Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Anonymous, Dec 29, 2012.


looooong gun discussion

gun ban 2 vote(s) 6.7%
stricter gun control 11 vote(s) 36.7%
gun freedom 15 vote(s) 50.0%
Americans suck 6 vote(s) 20.0%
The British suck 6 vote(s) 20.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Hugh Bris Member

    I'm not explaining it very well, so there's that.

    Here's another attempt at a thought experiment:

    If you were perfectly content/happy sitting in your chair, would you act? That is, if there was nothing that could increase your happiness, would you do something other than sitting in your chair?

    Then, what would make you get up? What happens that impels you to get up?

    IOW, what is the incentive to act? What propels action? Why do you act rather than sit in your chair? What changed? Why are you no longer perfectly content?
  2. Random guy Member

    Oh, I know the answer to this one: It's Mises' praexology axiom that you are never fully or at least not lasting content, and that you do things (in this case get off your but) in order to fulfil some plan as to how to increase your contentment.

    This simplistic explanation of motives ignore recent research, like 1st and 2nd order thinking and natural variation in time.
  3. fishypants Moderator

    aw. I'd be disappointed. I'm enjoying our interesting discussion.

    You can borrow my big-girl pants if you like? ;) (joke) Remember that you don't have an obligation to reply to anyone that you don't want to reply to.


    If you'll excuse me backtracking a little..

    I'm fairly sure on this point. The law is definitely different on sock-ownership versus nuke-ownership. Your argument - unless I misunderstand - is that that difference in law isn't justified by a normative moral/ethical rule.

    I don't know.

    Let's look at starlings:

    I think we can both agree that each bird is making individual decisions. Like individuals in the free market.

    Yet the flock as a whole 'does things'. By which I mean that it is meaningful to say that the flock is 'wheeling' or 'spinning'. The flock-as-a-whole is performing actions beyond those performed by each individual birds.

    It's an example of the kind of emergent behaviour that you were talking about earlier, of course.

    But I don't think it's true to say that the behaviour and decisions of the birds in that flock can only be described in terms of the behaviour of each individual bird. The flock itself - the collective - is performing actions.

    Similarly, its not nonsensical to say that 'the market' goes up and 'the market' goes down:


    even though 'the market' is an amalgam of individual decisions.

    Well... some examples...:
    "Children murdered by the Mafia as Italian mobsters sink to new low"
    "Why the mafia had to murder Marilyn Monroe"

    OK, so those are press reports and I can see that you're saying "think of the law". And it's true that in law a murder is committed by a specific person.

    But maybe we should take a look at crimes other than murder:

    Corporate manslaughter: "The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 is a landmark in law. For the first time, companies and organisations can be found guilty of corporate manslaughter as a result of serious management failures resulting in a gross breach of a duty of care."

    So the answer to "Can an organisation commit a crime?" is 'yes'.

    Can a country commit a crime? I'm not sure. I've taken a look at war crimes and the ICC and it looks like war crimes are prosecuted against an individual and not against a country.

    But if you look at the way that countries relate to one another, they do relate to one another as corporate entities: e.g. "Britain declares war on Germany", not "Chamberlain declares war on millions of individual Germans".

    Hmm. I don't know. If parliament votes to pass a law, then it is true that each individual MP has voted in a specific way, but I think it's also true that the decision of parliament (as a whole) is X. Don't you?

    Um. You're coming from the point of view that everyone should be permitted to do everything unless/until it impinges on the rights of others?

    I do have a lot of sympathy for that view.

    But I tend to think that that some weapons are just so dangerous - that is, they enable people to impinge upon the rights of others (such as by killing them) at such large scale and with such speed - that the risk that they'll impinge others rights (e.g. killing or injuring them) becomes very high.

    So its worth protecting those rights - the right not to be killed/injured - pre-emptively.

    As in, for example, not allowing individuals to have nuclear weapons (because the risk that they'll cause WWIII and destroy the world is just too great). To me the argument for gun control runs along the same lines. The intrusion upon the rights of the potential gun-owner is justified by the need to defend the rights of the innocent victim.
  4. fishypants Moderator





    Domestic violence...

    Public opinion...

    • Like Like x 1
  5. Random guy Member

    According to one branch of the Austrian school (the one Mises belong to), economy only happens on an individual level, and no economical question that can't be reduced to a personal level perspective is therefore meaningless. This leads to the peculiar situation that the same school reject any statistical data and theories based on large samples or historical data, i.e the whole field of macro-economy.

    I believe this might be where Bris get the idea that systems can't have properties and can't act as such from.
  6. Hugh Bris Member

    I think it was a pink monkey. But it's odd that I could say one of my influences is Mises, and somehow that leads to me wanting to murder millions of people.

    That was a bit over the top.
    I don't know how things ought to be. No one does. To think otherwise is the ultimate in hubris. I know what I want, but that isn't the same as knowing what ought to be. I'm not that smart, nor that arrogant, to pretend to know that.

    The law is different because "Men" made it different. There was no God like judgement here, only what you say: "The Bomb is dangerous, hence must be banned"

    I look at the consequences of acts, but I try hard not to judge people, just their acts.

    My point about the socks and bomb is they are both artifacts made by man so at least at one point they were legal (ie, made according to the rules of private property). If the reason for banning them is 'danger' then we would ban everything. So danger cannot be the reason for banning something.

    I love watching them.
    If the "Flock" were performing actions, then take away all the individual birds and what remains to flock?

    The Flock is a conceptualization of an event. We don't want to say "Millions of birds flying in a a particular manner" so we call it flocking. It is certainly a behavior of the birds (they want to get warm to get through the nigth, IIRC) but the Flock is the individual birds, and has no existence outside of the birds.

    It's not nonsensical, it's just imprecise, which is a running theme of my answers, I see now.

    The numbers representing the market do go up and down, but 'The Market' never moves. We never 'see' "The Market." It's in our heads and in the interactions that the 'market' emerges.

    IOW, it's a process not a place.

    Marketplaces exists. But "The Market" is a construct we use to talk about a process.
    What we call methodological individualism: that all acts are done by humans, never a collective. To attribute to the collective what is done by the individuals is to obscure reality and truth, which is a bad thing to do.

    That bill is a travesty of justice, IMO. It says that a concept can commit a crime. That's nuts. It is the type of bill that govts pass when they want to keep companies in their place, without scaring the CEOs. This is basically a bill that allows companies to act in bad faith knowing that the individuals won't be held accountable, the Corporation will be. This sucks big time.

    But, it is still people who made the decisions. A corporation can't make a decision. A corporation does not have goals or values. It is a shell that contains people who act in its name. It is not the corporation that acts, but the people. Again, as with the birds, if you take away the people the corporation is just a piece of paper.

    Countries relate to each other in an anarchic manner. That is, they create the rules in emergent order fashion, through interaction. The Laws of the Sea, for instance, emerged as a response to on going exploration and trade.

    What I am hoping to do here is get everyone to see the difference between normal language ("England Declares War") and more precise language ("Fifty members of Parliament (names attached) passed a resolution declaring war on Germany.")

    This is what is called methodological individualism. It strips away the collective language ("England Declares War") in favor on individual terms ("Bill, Fred and Mark voted to declare war on Germany.")

    Put another way, when I see "WE" I want to disambiguate.
    Well, no, since if 51 of them vote yes and 49 voted no that is not the decision of the whole, but of those specific 51 people.

    I think the point is that in regular language we say "Parliament voted on the bill and they passed it" makes sense in a non rigorous way. But to assess the actual event, you would have to look at the actions of all of the members of the parliament, and not just the end result.

    IOW, I'd want to know what each individual did to contribute to the final result. Only then would I feel I might have some understanding of the matter.

    That's a good summary of my position. People have to have the freedom to act in order to discover what works for them and what doesn't. The more we restrict this freedom, the more we deny our humanity and nature as people. So as long as I am not infringing on other people's rights, I should be left to go about my business.

    It ties right in with the Bomb question. What is too scary, or dangerous, to allow? Whose decision is it to make? Do I have the right to ban your actions due to my fear?
    There is no right not to be killed. Sorry, just not there.
    We are back to this: at what point does an object become too dangerous? How do we determine it? Is there are objective way to make this decisions, or is it inherently subjective? And what principle should override a foundational principle (private property)?

    I totally get that the Bomb is scary as shit. But I think there are other things even scarier, such as another person making decisions for me. That is the ultimate in scary.
  7. fishypants Moderator

    What? Missed that.

    I'm confused!

    It sounds like you're saying that individuals have a human right of private property ownership but they don't have a right to life.

    But that doesn't make any sense (to me) so I think I must be misunderstanding.


    but one can argue in terms of 'natural justice' or intrinsic rights, as you were doing here:

    On methodological individualism, I'll take some time to read up on it...
  8. Hugh Bris Member

    Well, I mentioned Mises. Next thing I know Quentin is quoting Hubard about killing everyone under Tone 2. Everyone else was all up in arms over the mere mention of an influence, as if having influences inevtiably leads to genocide or something.

    And pink monkey is from a story I heard years ago. If you take a monkey out of him tribe, paint him pink, and place him back with the tribe, he will be killed, for being different.

    I figured it would be a source of confusion.
    It's a matter of what 'rights' are and are not. I'll have to think this over before I can explain my reasoning.

    But, to start, I assume you are saying you have a right not to be killed by another human. Because if you were saying "you have the right not to be killed" nature couldn't care less. It'll send a lightning bolt or earthquake to let you know who's really in charge.
    Let me think on this a bit. (YOu can look over methodological individualism) (does it have to have so many letters)
    Yes one can. But I don't ever know what ought to be. I only know what I think is right for me.
    Not sure where you were going with this.
    I was not aware it started with Max Weber. I thought it was Mises. Interesting. Learning, what a concept.

    To give an example of how I might use this, look at FDR. The normal explanation for WWII is the Japanese bombed Pearl for no reason. But if you start looking at the motivations and actions of FDR and the other players, a rather different picture emerges, of a man FDR, who had his prejudices (he liked the Chinese, hated the Japanese) which influenced his actions.It leads to a different narrative of the events leading up to WWII, which leads to a different assessment of the various actors in that time.
  9. fishypants Moderator

    Thank you, I'll take a look at that.

    On 'rights', yes, I meant 'the right not to be killed by another person'.

    I'd derive 'human rights' from Kant's 'categorical imperative', so some relevant reading is....

    ... and of course Watchmen, which does the whole consequentialist-versus-deontological-ethics thing brilliantly.

  10. Hugh Bris Member

    OK. I'll think on this. If you say "killed" then I have to wonder about accidents. Do you have the right not to be killed in an accident? For instance, you and your buddy are coming home from the pub and he loses control and kills you. I don't see a right there. But if you had said "murder..." Let me think (ie research) on it further.
    This is a long time gone for me. It's been 30 years or more since I've studied philosophy. I read through the article and came to a few preliminary thoughts.

    I derive rights from our nature as people, as rational beings who depend on our minds to survive.

    I do believe there are moral absolutes. NAP. You don't initiate violence or fraud.

    this is from the article
    I would analyze the actions in terms of force and coercion. I would not hesitate to lie to that person, not for an instant, and I would not feel I was being immoral or breaking my code of ethics. NAP is the controlling principle here, for me. My duty would be to protect those in danger, and for that I'd take an active role, not just the passive one of locking the door (I'd do that too).

    So, I'll have to study further on this. I studied this in my teens and 20s, and I have a different view of life 40 years on. And I'll admit that we are right at the limits of what I can talk about and not make an utter fool of myself. Making a fool of myself is all right, but not an utter fool. Or in anon terms, don't go full retard. If I tried to talk about this any more, I'll be there.
    Sorry, do you mean Watterson? Isn't there a comic book series called Watchmen?
    Calvin and Hobbes is probably the best comic strip ever. Ever.
    And that was a great one. Thanks.
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Random guy Member

    Your use of the methodological individualism is actually two separate issues:

    - Legal/ethical (the Brits didn't declare war on anything, a number of people in the Parliament did)


    - Physical/methodological (The starling flock can't do anything, only individual starlings can)

    These two, while they might influence each other, are not the same.

    Legally, you are correct in some cases and wrong in others. In France, our favourite cult as well as single members were convicted of fraud, so legally the group exists as a unit. There are lots of laws that address units like corporations, seeing groups-as-units is legally correct under some circumstances. Us channologists should know, most hate the cult, but laugh at the members.

    Physically/methodologically the groups-as-units is warranted when there are emergent properties afoot, typically where the total is greater than the sum of parts (take a look at your older rock band of choice). The typical example would be an ant hill, where the action of any single ant is largely inconsequential, but the end result is spectacular. Don't get me wrong, methodological individualism can be useful here too (a lot of studies have been done on how the behaviour of single ants create the large scale patterns), but in the ants case the hill is often the functional unit. Studying ant hill interactions and ant interaction is not the same thing.

    Granted, ants aren't humans. Ants (like wasps and termites) are so-called eusocial animals, often referred to as super organisms. The are defined by:

    - Cooperative brood care
    - Overlapping generations in a single colony
    - Division of labour and reproduction, giving rise to "casts"

    The only unambiguously eusocial mammal are the naked mole rats (ugly little buggers they are too). However, humans are very social animals, we almost always exhibit the two first of these traits. Sometimes we see hints of the third trait, where some individuals sacrifice their own reproduction for helping out family, making us borderline eusocial.

    Because of this, human units can do spectacular things single humans could never dream of achieving. Thus, from a methodological POV it is not unreasonable to view groups like nations as units. Understanding things like the Industrial Revolution or the outbreak of the Great War through methodological individualism will make you miss the larger picture.

    A frequent critique if methodological individualism in economy is that strictly interpreted (as you do), it is impossible to do do any large scale calculations (macro-economy). A strict methodological individualist approach to economy is therefor rejected by mainstream economics. So, if you insist on strict methodological individualism, you are really down to fringe science.

    The problem is that when people build nuclear bombs (actually any bomb for that matter), you risk your neighbour making life and death decisions for you, and you have no say in the matter.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Random guy Member

    Oh, he meant Watchmen. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes and all that jazz. Made by the same guy who introduced the Guy Fawkes mask.

    • Like Like x 1
  13. fishypants Moderator

    Yeah, that's what I meant. Apologies for my terminological inexactitude.

    Yup (also a movie but read the comic book first).

    *spoiler - highlight to see*
    The villain has a secret plan which is (in terms of deontological ethics) evil. The heroes fail to prevent the evil plan from succeeding. The outcome of the evil plan is that the world is saved, therefore the 'evil' plot was highly moral in terms of consequentialist ethics, which makes the villain into a hero. Genius.


  14. Hugh Bris Member

    The method is applicable in numerous fields.

    Again, if you take away all the members of the Church, what is left? Did France convict a building? A book? A set of rules? They indeed convicted people, meaning they followed MI. That they also charged the Cult is probably due to the law of the country. It sounds like a tactical maneuver. I don' know enough to comment.

    The division of labor is what makes society rich. I can indeed look at the Union Pacific and the Southern Pacific as a unitary group, and look at how the two acted, and I will. But to fully understand the railroad building in the 19th century, you have to look at the people who made up those companies, otherwise you are eliding a whole section of reality.
    There is nothing in MI that prevents you from looking at the bigger picture.

    And I don’t see how using MI would prevent you from viewing the larger picture. I feel I have a much better understanding of WWII using MI than not. It doesn’t prevent me from seeing the big picture, in fact it informs and deepens the perspective and understanding.

    Macro is not that big of a deal for Austrians. All the group aggregate functions prevents people from seeing the full picture, ie, the people, since the economy is nothing more than 7B people living life.
    An example: GDP was developed in the 30s as a shorthand for the govt to use to see how the economy as a whole was doing. Meaning, the higher GDP the better off people presumably were.
    Then comes WWII and GDP rose in the US.

    So tell me, how does GDP rise when the people are having meatless, wheatless and sugarless days, their gas and tire consumption was strictly rationed?
    Does that sound like people's lives are getting better?

    IOW, macro obscures more than it enlightens.
    It’s highly doubtful people would be building bombs in their basement in AnCapistan. The rules would most likely prevent it. Not ban it, mind you, just say that what you are doing is inappropriate here, in this location.
    IOW, insurance companies and those charged with protecting life and property would not insure you. I'm sure other sanctions would develop if this actually became a problem.
  15. The Wrong Guy Member

    • Like Like x 2
  16. Darth Alor Member

    Dude did you really just steal my thread >:O
  17. Darth Alor Member

    Sorry but my thread on the 2nd ammendment can discuss guns and other stuff too. :p
  18. Chicago is my answer to this debate.

    Highest death rate from guns in America and yet they have banned guns there.

    Moving on to another thread!
  19. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  20. Darth Alor Member

    Its because the wanna be gangsta bangers aquire them illegally through the black market or transport them in from surrounding states / cities. Assault rifles are used the least in crime, its mainly pistols and machine pistols.
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Darth Alor Member

  22. Exactly the point.

    How do you enforce "Gun Control" when you can still get them illegally through the black market?

    Answer: You don't, if you can still get firearms under a gun bann then gun control isn't working.
  23. Hugh Bris Member

    I just realized the guns spelled backwards is snug
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Lemming Member

    About guns:
  25. Strange - I live in a country where guns were banned (for John Doe) long before I was born. I can't remember witnessing the shot out of a weapon and I think I don't even saw a real bullet in decades - and proud of it.
    If it wasn't so sad, I'd lmao at those countries still having guns available for everybody. Sad because it's not only the idiots selected by evolution, but too much innocent deaths. Therefore one day even the super-duper Americunts will learn how2law, against the lobby. Hey, you managed your slavery problem, an internal war, once nearly your bank problem - just try harder and you will succeed. Good luck.
    This message by HopeNeverDies has been hidden due to negative ratings. (Show message)
    • Dislike Dislike x 3
  26. Anonymous Member

  27. Darth Alor Member

  28. The Wrong Guy Member

    Identity Crisis

    Michael Murphy

    Identity Crisis is about the United States rooting its image in violence and intimidation. By persistently sustaining the largest military in the world we have accepted violence as a our primary solution; being not only viewed as the strongest country but also occupying this role is fundamental to Americans' national identity. In order for taxpayers to support funding the military, militarization must first be normalized in our homes, on our streets, and in our backyards. Once violence is normalized as a part of everyday life, it is a only short step to accepting violence as an inherent facet of human existence. Which in turn allows the excuse for our government's continual murder of civilians at home and abroad.
  29. The Wrong Guy Member

    Scalise Update - MedStar Washington Hospital Center

    Media Statement
    June 14, 2017, 8:15 pm

    Congressman Steve Scalise sustained a single rifle shot to the left hip. The bullet travelled across his pelvis, fracturing bones, injuring internal organs, and causing severe bleeding. He was transported in shock to MedStar Washington Hospital Center, a Level I Trauma Center. He underwent immediate surgery, and an additional procedure to stop bleeding. He has received multiple units of blood transfusion. His condition is critical, and he will require additional operations. We will provide periodic updates.


    Not Even the Shooting of a GOP Congressman Will Make Republicans Consider Gun Control

    If you thought the mass shooting of Republican lawmakers would be the sort of thing to make them think about combating gun violence in America, think again.
  30. The Wrong Guy Member

    Gun Violence Makes Us Feel Powerless, But We're Not | The Late Show with Stephen Colbert

    Stephen expresses his feelings on the most useful emotional response to the mass shooting in Sutherland Springs, Texas.
    • Like Like x 1
  31. The Wrong Guy Member

    3D-printed gun pioneer Cody Wilson accused of having sex with underage girl | Ars Technica


    According to the document, which was also described by KVUE, Wilson is accused of meeting a girl under the age of 17 through a website known as and paying her $500 for sex last month in Austin, where Wilson lives.

    More at

    Judge orders Cody Wilson’s arrest, but he skipped his return flight from Taiwan | Ars Technica

    New court docs detail child sexual assault allegations against the digital firearms activist.


    On Wednesday morning, a county judge signed the arrest warrant for 3D-printed gun rights activist Cody Wilson, who is accused of sexually assaulting an unnamed underage girl.

    On Wednesday afternoon, the Austin Police Department told the public that Wilson still wasn't in custody. The Defense Distributed founder's last known whereabouts are Taipei, Taiwan, and he skipped his flight back to the States. Authorities believe he received a tip about the new allegations.

    "We know Mr. Wilson frequently travels for business," Commander Troy Officer, of APD’s Organized Crime Division, told assembled press shortly after 2pm Central Time. "We don't know why he went to Taiwan, but we do know that he was informed that he was being investigated."

    Just after 6pm Central Time, the United States Marshals Service released a wanted poster for Wilson, which is pictured at right.

    The allegations

    In a five-page affidavit obtained earlier in the day by Ars, APD detective Shaun Donovan outlines what allegedly took place between Wilson and the unnamed victim. The Defense Distributed founder initially met with the girl on August 15 at Bennu Coffee on 515 South Congress Ave.

    APD later obtained surveillance video from the area, which showed the girl at around 8:09pm that evening. She also told police that she next got in Wilson’s black Ford Edge SUV. The affidavit notes that a Ford Edge is registered to Defense Distributed.

    The girl told police that she accompanied Wilson to the Archer Hotel, about 13 miles north of Bennu, and that Wilson parked using the hotel’s valet service. APD discovered hotel surveillance video showing that Wilson and the girl exited the car at the hotel around 8:35pm. Police also obtained "digital valet receipts," which showed that the SUV was returned to Wilson around 9:17pm.

    According to the girl, she and Wilson took an elevator to the 7th Floor, where they entered Room 718. Again, hotel surveillance video corroborated her account, and hotel records confirmed that Wilson was registered for the hotel that evening. After their encounter, Wilson allegedly paid her with five $100 bills.

    Police say Wilson next drove the girl 33 miles south and dropped her off at a Whataburger. Once more, police found that video footage corroborated her account.

    A week after the alleged encounter, a counselor contacted APD on August 22 to inform them that one of her clients had been involved in this incident. Detectives then interviewed the girl, who provided numerous details about her alleged encounter with Wilson.

    The girl's parents also allowed the police to search the girl's iPhone. There, authorities found numerous messages and links to, the website where Wilson and the girl apparently met.

    Police ultimately matched a Texas driver’s license of Wilson, who allegedly went by the handle "Sanjuro," with Sanjuro’s profile picture on the website.

    Wilson and the girl exchanged messages first through SugarDaddyMeet and later via iMessages. Reportedly, he eventually told the girl that he was a "big deal." When she attempted to learn more about him, the girl found numerous news articles about the digital firearms activist.

    She was interviewed a second time on August 30 by Austin police, and at that time she told authorities she and Wilson had exchanged nude photos of one another.

    Today, Travis County Magistrate Judge Tamara Needles set a bond at $150,000 and required that Wilson surrender his passport. Upon arrest, Judge Needles also ordered police to take photographs of the inside of Wilson’s "upper legs," presumably as a way to be identified by the victim. Wilson apparently has a "uniquely identifiable skin condition," according to court documents.

    Wilson still not in custody

    APD notified the press shortly after 1pm that it would be sharing updates on the Wilson situation. Cmdr. Officer started by outlining the details from the affidavit before revealing the fact that Wilson wasn't yet in custody and was last known to be in Taipei, Taiwan. Cmdr. Officer did not know the precise date when Wilson flew out to Taiwan, nor did he know the exact date of Wilson's missed return flight.

    According to the US State Department website, there is no extradition treaty in force between Taiwan and the United States (should Wilson still be in the country).

    APD is now working with US Marshals and international partners to carry out the arrest warrant. Wilson has also been entered into a national law enforcement database for sexual assault of a child, Cmdr. Officer said.

    At the press conference, APD shared a few more details on the situation not previously included in the court documents. The alleged victim is 16 years old and lives in Central Texas. Regarding her entry on SugarDaddyMeet, Cmdr. Officer said authorities have no reason to believe that "anyone other than the victim" signed up for the site.

    “The charge is sexual assault, and the statute says a victim under 17 is considered a child," Cmdr. Officer said. "My detectives have interviewed and spoken with this victim, and in their opinion if someone mistakes their age, it’d be because she’s younger not older.”

    Cmdr. Officer added that the allegations against Wilson would constitute a second degree felony, which is punishable by up to 20 years and a $10,000 fine.

    More at

    Jason Rockwood‏ @jasonrockwood 1 hour ago
    I don't care about Cody Wilson, @Radomysisky, but I do care about mob rule manipulating the facts to defame someone out of animosity. Headlines of child rape are fake. The "child" was 16, the legal age of consent in UK, and the "victim" propositioned him on a sugardaddy website.

    Jason Rockwood‏ @jasonrockwood 56 minutes ago
    Cody deserves what ever punishment the law gives him, because he broke the law. And he's clearly an idiot for either a) not asking the girls age or b) knowing her age and thinking he could get away with it. I'm not apologizing for his unlawful behavior.
  32. VickiWeaver Member

    I was browsing the net and stumbled upon THE WORLD'S FIRST 3D PRINTABLE DROP-IN AUTO SEAR, which evidently converts any AR-15 into a machine gun in about 5 seconds! Strange that this should emerge right after the charges against Cody were announced. It's almost as though this was an act of retaliation on someone's part...
    decryption password: YFYZaQc8dT

    AR-15 Drop-In Auto Sear (DIAS): bottle_opener_01.stl

    Attached Files:

  33. fuck off you mad bitch
  34. Sticky Vicky the spammer.

  35. The Wrong Guy Member

    Cody Wilson reportedly trying to rent an apartment in Taiwan, per local media | Ars Technica


    After skipping his flight back to the US in the wake of accusations of sexual assault against a minor, Defense Distributed founder Cody Wilson attempted to rent an apartment in Taipei this week, according to United Daily News (Chinese, Google Translate), a Chinese-language media outlet based in Taiwan.

    That article indicates that Wilson appears to have initially passed himself off as an American student living in the city. But after Wilson seemed to have secured an apartment by making an initial down payment, the rental agency reportedly recognized him and called the authorities. UDN writes that area police and Taiwan's Criminal Investigation Bureau are now trying to again locate Wilson.

    Continued at
  36. The Wrong Guy Member

    Cody Wilson is on the lam with $1 million in bitcoin | Southern Poverty Law Center


    Notorious crypto-anarchist and antigovernment extremist Cody Rutledge Wilson left the country on a flight to Taiwan after he was alerted of an impending investigation against him for his alleged sexual assault of a minor.

    Before he departed, Wilson cleared out personal cryptocurrency accounts and one related to his business, Defense Distributed, which sells a boutique milling machine for finishing unregistered AR-15 lower receivers.


    Bitcoin accounts identified as belonging to Wilson and his company by Hatewatch staff show that on Aug. 16, 2018, in a little over an hour, Cody Wilson emptied more than 60 bitcoin accounts with five transactions totaling $986,525. These transactions can be viewed through the cryptocurrency’s public ledger.

    All funds were transferred to a new 1FBxL account with a value of around $1 million.

    On Aug. 31, 2018, Wilson emptied this new account, valued at $986,525.37, and moved these funds to a new account, 1Q6B2, where it still sits.

    No IP addresses or countries of origin are visible for those transactions through the public ledger.

    More at

    American Institute in Taiwan cancels US 3D-printed gun maker Cody Wilson's passport to prevent him from fleeing Taiwan | Taiwan News

    Taiwan police arrests American 3D-printed gun maker Cody Wilson | Taiwan News


    Police arrested American 3D-printed gun advocate Cody Wilson in Taipei City’s Wanhua District Friday evening, just a day after it became known he was wanted in Texas for paying a 16-year-old girl for sex, the Apple Daily reported.

    His arrest and expected transfer, first to the Criminal Investigation Bureau and later to the National Immigration Agency, brings to a quick close a case which had police hurrying to check out his movements since his arrival in Taiwan on September 6.

    Wilson, 30, first checked in at the luxurious Mandarin Oriental Hotel on the capital‘s Dunhua North Road after a flight from the U.S. However, he left the following day and left by taxi for an unknown destination, reports said.

    As it became known that Wilson was a wanted man in his native country, Taiwan police stepped up the search for his whereabouts. A real estate agent who saw the reports about the American on TV alerted the police to his recent visit to sign a six-month rental agreement for a studio, reports said.

    Wilson had paid the first month’s rent of NT$19,000 (US$620) and a deposit of NT$18,000 on Thursday afternoon, but he failed to turn up at the agreed time around Friday noon to take possession of the keys for the apartment, possibly aware that he had become a wanted man in Taiwan as well.

    He was arrested around 6 p.m. at a hotel on Wanhua’s Guangzhou Street, the Central News Agency reported.

    As the American Institute in Taiwan reportedly moved to cancel his passport, Wilson will no longer have a legal travel document, making his deportation to the U.S. possible, reports said.

  37. NRA Host Blames Botham Shem Jean For Not Having A Gun

  38. The Wrong Guy Member

    3-D printed gun advocate Cody Wilson bonds out of jail in Houston after arrest in Taiwan | Houston Chronicle


    The Austin man known as an advocate for 3-D printed guns was released on bond from the Harris County Jail Sunday evening after he was extradited from Taiwan to face sexual assault charges in Texas.


    It's not immediately clear when Wilson might be transferred to Travis County. If convicted, he could face 20 years in prison and would be unable to own a gun legally.

    More at
  39. The Wrong Guy Member

    Defense Distributed’s new era — Cody Wilson resigns, former arts professional steps in | Ars Technica

    Paloma Heindorff takes over: "I’m a different person... I think everyone involved knows that.”


    Defense Distributed announced Tuesday that founder Cody Wilson had resigned from the company as of last Friday. The company is now under new leadership — Paloma Heindorff takes over as director. Previously, she served as a vice president focused on development and operations during her three years with Defense Distributed.

    “He’s been an incredibly powerful figure, but this is about an idea,” Heindorff said when asked how the company will move on from its founder. “We believe in something, and that something isn’t one man — it’s an idea.”


    Attorneys Josh Blackman and Chad Flores joined Heindorff on stage to field any questions related to Defense Distributed's ongoing case against various state attorney generals. Blackman noted the case should be unaffected by Wilson's legal situation and will move forward. The attorneys noted they don't have any involvement in Wilson's personal legal situation (there's a separate team of attorneys) and that no Defense Distributed money will go towards that effort (Heindorff mentioned earlier that Defense Distributed's legal fund for the states case has reached $400,000).

    More at
  40. The Wrong Guy Member

    House passes most sweeping gun control legislation in decades | POLITICO

    In one of their biggest moments since winning the majority in November, House Democrats pushed through legislation on Wednesday mandating federal criminal background checks on all gun sales, including private transactions.

    The House just passed what could be the biggest change to federal gun laws in decades | Vox

    The research, however, suggests that Congress should go even bigger.

    Search: Background Checks Act
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins