Boy genius says guns bad; proposes that we by them back from ourselves

Dirichlet said:

I tried posting this comment - let's see if it passes "review"

From one PhD to another, your degree should be revoked. First, this issue isn't about "enjoyment" of owning a firearm nor is it about hunting. It is about a fundamental, inalienable right which SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Second, your proposed taxes are moronic, at best. You propose to tax the the ammunition and the guns so that you can buy back the guns whose ammunition you are taxing so you can buy back the... what?? Have you ever heard of circular logic? Also, your proposal to increase the tax on owning a gun on a yearly basis will do what, exactly? Oh, yes, I know - it will allow those with means to own firearms while those of a lower socioeconomic status would be denied that right; otherwise known as disenfranchisement of the poor. Congrats, professor, you're a douche... If you would like to actually educate yourself on the topic (which it's clear you haven't), please read the following article http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01/the-rifle-on-wall-left-argument-for-gun.html

Click to expand...

Brooklyn said:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris...trol_b_2638658.html?utm_hp_ref=crime&ir=Crime


Boy genius professor of economics, the kind that looses money apparently , proposes ban on all guns that are actually useful, but says existing guns will be bought back from owners using revenue raised by taxing the ammo that these same gun owners would buy to use in the guns they will now sell to get back to the government to get back the money that they paid in taxes for the ammo they can no longer use in the guns they just sold. Normally I need to try harder to achieve this level of perfect self parody, but that is only because I consider economics to be a mental health problem, and avoid making fun of it out of respect for the mentally ill.

I profusely apologize to the criminally insane for the insinuation that they may, in fact , be closeted economists.

Those who may wonder why anyone would want to participate in such a circular firing squad will be happy to know that he is willing to study this issue in order to find out. When he does I am sure he will tell us. Until then feel free to assume that the good professor has no idea. Lucky for us we are not bright enough to understand, and thus in our ignorance we will KEEP OUR GOD DAMN GUNS. We will also " DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION".

Thank you for playing, professor.

Click to expand...

Dirichlet said:

I tried posting this comment - let's see if it passes "review"

From one PhD to another, your degree should be revoked. First, this issue isn't about "enjoyment" of owning a firearm nor is it about hunting. It is about a fundamental, inalienable right which SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Second, your proposed taxes are moronic, at best. You propose to tax the the ammunition and the guns so that you can buy back the guns whose ammunition you are taxing so you can buy back the... what?? Have you ever heard of circular logic? Also, your proposal to increase the tax on owning a gun on a yearly basis will do what, exactly? Oh, yes, I know - it will allow those with means to own firearms while those of a lower socioeconomic status would be denied that right; otherwise known as disenfranchisement of the poor. Congrats, professor, you're a douche... If you would like to actually educate yourself on the topic (which it's clear you haven't), please read the following article http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01/the-rifle-on-wall-left-argument-for-gun.html

Click to expand...

molonlabe said:

Anything I read in the huffington post usually causes me to vomit.

Click to expand...

Intelligence

1
a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations : reason; also : the skilled use of reason (2) : the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)


Wisdom
1
a : accumulated philosophic or scientific learning : knowledge
b : ability to discern inner qualities and relationships : insight
c : good sense : judgment
d : generally accepted belief <challenges what has become accepted wisdom among many historians — Robert Darnton>
2
: a wise attitude, belief, or course of action
3
: the teachings of the ancient wise men

Click to expand...

gtodave said:

Some economist he is...."$200 year 1, $300 yr 2, etc". If you REALLY wanted to disarm people quickly, you'd offer the higher amount right up front, and diminish the amount as time went on. THAT actually would make sense economically.

What a maroon.

Click to expand...

gmhowell said:

Uh, what? Why would the government start bids high an move lower? How does that make sense economically? If someone doesn't turn in a gun in 2014 for $300, why would they do it in 2015 for $200 or 2016 for $100?

I also think those of you screaming 'molon labe' are forgetting that lots of people turn in guns for free. The way this works (and it could) is that all of us buy ammo (or powders and primers) that can be taxes heavily, or the gun tax/license he proposes. That money then goes to buy granddad's WWII pistol, Taqwon's Hi Point, or empty AT-4 tubes.

Don't let your emotions cloud your judgment.

Click to expand...

Brooklyn said:

Look rule 5.. ridicule not Reformation.

They don't need us defending their ideas.. really they can do that themselves....

Please, if you can' t say anything snarky don't say anything

That's the point of rule 5 of rules for radicals.
We must win. We must learn how to play the game we are in not the game we would like to be in.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals#section_3

Click to expand...

foxtrapper said:

I apologize to everyone if this douchewaffle has aspergers. Doesn't quite fit though, logical thinking and questioning the shit out of everything ( beginning with "why are those other kids mean to me?") seems to be a trait of my tribe. But there are always some, so sheltered and so coddled, they never see the real world.

Click to expand...