• 6 Posts
  • 152 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 8th, 2023

help-circle


  • Libertarian here. According to you I don’t want to help the poor so can you please explain to me why I’m spending hours every month doing volunteer work that has positive impacts for the disadvantaged?

    It’s long been said Libertarians are just Republicans that want to smoke weed and distance themselves from the outwardly racist rhetoric.

    Some are but not all. The people who repeat that line really don’t like to be confronted with the reality that there’s a lot more to a libertarian than weed. As an example the party platform started pushing LGBTQ rights clear back in the late '70s, long before anyone else was.

    There certainly are selfish bastard libertarians but undesirables exist in every party and I maintain that we shouldn’t define a group by its worst members.


  • Why would I, a right wing libertarian, lend my time to developing a piece of software that I am unable to make a profit from?

    You are making a reductionist argument that the only thing that motivates a libertarian is profit. It is certainly a motivator but it’s certainly not the only one. Libertarian’s have a long history of association with FOSS, for example my own stretches back to the mid-90s. I have no desire to make money from it but I have a strong desire to stay out of the clutches of BigTech as much as possible and so I contribute to FOSS as I can.

    Something like bitcoin is the kind of tech project of that mould that i think attracts the right wing libertarian.

    A lot of libertarians push on cryptocurrency not because of a profit motive but because of the freedom and privacy aspects. To use myself as an example I don’t hold crypto as an investment but rather as a way of holding a currency that isn’t subject to the US Federal Reserve system.

    Are there some libertarians who fit your descriptions? Absolutely there are, and they are generally referred to as Anarcho-Capitalists, An-Caps for short, but just like every Democrat isn’t a Progressive not every libertarian is an An-Cap.



  • Simple mechanisms for flagging/reviewing misinformation would be helpful

    It would be helpful but it would only be a band-aid on the sucking chest wound of economic issues. There’s also the very real problem of who gets to declare something as “misinformation”. There’s absolutely no way I would entrust our Government with that power and I trust the private companies running Media and Social Media outlets even less.


  • The Russian and Chinese propaganda machines are making headway for two very clear reasons:

    1. Liberal Immigration Policy.
    2. Rapidly diminishing economic prospects.

    The first one is nearly brain dead simple to resolve. Tighten controls on immigration. Like it or not that seems to be what many voters want and the continuing refusal to be responsive to that makes politicians out of step with their constituents. Are these Representative Democracies or not?

    The second is more nuanced but also relatively straightforward; stop outsourcing Blue Collar / Manufacturing work to low labor cost places like China. In fact the whole trends needs to reverse and those jobs needs to brought back!

    That’s it. Those two things explain the rising support for the “Far Right” in both the Europe and the United States. The person pulling the lever for a Right-Oid candidate isn’t doing it because they love Russia or Putin, they are doing it because they want meaningful employment that allows them to be at least somewhat comfortable.





  • But if a dude is buying 95 semi-automatic rifles in a short period of time you bet your ass I think that should be public knowledge.

    I disagree, I really don’t see why it’s any business of the PUBLIC (nor is there anything you could do about it.) But hold on…

    No one should be able to secretly purchase enough firearms to arm a small malitia.

    That’s the thing, it’s NOT “secret”. The FBI and the BATFE both know they are just choosing not to do anything about it. I mean they literally KNOW, and not in some vague / abstract manner that is time delayed. They know in near real time that one purchaser has submitted a 4473 with multiple firearms on it and they also know if a single purchaser submits multiple form 4473s.

    So when Craig Adlong was showing up to the Gun Store and buying 15,16,17 Rifles at a time multiple times a week both the BATFE and the FBI KNEW and chose not to do anything. They could have delayed or denied any of the transfers (sales) and / or sent out a Field Agent to figure out what was going on. They didn’t.

    This is the foundation of my “The public doesn’t need to know” argument when it comes to individuals. Assuming the Gun Store is complying with Federal Law then this isn’t happening in secret. At least two different Federal Law Enforcement Agencies know about it.


  • Nothing to do with the Mexican govt.

    I’m interested to know how the Mexican Government, who also had / has the trace data, is bound by the Tiahart Amendment.

    I know it’s going to be an unpopular opinion but I really see no problem with the Tiahart Amendment shielding Firearms Manufacturers and Gun Stores. The Manufacturers are already regulated and monitored directly by the Federal Government and Gun Stores can only make sales in compliance with Federal Law. They should not be culpable in either Criminal or Civil court for that reason. The truth is that most of the organization who want that data aren’t working in Good Faith and only want it so they can launch lawsuits meant to force Manufacturers and Sellers out of business.

    It gets even worse at the individual level. There is absolutely zero cause for firearm transaction records to an individual to be publicly available. It’s not only a gross violation of privacy but it’s also a security concern.

    What you SHOULD be mad about is why the BATFE, who clearly and provably does have this data, isn’t doing something with it. They already know literally everything in this article and yet they don’t seem to be doing much about it. Why?








  • Something’s fishy going on with this statement

    It’s not difficult to understand. The SACEUR doesn’t speak for NATO as an organization and in fact the idea that Christopher Cavoli is “NATO’s top military officer” would come as quite a surprise to his boss Admiral Rob Bauer the Chair of the NATO Military Committee.

    Admiral Bauer, unlike Cavoli, actually does speak for NATO.

    What does Admiral Bauer have to say? His statements are the official ones, not the just opinion of an Officer.