Requires a criminal history background check for the purchase of a three-dimensional printer capable of creating firearms; prohibits sale to a person who would be disqualified on the basis of criminal history from being granted a license to possess a firearm.
My point exactly. This is a bill promoted by the capital class (that can get access to weapons easily) designed to prevent labor from having the means of producing their own means of self defense.
It is NY liberals pushing this bill though. It is specifically an American NY liberal bill.
Just because he is specifying the particular sect of capital class ideology doesn’t mean he is incorrect, nor that he is specifically positing a ‘liberal vs. conservative’ dichotomy. You are reading that into the statement for some reason, which is outside my business.
It’s hardly being pushed through. It’s currently in an assembly committee. You are reading liberals pushing a bill that will likely not even make it to the floor into the current state of the bill for some reason, which is outside my business.
Do you just make a habit of reading incorrect context into things that aren’t there?
It is legislation being introduced and supported (colloquially ‘pushed’) by NY liberals, I never implied it was being shoved through committee or forced through the legislature.
Look, not to be pedantic, but you’ve already moved the goalposts once, care for a second time?
‘Moving the goalposts’ is when someone, during a conversation, rather than admitting they were incorrect about something, changes the subject to be about some other matter, as if that was the point of the discussion. Basically, it’s something people do to be annoying.
I suppose the only way to assume the ‘liberal vs. conservative’ context is to read into it, and assume the media consensus American political context applies to it, but I personally don’t do that, since we are far away from media consensus around here, I just try to read people as they say. Which you have now been doing so, awesome!
I’m not sure why they specified ‘NY’ either, but I don’t think it particularly matters other than that the bill is clearly some sort of attempt to curry favor with those who were opposed to the Mangione killing.
Yeah, exactly. Siding with capital against the workers is libs doing lib shit. Nothing to do with the blue-versus-red team sport of US bourgeois electoral politics.
Yeah, you’re the one invoking that false dichotomy in response to “Fucking NY liberals” — especially when the liberals in question are the lawmakers here, not workers. Liberalism is a real ideology, and one that’s in opposition with and derided by communists. Complaining about liberals making liberal policy decisions isn’t anti-worker in any way.
Please list the liberals, other than the sponsor, that are in support of the bill.
Edit: assuming that you mean liberal v communist as raised in the other posts, my confusion came from the qualifier “NY.” Aren’t most US politicians liberals in this context? What is it about the NY specific variant that matters in the context of the bill?
I mean, I’m not clairvoyant, you’ll get your list when they discuss and vote on the bill. Given the state of the NY political apparatus, probably a lot of them. Why are you trying to defend liberals as a category? They’re anti-worker.
Edit for your edit: The NY context is because this is a NY bill. Lately NY liberals have been extra clownish in response to The Adjuster capping the UHC CEO in NYC, including talking about setting up a help line for scared billionaires. This bill is also reaction to The Adjustment of Brian Thompson.
I am not defending liberals. I was taking issue with what I thought was a liberal-conservative comment. In the context of a law regulating firearms in the USA that is an easy mistake to make.
With that clarification the prior comment by someone of “we are all communists here” and my response demonstrates my mistake.
Ha. The client I use is really bad when the posts get that deep. I was so confused by that comment at first and then in the middle of responding it hit me.
I appreciate the exchange and you sticking with it until I caught up
Technically, they are all conservative liberals (in the legislature) at this point. There was a point in time when there were radical liberals who wouldn’t be opposed to a little outside the law tomfoolery.
My point exactly. This is a bill promoted by the capital class (that can get access to weapons easily) designed to prevent labor from having the means of producing their own means of self defense.
The last line of his comment is
It is NY liberals pushing this bill though. It is specifically an American NY liberal bill.
Just because he is specifying the particular sect of capital class ideology doesn’t mean he is incorrect, nor that he is specifically positing a ‘liberal vs. conservative’ dichotomy. You are reading that into the statement for some reason, which is outside my business.
It’s hardly being pushed through. It’s currently in an assembly committee. You are reading liberals pushing a bill that will likely not even make it to the floor into the current state of the bill for some reason, which is outside my business.
Do you just make a habit of reading incorrect context into things that aren’t there?
It is legislation being introduced and supported (colloquially ‘pushed’) by NY liberals, I never implied it was being shoved through committee or forced through the legislature.
Look, not to be pedantic, but you’ve already moved the goalposts once, care for a second time?
When did I move goal posts? Honest question.
It’s a NY state bill on an issue related to firearms. In that context it is not strange to read the word liberal on the same context.
Now that I understand you mean liberal v communist it is more clear. Although I don’t understand the significance of a NY liberal vs any other state.
Ah. My bad. I was being overly snippy.
‘Moving the goalposts’ is when someone, during a conversation, rather than admitting they were incorrect about something, changes the subject to be about some other matter, as if that was the point of the discussion. Basically, it’s something people do to be annoying.
I suppose the only way to assume the ‘liberal vs. conservative’ context is to read into it, and assume the media consensus American political context applies to it, but I personally don’t do that, since we are far away from media consensus around here, I just try to read people as they say. Which you have now been doing so, awesome!
I’m not sure why they specified ‘NY’ either, but I don’t think it particularly matters other than that the bill is clearly some sort of attempt to curry favor with those who were opposed to the Mangione killing.
Anyways. Cheers, comrade.
It took me a bit to get there but I finally did. I was genuinely confused. I appreciate the exchange and you sticking with it until I caught up
Yeah, exactly. Siding with capital against the workers is libs doing lib shit. Nothing to do with the blue-versus-red team sport of US bourgeois electoral politics.
Never said blue-red. Said conservative-liberal. The point I made is that those are all arbitrary distinctions designed to turn worker on worker.
Yeah, you’re the one invoking that false dichotomy in response to “Fucking NY liberals” — especially when the liberals in question are the lawmakers here, not workers. Liberalism is a real ideology, and one that’s in opposition with and derided by communists. Complaining about liberals making liberal policy decisions isn’t anti-worker in any way.
Please list the liberals, other than the sponsor, that are in support of the bill.
Edit: assuming that you mean liberal v communist as raised in the other posts, my confusion came from the qualifier “NY.” Aren’t most US politicians liberals in this context? What is it about the NY specific variant that matters in the context of the bill?
I mean, I’m not clairvoyant, you’ll get your list when they discuss and vote on the bill. Given the state of the NY political apparatus, probably a lot of them. Why are you trying to defend liberals as a category? They’re anti-worker.
Edit for your edit: The NY context is because this is a NY bill. Lately NY liberals have been extra clownish in response to The Adjuster capping the UHC CEO in NYC, including talking about setting up a help line for scared billionaires. This bill is also reaction to The Adjustment of Brian Thompson.
I am not defending liberals. I was taking issue with what I thought was a liberal-conservative comment. In the context of a law regulating firearms in the USA that is an easy mistake to make.
With that clarification the prior comment by someone of “we are all communists here” and my response demonstrates my mistake.
Lol no worries. The “someone” was me, that’s my first post in this whole comment chain.
Ha. The client I use is really bad when the posts get that deep. I was so confused by that comment at first and then in the middle of responding it hit me.
I appreciate the exchange and you sticking with it until I caught up
Most communists don’t bother making a distinction between Liberals and conservative Liberals. They’re just libs.
Technically, they are all conservative liberals (in the legislature) at this point. There was a point in time when there were radical liberals who wouldn’t be opposed to a little outside the law tomfoolery.