United States Corrupt Twattery

BloodOmen

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
17,606
Another big shooting over there. I wonder if enough will ever be enough?
No meaningful regulations that's for sure. They all keep using the amendment to bear arms as an excuse to own firearms... silly fuckers don't seem to understand that amendment means it can be changed.

Automatic weapons have no place in public hands. If it's for hunting then a rifle or shotgun is more than sufficient - home defence? shotgun or pistol.

Other than that, there is no valid reason to own automatic weapons as the public - even those going "But we need to defend ourselves against the goverment!" please, if it ever came to civil war again who is the smart money on? sure as hell isn't on Hill billies in pickup trucks, its on trained army personal with modern hardware.
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
17,192
So it will come down to who owns the tanks, warplanes, missiles and UAVs. Assault rifles will be irrelevant.
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
17,192
Also, defending yourself against the government is not a constitutional reason for owning firearms and is nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Sedition for any reason is explicitly unconstitutional.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,081
Also, defending yourself against the government is not a constitutional reason for owning firearms and is nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. Sedition for any reason is explicitly unconstitutional.
Americans routinely freight the 2nd Amendment with all kinds of stuff that isn't there (and conveniently ignore stuff that is); in this case it's all that well-known slave shagger Thomas Jefferson's fault; "The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants" etc. It's amazing how many Americans seem to think this is the point of gun ownership.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
34,095
So it will come down to who owns the tanks, warplanes, missiles and UAVs. Assault rifles will be irrelevant.
Makes you wonder why armies have them if tanks and missiles can do the whole job :)
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
17,192
Americans routinely freight the 2nd Amendment with all kinds of stuff that isn't there (and conveniently ignore stuff that is); in this case it's all that well-known slave shagger Thomas Jefferson's fault; "The tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants" etc. It's amazing how many Americans seem to think this is the point of gun ownership.
Yep, but at no point in the constitution did it say that if enough hillbillies with mullets gather together and whine hard enough then this document will cease to be applicable :)
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
17,192
Makes you wonder why armies have them if tanks and missiles can do the whole job :)
It’s not saying that they can do the whole job. It’s saying that the side without them will lose.
 

Wij

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
17,192
Both sides will have them in a civil war - as large parts of the army will defect. :)
Maybe, in which case it would be those that are decisive, not the assault rifles held by rednecks, as per my point.
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
34,095
  • The New York Times
  • Le Monde
  • The Guardian
  • Der Spiegel
  • El Pais

All think Wikileaks is a legitimate publishing entity, that Assange committed no crime and the current prosecution is a "direct attack on media freedom".

Obama said he wouldn't prosecute, Biden was vice-president at the time.

This is their combined letter:


Twelve years ago, on November 28th 2010, our five international media outlets – the New York Times, the Guardian, Le Monde, El País and Der Spiegel – published a series of revelations in cooperation with WikiLeaks that made the headlines around the globe.


“Cablegate”, a set of 251,000 confidential cables from the US state department, disclosed corruption, diplomatic scandals and spy affairs on an international scale.

In the words of the New York Times, the documents told “the unvarnished story of how the government makes its biggest decisions, the decisions that cost the country most heavily in lives and money”. Even now in 2022, journalists and historians continue to publish new revelations, using the unique trove of documents.

For Julian Assange, publisher of WikLeaks, the publication of “Cablegate” and several other related leaks had the most severe consequences. On April 12th 2019, Assange was arrested in London on a US arrest warrant, and has now been held for three and a half years in a high-security British prison usually used for terrorists and members of organised crime groups. He faces extradition to the US and a sentence of up to 175 years in an American maximum-security prison.

This group of editors and publishers, all of whom had worked with Assange, felt the need to publicly criticise his conduct in 2011 when unredacted copies of the cables were released, and some of us are concerned about the allegations in the indictment that he attempted to aid in computer intrusion of a classified database. But we come together now to express our grave concerns about the continued prosecution of Julian Assange for obtaining and publishing classified materials.


The Obama-Biden administration, in office during the WikiLeaks publication in 2010, refrained from indicting Assange, explaining that they would have had to indict journalists from major news outlets too. Their position placed a premium on press freedom, despite its uncomfortable consequences. Under Donald Trump however, the position changed. The DoJ relied on an old law, the Espionage Act of 1917 (designed to prosecute potential spies during world war one), which has never been used to prosecute a publisher or broadcaster.

This indictment sets a dangerous precedent, and threatens to undermine America’s first amendment and the freedom of the press.

Obtaining and disclosing sensitive information when necessary in the public interest is a core part of the daily work of journalists. If that work is criminalised, our public discourse and our democracies are made significantly weaker.

Twelve years after the publication of “Cablegate”, it is time for the US government to end its prosecution of Julian Assange for publishing secrets.

Publishing is not a crime.

The editors and publishers of:
The New York Times
The Guardian
Le Monde
Der Spiegel
El País
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom