|
|
Post by johneaztec on Dec 5, 2022 8:29:54 GMT -8
You are putting forth a very juvenile argument. You can have both gun rights and safe schools. You try to present the point that they are mutually exclusive, which is simply not the case. See Israel. See the United States of America. No other country has school shootings like we do. This has been going on in a big way for a quarter century. The Republicans have had total control of the Federal government multiple times in that span, and have done nothing to stop the mass shootings. So, tell me, what can be changed to stop the mass shootings - and I don't want to hear about armed guards at every school. Kids should NOT have to grow up feeling like they are literally in a prison camp. This country is flooded with wackos and copycat killers, unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Dec 5, 2022 9:05:33 GMT -8
See the United States of America. No other country has school shootings like we do. This has been going on in a big way for a quarter century. The Republicans have had total control of the Federal government multiple times in that span, and have done nothing to stop the mass shootings. So, tell me, what can be changed to stop the mass shootings - and I don't want to hear about armed guards at every school. Kids should NOT have to grow up feeling like they are literally in a prison camp. This country is flooded with wackos and copycat killers, unfortunately. Exactly. The angry, violent, psychopathic nutjobs know how to get famous easily. All they have to do is get an assault rifle, some ammunition, and pick a school. The genie is out of the bottle. Time to take away the tools to commit mass murder. No one on the Republican side is willing to put any reasonable limits on guns, or even to provice mental health care to those who need it most. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 15:59:40 GMT -8
This country is flooded with wackos and copycat killers, unfortunately. Exactly. The angry, violent, psychopathic nutjobs know how to get famous easily. All they have to do is get an assault rifle, some ammunition, and pick a school. The genie is out of the bottle. Time to take away the tools to commit mass murder. No one on the Republican side is willing to put any reasonable limits on guns, or even to provice mental health care to those who need it most. I share your passion for change, but to try and pin the utter lack of action on the conservatives is such a weak move. Not to mention, patently false. Shame on you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 16:01:55 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 16:08:23 GMT -8
It would be refreshing if Erik, for once -- shared any intelligent thought on how to invoke change. All he seems to do on ANY sub forum (including discussing SDSU football and the Padres) is to assess blame.
It's time for BOTH sides of the aisle to step the f x x x up.
And yes, there are indeed too many Republican leaders under the influence.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Dec 6, 2022 16:18:15 GMT -8
It would be refreshing if Erik, for once -- shared any intelligent thought on how to invoke change. All he seems to do on ANY sub forum (including discussing SDSU football and the Padres) is to assess blame. It's time for BOTH sides of the aisle to step the f x x x up. And yes, there are indeed too many Republican leaders under the influence. So, how many Democrats oppose increased gun restrictions? Damned few. There are a lot of good ideas out there, none of which are supported by Republicans. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 6, 2022 16:27:27 GMT -8
It would be refreshing if Erik, for once -- shared any intelligent thought on how to invoke change. All he seems to do on ANY sub forum (including discussing SDSU football and the Padres) is to assess blame. It's time for BOTH sides of the aisle to step the f x x x up. And yes, there are indeed too many Republican leaders under the influence. What Erik said Josh. Just read Den60's posts and you will see the same NRA / Republican (cause they all fear NRA) talking points that will never change. What are the talking points? "What problem?". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 17:05:33 GMT -8
It would be refreshing if Erik, for once -- shared any intelligent thought on how to invoke change. All he seems to do on ANY sub forum (including discussing SDSU football and the Padres) is to assess blame. It's time for BOTH sides of the aisle to step the f x x x up. And yes, there are indeed too many Republican leaders under the influence. So, how many Democrats oppose increased gun restrictions? Damned few. There are a lot of good ideas out there, none of which are supported by Republicans. That’s part of the problem. What a weak statement. “We don’t oppose it! “ A lot of conservatives talk tough after mass shootings also. What did your party get done here when they had control? Blaming NRA is misguided and will keep us where we are today ——“ The narrative is familiar: Gun-control measures can never pass, because the NRA forbids it. The group buys off all the politicians with its incredible campaign spending. Then it owns their votes, and gets everything it wants. But the reality is starkly different. In the 2020 election cycle, the NRA contributed less than $1 million directly to candidates. That made it the 996th-largest donor for the cycle, according to OpenSecrets. The group spent about $5.4 million on lobbying in that same time frame, which put it a bit higher, at 169th. Since 2012, the NRA’s highest contribution ranking has been 294th, and its highest lobbying ranking has been 85th. Congressional staffers from both sides of the aisle, several of whom asked not to be named so they could speak candidly, told me the NRA’s campaign spending is not the reason restrictions on gun ownership or use haven’t passed at the federal level in decades“. The NRA is the weakest it’s ever been, financially and influentially. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/nra-broken-so-why-cant-democrats-pass-gun-control/620190/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 17:07:47 GMT -8
It would be refreshing if Erik, for once -- shared any intelligent thought on how to invoke change. All he seems to do on ANY sub forum (including discussing SDSU football and the Padres) is to assess blame. It's time for BOTH sides of the aisle to step the f x x x up. And yes, there are indeed too many Republican leaders under the influence. What Erik said Josh. Just read Den60's posts and you will see the same NRA / Republican (cause they all fear NRA) talking points that will never change. What are the talking points? "What problem?". Again, false. If all you guys can cling to is the f****** NRA, frankly your intelligence or research is alarming. Perhaps both. You’re not even looking at the problem. And it’s amazing that nobody is even discussing the (linked) mental health crisis in this country, which is woefully underfunded. Do better. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 17:20:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 6, 2022 17:29:16 GMT -8
What Erik said Josh. Just read Den60's posts and you will see the same NRA / Republican (cause they all fear NRA) talking points that will never change. What are the talking points? "What problem?". Again, false. If all you guys can cling to is the f****** NRA, frankly your intelligence or research is alarming. Perhaps both. You’re not even looking at the problem. And it’s amazing that nobody is even discussing the (linked) mental health crisis in this country, which is woefully underfunded. Do better. The Republican Party disagrees with you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2022 17:57:21 GMT -8
Again, false. If all you guys can cling to is the f****** NRA, frankly your intelligence or research is alarming. Perhaps both. You’re not even looking at the problem. And it’s amazing that nobody is even discussing the (linked) mental health crisis in this country, which is woefully underfunded. Do better. The Republican Party disagrees with you. Fine by me. I disagree with them on many things. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 6, 2022 19:59:03 GMT -8
The Republican Party disagrees with you. Fine by me. I disagree with them on many things. Hey, I had kind of a dick response. Hope there are more like you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2022 6:06:19 GMT -8
Fine by me. I disagree with them on many things. Hey, I had kind of a dick response. Hope there are more like you. So did I. I respect you, brotha ! |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Dec 8, 2022 15:19:47 GMT -8
Wyoming and Montana, for example, have many more guns owned per capita than the other 50 states but their murder rate by guns per capita is near the bottom. So, it seems, the availability of guns does not necessarily correlate to the amount of violence by guns. Of course, no one, in leftist power circles anyhow, is asking what is Wyoming or Montana doing right in that regard. They ask, rather, what is everybody, including the innocent gun owner, doing wrong? So from that perspective, they want to implement wrong minded solutions that punish the innocent along with the guilty.
For me, I am OK with any and all background checks required for gun ownership. And mandatory sentences for gun use in a crime. Would also sure like to see something like Anti-J6 FBI mobilization against gun criminals. I also think Red Flag laws and the related laws (see Judicial decisions) that limit the Government's ability to forcibly institutionalize mental patients should also be addressed.
And while I come down on the side that says that we all can own semi-automatic rifles (so long as we are law abiding and sane), I also understand the debate on banning the sale/ownership of semi-automatic rifles (and could live with laws against AR-15s, if passed). But I do believe in the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that enables the citizenry to own guns, not just for hunting or home defense, but to counter a situation when a Government turns on them.
Of course, some say that if the citizens of the U.S. just gave up all their guns, our Government wouldn't use their extreme advantage in power to its benefit. They say "Just look how happy and safe other countries that do that are". Saying something like "extreme Totalitarianism" would "never happen here". Sorry but I'm skeptical.
To that end, consider how things were in 2005, for example. Trump was one of thousands of Reality TV stars, Musk hadn't made any sales at SpaceX or Tesla, Shop-lifting was a crime, and Twitter wasn't invented yet. Now Trump is an ex-president and daily animates the lives of the MSM and other millions in the US (We have pinned threads in here effectively dedicated to him, no less). Musk is reported as the richest and perhaps now the most influential man in the world, Shop-lifting is now a social fad, of sorts, and Twitter is so ubiquitous, some are calling for it be regulated by Government (from both ends of the political spectrum btw). All that in a mere 15 years or so and virtually nobody could have predicted these outcomes.
Who can tell what could happen in the next 15 years, for example, if we were to lose a war with China, have one party rule, have a global fiscal collapse, have a global famine, etc., etc.? And what would the changes/reactions in our Government to those situations be?
Did the Ukrainians, who fought for Russia in WW1, expect to be systematically starved to death by Russia some 15 years later? Did the Jews in Europe, for example, who were simply minding their own businesses in early 1930s, expect to be sent to gas chambers in the mid 1940s? Did some teachers/professors working in Cambodia during the late 1960s expect to be executed by their country's Government in the mid 1970's? That sort of list could go on and on.
Doesn't have to be just about executions, of course. Just look at how the J6 Riot perps are treated compared to the Portland Federal Courthouse Riot perps. I sure would rather be one the armed 87,000+ IRS agents instead of being a disarmed nobody who is part of a hated minority (~political, ethnic, religious, social, etc) in a time of civil breakdown.
But what to do about the gun crime? Besides the things noted above, changing the culture is also really needed but that is improbable to impossible. That would take Government, Church, Education and Media/Entertainment to all be on the same page pushing the same values. And those being the values prevalent in Montana and Wyoming. Not going to happen any time soon...Too "bougie".
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 8, 2022 16:45:56 GMT -8
Wyoming and Montana, for example, have many more guns owned per capita than the other 50 states but their murder rate by guns per capita is near the bottom. So, it seems, the availability of guns does not necessarily correlate to the amount of violence by guns. Of course, no one, in leftist power circles anyhow, is asking what is Wyoming or Montana doing right in that regard. They ask, rather, what is everybody, including the innocent gun owner, doing wrong? So from that perspective, they want to implement wrong minded solutions that punish the innocent along with the guilty. For me, I am OK with any and all background checks required for gun ownership. And mandatory sentences for gun use in a crime. Would also sure like to see something like Anti-J6 FBI mobilization against gun criminals. I also think Red Flag laws and the related laws (see Judicial decisions) that limit the Government's ability to forcibly institutionalize mental patients should also be addressed. And while I come down on the side that says that we all can own semi-automatic rifles (so long as we are law abiding and sane), I also understand the debate on banning the sale/ownership of semi-automatic rifles (and could live with laws against AR-15s, if passed). But I do believe in the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that enables the citizenry to own guns, not just for hunting or home defense, but to counter a situation when a Government turns on them. Of course, some say that if the citizens of the U.S. just gave up all their guns, our Government wouldn't use their extreme advantage in power to its benefit. They say "Just look how happy and safe other countries that do that are". Saying something like "extreme Totalitarianism" would "never happen here". Sorry but I'm skeptical. To that end, consider how things were in 2005, for example. Trump was one of thousands of Reality TV stars, Musk hadn't made any sales at SpaceX or Tesla, Shop-lifting was a crime, and Twitter wasn't invented yet. Now Trump is an ex-president and daily animates the lives of the MSM and other millions in the US (We have pinned threads in here effectively dedicated to him, no less). Musk is reported as the richest and perhaps now the most influential man in the world, Shop-lifting is now a social fad, of sorts, and Twitter is so ubiquitous, some are calling for it be regulated by Government (from both ends of the political spectrum btw). All that in a mere 15 years or so and virtually nobody could have predicted these outcomes. Who can tell what could happen in the next 15 years, for example, if we were to lose a war with China, have one party rule, have a global fiscal collapse, have a global famine, etc., etc.? And what would the changes/reactions in our Government to those situations be? Did the Ukrainians, who fought for Russia in WW1, expect to be systematically starved to death by Russia some 15 years later? Did the Jews in Europe, for example, who were simply minding their own businesses in early 1930s, expect to be sent to gas chambers in the mid 1940s? Did some teachers/professors working in Cambodia during the late 1960s expect to be executed by their country's Government in the mid 1970's? That sort of list could go on and on. Doesn't have to be just about executions, of course. Just look at how the J6 Riot perps are treated compared to the Portland Federal Courthouse Riot perps. I sure would rather be one the armed 87,000+ IRS agents instead of being a disarmed nobody who is part of a hated minority (~political, ethnic, religious, social, etc) in a time of civil breakdown. But what to do about the gun crime? Besides the things noted above, changing the culture is also really needed but that is improbable to impossible. That would take Government, Church, Education and Media/Entertainment to all be on the same page pushing the same values. And those being the values prevalent in Montana and Wyoming. Not going to happen any time soon...Too "bougie". Apples and oranges. Montana and Wyoming are not equally comparable to other States..other than maybe Alaska and Idaho. There is the issue of density for one. Access to wide open spaces tends to reduce tension. Also, young people in those states tend to grow up in families with guns, and learn to use and respect at younger ages. Of course required training and license have been fought against by the gun lobby forever. Thus, a total loser 18 year old kid can go into a gun store in the US and buy an AR-15...as we've seen. Again, the tired old argument about..what if they took away all the guns is stupid..its just not going to happen. In fact, you know that very fear is constantly driven in..so the gun lobby can drive up sales. I know places in the world where the gun murder rate is lower than Wyoming and Montana, but I'm not going to use it because its apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Dec 9, 2022 9:30:14 GMT -8
Wyoming and Montana, for example, have many more guns owned per capita than the other 50 states but their murder rate by guns per capita is near the bottom. So, it seems, the availability of guns does not necessarily correlate to the amount of violence by guns. Of course, no one, in leftist power circles anyhow, is asking what is Wyoming or Montana doing right in that regard. They ask, rather, what is everybody, including the innocent gun owner, doing wrong? So from that perspective, they want to implement wrong minded solutions that punish the innocent along with the guilty. For me, I am OK with any and all background checks required for gun ownership. And mandatory sentences for gun use in a crime. Would also sure like to see something like Anti-J6 FBI mobilization against gun criminals. I also think Red Flag laws and the related laws (see Judicial decisions) that limit the Government's ability to forcibly institutionalize mental patients should also be addressed. And while I come down on the side that says that we all can own semi-automatic rifles (so long as we are law abiding and sane), I also understand the debate on banning the sale/ownership of semi-automatic rifles (and could live with laws against AR-15s, if passed). But I do believe in the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that enables the citizenry to own guns, not just for hunting or home defense, but to counter a situation when a Government turns on them. Of course, some say that if the citizens of the U.S. just gave up all their guns, our Government wouldn't use their extreme advantage in power to its benefit. They say "Just look how happy and safe other countries that do that are". Saying something like "extreme Totalitarianism" would "never happen here". Sorry but I'm skeptical. To that end, consider how things were in 2005, for example. Trump was one of thousands of Reality TV stars, Musk hadn't made any sales at SpaceX or Tesla, Shop-lifting was a crime, and Twitter wasn't invented yet. Now Trump is an ex-president and daily animates the lives of the MSM and other millions in the US (We have pinned threads in here effectively dedicated to him, no less). Musk is reported as the richest and perhaps now the most influential man in the world, Shop-lifting is now a social fad, of sorts, and Twitter is so ubiquitous, some are calling for it be regulated by Government (from both ends of the political spectrum btw). All that in a mere 15 years or so and virtually nobody could have predicted these outcomes. Who can tell what could happen in the next 15 years, for example, if we were to lose a war with China, have one party rule, have a global fiscal collapse, have a global famine, etc., etc.? And what would the changes/reactions in our Government to those situations be? Did the Ukrainians, who fought for Russia in WW1, expect to be systematically starved to death by Russia some 15 years later? Did the Jews in Europe, for example, who were simply minding their own businesses in early 1930s, expect to be sent to gas chambers in the mid 1940s? Did some teachers/professors working in Cambodia during the late 1960s expect to be executed by their country's Government in the mid 1970's? That sort of list could go on and on. Doesn't have to be just about executions, of course. Just look at how the J6 Riot perps are treated compared to the Portland Federal Courthouse Riot perps. I sure would rather be one the armed 87,000+ IRS agents instead of being a disarmed nobody who is part of a hated minority (~political, ethnic, religious, social, etc) in a time of civil breakdown. But what to do about the gun crime? Besides the things noted above, changing the culture is also really needed but that is improbable to impossible. That would take Government, Church, Education and Media/Entertainment to all be on the same page pushing the same values. And those being the values prevalent in Montana and Wyoming. Not going to happen any time soon...Too "bougie". Apples and oranges. Montana and Wyoming are not equally comparable to other States..other than maybe Alaska and Idaho. There is the issue of density for one. Access to wide open spaces tends to reduce tension. Also, young people in those states tend to grow up in families with guns, and learn to use and respect at younger ages. Of course required training and license have been fought against by the gun lobby forever. Thus, a total loser 18 year old kid can go into a gun store in the US and buy an AR-15...as we've seen. Again, the tired old argument about..what if they took away all the guns is stupid..its just not going to happen. In fact, you know that very fear is constantly driven in..so the gun lobby can drive up sales. I know places in the world where the gun murder rate is lower than Wyoming and Montana, but I'm not going to use it because its apples and oranges. If not all the guns, what is the prevailing proposal? Just AR-15s like guns? And is that confiscate all or just ban new sales? Either way, nothing changes in Chicago or Baltimore. Or is it just no new sales of handguns and ammo? That would slow gun crime a bit over time but would create a black market crime wave that would have its own new set of criminal unintended consequences (~increases in break-ins, more smuggling rings, etc). Also, that sort of law would take a modification to the 2nd Amendment (or Judges to be wildly different than the Judges on the SCOTUS for the near future) and the backlash to that legislative/judicial feat would be truly ugly (for those who pushed it anyhow) and short lived. If people for stopping gun violence are actually serious about their aims, they would try to make changes to laws within the reality that gun confiscation will not happen here and gutting the 2nd Amendment will not happen here either. For one, they need to focus on the perpetrators and, for example, if Chicago has 28 shootings over a weekend, they should have 28 arrests shortly thereafter. And 28 sentenced to prison a few months later. Some say we have done that in the past and it just decimates a community and creates more fatherless children who quickly become the next generation of criminals. Therein lies the requirement for a cultural aspect of the solution. How to break that circle of incarceration & fatherlessness (repeat) without throwing away the 2nd Amendment. Liberal DAs are addressing that dynamic with more leniency. I understand that in today's social dynamic, the communities involved have to make their own policies but at the end of the day, if changes to Law Enforcement policy does not result in more public safely, it is actually failed public policy. The Swiss have a gun culture too and gun violence rates that are relatively low. They teach gun safety and gun responsibility to their children when young (ala Wyoming and Montana?). They also have strict gun registration requirements, etc. and many would support that. But punishing the innocent will get you nowhere fast. Breaking the cycle of violence by other means is needed. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Dec 9, 2022 18:23:11 GMT -8
Apples and oranges. Montana and Wyoming are not equally comparable to other States..other than maybe Alaska and Idaho. There is the issue of density for one. Access to wide open spaces tends to reduce tension. Also, young people in those states tend to grow up in families with guns, and learn to use and respect at younger ages. Of course required training and license have been fought against by the gun lobby forever. Thus, a total loser 18 year old kid can go into a gun store in the US and buy an AR-15...as we've seen. Again, the tired old argument about..what if they took away all the guns is stupid..its just not going to happen. In fact, you know that very fear is constantly driven in..so the gun lobby can drive up sales. I know places in the world where the gun murder rate is lower than Wyoming and Montana, but I'm not going to use it because its apples and oranges. If not all the guns, what is the prevailing proposal? Just AR-15s like guns? And is that confiscate all or just ban new sales? Either way, nothing changes in Chicago or Baltimore. Or is it just no new sales of handguns and ammo? That would slow gun crime a bit over time but would create a black market crime wave that would have its own new set of criminal unintended consequences (~increases in break-ins, more smuggling rings, etc). Also, that sort of law would take a modification to the 2nd Amendment (or Judges to be wildly different than the Judges on the SCOTUS for the near future) and the backlash to that legislative/judicial feat would be truly ugly (for those who pushed it anyhow) and short lived. If people for stopping gun violence are actually serious about their aims, they would try to make changes to laws within the reality that gun confiscation will not happen here and gutting the 2nd Amendment will not happen here either. For one, they need to focus on the perpetrators and, for example, if Chicago has 28 shootings over a weekend, they should have 28 arrests shortly thereafter. And 28 sentenced to prison a few months later. Some say we have done that in the past and it just decimates a community and creates more fatherless children who quickly become the next generation of criminals. Therein lies the requirement for a cultural aspect of the solution. How to break that circle of incarceration & fatherlessness (repeat) without throwing away the 2nd Amendment. Liberal DAs are addressing that dynamic with more leniency. I understand that in today's social dynamic, the communities involved have to make their own policies but at the end of the day, if changes to Law Enforcement policy does not result in more public safely, it is actually failed public policy. The Swiss have a gun culture too and gun violence rates that are relatively low. They teach gun safety and gun responsibility to their children when young (ala Wyoming and Montana?). They also have strict gun registration requirements, etc. and many would support that. But punishing the innocent will get you nowhere fast. Breaking the cycle of violence by other means is needed. Good luck in America..the horse has left the barn. Was going to bring up the Swiss example..which works...but much much more homogeneous than here. I guess we will just have to settle for the associated population reduction... dis place gone nuts. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Dec 12, 2022 11:49:25 GMT -8
How...
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Dec 12, 2022 15:00:12 GMT -8
Very unfortunate and unnecessary incident. Horrible. I hope the Cop is prosecuted to the fullest. Well, because the reality of it all is that there are good cops and bad cops, also there are incompetent and competent, trained and untrained ones as well. That goes for all facets of life, unfortunately. |
|
