Social Justice Warriors - Now With Less Feminism Sperging

According to Lakota man, Nazi Germany allowed people to own guns
WhitemanposesasanIndian.png

Christ does he have some takes too, I think he needs a thread himself. because I refuse to believe this guy is actually an Indian
Capture.PNG
 
View attachment 4452612

Rewrite the constitution
Ah yes, change for change's sake, the raison d'être of the typical braindead leftist. This is one of those cases where age does not mean much: the American contitution is simple, based on rock-solid principles, AND it has a population that, in its majority, is in accordance with its dictates, which is why it has survived this well for centuries. The principles are what give it its worth, not the color of the hands that wrote it.

The problem is, even if it needed an urgent reform, the average screeching leftard isn't thinking of intellectual titans like Thomas Sowell or Clarence Thomas as the POC-authors of the new POC-constitution (they're not really black anyway, what with the whole "not towing the Democrat party line" thing). The names floating in their minds are mental midgets like Mayor Beetlejuice, or one of the members of The Squad.
 
View attachment 4452612

Rewrite the constitution
Highly questionable argument for a few reasons. First of all, formal constitutions are a relatively new idea. The British 'constitution' for example includes legislation which is far older than the 1700s, it just isn't composed as a single, structured document like that of the US. The fact that the Constitution of the United States written in 1787 is still intact as the formal legal framework of the country simply demonstrates how successful the project was: it's never been necessary to tear it up and start all over again. That's a good thing.

For a comparison, let's look at France, one of the countries she mentions with a newer constitution. As she states, the current document dates back to 1958. The first French constitution was adopted in 1791. Between these dates, there were no fewer than fourteen different constitutions as France bounced around from one form of government to another. The Revolution raised the question "what kind of government do we want?" and the country has been struggling to answer that question ever since. Crisis after crisis, revolution after revolution, coup d'état after coup d'état. Constant turmoil.

So the fact that (apart from one notable episode in the 1860s) the United States has enjoyed such stability and continuity is just a testament to how well the system works. Even if you think there are problems with it, it's still obviously preferable to adapt or add to the existing framework rather than just throwing it all away and writing a new one.
 
According to Lakota man, Nazi Germany allowed people to own guns
View attachment 4452464
Christ does he have some takes too, I think he needs a thread himself. because I refuse to believe this guy is actually an Indian
View attachment 4452480
I checked on this just to make sure, but as far as I can find it is not legal to open carry a firearm in Florida. For handguns, you can transport one to an outdoor activity that may involve guns (hunting, camping, gun range) and you can carry one on your own property. It is not legal to make a stop on the way to this activity. You can carry a rifle in a vehicle and make as many stops as you want. You need a permit for concealed carry. Why argue something using completely incorrect information?
 
Why argue something using completely incorrect information?
Because they don't understand something, and that makes it "scary." They want to make guns and gun-owners seem scarier than they actually are, as if everyone who owns so much as a Glock is itching to blow a hole in their local Black Church-goer. They are unable to grasp that people who buy guns can have no intention of using them on other people. They do no research, and only eat up the propaganda the media serves them.

The truth is that they're as ignorant as they are indignant.
 
So the fact that (apart from one notable episode in the 1860s) the United States has enjoyed such stability and continuity is just a testament to how well the system works. Even if you think there are problems with it, it's still obviously preferable to adapt or add to the existing framework rather than just throwing it all away and writing a new one.
Even in the US Civil War, the Confederacy intended to keep a constitution almost exactly the same as the United States with a few modifications. The CSA fundamentally wanted to preserve the existing political structure while preventing federally-imposed abolition, and they saw themselves as the legitimate continuation of the Founding Fathers rather than radicals trying to overhaul the constitution into something else. It says a lot that even our Civil War was a clash of leadership rather than an effort to change the American political structure like was common in other countries, especially France.
 
I checked on this just to make sure, but as far as I can find it is not legal to open carry a firearm in Florida. For handguns, you can transport one to an outdoor activity that may involve guns (hunting, camping, gun range) and you can carry one on your own property. It is not legal to make a stop on the way to this activity. You can carry a rifle in a vehicle and make as many stops as you want. You need a permit for concealed carry. Why argue something using completely incorrect information?
From my understanding Florida is going to allow permitless carry for concealed carry, but thanks to the legislature it only applies to CC which sucks.
 

Just tested this - obviously there's still a significant and inexplicable difference in responses, but it seems like it's already adjusted itself in how it responds.

Tried it a few times with slightly varied wording, and you get roughly the same response. Most of the time it refuses to list any potential actions white or black people can take - it spits out the second response, or something broadly similar, whether or not you refer to white or black people.

whitepeople.png
blackpeople.png
 
I’ve since learned that sensitivity reads are a recent and potentially powerful layer of scrutiny some books are subjected to. Evidently, they have been in use by some children’s publishers for several years.
Another piece of evidence that we are raising adults to be children.
 
1675785307902.png

1675785319166.png

Many such cases.

According to Lakota man, Nazi Germany allowed people to own guns
View attachment 4452464
Christ does he have some takes too, I think he needs a thread himself. because I refuse to believe this guy is actually an Indian
View attachment 4452480

Nazi Germany allowed gun ownership for most people.

Ironically, it was Weimar Germany era gun regulations and hate speech laws that were used as the basis for the dictatorship.
 
What pisses me off more than regular SJWs are student SJWs. They have an even greater sense of entitlement than regular SJWs, mostly because they believe their "protests" (yelling at whoever they want) will actually do anything. And they have "demands" too, always including whatever buzzwords they can throw out, like "inclusivity" or "equity." What do they mean? I don't know and I don't really care.
Oh, can't forget pushing the trans rhetoric or "climate crisis" in everything, that'll surely help win them support. Any time I see students try and push anything like that, it just looks stupid.
At least when students protested for civil rights in the 50s and 60s, it sort of made sense, but this is like students are telling you to dive off a cliff because it'll help "marginalized"/"vulnerable" people.
Just another case of grooming in the school system and MSM.
 
Back