Page 11 of 228 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 2276

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    So far as I'm aware his discharge and domestic abuse records were done through a court marshall and somehow didn't carry forward to a civilian arrest record. To me, a dishonorable discharge should probably be a disqualifying event. The dude beat his wife and kid, was convicted and could still legally buy a gun. That's absurd.

    I do know what you're saying though. It's always strange at a gun show how people carry around a gun and you can just offer to pay cash and there is no record of that exchange. I somewhat think all transactions should be done by a FFL or something. It's crazy that there are loopholes that big and those loopholes almost exclusively benifit people trying to acquire a firearm without a record. Personally, I don't like 80% AR lowers for a similar reason.

  2. #102
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Gordon - you have no data to back up your opinion. I have data to back up my position. You seem to treat your opinion as fact. It is just a guess, and that is obvious. Like I mentioned several times also, while Australia saw a 20% decline in deaths after banning guns, the US saw a 50% decrease during the same time, while loosening gun control laws, and ownership of firearms went up.

    Firearms do not make a nation more or less violent.

    This is another argument that can't go anywhere if neither side is offering a suggestion to help the situation besides no guns or everyone needs a gun...
    Ah, maybe I wasn't clear. Even though I said what I think the problem (and hence, the solution is) several times and I have been the most verbose on the subject in this forum, and I have not said, not once, that everybody needs to carry a gun, that seems to be inferred instead of understood.

    To be clear:

    The answer is you need to change the CULTURE. Not that you need to disarm everyone, nor give everybody a gun, but you need to affect a culture that respects firearms, trains people with firearm usage, and doesn't glorify them like we do in and with our gang/movie cultures.

    Switzerland has that. Most of the US has that. But 5% do not. And that 5% causes the vast majority of the problem.

    Sitting here and crowing about guns being the problem is totally missing the point. They are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. It should be so fucking obvious that everybody gets it but almost none of you do, and you guys are smart.

    Here is the obvious part:

    People have always killed other people. They have always found a way. But as culture moves forward, as we become more civilized we stop doing that. Guns, knives, swords, bows and arrows, clubs, sticks, bones. They always find a way. Gun are not unique, though they do it better.

    As weapons become more lethal, the surprising fact is civilization has become more civil. Just a weird correlation, and no, not a causation.

    But people will try and kill others. They always will. Hence the discussion in the beginning of Evil.

    For the argument to move forward we need to discard if it is about guns or not about guns. Because it really isn't. That won't solve the problem of whither people kill each other.

    My position is: It will come, in the US, from 1) radically changing gang/gun culture 2) better mental health care 3) proper paperwork systems that can properly block some people who have access to firearms who shouldn't.

    That accounts for almost all homicides and gun related crime in the US. And it won't stop everything. Nothing will. It is Evil. But it will reduce it to levels seem in the rest of the developed world. Just eliminating gang gun usage will. Just that.

    The argument is wrong though if you are arguing the tool, or the means. You need to look at changing the MOTIVE. If you can change the Motive, the means will have no use.
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-07-2017 at 10:38 AM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  3. #103
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    3) proper paperwork systems that can properly block some people who have access to firearms who shouldn't.
    I actually think this is particularly relevant for people with prior service and even active military. PTSD is gnarly. Goes with #2.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 11-07-2017 at 11:11 AM.

  4. #104
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    If we look at deadly mass shootings, none of the 20 deadliest in U.S. History have anything to do with gang violence. http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-...cts/index.html

    Certain articles do point to the issue of culture, but list nothing about gang activity. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...dwide/1776191/

    Josh, straight up, are you using code here? It comes across as a strange non-sequitur in the topic to keep mentioning gangs.

    Informal social controls in general seem like a thing that people with a libertarian bent would chafe against, and Republicans might support in principle but not in practice when it would limit some access to guns for some at-risk people.

  5. #105
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    If we look at deadly mass shootings, none of the 20 deadliest in U.S. History have anything to do with gang violence.
    I totally agree. But Chicago ALONE had more gang related deaths in just about every month as the Las Vegas shooting.

    Every month.

    There was a chart showing that living in Chicago was worse than going to war in Iraq. Ah, found it.



    That is almost entirely gang violence.

    So I am not speaking in code. Gang violence is the majority of all homicides in the US. It is the majority of the crime in the US in total. Removing just that results in homicide rates equal to Europe. We would be just as safe. There would not be the high gun crime, nor much crime.

    As for culture, no, I am not talking about some government control of speech or related.

    Simply that we need to say, right out front, that gang culture is the problem. Not guns. Not the tool. The culture that produces and supports gangs is an issue.

    Then, (because libertarians do support police and courts, though we also think they shouldn't be unionized and easy to fire, plus body cams since they have to be responsible for their actions, like the rest of us, and proof helps, since in the end they need to be responsible to the people) we should act as if that is the problem, and police accordingly. Many have said the that the welfare system that benefits broken homes also accounts for part of the problem, which lead to gang culture and involvement as youth look for support. Also the War on Drugs has resulted in a strong illegal gang culture to arise. Where as most of us support the Portugal approach, which treats the problem as one of community, and again, culture, instead of something criminal.

    Again, a link (and there are many): Gangs responsible for 80% of crime:

    http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/FedCrim...6773423&page=1

    "Criminal gangs commit as much as 80 percent of the crime in many communities, according to law enforcement officials throughout the nation," the report notes as part of its key findings. "Typical gang-related crimes include alien smuggling, armed robbery, assault, auto theft, drug trafficking, extortion, fraud, home invasions, identity theft, murder and weapons trafficking."

    A copy of the threat assessment, prepared by the Justice Department's National Gang Intelligence Center and the National Drug Intelligence Center, was obtained by ABC News from U.S. law enforcement officials on Friday.
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-07-2017 at 12:07 PM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  6. #106
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    Fixing gang culture would not have prevented any of the twenty deadliest shootings in U.S. History, though. And the culture that produces gang violence, touched on very well upthread, is different from the culture that creates social isolation that does precipitate large mass shootings. From a fear and trauma perspective, most citizens do not worry in this country about being a victim of a gang death. They do worry about being shot in their churches, schools, shopping centers, and places of business. Whether that's an irrational fear or not, that fear is driving the current gun debate on the left.

    I'm really not arguing against trying to reduce gang violence, particularly your argument that we need to police gang violence appropriately (though we part ways on welfare, it would appear). I'm just confused why you're so head strong on that approach when it seems so out of bounds from what the left is talking about as the problem. Reducing gun deaths is important, reducing suicides is important, but random mass shootings are their topic. People talk about columbine and newtown and the pulse, not living in Chicago day to day.

  7. #107
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Fixing gang culture would not have prevented any of the twenty deadliest shootings in U.S. History, though.
    Nope. Never said it would.

    They do worry about being shot in their churches, schools, shopping centers, and places of business. Whether that's an irrational fear or not, that fear is driving the current gun debate on the left.
    Right or left?

    Did making those areas gun free zones help? No. It made them targets. Predators who are doing illegal things are not going to be stopped by a sign. They will flock to where the Prey is in large groups, and most likely not able to defend themselves, de-horned.

    I'm just confused why you're so head strong on that approach when it seems so out of bounds from what the left is talking about as the problem. Reducing gun deaths is important, reducing suicides is important, but random mass shootings are their topic. People talk about columbine and newtown and the pulse, not living in Chicago day to day.
    Of course. What did he say? Rahm Emanuel:

    You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.
    The Left shows little to no knowledge of firearms, as a political body. They show irrational fear, and have, pretty continuously and embarrassingly, shown they barely know which end is the bad end. In fact, gun free zones result in an increase in the ability of a mass shooter to do damage, and the results are opposite of what they tried to do.

    Why would I, or you or anybody, listen to somebody who is obviously so ignorant on a subject, and try to figure out how to best suit them?

    It is like watching a child explain why I should be afraid of the thing in the closet.

    The bigger question, is why do they ignore the problem built into the cities they run? The answer is political capital, and opportunity. Nothing new or special there.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

  8. #108
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    795
    I'm not inclined to disagree with you that a portion of the ideological left wants to ban guns without the basic understanding of how they work. And while you didn't explicitly say it, that there is an element of the left that sees gun control as the first step to completely banning all guns. The right believes that's a bigger population of the left than it actually is, though.

    But so if I gather your answer, you're basically saying that you don't care that there are mass shootings in the United States? I don't know how to read it any other way - you're focused on topics that have nothing to do with it, you reference it as opportunistic advancement of a crisis for other purposes from the left side, and discuss the political nature of the left-right debate, but you seem to take mass shootings as a regular facet of life.

    Predators are removed by creating a cultural stigma against predators. Most of these predators are solitary white males. Making solitary white males a cultural negative in this country would have great benefits beyond just the gun debate. That should be an achievable goal that has nothing to do with gun control. Are you arguing against that idea?

  9. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by pbjosh View Post
    Gordon - you have no data to back up your opinion. I have data to back up my position. You seem to treat your opinion as fact. It is just a guess, and that is obvious. Like I mentioned several times also, while Australia saw a 20% decline in deaths after banning guns, the US saw a 50% decrease during the same time, while loosening gun control laws, and ownership of firearms went up.

    Firearms do not make a nation more or less violent.



    Ah, maybe I wasn't clear. Even though I said what I think the problem (and hence, the solution is) several times and I have been the most verbose on the subject in this forum, and I have not said, not once, that everybody needs to carry a gun, that seems to be inferred instead of understood.

    To be clear:

    The answer is you need to change the CULTURE. Not that you need to disarm everyone, nor give everybody a gun, but you need to affect a culture that respects firearms, trains people with firearm usage, and doesn't glorify them like we do in and with our gang/movie cultures.

    Switzerland has that. Most of the US has that. But 5% do not. And that 5% causes the vast majority of the problem.

    Sitting here and crowing about guns being the problem is totally missing the point. They are a symptom of the problem, not the cause. It should be so fucking obvious that everybody gets it but almost none of you do, and you guys are smart.

    Here is the obvious part:

    People have always killed other people. They have always found a way. But as culture moves forward, as we become more civilized we stop doing that. Guns, knives, swords, bows and arrows, clubs, sticks, bones. They always find a way. Gun are not unique, though they do it better.

    As weapons become more lethal, the surprising fact is civilization has become more civil. Just a weird correlation, and no, not a causation.

    But people will try and kill others. They always will. Hence the discussion in the beginning of Evil.

    For the argument to move forward we need to discard if it is about guns or not about guns. Because it really isn't. That won't solve the problem of whither people kill each other.

    My position is: It will come, in the US, from 1) radically changing gang/gun culture 2) better mental health care 3) proper paperwork systems that can properly block some people who have access to firearms who shouldn't.

    That accounts for almost all homicides and gun related crime in the US. And it won't stop everything. Nothing will. It is Evil. But it will reduce it to levels seem in the rest of the developed world. Just eliminating gang gun usage will. Just that.

    The argument is wrong though if you are arguing the tool, or the means. You need to look at changing the MOTIVE. If you can change the Motive, the means will have no use.
    Good job reading the post guy

  10. #110
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    I'm not inclined to disagree with you that a portion of the ideological left wants to ban guns without the basic understanding of how they work. And while you didn't explicitly say it, that there is an element of the left that sees gun control as the first step to completely banning all guns. The right believes that's a bigger population of the left than it actually is, though.
    I agree. It is mostly their representatives.

    But so if I gather your answer, you're basically saying that you don't care that there are mass shootings in the United States? I don't know how to read it any other way
    Like Flory said.

    It is interesting the conclusions people make when they are not familiar, not only with the subject matter, but the mentality behind it. What I said is quite different. Culture.

    I would like to take on the largest problem, and address those, partially because it is the overwhelming largest problem, and also because it is NOT being addressed. Which is not the gun, nor mass shootings, but gang crime, followed by how we deal with mental health and how we deal with paperwork and licensing. Also how we deal with drug laws and drug abuse. Some of that would have stopped almost every mass shooting also. Like I said, not all, but the majority.

    Predators are removed by creating a cultural stigma against predators.
    There is something in that, in controlling the stigma. But also they need to feel they are not safe. That is far more important, because most do not care about social stigma - or are diametrically opposed to it, or fight it directly. But all of them are self centered, and all want to feel safe doing their heinous dead to the largest possible level. Make them feel less safe, and they are far less likely to do it.

    Most of these predators are solitary white males. Making solitary white males a cultural negative in this country would have great benefits beyond just the gun debate. That should be an achievable goal that has nothing to do with gun control.
    Sexist and racist comments like that should have a social stigma against using them also. I wonder why not? I wonder how that would sound if you flipped the race and sex?

    Making solitary black females a cultural negative in this country would have great benefits beyond just the gun debate.
    Wow. Uggggly.

    Focusing on race is stupid when it comes to Motives, I mean, about the most idiotic think a person can really post. Why?

    Race isn't culture. It isn't a motive. Anyone of any race and sex can have a mental illness. Any can have a drug problem. Any race can be raised in a gun culture, or in a gang culture, or Tiger Mom culture, or any - none of that is defined by race.

    I would feel horribly embarrassed to have said what you just said.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •