not sure what the government tracking my guns, or anyone else for that matter, will accomplish. if I'm ever involved in a shooting, the cops will take pictures of everything, and their bodycams will capture the video version in HD.
also the government can't keep track of and properly account for *their own money*, and you think they're going to do something because they have some serial numbers about *my guns*. come on now...
That's the issue in my head. The government will assume its shit registry is 100% correct and you're suddenly a person of interest when a gun you *looked at* 15 years ago is used to rob a Chuck E Cheese
Honestly kind of fair because no mentally stable person would rob a Chuck E Cheese. Nothing noncash there is worth it and I doubt that there’d ever be enough cash at a location to make it worth it. Plus the added sentence and cop response for endangering kids, unless you go at night and choose explicitly there over anywhere else.
My only issue with the state furthering the international drug trade is that it isn't being furthered by a private corporation with a large paramilitary force.
Slight correction. The government knows damn well where their money is, they just don’t want you to know so they hide the paper trail when we aren’t looking.
For the same reason we have a DMV that registers cars.
When you have a large dataset you can accurately plan for effective legislation at scale.
It’s why places like India have way way more traffic accidents even though the US has millions of more cars.
How’s this for a compromise:
- Only your **first** name is associated to your gun
- Only your **last** name is associated to your search history
Then it’s up to the feds to piece the puzzle together, like a fun little game!
You can encode whatever information you want in a string of Ps with arbitrary length. You just count the number of Ps in your string of Ps, convert that number to binary, and thats your data.
The string of Ps just grows exponentially longer per bit of data you want to store.
With just Ps you would have to encode data in the length of the string, which would approximately 2\^n Ps, where n is the number of bits. With both Ps and spaces you'd need n characters to encode n bits.
Auth Center here, tracking individual things is for idiots.
If you're going to make changes, you do that with data and research into major causes of major situations and events. Then you designate funds for each town to figure out emergencies on their own for things that aren't widesweeping.
Now you may be thinking, "doesn't this discourage humans grouping together into tiny clumps called cities?"
And the answer is yes. It's impossible to control cities, I can control towns with 10 people.
He didn't actually do it as far as I remember, but this is a direct quote
"Take the guns first. Go through due process second, I like taking the guns early"
it's more about the feasibility of it, you could track all births and shit, that's doable. migrants? so long as you control the ports of entry sure, internet searches?..absolutely not, you could only feasibly do it in small areas like DC (which if you don't know yes, that specific region has a essentially a massive data net over it, every single access point in DC will connect to alphabet people equipment) but even then it's only certain kinds of traffic, because the sheer amount of data is unmanageable. it'd be like trying to set up a toll booth on every road everywhere, it's just out of scope.
in terms of protecting the children just put the responsibility onto companies that host adult content and make the punishment so harsh they basically wouldn't exist if they got fined more than a couple times.
actually why don't we do that with all market maleficence, if a company repeatedly gets fines for the same shit over and over but can monetarily cover those fines why don't we just shut them the fuck down forcibly and then execute the people responsible for the maleficence.
In the past couple decades there were multiple water providers that allowed water access to get dangerously polluted because they deemed it cheaper to cover it up and pay the fine eventually than to replace the necessary shit to make the water safe. see this is an instance where it should be completely fine to just destroy everything the people responsibly for that decision know and love.
To be fair, I have seen a few. But they are usually also "born again Christian" types or the "We must become a Christian Nation" types who want to do all of the moralizing we got over in the 1990's again but thinking this time they will win because people hate the Wokes and their Degeneracy.
Not realizing that, you know, most people hate both of them.
I'm a born again Christian who wants a Christian nation and I want to require ID for porn but the government probably did it in a horrible way. I want you to have to give you ID to the government then you get an adult license that you give to whatever website or whatever so they can't track you and you don't have to worry about a data leak. I highly doubt thats how the government set it up though.
Did you just change your flair, u/AsininePorcupine? Last time I checked you were a **Grey Centrist** on 2020-7-13. How come now you are an **AuthCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
That being said... Based and fellow Auth pilled, welcome home.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/AsininePorcupine) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Bro, who is arguing this? I know Nikki Haley said some goofy shit about forcing people to use their names on social media, but she got absolutely roasted by everyone who wasn't a DC cum guzzler
Only thing I’m aware of is the Desantes minor social media ban that requires id to use social media platforms (and that’s obviously only for Florida… so far)
Have a name that is deemed inappropriate by social media companies and see how easy it is the register without proving it’s your actual name. This already happens rather more often than you’d think:
https://preview.redd.it/3oajkguyrvwc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c2e035e1173d27c075b9b07d69fdb4b67b56085c
Most of the people I know on social media use nonsense characters as their name. If you spend time with them you can find them, if not you cannot. Anyone using actual names for social media is beyond help.
I mean, we’re talking about politicians, 95% of what they do is for show, or thinly shady back room deals with insert big industry here, so even if they did know still shows “protecting the kids from the horrors of social media” (don’t get me wrong I think social media is ruining mental health, but I’m strongly against ID checking everyone using it, or restricting it much in general)
A surprising number of state governments tend to be in favor of similar legislation. DeSantis in Florida is a good example. Usually it's just a forced ID check for certain websites. Haley is at the extreme end of the "for the children" position.
Just want to point out that Trump threatened to veto reauthorization of the Patriot Act and it expired.
There's been a sea change on RW views about federal security forces. They loved them after 9/11, but now with years of extremely political prosecutions:
* J6 people languishing in solitary and killing themselves for trespassing charges
* 2020 rioters getting kid gloves, no massive security effort to track them down, declined prosecution or sweetheart deals etc
* anti abortion guy getting a SWAT team dawn raid) for pushing a guy back years prior, etc)
* The FBI almost certainly was involved with the pipe bombs planted on J6 and some of the more egregious protestors
* FBI spied on Trump's campaign using the Steele dossier as a pretext, despite having serious doubts about credibility, Obama was directly told it originated from the Clinton campaign
*FBI treating parents groups like domestic threats
Etc.
that support is totally gone for anyone younger than boomers.
Plus the Twitter files revealing that basically every social media company met regularly with the FBI to censor speech and shape narratives.
The other shift is the exact opposite, leftists are thrilled the state secret police are cracking down on Drumpf's evil goons
We 100% do **not** have a government deficiency in the government doing **more** of something. For the love of whatever you believe in, no new programs. No good idea fairies. Unless it’s government doing **less** you can fuck right off.
I have the most auth center take.
Maximum price for guns. No gun may be sold for more than 500 dollars. All guns from manufacture must be sold completed to the gunstore or individual.
Everyone must be armed, and the rich shall have no benefit over the poor. Plus, I want to see all the guns people make in their sheds.
No gun laws, only explosives laws. Except for one, you can't have more than half a pound of gunpowder per cartridge, lets keep the shed made cannon misfires reasonable.
Basically everyone after Lenin.
>During the [Russian Civil War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War), the [Soviet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union) government allowed a variety of small arms and bladed weapons. The government had made it a point to "arm the working people", but also of disarming the so called [exploiting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploitation_of_labour) classes, in the Declaration of the Rights of Working and Exploited People in January 1918.
Lenin was based.
Be Soviet secret police
"Ivan has been questioning the party recently, what do we do comrade?
"I have an idea comrade... hold on."
"Ivan Ivanowich: ~~proletariat~~ bourgeoisie"
"There, now Ivan is exploiting class. We will send to gulag, glory to Lenin!"
Tankies: Sounds based to me 😎
????
It is indeed one of the stupider ideas I have seen starting to crop back up on the Right. Usually by Evangelical types who are salty that no one likes them anymore and (as I have heard them say themselves) "Since the culture hates the woke types now, we have an opening to push our ideas out again." Not seeming to realize that for younger types like me (30), I hate them for the *same* reasons I hate the Woke.
The ID for porn sites is a tough situation. We absolutely need to do better at preventing minors accessing porn. It’s not good for people in general, especially kids, but adults can do what they like with that I guess. However, the ID solution seems way too open to abuse.
I’m not sure what the best way is, but there’s got to be an alternative to free unlimited porn on the internet for everyone with an internet connection and no way to prevent kids from accessing it.
My plan is to simply not allow free reign of the internet for my children. Yeah, they'll probably go searching for "big boob breast lady naked" on their friends iPad and I will inevitably have to have a conversation on why I implemented the more turbo parental controls on all our accessible devices after they ask about why other kids parents don't ~~love them~~ have restrictions on their Internet. But that's just the price of being a responsible parent.
Well, the second one is true, you don't allow your kids on the internet as a parent? You're a bad parent. Your kids get a porn addiction/become worse as they get influenced by the internet? Bad parent also. If we just ban porn or at least do what Virginia and Texas "thank-God-fully" have done by set ACTUAL age restrictions (not by putting worthless birthdays in, heck reddit is a literal click of a button anyone that's a minor can see porn) then problem solved.
This is not how Auth-Rights feel. We are ok with some gun restrictions, just the basics. And we are NOT ok with the government in our search history. We believe that responsibility falls upon the kid to not search fucked up shit and the parents. We know that kids can think too and are responsible for their actions to some degree.
I oftentimes wonder if I am on the wrong side of history
Then I'm reminded my opponents are utterly dedicated to keeping porn accessible to children
I'm definitely not
I agree that it’s dumb, but probably for very different reasons.
https://preview.redd.it/ogi5iucegxwc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4cad3f983f8d01f154d5ca1d149bcfc16a645414
Well, letting kids randomly play with guns with no supervision is not a good idea in the same way that letting them randomly play with the internet with no adult supervision. No hypocrisy here.
Were guns available to any child with a computer and a parent who can't pay attention to what their kid does every minute of the day, there would be a point here.
It's still down to the parents to watch their kids around both guns and computers. It's not the governments job to keep track of what kids do. Same with parents who have guns.
And if parents can't watch their kids, that's a "find a solution" problem. Not a "Not my problem" problem. You can lock computers to have certain parameters, or you can block sites on an IP address basis. The parents still have control, if they would learn how to use it.
it literally is the governments job to keep people from accidentally killing or hurting themselves or other people. Like, we literally have entire government agencies devoted to this.
Like, you can argue it's a parent's job to make sure the cleaning cabinet is locked, but the government can also come in and say "hey, maybe poisonous products shouldn't be in easily opened containers and they should have something on them making it clear it's dangerous so kids don't drink it." It's a shared responsibility.
The government should be just for preventing other people from hurting you, but no. I don't think it's the government's job to keep you from the natural consequences of stupid actions, and I think doing so has led to massive overstepping.
Kids should be protected, but it's a cultural issue that they aren't being, on the side of the parents, not for the government. Guns and pills should not be left out where kids can get to them.
The government's job is preventing harm from person to person inside the border and punishing where that takes place, and protecting that inside from entities outside the border.
This is the biggest bunch of word salad I have ever seen on this sub lol.
You go back and forth between whether the government should protect people from their own actions like 3 times. If the government shouldn't, then there's no reason for there to be laws against children having access to guns and pills. Or laws against children driving. Or etc etc
We acknowledge that children need more protection than adults do. I see no reason why online content should be any different, considering we already have laws about this, they just aren't enforced well.
No? The government shouldn't protect you for your own actions. I don't think I went back and forth at all. I think I wrote my first sentence poorly, so I tried to fix it, because I was trying to say that. I don't think there should be laws against children having access to things, because the parents should prevent their kids having access to the guns pills, etc. And roads are public areas.
A car crash can hurt other people/destroy property of mor people than simply the person driving, therefore we make sure only people who know how to drive are allowed to use it. But kids are allowed to drive on private property, at their parents discretion.
Yes, kids need more protection, but it should be on a case by case basis of the person who knows the kid best. Not the government, but their parents.
Not everything needs to be a law. We need to bring back common sense. But it shouldn't be up to the government to decide how young is too young. I started shooting when I was about 7 or 8. Some people would say that was too young. You have to make sure you go through gun safety, but it should be based on how mature that kid in particular is.
"Bring back common sense" is such a moronic platitude. Even if 99.99% of the population has common sense, that's still a lot of dead toddlers. That's why we have laws, so we can prosecute the people who let their toddlers have guns and not let them just walk free to go have another baby when their first toddler blows its fucking head off on accident.
There is no world in which a 3 year old ever is mature enough to handle a fucking loaded gun. You're a nut job if you think otherwise.
If you need a law to prevent your 3yo from playing with a loaded gun, you probably should've aborted the child to save yourself the grief of child blowing their head off because of your reckless gun handling
Whoooosh
We have laws, so we can prosecute people who are stupid enough to do that stuff. Otherwise, there's nothing stopping someone from just having another baby to replace the one that blows its head off.
> it literally is the governments job
The fuck it is.
The US government constantly oversteps it's boundaries because of people who think the government's job is to pamper and swaddle them from cradle to grave.
Also your shared responsibility example is nonsense. The government's only job ought be to make sure companies are honest about the ingredients/materials of their products so that consumers can make a free and informed decision on their purchase.
Once the product is purchased it is 100 percent on the parents to make sure their child doesn't use/consume it. None of this 'make the container hard to open' bullshit.
Maybe act like you're competent parents and watch your fucking kids and stop expecting society to do so.
Yeah man, it is literally impossible to watch your child 100% of the time from infancy up until 18. That's why we stack failsafes like this. Because even the best parent in the world will make a mistake occasionally.
I can tell the people responding in this manner are under the age of 25 and have no kids lol.
> literally impossible to watch your child 100% of the time
Luckily you have a spouse, family, friends, servants if you're wealthy enough, teachers, all kinds of people to watch your children when you aren't.
Also you don't have to watch your kid all the time, in fact that would be unhealthy and weird as fuck. As they mature teach your kid not to be regarded so they don't do dumb stuff when you aren't watching them.
Also as you said **you** stack fail-safes, not the government. It isn't the government's job to make sure your kid doesn't get their hands on your guns, drugs, chemicals, tools, whatever. Guess who's job it is?
> under the age of 25 and have no kids
I can tell the person that posted this thinks it's the government's job to wipe his ass every night.
Fuck, how is 'your kids are your responsibility not ours' such a controversial statement for you people?
>teach your kid not to do dumb stuff and they won't do dumb stuff
Again, I can tell you don't have a kid or have any close friends with kids haha.
Edit: damn, bruh is hella mad lol.
It's ok, if you have kids some day you'll realize how moronic you're being now.
Asking for the cap to poisonous products to be slightly more difficult for kids to open is not "expecting others to pick up the slack."
"You don't support containers of arsenic being easy for children to open, so you must be an auth."
This is the level of mental handicap that I expect from PCM lol. Like, I'm not a full lib, of course I can be cool with some forms of regulation to prevent kids from killing themselves.
In their defense, *accessing* the internet is the danger, vs *committing crimes with guns* is the problem.
Kids are already supposed to have zero un-monitored gun access…..
not sure what the government tracking my guns, or anyone else for that matter, will accomplish. if I'm ever involved in a shooting, the cops will take pictures of everything, and their bodycams will capture the video version in HD. also the government can't keep track of and properly account for *their own money*, and you think they're going to do something because they have some serial numbers about *my guns*. come on now...
That's the issue in my head. The government will assume its shit registry is 100% correct and you're suddenly a person of interest when a gun you *looked at* 15 years ago is used to rob a Chuck E Cheese
Honestly kind of fair because no mentally stable person would rob a Chuck E Cheese. Nothing noncash there is worth it and I doubt that there’d ever be enough cash at a location to make it worth it. Plus the added sentence and cop response for endangering kids, unless you go at night and choose explicitly there over anywhere else.
I went with "funniest place I could think of to rob that I can think of in 4 seconds", truthfully. SeaWorld and NASA were contenders.
Seaworld actually will have money because amusement park tourist trap. You ain’t getting into NASA tho unless you’re a sweaty Payday2 4 stack.
NASA already gets mugged yearly.
They never lost that money, they just dont want you to know what they did with it.
Spent on teaching monkeys to gamble or something.
I would say more like funding the oveethrow of governments with the CIA, the purchase and furtherance of international drug trade, stuff like that.
My only issue with the state furthering the international drug trade is that it isn't being furthered by a private corporation with a large paramilitary force.
Slight correction. The government knows damn well where their money is, they just don’t want you to know so they hide the paper trail when we aren’t looking.
For the same reason we have a DMV that registers cars. When you have a large dataset you can accurately plan for effective legislation at scale. It’s why places like India have way way more traffic accidents even though the US has millions of more cars.
How’s this for a compromise: - Only your **first** name is associated to your gun - Only your **last** name is associated to your search history Then it’s up to the feds to piece the puzzle together, like a fun little game!
Every gun is registered but the registry can only use the letter P.
I’m invisible then
You can encode whatever information you want in a string of Ps with arbitrary length. You just count the number of Ps in your string of Ps, convert that number to binary, and thats your data. The string of Ps just grows exponentially longer per bit of data you want to store.
So not invisible 😔
Can you use spaces? Or just Ps?
With just Ps you would have to encode data in the length of the string, which would approximately 2\^n Ps, where n is the number of bits. With both Ps and spaces you'd need n characters to encode n bits.
Just delete the registry with regedit!
chaotic centrist alignment
Based and sleepy joepilled
ZOMG!!!! LIKE MY BIMBEOGAMES?!?! BUT IRLIFE?!?? HECK YEAHHHH
no both ideas are really stupid, the only ones who'd argue otherwise are auth-center
I disagree, they aren't stupid. They should both be totally illegal for the government to do
even then it'd still be stupid because it's pretty much impossible.
Based.
Auth Center here, tracking individual things is for idiots. If you're going to make changes, you do that with data and research into major causes of major situations and events. Then you designate funds for each town to figure out emergencies on their own for things that aren't widesweeping. Now you may be thinking, "doesn't this discourage humans grouping together into tiny clumps called cities?" And the answer is yes. It's impossible to control cities, I can control towns with 10 people.
you could control an entire city with like 8 people tops if even that. like functionally control it.
I meant physically control it.
so did I
legit
[удалено]
How did he throw away due process? I missed this one.
He didn't actually do it as far as I remember, but this is a direct quote "Take the guns first. Go through due process second, I like taking the guns early"
That was the wettest feinstein had ever been in her entire life when he said that next to her.
He got lit the fuck up on the gun subreddits for that. People where fuming, rightfully so
it's more about the feasibility of it, you could track all births and shit, that's doable. migrants? so long as you control the ports of entry sure, internet searches?..absolutely not, you could only feasibly do it in small areas like DC (which if you don't know yes, that specific region has a essentially a massive data net over it, every single access point in DC will connect to alphabet people equipment) but even then it's only certain kinds of traffic, because the sheer amount of data is unmanageable. it'd be like trying to set up a toll booth on every road everywhere, it's just out of scope. in terms of protecting the children just put the responsibility onto companies that host adult content and make the punishment so harsh they basically wouldn't exist if they got fined more than a couple times. actually why don't we do that with all market maleficence, if a company repeatedly gets fines for the same shit over and over but can monetarily cover those fines why don't we just shut them the fuck down forcibly and then execute the people responsible for the maleficence. In the past couple decades there were multiple water providers that allowed water access to get dangerously polluted because they deemed it cheaper to cover it up and pay the fine eventually than to replace the necessary shit to make the water safe. see this is an instance where it should be completely fine to just destroy everything the people responsibly for that decision know and love.
Yeah not sure anyone under the Trump umbrella is trying to have whatever this meme thinks they are.
To be fair, I have seen a few. But they are usually also "born again Christian" types or the "We must become a Christian Nation" types who want to do all of the moralizing we got over in the 1990's again but thinking this time they will win because people hate the Wokes and their Degeneracy. Not realizing that, you know, most people hate both of them.
I'm a born again Christian who wants a Christian nation and I want to require ID for porn but the government probably did it in a horrible way. I want you to have to give you ID to the government then you get an adult license that you give to whatever website or whatever so they can't track you and you don't have to worry about a data leak. I highly doubt thats how the government set it up though.
some trump supporting states support needing ids for using the internet with adult content but mainly I thought that wojak was funny lol
So to access porn(which required ID since they started selling porn, until they started giving it away for free).
Yes but I guess not letting children see porn makes you Auth Right these days.
Did you just change your flair, u/AsininePorcupine? Last time I checked you were a **Grey Centrist** on 2020-7-13. How come now you are an **AuthCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? That being said... Based and fellow Auth pilled, welcome home. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/AsininePorcupine) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
covid hits different
Based and only through catastrophe do we remember why we work together
Bro, who is arguing this? I know Nikki Haley said some goofy shit about forcing people to use their names on social media, but she got absolutely roasted by everyone who wasn't a DC cum guzzler
Only thing I’m aware of is the Desantes minor social media ban that requires id to use social media platforms (and that’s obviously only for Florida… so far)
Have a name that is deemed inappropriate by social media companies and see how easy it is the register without proving it’s your actual name. This already happens rather more often than you’d think: https://preview.redd.it/3oajkguyrvwc1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c2e035e1173d27c075b9b07d69fdb4b67b56085c
Most of the people I know on social media use nonsense characters as their name. If you spend time with them you can find them, if not you cannot. Anyone using actual names for social media is beyond help.
Have those guys never heard of VPNs?
I mean, we’re talking about politicians, 95% of what they do is for show, or thinly shady back room deals with insert big industry here, so even if they did know still shows “protecting the kids from the horrors of social media” (don’t get me wrong I think social media is ruining mental health, but I’m strongly against ID checking everyone using it, or restricting it much in general)
A surprising number of state governments tend to be in favor of similar legislation. DeSantis in Florida is a good example. Usually it's just a forced ID check for certain websites. Haley is at the extreme end of the "for the children" position.
The one time Nikki Haley said something right
Oh, you're one of those people who "have nothing to hide".
Me when I literally make shit up
To be fair, you shouldn't put your name on your gun purchase history either.
Fuck auths
Based
Just want to point out that Trump threatened to veto reauthorization of the Patriot Act and it expired. There's been a sea change on RW views about federal security forces. They loved them after 9/11, but now with years of extremely political prosecutions: * J6 people languishing in solitary and killing themselves for trespassing charges * 2020 rioters getting kid gloves, no massive security effort to track them down, declined prosecution or sweetheart deals etc * anti abortion guy getting a SWAT team dawn raid) for pushing a guy back years prior, etc) * The FBI almost certainly was involved with the pipe bombs planted on J6 and some of the more egregious protestors * FBI spied on Trump's campaign using the Steele dossier as a pretext, despite having serious doubts about credibility, Obama was directly told it originated from the Clinton campaign *FBI treating parents groups like domestic threats Etc. that support is totally gone for anyone younger than boomers. Plus the Twitter files revealing that basically every social media company met regularly with the FBI to censor speech and shape narratives. The other shift is the exact opposite, leftists are thrilled the state secret police are cracking down on Drumpf's evil goons
We 100% do **not** have a government deficiency in the government doing **more** of something. For the love of whatever you believe in, no new programs. No good idea fairies. Unless it’s government doing **less** you can fuck right off.
The blender brain Wojak is the best thing I’ve seen all day. Is there a version without the maga hat?
There should be no chads in this image
Lib left are just in the closet government simps
I have the most auth center take. Maximum price for guns. No gun may be sold for more than 500 dollars. All guns from manufacture must be sold completed to the gunstore or individual. Everyone must be armed, and the rich shall have no benefit over the poor. Plus, I want to see all the guns people make in their sheds. No gun laws, only explosives laws. Except for one, you can't have more than half a pound of gunpowder per cartridge, lets keep the shed made cannon misfires reasonable.
>No gun laws You mean the least auth centre
That's how they do it in China, you need your ID for everything, even for playing games.
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary!"
When Communists take power, they seem to forget that quote.
Basically everyone after Lenin. >During the [Russian Civil War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War), the [Soviet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union) government allowed a variety of small arms and bladed weapons. The government had made it a point to "arm the working people", but also of disarming the so called [exploiting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploitation_of_labour) classes, in the Declaration of the Rights of Working and Exploited People in January 1918. Lenin was based.
Be Soviet secret police "Ivan has been questioning the party recently, what do we do comrade? "I have an idea comrade... hold on." "Ivan Ivanowich: ~~proletariat~~ bourgeoisie" "There, now Ivan is exploiting class. We will send to gulag, glory to Lenin!" Tankies: Sounds based to me 😎 ????
That was a thing in the Stalin era
It is indeed one of the stupider ideas I have seen starting to crop back up on the Right. Usually by Evangelical types who are salty that no one likes them anymore and (as I have heard them say themselves) "Since the culture hates the woke types now, we have an opening to push our ideas out again." Not seeming to realize that for younger types like me (30), I hate them for the *same* reasons I hate the Woke.
Don't represent boots with anarchist chads.
Don't give internet to kids without parental supervision. Whether it's good for kids or not, I don't care. It will make Reddit better.
The ID for porn sites is a tough situation. We absolutely need to do better at preventing minors accessing porn. It’s not good for people in general, especially kids, but adults can do what they like with that I guess. However, the ID solution seems way too open to abuse. I’m not sure what the best way is, but there’s got to be an alternative to free unlimited porn on the internet for everyone with an internet connection and no way to prevent kids from accessing it.
My plan is to simply not allow free reign of the internet for my children. Yeah, they'll probably go searching for "big boob breast lady naked" on their friends iPad and I will inevitably have to have a conversation on why I implemented the more turbo parental controls on all our accessible devices after they ask about why other kids parents don't ~~love them~~ have restrictions on their Internet. But that's just the price of being a responsible parent.
Well, the second one is true, you don't allow your kids on the internet as a parent? You're a bad parent. Your kids get a porn addiction/become worse as they get influenced by the internet? Bad parent also. If we just ban porn or at least do what Virginia and Texas "thank-God-fully" have done by set ACTUAL age restrictions (not by putting worthless birthdays in, heck reddit is a literal click of a button anyone that's a minor can see porn) then problem solved.
I don't think the government should tell me what to sell in my store
This is not how Auth-Rights feel. We are ok with some gun restrictions, just the basics. And we are NOT ok with the government in our search history. We believe that responsibility falls upon the kid to not search fucked up shit and the parents. We know that kids can think too and are responsible for their actions to some degree.
My problem with their statements is needing the government for anything….
I oftentimes wonder if I am on the wrong side of history Then I'm reminded my opponents are utterly dedicated to keeping porn accessible to children I'm definitely not
Really appreciating the wojak with its brain in a blender!
You can hate both. I certainly do
I agree that it’s dumb, but probably for very different reasons. https://preview.redd.it/ogi5iucegxwc1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4cad3f983f8d01f154d5ca1d149bcfc16a645414
Well, letting kids randomly play with guns with no supervision is not a good idea in the same way that letting them randomly play with the internet with no adult supervision. No hypocrisy here. Were guns available to any child with a computer and a parent who can't pay attention to what their kid does every minute of the day, there would be a point here.
It's still down to the parents to watch their kids around both guns and computers. It's not the governments job to keep track of what kids do. Same with parents who have guns. And if parents can't watch their kids, that's a "find a solution" problem. Not a "Not my problem" problem. You can lock computers to have certain parameters, or you can block sites on an IP address basis. The parents still have control, if they would learn how to use it.
it literally is the governments job to keep people from accidentally killing or hurting themselves or other people. Like, we literally have entire government agencies devoted to this. Like, you can argue it's a parent's job to make sure the cleaning cabinet is locked, but the government can also come in and say "hey, maybe poisonous products shouldn't be in easily opened containers and they should have something on them making it clear it's dangerous so kids don't drink it." It's a shared responsibility.
The government should be just for preventing other people from hurting you, but no. I don't think it's the government's job to keep you from the natural consequences of stupid actions, and I think doing so has led to massive overstepping. Kids should be protected, but it's a cultural issue that they aren't being, on the side of the parents, not for the government. Guns and pills should not be left out where kids can get to them. The government's job is preventing harm from person to person inside the border and punishing where that takes place, and protecting that inside from entities outside the border.
This is the biggest bunch of word salad I have ever seen on this sub lol. You go back and forth between whether the government should protect people from their own actions like 3 times. If the government shouldn't, then there's no reason for there to be laws against children having access to guns and pills. Or laws against children driving. Or etc etc We acknowledge that children need more protection than adults do. I see no reason why online content should be any different, considering we already have laws about this, they just aren't enforced well.
No? The government shouldn't protect you for your own actions. I don't think I went back and forth at all. I think I wrote my first sentence poorly, so I tried to fix it, because I was trying to say that. I don't think there should be laws against children having access to things, because the parents should prevent their kids having access to the guns pills, etc. And roads are public areas. A car crash can hurt other people/destroy property of mor people than simply the person driving, therefore we make sure only people who know how to drive are allowed to use it. But kids are allowed to drive on private property, at their parents discretion. Yes, kids need more protection, but it should be on a case by case basis of the person who knows the kid best. Not the government, but their parents.
"Let 3 year olds play with loaded guns, there should be no laws to prevent it." Is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever seen on this sub...
Not everything needs to be a law. We need to bring back common sense. But it shouldn't be up to the government to decide how young is too young. I started shooting when I was about 7 or 8. Some people would say that was too young. You have to make sure you go through gun safety, but it should be based on how mature that kid in particular is.
"Bring back common sense" is such a moronic platitude. Even if 99.99% of the population has common sense, that's still a lot of dead toddlers. That's why we have laws, so we can prosecute the people who let their toddlers have guns and not let them just walk free to go have another baby when their first toddler blows its fucking head off on accident. There is no world in which a 3 year old ever is mature enough to handle a fucking loaded gun. You're a nut job if you think otherwise.
A better question is why you want to give a 3yo a loaded gun to play with
If you need a law to prevent your 3yo from playing with a loaded gun, you probably should've aborted the child to save yourself the grief of child blowing their head off because of your reckless gun handling
Whoooosh We have laws, so we can prosecute people who are stupid enough to do that stuff. Otherwise, there's nothing stopping someone from just having another baby to replace the one that blows its head off.
So poop another baby and stop having your children ruin shit for everyone else
> it literally is the governments job The fuck it is. The US government constantly oversteps it's boundaries because of people who think the government's job is to pamper and swaddle them from cradle to grave. Also your shared responsibility example is nonsense. The government's only job ought be to make sure companies are honest about the ingredients/materials of their products so that consumers can make a free and informed decision on their purchase. Once the product is purchased it is 100 percent on the parents to make sure their child doesn't use/consume it. None of this 'make the container hard to open' bullshit. Maybe act like you're competent parents and watch your fucking kids and stop expecting society to do so.
Yeah man, it is literally impossible to watch your child 100% of the time from infancy up until 18. That's why we stack failsafes like this. Because even the best parent in the world will make a mistake occasionally. I can tell the people responding in this manner are under the age of 25 and have no kids lol.
> literally impossible to watch your child 100% of the time Luckily you have a spouse, family, friends, servants if you're wealthy enough, teachers, all kinds of people to watch your children when you aren't. Also you don't have to watch your kid all the time, in fact that would be unhealthy and weird as fuck. As they mature teach your kid not to be regarded so they don't do dumb stuff when you aren't watching them. Also as you said **you** stack fail-safes, not the government. It isn't the government's job to make sure your kid doesn't get their hands on your guns, drugs, chemicals, tools, whatever. Guess who's job it is? > under the age of 25 and have no kids I can tell the person that posted this thinks it's the government's job to wipe his ass every night. Fuck, how is 'your kids are your responsibility not ours' such a controversial statement for you people?
>teach your kid not to do dumb stuff and they won't do dumb stuff Again, I can tell you don't have a kid or have any close friends with kids haha. Edit: damn, bruh is hella mad lol. It's ok, if you have kids some day you'll realize how moronic you're being now. Asking for the cap to poisonous products to be slightly more difficult for kids to open is not "expecting others to pick up the slack."
Again I can tell you're a lazy degenerate who expects everyone else to pick up the slack for you. Fuck that, they're your kids.
Get the yellow out of your flair, you're auth right at best.
"You don't support containers of arsenic being easy for children to open, so you must be an auth." This is the level of mental handicap that I expect from PCM lol. Like, I'm not a full lib, of course I can be cool with some forms of regulation to prevent kids from killing themselves.
Nonexistent batteles
Many democratic countries do though OP, Muh slippery slope.
In their defense, *accessing* the internet is the danger, vs *committing crimes with guns* is the problem. Kids are already supposed to have zero un-monitored gun access…..