Kent State gun girl open carries on campus. The intolerant socialist left rears its ugly head.

[epronovost]

That has nothing to do with the claim of guns worn as a fashion statement.

I don't think we can say that people wear guns as a political statement on the daily either. I do believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that people wear guns on the daily because they like guns and how they look and how they feel with them in pretty much the sam way than any other piece of apparel. They think it makes them look good/cool/whatever positive emotion you prefer. The fact that there is line of clothing designed to help you carry guns seems to indicate that it's part of a fashion. The fact that certain American icons like the cow-boys have guns as accessories in popula media makes me believe that people who want to project this image of them as "modern cow-boys" and "American rough-neck" will carry firearms as part of the "costume" just like a hipster carries an overpriced equitable brand cup of coffee with him or her.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, it is.

I've checked several mainstream dictionaries.
It doesn't appear there.

Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management of enterprise, including the political theories and movements associated with such systems. And that's just the first lines of a chapters long books on the subject.

This is an ad hoc definition.

If you take the US and the USSR as example, literacy and education was higher in the USSR, though the life expectancy of the US was generally a bit higher (by about 8 months though so still comparable). Cuba generally has better healthcare than the US, though they are exceptionaly good in that domain.
Cuba vs United States: Health Facts and Stats

You're still chasing a false definition.
As for claiming that the USSR had better social welfare by claiming a
higher literacy rate, that is ridiculous. It also murdered many millions
of its own citizens in pogroms using starvation. Add to this the horrendous
oppression of the rest. China accomplished much of the same, although
starvation was more inadvertent than intentional. Same in N Korea.
Those are the true socialist states. The more socialist a country is,
the worse off the people are. So your stated goals are more than just
omitted from the definition of "socialism", they're goals which socialism
tends to prevent.

Well if you want to listen to the economical insight of people who aren't trained economists and are known cranks and propagandists you can do it. I pesonnaly, don't take their analysis as facts.

You're criticizing them without evidence or argument.

The methodology to calculate this economical freedom index has numerous problems from ill-defined criteria, unapplicable criteria to certain economy, to bureaucratic efficeny which can vary tremendously even within a single country. In other words, a well managed democratic country will score very high no matter it's economical system simply on the virtue of being financially stable, having little inflation, a manageable debt, an efficient bureaucracy backed by independant courts and ease of access to information. Trust in politician and the government even factors in. Sweden scores very highly because it's a very well managed democratic country and it's a liberal-socialist economy where 67% of employees are member of a union, where dozens of businesses are government owned, where various key sectors are tightly managed, with a relatively high level of taxation (though in a much simpler and cleaner system than the byzantine system of the US). This index tells pretty much nothing and everything at the same time and it's certainly not an index that says what is capitalism and what is socialism or evaluate them on a single spectrum. Socialism doesn't mean "less fee" either. It's just a different kind of structure.

Feel free to prevent alternative analysis...something more than mere
gainsaying, demonization, & changing the definition of "socialism" to
be capitalism with social welfare programs.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think we can say that people wear guns as a political statement on the daily either.

You claim that the Kent State gal carried a gun as a
fashion statement rather than a political statement?

I do believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that people wear guns on the daily because they like guns and how they look and how they feel with them in pretty much the sam way than any other piece of apparel. They think it makes them look good/cool/whatever positive emotion you prefer. The fact that there is line of clothing designed to help you carry guns seems to indicate that it's part of a fashion. The fact that certain American icons like the cow-boys have guns as accessories in popula media makes me believe that people who want to project this image of them as "modern cow-boys" and "American rough-neck" will carry firearms as part of the "costume" just like a hipster carries an overpriced equitable brand cup of coffee with him or her.

Do you know many people who carry guns daily?
I do. Many. Not a single one would call it "fashion".
This is particularly so for those who carry concealed.

What I think is going on is that anti-gun types will say
anything to demonize gun owners....Skwim would
say it's about inadequate penis size....even for women.
You say it's a fashion statement....like a red vs a blue
color tie. I find the claim utterly invented & incredible.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Actually, in this case, it was, per Kent State

Nah...I was responding to @Revoltingest , so my comment was in relation to Sweden, not the Kent State person.

My assumption (now confirmed) was that her action wasn't illegal by your state laws or whatever.

 

[Thief]

There is nothing anti-gun about Socialism.

I personally would feel unsafe if there was a student carrying an assault rifle. I’m from Australia though, and have never seen a gun in real life. I would not attack them though. That’s in poor taste.

Intolerant people is a problem all political ideologies share.

so.....you never have seen a gun....?????
and you feel unsafe....????

and you live in Australia where guns were confiscated and destroyed
but that's ok...…..????

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Sweden isn't socialist.
They have a capitalist economy.
Ref...
Economy of Sweden - Wikipedia

We've done this dance. Sweden, Australia and the USA are neither unfettered capitalistic societies, nor completely socialist.
It's not a binary state, but a continuum between the two.

Saying Sweden isn't socialist is correct. But neither are they capitalist.
They're 'more socialist' than the US, and 'less socialist' than NK.
They're 'more capitalist' than NK and 'less capitalist' than the US.

I don't know about the relevant laws in Ohio.
But I'd expect variation from state to state.

Second person who assumed my comment was about Ohio law, when I was merely expounding further on Sweden. That tells me I was unclear, so apologies to you and @Wu Wei for any confusion.

 

[Revoltingest]

Nah...I was responding to @Revoltingest , so my comment was in relation to Sweden, not the Kent State person.

My assumption (now confirmed) was that her action wasn't illegal by your state laws or whatever.

Not illegal....but I'd say it was ill advised.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

so.....you never have seen a gun....?????
and you feel unsafe....????

and you live in Australia where guns were confiscated and destroyed
but that's ok...…..????

I'm Australian as well. Apart from police sidearms, guns are uncommon.

I also think you're mis-characterising what @Terese posted to some degree.

 

[Revoltingest]

Saying Sweden isn't socialist is correct. But neither are they capitalist.
They're 'more socialist' than the US, and 'less socialist' than NK.

On what basis to you rank Sweden less socialist than USA?
I gave a source.
The naysayers hate it, but no alternative or cogent criticism is offered.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

On what basis to you rank Sweden less socialist than USA?
I gave a source.
The naysayers hate it, but no alternative or cogent criticism is offered.

I said they were 'more socialist' than the US.

I've spent time in both countries, Sweden far more than the US.
But I agree, it would require evidence to prove that opinion.

However, regardless, the principle holds. One country is 'more socialist' than the other. Flip them around however you like, my point remains.

 

[Revoltingest]

I said they were 'more socialist' than the US.

Buy the measure I linked, Sweden has greater economic liberty
than the USA (which has been falling relative to other countries
for many years). Based upon that, I'd say Sweden is more capitalistic.

Where the confusion comes in is that fans of socialism believe that
social welfare programs are fundamental to it. Thus, they call
countries with market economies (capitalist) "socialist".
Canuckistan is another one they call "socialist", but they also
have increasingly more economic liberty than Ameristanians .

We have a lot of regulation which isn't known to people who
don't run businesses. In my real estate dealings, I've faced
very restrictive zoning, building, & housing regulations.
My licenses have been strictly regulated, & took years to get.
Local government can even tell me what hours of operation
my self storage business can have. We have extensive
reporting requirements to the IRS about money we receive,
money we pay, to & from whom. We have regular inspections
by various agencies. I've had to certify that I'm not a terrorist.
(That happened when borrowing money.) The list goes on
& on. And cops....I hate having to deal with those imperious
useless ba****ds.

Whew....I feel better now. But I'll need to watch me
some MikeTyson Mysteries before getting to sleep.

 

[Hidingfromyou]

The incident speaks volumes about redneck culture in America. Maybe another armed, trembling redneck with a gun will have a shootout with her, perhaps in a Stuckey's or Winn Dixie near you. Yee-haw!

Maybe they'll kill one another. Would anybody but you consider that a loss?

Hi!!!

Looks like I found you guys!

I hope everything is well

 

[epronovost]

I've checked several mainstream dictionaries.
It doesn't appear there.

Mainstream dictionnaries aren't economical dictionnary. They offer only a basic definition of the term without any detail or substance. That's why appeal to dictionnary are fallacious in such kind of conversation. The Webster dictionnary and other of its style aren't an authority on what socialism is. Socialist writters, economists, philosophers and politicians are. The welfare state is a concept central to socialist social and economical policies.

I would also like to note there isn't one style of socialism and neither is there a "purer" style of socialism. Liberal-socialism isn't less socialist than marxist-leninism. They are simply different.

 

[Revoltingest]

Mainstream dictionnaries aren't economical dictionnary. They offer only a basic definition of the term without any detail or substance. That's why appeal to dictionnary are fallacious in such kind of conversation. The Webster dictionnary and other of its style aren't an authority on what socialism is.

I would also like to note there isn't one style of socialism and neither is there a "purer" style of socialism. Liberal-socialism isn't less socialist than marxist-leninism. They are simply different.

I've heard it before....we're in a post-dictionary age.
Everyone gets to use their own definitions.
Otherwise, socialists would have to face the fact that
countries actually practicing socialism are historically
poor, deadly, & oppressive.
You need capitalism....it's the only economic system
which can pay for generous social benefits. It's what
they do in the vaunted Scandinavian model.

Straight from the horse's mouth....
Denmark Tells Bernie Sanders It's Had Enough Of His 'Socialist' Slurs | Investor's Business Daily

The Danes apparently have grown weary of Sen. Bernie Sanders insulting their country.
Denmark is not a socialist nation, says its prime minister. It has a "market economy."

 

[epronovost]

Do you know many people who carry guns daily?
I do. Many. Not a single one would call it "fashion".
This is particularly so for those who carry concealed.
.

What do they call it then? Why do they carry guns if they don't like them and don't think they look good/cool with them?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Buy the measure I linked, Sweden has greater economic liberty
than the USA (which has been falling relative to other countries
for many years). Based upon that, I'd say Sweden is more capitalistic.

Where the confusion comes in is that fans of socialism believe that
social welfare programs are fundamental to it. Thus, they call
countries with market economies (capitalist) "socialist".
Canuckistan is another one they call "socialist", but they also
have increasingly more economic liberty than Ameristanians .

We have a lot of regulation which isn't known to people who
don't run businesses. In my real estate dealings, I've faced
very restrictive zoning, building, & housing regulations.
My licenses have been strictly regulated, & took years to get.
Local government can even tell me what hours of operation
my self storage business can have. We have extensive
reporting requirements to the IRS about money we receive,
money we pay, to & from whom. We have regular inspections
by various agencies. I've had to certify that I'm not a terrorist.
(That happened when borrowing money.) The list goes on
& on. And cops....I hate having to deal with those imperious
useless ba****ds.

Whew....I feel better now. But I'll need to watch me
some MikeTyson Mysteries before getting to sleep.

Heh...I ran a business here for years, and I hear you...

But again...flip the countries whatever way you like, my point remains.

Have a good sleep.

 

[epronovost]

I've heard it before....we're in a post-dictionary age.
Everyone gets to use their own definitions.

Precisely, stop using your own definition, or that of a propaganda outlet, and start using the one that applies to the situation; the one that finds it's support in the relevent literature on the subject.

 

[Revoltingest]

What do they call it then? Why do they carry guns if they don't like them and don't think they look good/cool with them?

You speak of how others feel about carrying guns.
How do you know this?

 

[Revoltingest]

Precisely, stop using your own definition, or that of a propaganda outlet.....

Dictionary.com & Merriam Webster as "propaganda outlet".
Oh, you lefties.....Bless your heart.

 

[epronovost]

You speak of how others feel about carrying guns.
How do you know this?

I don't know this, I'm making an hypothesis. If I were to carry a gun in a university campus, why would I do it? My first answer would because I think it makes me look good or that matches well with the rest of my apparel. It's not an unreasonnable hypothesis I think. You say it's false, that you know better because you actually know people who do it on a daily basis. I'm disposed to believe you on faith on that point. Why do they carry then?