Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blotsfan

Trump Regime thread.

Recommended Posts

Poverty is more about the general kind of gun violence that is way more common than mass shootings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of animal is most likely to attafk? A starving animal or a sick animal or an animal protecting it's children. We are after all, animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think gun violence is perpetrated by 3 kinds of people mentally I'll/socially inept people (mass shootings/domestic terrorism), poor people (most gun violence) and people acting in self defense (the smallest portion).

People who are poor Rob people to eat or get high. Gangs don't exist in areas where people have money lol so there's that too. What neighborhoods do you lock your doors and roll up your windows in? The poor ones. It's a very basic principle that has existed as a law since people have come together to form civilizations throughout every single society without exception in human history. Poverty=violence. There is no debate on that fact.

So then let me ask you this man. How would you go about solving any of this? I think most people like to chunk this problem up because to solve something on the enormity of the scale that you're talking about would be the closest thing to Impossible, without actually being impossible.

 

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, so let me make sure I have this right. In your mind, to solve the gun problem, we have to sell the Mental Health crisis of unprecedented proportions, poverty, and people with sociopathic tendencies and societal depression. I am not saying you're wrong, I believe wholeheartedly and everything you just said, but to solve something like that would be an enormous undertaking, granted it would be a Monumental victory, but basically we would have to create a perfect society and then have gun violence go away on its own.

 

I like your style Sean. Again, I would really like to know how you would try to fix something like this. Not in a smartass way, but I'd like to hear some of your ideas on how to do something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So then let me ask you this man. How would you go about solving any of this? I think most people like to chunk this problem up because to solve something on the enormity of the scale that you're talking about would be the closest thing to Impossible, without actually being impossible.

 

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, so let me make sure I have this right. In your mind, to solve the gun problem, we have to sell the Mental Health crisis of unprecedented proportions, poverty, and people with sociopathic tendencies and societal depression. I am not saying you're wrong, I believe wholeheartedly and everything you just said, but to solve something like that would be an enormous undertaking, granted it would be a Monumental victory, but basically we would have to create a perfect society and then have gun violence go away on its own.

 

I like your style Sean. Again, I would really like to know how you would try to fix something like this. Not in a smartass way, but I'd like to hear some of your ideas on how to do something like that.

I know you don't like my style, but undoing the massive budget cuts to mental health care from the Reagan administration would probably be a start. But I do agree that that wouldn't be enough for gun violence to go away, so we should probably make access to guns significantly more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not against some more training and safety type courses and things, but lawful gun owners make up less than a fifth of gun crime...

 

I don't think making guns harder to get is really going to make the impact that a lot of people think it would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why has it worked in every other developed country? Serious question. If gun control won't work here, why? Why does it work in Australia, Japan, England, France- I could go on and on. The issue seems to solely be the US's issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why has it worked in every other developed country? Serious question. If gun control won't work here, why? Why does it work in Australia, Japan, England, France- I could go on and on. The issue seems to solely be the US's issue.

 

I've answered this question multiple times in this thread, my answer isn't changing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know you don't like my style, but undoing the massive budget cuts to mental health care from the Reagan administration would probably be a start. But I do agree that that wouldn't be enough for gun violence to go away, so we should probably make access to guns significantly more difficult.

If you're having this conversation in earnest, and I will offer you this Banning anything in the United States has never been a recipe for Success. Didn't work for alcohol, it didn't work for assault rifles, it didn't work for marijuana, doesn't work for any illicit drugs, and all of this leads me to believe it wouldn't work for assault rifles in the second go-round. I think saying banning something would decrease access to it is a fallacy, or at least it has been through our entire existence of the nation.

 

I will also add, that I would like to hear what it is were Banning. Is it weapons that are the most lethal, or the ones that just look the scariest. If it's the ones that are most letgal, then I am behind that in principle(trial period only until the results best themselves out), however, somebody is going to have to show me what they mean by lethal. Obviously the definition is what it is, however are we talking about guns that can kill people at a rate of 506 people per minute, one or two, 10 or more, or do we go by how many it can kill per magazine, or per round, how are we deciding this criteria. If I could get some solid answers on that I think we could have a discussion about how this goes. That said, saying let's ban guns because they have a pistol grip, for both cyst, carrying handle, a bayonet lug, generally doesn't work for me. All of those things might look like it makes against carrier the bayonet lug is the only thing that adds to it.

 

Even at that it doesn't come up significantly.

 

I agree with your mental health issue, I think we're terribly underfunding this thing, and we're not giving people enough resources to be able to deal with problem adequately. And when I say adequately I don't mean push more drugs, the number of mass shooters that were on antidepressants or coming off of them is a terrifying number. I think instead of holistic approach would be more appropriate, but exponentially more expensive depending on the person.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not forget that 3/5 of all gun deaths in this country are suicide.

Our citizens are in pain and suffering. Gotta get to the root of the gun violence to make a noticeable difference, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've answered this question multiple times in this thread, my answer isn't changing.

 

 

 

Your source that you linked saying gun control wasn't working in other countries? The one who has been found out as having lied about making up stats to fit his narrative? It's simply not true that many other countries have as dangerous of a problem as we do.

 

Why do we keep trying to bring the conversation around to what guns we're banning? That's a small side point to the grander scheme of gun control. I know the NRA's line is that the left wants to ban guns, but that is not really true. Gun control- making it harder to get guns, and making you do just as much as, say, what it takes to own a car, is what people are trying to see happen.

Edited by Thanatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any gun laws would stop mass shootings. For example Eric Harris and Dylan Kleibold planned Columbine up to 18 months in advance. They were able to buy guns and materials to make explosives despite being under 18. Nothing could have or would have stopped them.

 

However restricting gun access would have an effect on heat of the moment killings. Guy comes home and catches his wife in bed with another man and snaps. He can't just go get a gun because it takes him longer to legally purchase it. In the meantime he calms down and merely divorces her instead of killing her and her new guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Your source that you linked saying gun control wasn't working in other countries? The one who has been found out as having lied about making up stats to fit his narrative? It's simply not true that many other countries have as dangerous of a problem as we do.

 

Why do we keep trying to bring the conversation around to what guns we're banning? That's a small side point to the grander scheme of gun control. I know the NRA's line is that the left wants to ban guns, but that is not really true. Gun control- making it harder to get guns, and making you do just as much as, say, what it takes to own a car, is what people are trying to see happen.

 

I mean, I had what... 7-8 paragraphs in this post.. ONE of which was using that link / source and consisted of ONE of the multiple points I made? And you decided to refute that one and that one only?

 

What do people call that.. cherry picking?

 

Not really a good argument, but you do you. lol

Edited by DalaiLama4Ever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any gun laws would stop mass shootings. For example Eric Harris and Dylan Kleibold planned Columbine up to 18 months in advance. They were able to buy guns and materials to make explosives despite being under 18. Nothing could have or would have stopped them.

However restricting gun access would have an effect on heat of the moment killings. Guy comes home and catches his wife in bed with another man and snaps. He can't just go get a gun because it takes him longer to legally purchase it. In the meantime he calms down and merely divorces her instead of killing her and her new guy.

I think the Columbine shooting is also an important point to bring up when we're talking about school shootings and mass murder. From what I understand in the documentaries that I have watched about Columbine, it seems to me that the guns were for the satisfaction of killing people, but they made bombs intending to blow up the entire school. So in effect the guns were for gratification, what was really going to cause the mass casualties were bombs.

 

I'm not saying it would happen, but if we would have bbanned assault rifles, or any of the scary guns in general, I'm not sure I would like the trade if it meant more school bombings. I can't say definitively that it would, but nobody can say definitively that it wouldn't either. I don't know, I guess what I'm saying is that I wouldn't want to use the guess and check method to see if it would work or not.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Columbine shooting is also an important point to bring up when we're talking about school shootings and mass murder. From what I understand in the documentaries that I have watched about Columbine, it seems to me that the guns were for the satisfaction of killing people, but they made bombs intending to blow up the entire school. So in effect the guns were for gratification, what was really going to cause the mass casualties were bombs.

 

This is more than likely true. The official police report says there was enough explosive power to totally destroy the cafeteria where hundreds of students were eating. It just didn't detonate.

 

Their original plan was to detonate that bomb and shoot survivors as they fled the school. I believe a page from Eric Harris' journal or online blog confirmed that.

Edited by Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is more than likely true. The official police report says there was enough explosive power to totally destroy the cafeteria where hundreds of students were eating. It just didn't detonate.

Their original plan was to detonate that bomb and shoot survivors as they fled the school. I believe a page from Eric Harris' journal or online blog confirmed that.

I am by no means saying we shouldn't even bother addressing the gun problem, but I guess the question is would that become the alternative? If it is did we really solve anything? I mean, it seems like people are going to try to kill people one way or the other, we really have no idea how it's going to pan out. I mean that's not to say we shouldn't try something like I said, I just wouldn't hold my breath for a dramatic reduction in it.

 

I really don't think banning guns, or even assault rifles would work. At least not in this country, I know it's a popular argument that other countries do and so we can too. That really isn't the case though, we can ban whaling and almost eliminated completely, but Japan can't seem to do the same thing. Why? Because it's a part of their culture comment has been as long as they've been a nation, and probably will continue to be. That is how the United States has with guns, we're not getting rid of them, we're not Banning them, and in all likelihood we're probably not going to ban assault rifles. It just won't happen in my opinion. It is too ingrained in our culture, it is a part of Who We Are. For Better or Worse, I think we're stuck with them, and obviously I don't mind that, but a lot of people who were to ban this or band that, I think they're going to be disappointed if they think that's going to be a realistic outcome.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also knives are just as deadly in closed quarters as guns. A lot of countries with strict gun control have problems with massive knife attacks.

 

In some ways, as an overall weapon a knife is just as terrible as a gun. You don't have to reload a knife, a knife doesn't jam, and it is very difficult even for a person with training, let alone the average person, to disarm a knife-wielding attacker.

 

I want to see the government do its job and implement some common sense safety laws. I just don't know if they will work to the exact extent that people are hoping. I'd love to be wrong about that.

Edited by Sarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me start by saying this. As a society we have put a fucking space craft on Mars and it's sent back data, pictures, video. I'm not buying that ending poverty would be harder than that.

 

I would start by ending hunger. It's been estimated that it would cost 30 billion dollars to end WORLD hunger. The US spent 61 billion EXTRA on the military with the last budget.

 

 

 

I would invest money into rebuilding and modernizing US infrastructure and in doing so at the same time try to do as much as possible to ensure the US using as much green energy as possible. If you put money into researching. Millions of people would get jobs and receive training for skills.

 

I would also make the internet a free and public utility and try to make sure as much of the country as possible had access to the best and fastest internet. It could make for an incredible advantage over other countries.

 

I would crack the skulls of pharma. Lots of people prepose the government buying patents, I'd be cool with that because then developing new drugs would still be lucrative.

 

I would make health care a human right by law and go with a single payer system.

 

I would stop building jails and start building schools.

 

I would stop writing blank checks to universities for college. If you want federal money for your school you to be held accountable for the allocation of that money. The price of education is outrageous.

 

I would make education and skills training free. Maybe in order to keep people from just trying to go to school forever to avoid work you make them have a job for 10 year before they can go back or they can choose to work and continue school.

 

Make every business of a certain size have to either have a union or be a collective. Small business could be exempt

 

Increase capital gains tax. Tax income after a billion dollars 66% or some shit.

 

End the wars, cut the military budget. Focus on actually defending our country.

 

Get people out of jail for nonviolent crimes. End the war on drugs

 

Legalize regulate and tax some drugs(decriminalize all), legalize, tax and regulate gambling and prostitution

 

Enforce anti-Trust laws. Smash Walmart and Amazon and Comcast etc into a thousand prices.

 

Crack down on predatory lending and tax and heavily regulate speculation.

 

Oh and I would also put a heavy estate tax into place because in reality it doesn't even effect most people.

 

There are tons of ways to eliminate poverty and hunger. Maybe not overnight but it's very much attainable in my eyes

Edited by seanbrock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think extensive background checks are our best option--2 week waiting period, but no more than that. I don't think banning anything will cause anything but constant uproar until it's rescinded.

 

The only worry I have about a waiting period is the inefficiency of our government, especially when it comes to bureaucracy . Pretty soon the wait would be several months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not forget that 3/5 of all gun deaths in this country are suicide.

 

Our citizens are in pain and suffering. Gotta get to the root of the gun violence to make a noticeable difference, in my opinion.

Suicide rates are lower in countries with stricter gun control. Turns out suicide is often a rash decision and not having a super easy way to kill yourself in your house gives you more time to change your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suicide rates are lower in countries with stricter gun control. Turns out suicide is often a rash decision and not having a super easy way to kill yourself in your house gives you more time to change your mind.

This would require a ban of common firearms. People aren't blowing their heads off with automatic weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suicide rates are lower in countries with stricter gun control. Turns out suicide is often a rash decision and not having a super easy way to kill yourself in your house gives you more time to change your mind.

 

Higher than some, lower than some.. did you research this? The US is ranked 48th in suicide. Not great by any stretch, but there are countries on both sides of the "gun control" issue both higher and lower than the US.

 

I don't see a strong correlation, but obviously I am not going to say it has zero impact.

 

Countries with stricter gun laws just find their citizens killing themselves by other means. Pesticides and swords in Asia, hanging in Europe...

 

Suicide isn't a gun issue, which is why it's kind of odd how so many people include suicide deaths into the gun violence numbers to try and artificially bolster their argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, I had what... 7-8 paragraphs in this post.. ONE of which was using that link / source and consisted of ONE of the multiple points I made? And you decided to refute that one and that one only?

 

What do people call that.. cherry picking?

 

Not really a good argument, but you do you. lol

 

I addressed your entire argument actually, so no cherry picking here.

 

Suicide rates in the US are lower in counties with stricter gun control, although in the world at large there does not seem to be a correlation. Japan has one of the highest rates in the world, but has strict gun control laws. Japan could be argued to be an outlier, given that their culture glorified suicide for so long- still does in some ways- but France has higher than the US as well, and they too have strict gun control laws.

 

Murders in those countries are well below the US, gun control definitely affects that. Suicide rates, I don't think there's a connection there.

Edited by Thanatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would require a ban of common firearms. People aren't blowing their heads off with automatic weapons.

 

 

 

Higher than some, lower than some.. did you research this? The US is ranked 48th in suicide. Not great by any stretch, but there are countries on both sides of the "gun control" issue both higher and lower than the US.

 

I don't see a strong correlation, but obviously I am not going to say it has zero impact.

 

Countries with stricter gun laws just find their citizens killing themselves by other means. Pesticides and swords in Asia, hanging in Europe...

 

Suicide isn't a gun issue, which is why it's kind of odd how so many people include suicide deaths into the gun violence numbers to try and artificially bolster their argument.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2013/12/gun_ownership_causes_higher_suicide_rates_study_shows.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blots what do you want to come to pass as far as gun control is concerned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's also not forget that 3/5 of all gun deaths in this country are suicide.

 

Our citizens are in pain and suffering. Gotta get to the root of the gun violence to make a noticeable difference, in my opinion.

 

There are other ways that legal gun ownership contributes to the problem. Namely, the legal purchase of a firearm and then the illegal resale of said firearm. 60% of guns recovered in Chicago came from a state that is not Illinois, and many of those that came from IL came from outside of city limits. 21% of guns used in Chicago come from Indiana alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×