Well, lookie here. Guess who supports strict gun control.

[beevul]

Repent or die: al-Qaeda forces announce rules for Iraqi territory they now control

ISIS, the al-Qaeda group that has swept through northern Iraq, releases list of rules that citizens must live by: including 'repent or die'

By Damien McElroy

12:51PM BST 12 Jun 2014


The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham has set out a list of rules for residents of Mosul as it seeks to impose its Islamist rules on Iraq's second city.

Firstly it tells "anyone who is asking," who its members are and what it is about: "We are soldiers of Islam and we've taken on our responsibility to bring back glory of the Islamic Caliphate."

All Muslims in the city have been instructed to attend mosque for the five daily prayers. Any one of its members who breach this promise will have their hands cut off.

"No drugs, no alcohol and no cigarettes allowed," it added.

No public gathering other than those organised by ISIS will be allowed at any stage. No guns will be allowed outside of its ranks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/10895007/Repent-or-die-al-Qaeda-forces-announce-rules-for-Iraqi-territory-they-now-control.html

How interesting.

No alcohol, no cigarettes, plenty of drug war, no public gatherings and presumably no free speech, and absolutely no guns allowed outside of perceived authority.

Its a gun control utopia.

Posted in the same spirit as the google dumps that have irresponsible gun owners as their subject, except with some comment and willingness to discuss by the author.

[CBGLuthier]

1. Careful now. i always find that bending over backwards to make a point

can cause one to kiss one's ass.

[blm]

2. When corporate empires complete their takeover of this nation, do you think they

will THEN use their quietly built private armies to really implement the gun control that they are pretending to be against now? Why is some measure of reasonable gun control getting such backlash from groups being funded now by corporate elites who enforce gun control on their own premises?

Will our rights that the corporate elite allow us be contained in the small print of our monthly bills?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

17. Are you suggesting that people who are pro-RKBA are going to one day pull off the mask

and suddenly ban guns in the face of their rank and file after amassing one court victory after another over the course of decades and them there crazy hick toothless rednecks that are stockpiling against a sudden government tyranny will be caught so unawares they should just come to terms with gun control right now.

But someone like Michael Bloomberg, with his squad of armed bodyguards and his restricted community, as he goes around openly declaring he wants people disarmed, is to be trusted implicitly.

I think Post #1 was addressed to you.

[blm]

19. I think you needed to claim I said something I didn't so you could argue with

yourself.

I am not talking about 'people' unless you're Romney and believe corporations are people.

Corporate empires who have thrown themselves BEHIND the no gun regulation at all movement exercise gun control within their own empires. What makes anyone think they are sincere right now in their funding of the NO REGULATION at all movement?

If you plan on furthering the RW claim that any gun control measures = disarming every gun owner, then you can go in a corner and argue with yourself and mastur your debate.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

20. Talk about non-existent arguments.

There is no, "no gun regulation at all movement." I have yet to see a pro-RKBA advocate who doesn't support keeping guns away from convicted felons.

There are, however, plenty of gun grabbers who openly profess as much; including the billionaire Bloomberg with his bullet bristling bodyguards.

I'm still curious how this convoluted plan you claim is underway is supposed to work. How does this nefarious cabal of corporations go from "no gun regulation at all" to suddenly overpowering everyone?

[NYC_SKP]

3. Shades of Mayor Bloomberg right there. What's their stand on supersized soft drinks?

Certainly Bloomberg was mostly in agreement with them on guns, tobacco, and public gatherings (Occupy Wall Street).

I wish I was kidding.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

4. ISIS; want to draw a few loose analogies?

What could equate to the "Night of the Long Knives"?

Maybe soon they'll be recruiting youths. Wait...they do that already.
Maybe soon they'll be destroying places of worship of the minorities. Wait...they did that already.
Maybe soon they'll start building camps...

[NYC_SKP]

12. I just came across this graphic, kind of off topic.

I'm tempted to drop it into every Google dump post as a refutation of the gun control talking points.

URL is: americangunfacts.com/images/infographic.jpg

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

14. Looks good n/t

[arcane1]

5. Gun control equals ISIS now?

I've not seen anyone advocate banning gun ownership entirely, the way ISIS appears to be doing

[Jenoch]

6. Lots of DUers

advocate banning private ownership of guns in the U.S.

[arcane1]

7. That doesn't make them anything like ISIS though.

[Jenoch]

8. I don't think anyone is attempting to make the point you are attempting to refute.

[arcane1]

10. Fair enough! :)

[ncjustice80]

21. I proudly advocate a total ban on firearms.

But you are *diagusting* to try to equate my peaceful, progressive stance with that of violent religious zealots

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. We're not saying grabbers = ISIS, we're saying

grabbers make things easier for groups like ISIS to act unopposed.

[Jenoch]

23. Please show me where I have posted

anything like you are assuming.

[NYC_SKP]

24. Correction: You don't speak for progressives. You seem to speak for an authoritarian police state.

You're entitled to your opinion, but please don't propose to speak for progressives.

Or even for Democrats.

[ncjustice80]

25. Please show me where I states I spoke for all democrats.

Oh wait, you can't. Nice try at shoving words in my mouth to prop up your hateful attack.

[DonP]

26. No, you made it very clear that you disagree with the party platform

and the party leadership as well as our President.

So, why are you on this site again?

[ncjustice80]

27. More misdirection. Please.

The president once opposed marriage equality, ans when the time was right he came out in support of it. The party supports many gun control regulations right now, b/c there are still too many gun humpers who value their precious manhood affirmers over others right to peace and life. When the time is right, the party platform will change and we will finally stop being the laughingstock of the civilized world over all these guns.

[gejohnston]

28. laughingstock of the civilized world over all these guns.

Haven't traveled much outside of the US have you? There are more private citizens with carry permits in Austria (and easier to get than some states) than California. In fact, I would take the gun laws of much of Europe over California, New Jersey, DC, New York, Mass.
Oh, I'm guessing that you think the gun laws of Mexico, Brazil, and Jamaica are more to your liking. At least, more so than Austria's or Finland's (Finland recently raised their age to buy a gun from 15 to 18).

[ncjustice80]

29. And I would take Britain or Japans gun laws.

And Britains healthcare to!

[gejohnston]

30. those are about the same as

Mexico's, Jamaica's, Brazil's. Japan has a good single payer or socialized system (Oh wait, I have socialized medicine here in Wyoming. I even have it in Florida.) The down side of Japan:
the cops can hold you for 30 days without charge or seeing a lawyer
you have no right to a lawyer while being questioned
forced confessions, which often means physical abuse, is admissible in court
no exclusionary rule, meaning warrant-less searches are not frowned upon.
You have no right to an impartial jury or to a fair trial. Acquittal's are not good for a judge's career (a panel of three judges, no jury)

Since Britain (and the rest of Europe) had the same murder rates or lower when they had no gun control laws, have to ask yourself why. I'll keep Wyoming's gun laws. Unlike Britain, we don't have kindergarten teachers being machine gunned while leaving their birthday party, and we don't have grandmothers and soldiers being beheaded by assholes with machetes and axes.

[ncjustice80]

31. Britain doesnt have mass shootings everh few months or cops murdering innocent black men on a daily

Basis either.

[gejohnston]

32. neither do we

If it bleeds it leads. The media as almost always, if not always, full of shit. You don't need a gun to commit a mass murder. Since the National Firearms Agreement in Australia, there have been several mass murders, all with higher body counts than mass shootings. They just happen to be arson. We also don't report on what happens in other countries than we do. Until Sandy Hook, the worst school shooting (by a student) was in Germany.

They don't have the gang problem we do either, which is 80 percent of our murders, including mass shootings.

[ncjustice80]

36. Havent watched the news lately, have we?

St Louis, Ferguson, Colombus...

[gejohnston]

37. I don't jump to conclusions

or band wagons until the facts are out. Only those facts contain the truth. Facts and evidence are the evolutionary science to ideology's creation stories. We don't know the innocence or guilt of anyone. Also, unfortunately, the news is more about making money with infotainment than informing.

[acalix]

34. Japan is a bad example for gun controllers

Japan is very authoritan and impedes many freedoms. There's hardly any pivacy and they have a 99% conviction rate for a reason.

Japanese culture revolves around submitting to authority at all costs.

Canada is a far better example for the pro-control crowd.

[acalix]

33. You don't speak for me

I'm all for better regulation like licensing and training, but banning all guns is foolish. For example I need my guns for hunting.

[ncjustice80]

35. Single shot shotgun, stored at the police station.

And why does everyone assume I claim to speak for them lol? So sensitive!

[gejohnston]

38. which will decrease the use of guns in suicides

but will not decrease suicides, murders, violent crime or anything else. If fact, it could increase some violent crime like home invasions. According to studies funded by the DoJ, guns are used to deter criminal attacks (rapes, strong armed robberies, etc) 100k-800k times a year. There have been studies going back to the 1970s by various criminologists who came up with those same results.
You will not disarm drug gangs, because they can get guns just as easily as they get heroin or pot (drug cartels are making their own in Mexico. Australian biker gangs make their own sub machine guns, to sell to drug dealers and use on each other.) You will not be disarming male domestic abusers, since they rarely use guns to kill. Most of them kill with bare hands or the nearest baseball bat. You would be disarming the victim of stakers however.
Your gun control view will not result in peace, saved lives, or anything else. You can call it progressive, but so was eugenics. You can't call it liberal.

[IronGate]

39. Ummmmm,

NO.
And just for the record, not gonna happen.

[gejohnston]

11. I have

[beevul]

13. Its kind of like the "somalia is a gun lovers paradise" comments, thrown about.

It just comes from the other side of the issue, this time.

Turnabout being fair play, and all.

[Eleanors38]

15. Oh, you and your symmetry. nt

[beevul]

16. I know...

I'm just not fair.

Or something.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. You should gander at Post #5 linked below --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172152767

Apparently it's the pro-RKBA folks who are ISIS-lite.

[Schema Thing]

9. "ISIS, the al-Qaeda group" huh?