quote:

Originally posted by GrumpyMCO:
What struck me as odd was that this supposedly first time gun owner choose a SA 1911 as his first gun. Nothing against SA or the 1911 platform, just seems like an odd entry into gun ownership. Maybe he's a fan of the classics.

I don’t know about most folks, but I wasn’t very far along my learning curve about firearms when I bought my first. The fact that I landed on a P229R was more due to luck than anything else. It is entirely possible that everyone else is smarter than me and went about their journey to being a responsible gun owner differently, but I’d guess that 99.9999% of what I have learned about firearms came after I bought my first firearm.

Rogue, that is utter horse pucky.

The NAZIs were absolutely a Socialist party. All tyrannies are - Pinochet, sorta, excepted.

By definition, a tyranny hinges on state ownership. The NAZIs and Fascist party absolutely believed in state economic control.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
Rogue, that is utter horse pucky.

The NAZIs were absolutely a Socialist party. All tyrannies are - Pinochet, sorta, excepted.

Bullshit. Tyranny isn't exclusive to one side of the political spectrum alone.

Either side, on the extreme ends, can result in tyranny.

Just because we tend to identify with the right, don't fall for the trap of "the left wing entails all that is bad/I disagree with, and the right wing is everything good/I agree with".

Besides Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, other easy examples of tyrannical right-wing dictatorships include Spain under Franco, Romania under Antonescu, modern day Iran, Iraq under Saddam, and a whole slew of Latin American and African military regimes, among others.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
By definition, a tyranny hinges on state ownership. The NAZIs and Fascist party absolutely believed in state economic control.

Which isn't automatically socialism/left-wing.

Read up on Authoritarian Capitalism/Totalitarian Capitalism.

Never heard of the Anton fellow. Apparently Romania has a really nasty 20th century. Reading about him now.

What else would you call Centralized Economic Control, other than Socialism or Communism?

All European politics are all statist. If you mean Left and Right in the European sense - as in, the Right believes the Historical Brigand and Whore Class owns everything, and the Left believes the bureaucrats should control everything - then yes, there are dictatorships, as there is no difference.

Both sides believe people are property - The Right exempts the Chief Brigand... and the left pretty much turns the Chief Bureaucrat into the Chief Brigand.

The US does NOT divide that way. To actually be American, means to reject the idea of People as Property. (And this was argued about, from the beginning.)

To be "conservative" in the US, is to be true to the Classical Liberal Roots of the US - there is no way to have a Classically Liberal Dicatorship. It is predicated on the rejection of Central Authority and Ownership.

quote:

Originally posted by Aglifter:
Ceausescu - as in the Soviet Dictator of Romania?

No, Antonescu - as in the fascist dictator of Romania from 1940-1944.

He reads more like the War of the Roses, etc than anything modern.

He was just a straight up Brigand. I'm sure the founders of the Royal Houses of Europe would have all liked him.

I know why the Vietnamese are arming up at work. It ain't because leftists are peaceful flower children. They are sick and tired of a certain demographic targeting them to home invasion rob.

quote:

Originally posted by kaschi:
It will be interesting to see how liberals will react/respond when 4th Amendment rights are abused to kick in THEIR door followed by the further abuse of 2nd Amendment rights to take THEIR firearms. Will they scream "foul" then???

I think they would gladly turn their guns in way, way before any sort of "door-kicking" started.

He's a liquor store owner. I have $20 on the place still gets robbed, he never pulls his gun. I'll toss another $20 saying that the robbers take his gun too.