers and so on, work short term for radical anarkids.

If you want to actually fight, you need at least a shotgun.

Actually, you need the support of the army, but anyway.

This is you brain on Bipartism.

lol

Well there's your problem. When have people ever not wanted to rebel against communism?

There ya go again. Forget the means and manage the motive. A few farmers with pitchforks and cooking knives can commandeer a barracks and get their hands on all kinds of toys. You see what I'm saying? Guns will be the final part of the puzzle if they even are part of it. Remove the guns from the equation entirely (not from the people but from your system of revolt) and then figure out your revolution. If you're ideals are so weak that they can be crippled by being unarmed then whatever revolution you want to lead is shit.

Whether you're the rebels or the party fighting them you can't have a system of government that's shit or it's going to crumble. Spend less time worrying about your guns (which are more plentiful and easier to get than you can imagine) and spend more time on your manifesto.

There's no point spilling the blood of innocents if you're just going to make society more sick. You're essentially creating another generation of discontent that will work to overthrow the society you worked so hard to build.

I'm personally pro gun, but for the sake of discussion you have to look past the bullshit and look to the real problem. Think for a moment, there's enough armed people in the U.S. right now to completely overturn the system and begin from scratch right now. The reason they don't do that is because they're placated. The system isn't perfect but it's not worth tearing down, at least not yet. You may disagree with this system but fundamentally it works. Otherwise the revolution would have already happened.

well, it never has been done right, right?

If I recall there was one form of socialism that did work until the pseudo communists ruined it. If only I could recall what eastern european state pioneered it…

This point keeps being made, but no one addresses it.

/k/ believes in RKBA for all citizens of the nation in question, regardless of political alignment, for self defense, recreation, survival or defense against tyranny and repression. When they talk about gun rights, this is what they mean.

When Holla Forums is pressed on the issue you guys always ramble about proletarian red guards taking up arms in some sort of revolution.

These are two totally different things. The question isn't "do you think guns are cool?" or "would you shoot enemies in war?" The question is whether you support gun rights as /k/ and more or less everyone else in America conceives of them.

Come on, someone? Anyone?

Yui this is an awful post
I just love you though

First and foremost - we don't have a say in a fascist state.

You said it yourself. Fascist state. Government guns are not going anywhere. What is better: to have some at our side or have none?

But more importantly - our platform relies on empowering the population at large (well, working population in my case, but still - not state/army/rich). Increasing gun control is counter-productive, to say the least.

All of the population?

Well, Revolution is an art and has no set formula, but (as ML) I consider that a idealism and utopian fallacy. It's Sisyphean task. Educating population in general from position of power is much more effective. Superstructure follows basis and so on.

Look at all those "but it was proven Socialism doesn't work!" Their only argument is that they are living in a state where they've got told this by appropriate authorities. And if it does work somewhere - it must be some special brand of Capitalism. State Capitalism! It would've been adorable, if it wasn't so pitiful.

No. Priority is a Vanguard party, not everyone. Again - ML. Anarchists might agree with you.

So what? It's not like we can avoid it. Uprisings happen because of organization, not insufficient of gun control.

Moreover, it is such uprisings when population comes face-to-face with the fact that they are not the ones in charge. Real life mass-education in historical materialism.

Not a single one. Left has a lot of ideologies (and I'm not even touching this Cultural "Marxism"). Some people here don't even believe that you should have one (which is retarded, imo).

That stuff is fine, why would that be controversial?

Did you read my post? It seems odd to micromanage every other aspect of live while allowing people to remain armed.

Gotta fight reactionary forces somehow.

Workers council's run by the workers themselves?

Because we are thinking within two different paradigms:

We tend to consider situation when the root of oppression is removed and we can trust government (or Civil War, when you need to kill the other fucker first and you don't care if tread on his civil liberties to do so). /k/ thinks purely pre-Revolution, when any crap that might happen due to lack of gun control is outweighed by government, criminals and lunatics.

Will you stop being retarded?

It is impossible to even conceive about "gun rights as /k/ thinks of them" in the first place, because most of us are not living in America, nor visit /k/ for dank memes.

We don't really care about guns. They are useful and nice to have around, but it's the organization that makes things happen, not guns.

Why are the only options a total ban or private ownership?
Couldn't the guns (and other more dangerous weapons) be owned socially?
For example, (post-)revolutionary society weapons could be held at a community center and given out to people on request, a kind of library for guns. I think this could avoid many of the pitfalls of private gun ownership while at the same time ensuring the workers are armed.

On the other hand if we're talking about society as it exists then we should defend the right to own guns, as taking them away will empower the state and make revolution more difficult.

Less bureaucracy the better. Until we go full automation someone has to keep the books. It'd be better for a more american style system and allow smaller states to dictate more nuanced regulations.

I feel the same way about minimum wage. Instead of mandating every state have $15 minimum wage allow the local economy to dictate the minimum wage. In New York city food, cloths, housing; it all costs more because there's more money there. There I could rationalize a $15 dollar wage.

At the same time rural New Yorkers working in the boonies don't need $15 an hour. Hell, they could nearly go into a barter system with farm animals and such. Again, the less bureaucracy the better.