Firearms appreciation thread

Its not a right, its a choice we all have.

His points are all fine and reasonable, except that he has previously asserted that second amendment to mean much more: He has claimed that it allows him (or codifies his inalienable right to) own any gun he desires and sell or give that gun to any person he desires.

NOBODY here or in Congress or in any state government has proposed any legislation that would infringe on that right.

One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.

Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”

By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable. To see how extremist these programs are, just consider the tactics they boast of using to achieve those ends: “false flag operations” (posting material to the internet and falsely attributing it to someone else), fake victim blog posts (pretending to be a victim of the individual whose reputation they want to destroy), and posting “negative information” on various forums.

inalienable right to self-defense and defense against tyranny.

Try to forget about the constitution, the framers and ally thing to do with the laws regarding firearms. You don't understand those things on the most basic levels. That's why your reasoning is so flawed and painful to read.

We live in 2014 not 1900 a bunch of "well armed" citizens are not gonna defeat a modern military machine...

ARM the citizenry with comparable weaponry such that it can in principle put up enough of a fight that the above principles seriously come into play.

Except we don't... Last I checked it very hard to obtain MPADs, RPGs or high explosives needed to wage modern asymmetrical conflict.

this is getting old... Can we agree the democratic process is likely the best way to achieve meaningful change?