The Reason Why Socialist Want Gun Control

[kelvin90701]

Think of your stereotypical firearms owner. They will never peacefully accept a socialist state. They will never support the oppressive taxes required to support socialist programs. They will never just "go with the flow". Firearms are political power. Your sterotypical firearms owner will not accept a 50% income tax. If a socialist state ever came down to that, they will all grab thier deer rifles and start shooting commies through a window while they are eating dinner. Remember 1776 was all about taxes. Before a socialist state can be formed, the firearms must be removed from people who will used them as tools to protect freedom.

[Just Joe]

i'm Socialist and 100% pro-firearm ownership. and i'm not even from the US.

the American position is correct, you need guns to stand up to oppressive governments.

and i don't think you'd need high taxes in a Socialist state. taxes are a comprimise with the upper class. you keep your businesses, and we'll just take some of your money. its basically the worst of both worlds. taxes would actually be cut with nationalisation, as the governments fund would come from big profit making companies rather than actual working people.

(Edited by Just Joe at 5:00 pm on Mar. 23, 2003)

[Umoja]

Guns are a socialist friend. The original reason for ownership is quite good. Protect yourself from the revolutionary government, if it ever loses it's spirit.

[kelvin90701]

Quote: from Just Joe on 4:59 pm on Mar. 23, 2003


i don't think you'd need high taxes in a Socialist state.

(Edited by Just Joe at 5:00 pm on Mar. 23, 2003)


Do you really believe that a socialist economy can support your tax system?

http://www.mises.org/econcalc/POST.asp

My point is: 1) A socialist state must support itself with oppressive taxes 2) To get away with it in this country you must disarm the "gun nuts"

[Just Joe]

thats an economics debate. i'd start another thread if i were you.

an oppressive tax system, would be anti-Socialist. some taxes are needed for some public services, but huge funds that go to big private companies could be used for most services like health care. thats where nationalisation comes in.

[kelvin90701]

Sorry but I humbly beg to differ, it belongs here just fine. Armed rebellion and economics are very much intertwined.

[Chiak47]

All lefties fighting for their cause want to be on top of the commie pyramid.

The few on top live nice while the ones on the bottom live in squalor.

The few on top DO NOT want the masses on the bottom to be armed.
China,The Soviets,Cuba,North Korea, Vietnam,and Cambodia all have tight gun controls.Basically if you are caught with on you get killed.

BTW-Before some smart ass pipes in and brings light to the fact I have the soviets on the list let me state this.THEY STILL CAN NOT OWN THEM.

Putin was a commie (KGB)and he still has a leftist leaning.

(Edited by Chiak47 at 10:55 pm on Mar. 23, 2003)

[Just Joe]

look kelvin, i know what you mean, but youre wrong. quite a few on 'the left' do indeed want guns restricted, buts that really doesn't have much to do with them wanting to enforce taxes. if you really think that, i think you've been watching too many conspiricy theory movies.

i an umoja are both Socialists and we favour guns; we think there a right citizens should have. if youre theory was correct, how do you account for Socialists favouring guns?

and your theory that Socialism is just taxes is not right either. if i do favour high taxes, its for the big companies not the working man.

[Chiak47]

Just Joe-I think I am confusing socialism with communism.
What was hitler again?Ohh yea a socialist a national socialist but still a socialist.He enacted gun control right off the bat.

But then again Sweden is a socialist state and her subjects are allowed to own firearms.

Hmm Sweden also has a average of 52% tax on its subjects average workingmen.But they have one of the best vacation-State sponsored-packages available.

Thanks but no thanks.
I'll save my own money and go to walley world.

[Reuben]

interesting thread, i seem to remember that when America backed the bay of pigs invasion Cuba armed 200,000 of its civilian population who were happy to dfend the revolution

[kelvin90701]

Quote: from Just Joe on 11:25 pm on Mar. 23, 2003
i think you've been watching too many conspiricy theory movies.

i an umoja are both Socialists and we favour guns; we think there a right citizens should have. if youre theory was correct, how do you account for Socialists favouring guns?



I believe that really a blanket statement that is not really true. I am very happy to hear you do favor firearms ownership. Socialist in
Canada, UK, and Austrialia have restricted firearms. Socialist (although they don't call themselves that) in the USA are attempting to do that.

Communist conspiracy? Probably no, but the liberals in this country are priming the USA for an armed rebellion. They need taxes to support thier social programs at the same time trying to restrict firearms.

[Chiak47]

Hmm 200,000.I seemed to read 125,000 before.But what the hay.

Yea and during the Revoluton in russia the Bolshevik's handed out all kinds of firearms.Only to take them back after they murdered and won.

[Just Joe]

Socialist in
Canada, UK, and Austrialia have restricted firearms.

none of those nations practice or claim to practice Socialism.

Communist conspiracy? Probably no, but the liberals in this country are priming the USA for an armed rebellion. They need taxes to support thier social programs at the same time trying to restrict firearms.

i don't think its ideological. there are Capitalists in the Democrat party in the US who i'm sure would oppose firearms. at the same time, there are Socialists like myself and umoja, who think gun ownership is ok.

if this is an argument about the right to own guns, then i'm on ur side. if its an argument saying all Socialists oppose guns because of taxes, then i think ur barkin up the wrong tree.