Trump's Final 100 days
Quote: RomesSo you're just going to IGNORE the fact that there were 0 deaths in this psychotic attack? No one wants ANY attacks, but you'd have to be completely ignorant to not realize this kid would have killed DOZENS (or even more) had he had a gun, instead of a knife.
Like I said, you need to learn what "Demonstrating Absurdity by Being Absurd" is about.
I am lampooning the losers who the second there is a gun attack rush to blame the NRA or/and gun manufacturers as if either has anything to do with any attack. I blamed Ginsu, maker of cheap knives sold on direct-response commercials, known to any person who remembers the 1970s/80s at the least. It is to show just how completely stupid people blaming the NRA look, since asking what the NRA has to do with anything or how they are to blame-----well said people can never answer that.
Not trying to divert. I posted at DT a link to the teacher that fired a round or two in Georgia, as it turns out he was taking anti-depressants. I suspect this kid was taking them as well. And the Cruz, and the Vegas killer. It isn't the guns, it's the people.Quote: boymimboWell there's a class A deflection!!!!
Quote: AZDuffmanLike I said, you need to learn what "Demonstrating Absurdity by Being Absurd" is about.
I am lampooning the losers who the second there is a gun attack rush to blame the NRA or/and gun manufacturers as if either has anything to do with any attack. I blamed Ginsu, maker of cheap knives sold on direct-response commercials, known to any person who remembers the 1970s/80s at the least. It is to show just how completely stupid people blaming the NRA look, since asking what the NRA has to do with anything or how they are to blame-----well said people can never answer that.
There is a ton of debate among historians as to the intent of the second amendment. And for nearly two centuries, that sentence was largely ignored. The NRA was founded after the Civil War to promote training and marksmanship. In fact, the NRA testified in SUPPORT of the first federal gun law in 1934. Fast forward to 1977 and the "Revolt at Cincinnati" where the group formerly embraced the idea that the 2A and its protection was their sole mission.
Interesting enough, when you walk into their headquarters, the words "marksmanship" and "safety" are no longer on the wall. But instead, "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Conveniently left out? "Well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state." We report, you decide.
To say that the NRA does not share blame for America's abundance of guns epidemic is NONSENSE. Do your damn homework.
My gift to you: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/nra-guns-second-amendment-106856?o=1
Ginsu hasn't purchased legislation to make it so the CDC can't even STUDY knives... the NRA has done that. The NRA is in fact an evil fear mongering organization hell bent on doing nothing but pumping out more guns in to the country for profit. They don't care what the results are, as shown by the fact that they PAY so that none of us can know the results.Quote: AZDuffmanLike I said, you need to learn what "Demonstrating Absurdity by Being Absurd" is about.
I am lampooning the losers who the second there is a gun attack rush to blame the NRA or/and gun manufacturers as if either has anything to do with any attack. I blamed Ginsu, maker of cheap knives sold on direct-response commercials, known to any person who remembers the 1970s/80s at the least. It is to show just how completely stupid people blaming the NRA look, since asking what the NRA has to do with anything or how they are to blame-----well said people can never answer that.
Quote: RomesGinsu hasn't purchased legislation to make it so the CDC can't even STUDY knives... the NRA has done that. The NRA is in fact an evil fear mongering organization hell bent on doing nothing but pumping out more guns in to the country for profit. They don't care what the results are, as shown by the fact that they PAY so that none of us can know the results.
The CDC should not be studying gun deaths, they are not a disease.
Quote: Steverinos
To say that the NRA does not share blame for America's abundance of guns epidemic is NONSENSE. Do your damn homework.
Seriously? When has the NRA advocated for gun violence?
What other group do you blame for actions of individual people?
NOW for teenagers getting pregnant? I mean, they push for abortion so women are not "burdened with a baby."
Gay groups for Jerry Sandusky molesting boys? They push for gays to be allowed to work with boys.
Who else?
I said they SHARE the blame for America's abundance of guns EPIDEMIC. Cracks me up. We all blame Cruz for shooting the school up. Duh. But I also blame the NRA for its decades long push and influence on the idea that the 2A guarantees Cruz's right to buy an AR-15 at 18 years old. I believe it does not, and for 200+ years, the courts agreed.
And teen pregnancy has drastically dropped over the past two decades, more drastically over the past ten years, mainly due to education and the availability of birth control. See, it turns out when you have DATA on something, you can implement policy in an effort to reverse the trend, which is why birth control was required in health care plans in the ACA. This is also the reason why the CDC should study things like this even though it's not herpes.
But what do Trump and the republicans want to do? You guessed it. They want to reverse something that works, because...umm...freedom...and...um...Obama.
"We have to quit being the party of stupid." - Bobby Jindal
Why do conservatives despise information?
Because it will lead to change... and they all want 'merica to be this white picket fence no gay marriage white suburbia they grew up with when the fact of the matter is the world, and the US is evolving and you can't stop that... but they'll try to fight it kicking and screaming because they can't see through enough to the future to get off the days of old.Quote: Steverinos...Why do conservatives despise information?
Quote: darkozIm thinking for the last 25 pages or so this is no longer a trump thread but a gun right/school shooter thread
Maybe time to separate this out?
Ship has sailed, I'm afraid.
These mega threads are flat impossible to manage as far as splitting goes. Even if I wished to spend 40-90min attempting, there's a too real chance all the stuff simply vanishes, as happened last time I tried.
Not too sure what to do atm. Seems that usually folks have no problem following a thread that may have 2 or 3 sub-threads in it, so I'm reluctant to force a new thread to effect a split. And this issue certainly involves Trump; in fact, I can't believe no one's yet posted his statements on gun control yet. For now I'll have it carry on; if it gets stupid I'll try something else.
Was listening to NPR where they gave some details into this kid's background. I don't much care about broken home, adopted, all that, but some things struck me as.... I dunno how to word it, I just know my response was "Are you f#$%ing kidding me?" Has anyone else heard these details? I'll supply those that struck me since I don't remember seeing them yet.
Has had cops called on him since the age of 8 or 9, usually for fights with his younger brother. Had cops called on him for shooting chickens with a BB gun as a minor. Had cops called for many, non-familial fights. Was reported for threatening violence on a school. Was reported for violence against others. Mother reported kid was "loose cannon" and was "afraid he was going to explode". I think I even remember the mother saying that SHE feared for her safety, but I could be mistaken.
I don't know Florida law. I do know NY, but I'm still unsure as to how exactly it's being implemented. I guess my question is, is there no action to be taken in cases like these?
I'm one of the gun nuts. And as a certified mental defective, my hair gets up when talking about "check ups" or "questionings". But even I see, and agree with, that if a person is ACTIVELY being sociopathic, sadistic, etc, there SHOULD BE an avenue of intervention. I'm not sure at exactly what point that should occur, and I'm not sure to what extent the intervention entails, but when you're torturing animals and openly threatening violence unto persons or places, how do you NOT pop in and shut it down?
I'm curious if there's any of my gunners who think folks like this should indeed be left alone, or if there are anti's here that think we already knew about this and are cool with it. I for one am not. I mean, if I tell the doc I got the blues and 5-0's waiting for me when I get home, that's BS. But if I go to the doc because I done cut myself 75 times to relieve the stress and I can't stop screaming wishes of death on people around me, yeah, I kinda of expect, maybe even demand, that someone be sent to scoop me up.
Comments?
Quote: SteverinosDid I say they are fully to blame? You quoted me. Did I say that? Did I say they have advocated for violence? Ever?
I said they SHARE the blame for America's abundance of guns EPIDEMIC.
To say the NRA should take ANY blame is silly and intellectually lazy. But the gun grabbers will keep saying it.
Quote:Why do conservatives despise information?
We don't, we just want real and correct information.
Quote: AZDuffmanWe don't, we just want real and correct information.
I call.
What part of the article I linked was inaccurate?
Quote: Face
I'm curious if there's any of my gunners who think folks like this should indeed be left alone, or if there are anti's here that think we already knew about this and are cool with it. I for one am not. I mean, if I tell the doc I got the blues and 5-0's waiting for me when I get home, that's BS. But if I go to the doc because I done cut myself 75 times to relieve the stress and I can't stop screaming wishes of death on people around me, yeah, I kinda of expect, maybe even demand, that someone be sent to scoop me up.
Comments?
This is a tough one. On one hand, I don't want the doc calling the cops because of a "maybe." I have been in corporate life, I can see there being pressure on docs, "you did not refer any depression cases this month? What's wrong??" OTOH, this dude was so far over the line he could not see the line.
We may have to accept that some people cannot be fixed. We used to have institutions to hold them, with various levels of confinement. After we stopped, homelessness and violence went up. Maybe the answer is a more halfway-house method. This one, the cops came what, 39 times? Looking like it was a lifelong thing. Gotta be a way to do better than the half-measures.
Quote: SteverinosI call.
What part of the article I linked was inaccurate?
The headline.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Trying to tell me it is not about individual gun rights? Sorry.
Like I said, correct information, please. Politico is probably not the best source.
Quote: AZDuffmanThe headline.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Trying to tell me it is not about individual gun rights? Sorry.
Like I said, correct information, please. Politico is probably not the best source.
Don't know why you didn't bold the entire thing. Interesting.
The 2A was written in a time where every white man age 16 to 60 was automatically enrolled in the militia and was actually REQUIRED to own a musket or other military weapon.
Question: does that sound like "freedom" to you?
You didn't read the article. Shocker.
Quote: Steverinos
Correct me if I'm wrong. But the 2A was written in a time where every white man age 16 to 60 was automatically enrolled in the militia and was actually REQUIRED to own a musket or other military weapon.
Does that sound like "freedom" to you?
Never heard "required." Ever. Would have been a local thing if it was.
Quote: Steverinos
Don't know why you didn't bold the entire thing. Interesting.
Because bolding the entire thing does not show the words that mean things.
Quote: AZDuffmanNever heard "required." Ever. Would have been a local thing if it was.
Local, as in, the 13 state militias?
Quote: SteverinosLocal, as in, the 13 state militias?
No, as in town or county.
Quote: AZDuffmanNo, as in town or county.
You are wrong. Do your homework. Read something OTHER than Drudge or Breitbart. Geez.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/militia-act-establishes-conscription-under-federal-law
"On this day in 1792, Congress passes the second portion of the Militia Act, requiring that every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years be enrolled in the militia."
Respective STATES. Not towns. Not city. Not county. STATES.
Quote: SteverinosYou are wrong.
Nope.
Only required if they were called up. Quite a bit different than you inferred.
And it shows a right for individual gun ownership as they were required to obtain and keep their own guns.
If you do not want a gun, don't buy one. But quit demanding other people lose rights because you do not like guns.
Hint: It doesn't.
Quote: AZDuffmanAnd it shows a right for individual gun ownership as they were required to obtain and keep their own guns.
It shows a right for gun ownership? But then it's required? Did you just put that in the same sentence? Seriously?
Quote: SteverinosWhere does it say it was only required if you were called up?
Hint: It doesn't.
Quote: wikipediaMilitia members, referred to as "every citizen, so enrolled and notified", "...shall within six months thereafter, provide himself..." with a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack.
No notification, no requirement to buy. In any case, you had to be crazy not to be armed at the time.
Quote: FaceAnd this issue certainly involves Trump; in fact, I can't believe no one's yet posted his statements on gun control yet. For now I'll have it carry on; if it gets stupid I'll try something else.
Why hasn't there been a discussion about his comments yesterday? He said he would like to take peoples' guns before due process. If Obama said that, all the righties heads would have literally exploded.
Does nobody care because everyone, left and right, knows he is a moron has no idea what he's talking about? (Hint: yes).
Quote: FaceI'm curious if there's any of my gunners who think folks like this should indeed be left alone, or if there are anti's here that think we already knew about this and are cool with it. I for one am not. I mean, if I tell the doc I got the blues and 5-0's waiting for me when I get home, that's BS. But if I go to the doc because I done cut myself 75 times to relieve the stress and I can't stop screaming wishes of death on people around me, yeah, I kinda of expect, maybe even demand, that someone be sent to scoop me up.
Comments?
I'm wondering if he is product of something we often do for kids to give them a fresh start when they've made some mistakes in their youth.
If a kid has a few problem incidents, people usually don't want these on a permanent record. It's good for kids who get their life straightened out, but not so good when it is something like this.
It's like they forgot he never was improving and didn't track him.
Now, we have a standing army, and do not have a well regulated militia.
The reasons for the inclusion of the second amendment are no longer relevant.
Quote: Dalex64The founders did not want to have a standing army, thus the requirement to have a well regulated militia.
Now, we have a standing army, and do not have a well regulated militia.
The reasons for the inclusion of the second amendment are no longer relevant.
How do you reconcile the above statement with the 2008 SCOTUS Heller Decision?
Quote: FaceAnd on the gun topic, a submission...
...I'm one of the gun nuts. And as a certified mental defective, my hair gets up when talking about "check ups" or "questionings". But even I see, and agree with, that if a person is ACTIVELY being sociopathic, sadistic, etc, there SHOULD BE an avenue of intervention. I'm not sure at exactly what point that should occur, and I'm not sure to what extent the intervention entails, but when you're torturing animals and openly threatening violence unto persons or places, how do you NOT pop in and shut it down?
Comments?
Like most people, you support people with mental health issues of certain kinds (I am thinking BiPolar and Schizophrenia especially) shouldn't have guns. Certainly, those who utter actual threats to the public also should not have guns, sane or no.
LEO should have intervened and taken the gun away.
I still think a graduated licensing should be required with those with large quantities of guns or high powered gun subject to a higher standard when it comes to training and licensing.
Quote: SteverinosNobody cares because what he says is meaningless. He will say something completely different tomorrow, depending on who's watching. He doesn't seem to even know what his party's position is on some of these issues. I mean, yeah, it's encouraging that he's trying to talk tough on the NRA. But he also said he wanted a "bill of love" for the dreamers in another meeting open to cameras., only to have every bi-partisan proposal from legislators that have been working on this problem for years shot down.
Trump is very reactive and says (tweets) things without thinking them through. He wants to be a good leader and so sometimes he will read what the public is saying and respond directly to that without FoxNews' filter. Hence the moments yesterday and moments before when he appears to make nice with Democrats only to yank it out.
Meanwhile, no legislation on DACA.
Quote: MaxPenDon't call her a whore. Call her a whore. This is getting to be funny. The bias is strong in this one. LOL
I guess the thing that struck me wrong is it's a very derogatory thing that's said only about females, and is blatantly sexual in nature. Call her an incompetent fool, or even a f $!#ing moron, and you're accurate without focusing on something irrelevant and sexist.
However, in her particular case, it seems to have been accurate, or at least widespread gossip, so I retracted my objection. If she is, in fact, whoring for power or whatever, call her what she is without objection from me.
Quote: ParadigmHow do you reconcile the above statement with the 2008 SCOTUS Heller Decision?
The court is not non-partisan, even less so in modern times
That was a 5-4 decision
The court is not infallible
In addition to the letters and other documents that the court used to justify their decision, there are letters and other documents from the same time period which support my assertion.
In short, with one judge with a different conservative/liberal bias, that decision could have gone the other way.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller
In addition to the details of that case you mentioned, there is a lot of other interesting information in the decision about what the 2nd amendment does not guarantee.
Quote: ParadigmSo the SCOTUS Heller opinion should be discarded because your assertion is correct and the highest court in the land got it wrong...you should discuss your strategy/next steps with the Pro-Life advocates...they’re just one peskie SCOTUS decision away from the “right” answer as well.
No, I am saying it is my opinion that the founders did not want a standing army, wanted a militia instead, and that is why the second amendment says what it says.
I am also saying that if the court had a different idealogical makeup by just one judge they may have come up with a different decision.
The SC is loath to overturn their previous decisions, but have done so in the past, more times than I thought:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions
The bottom line is the US economy thrives when the world economy thrives
Everything is intertwined
That's why smart republicans are against tariffs, its bad for business overall
What a moron we have for a President
Quote: AZDuffmanThe CDC should not be studying gun deaths, they are not a disease.
This is so completely wrong and hypocritical for someone who pushes the NRA agenda.
What are you afraid of? That science can PROVE a link between mental health and easy access to guns leads to a high rate of death? (Seems self-evident, but gun people deny it anyway.)
IF the NRA is right with their condescending slogan "guns don't kill people, people kill people", the NRA should be FIRST in line finding out WHY this is happening. IF the NRA claims more money and attention should be paid to mental illness leading to using these tools, they SHOULD want the CDC to study whether there is a connection or prove there isn't.
It puts your entire argument and agenda into the ludicrous spectrum when you deny access to facts via medical studies and research. And a strong suspicion you KNOW you're wrong about it, but it doesn't suit your purpose to have proof, so you block the fact-finding before it can be studied.
Man up, NRA. Get the facts, let our society take appropriate measures that work for BOTH factions.
Quote: MaxPenThere was a story in the early 90's about him stopping a mugger with a bat beating someone.
Those of us who don't drink the Orange Kool-Aid knew this was a fake "John Barron"-planted story. But for those naive enough to think otherwise:
Witness deflates Trump's claim that he stopped bat beating in 1991: 'He came at the tail end of the event'
Quote: beachbumbabsThis is so completely wrong and hypocritical for someone who pushes the NRA agenda.
What are you afraid of? That science can PROVE a link between mental health and easy access to guns leads to a high rate of death? (Seems self-evident, but gun people deny it anyways)
I am afraid of Hillary Clinton in a 2020 run cherry picking numbers to suit a gun-grabbing agenda. And any other number of gun grabbers out there. The "D" is for DISEASE. A gun death is not a disease, it is violence.
Quote:IF the NRA is right with their condescending slogan "guns don't kill people, people kill people", the NRA should be FIRST in line finding out WHY this is happening. IF the NRA claims more money and attention should be paid to mental illness leading to using these tools, they SHOULD want the CDC to study whether there is a connection or prove there isn't.
Then study mental health, not gun deaths. Even tying guns to "diseases" makes it seem there is something wrong with gun owners. BTW: It is not condescending, the slogan is correct. Though we have too many liberals out there thinking the NRA actually causes deaths.
Quote:It puts your entire argument and agenda into the ludicrous spectrum when you deny access to facts via medical studies and research. And a strong suspicion you KNOW you're wrong about it, but it doesn't suit your purpose to have proof, so you block the fact-finding before it can be studied.
Do you share this attitude about tracking crimes of illegal aliens? Last year the entire Democrat side of the aisle groaned when Trump said we would start tracking such crimes. Just wondering if you agree with them not to track, or with Trump that we should do so?
Quote:Man up, NRA.
Now, now, now. I seem to remember you getting upset when people say this.
This has to be one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read, in my entire life. Spoken like someone who is truly absolute and blind in their "one side" devoid of conceptualizing any new factual information about the topic.Quote: AZDuffmanTo say the NRA should take ANY blame is silly and intellectually lazy. But the gun grabbers will keep saying it...
Quote: RomesThis has to be one of the most ignorant statements I've ever read, in my entire life. Spoken like someone who is truly absolute and blind in their "one side" devoid of conceptualizing any new factual information about the topic.
Yeah, and AAA is responsible for deaths in auto accidents?
OK, show us the way! What on earth has the NRA done to encourage gun violence of any kind? I do not mean lobbying against this or that law, as we already have laws against shooting and killing people. I mean how on earth is the NRA to blame?
Be careful how you answer, as you may open up your favored group to blame for something depending on the logic you use.
In your analogy here you should say the beer companies, like anhizer/budwiser/etc... And yes, to some extent in some fashion they absolutely do play a role... THEY PROVIDE THE BOOZE, just like the NRA pushes guns and provides lobbying for legislation to give easier access to them, etc.Quote: AZDuffmanYeah, and AAA is responsible for deaths in auto accidents?
They advocate pushing more and more guns in to our communities. There. Done. Proof. They have some responsibility. That was easy. Hell, that's without even getting in to the lobbying so that we can't even STUDY guns to understand their true effects on our society.Quote: AZDuffmanOK, show us the way! What on earth has the NRA done to encourage gun violence of any kind?
Quote: RomesIn your analogy here you should say the beer companies, like anhizer/budwiser/etc... And yes, to some extent in some fashion they absolutely do play a role... THEY PROVIDE THE BOOZE, just like the NRA pushes guns and provides lobbying for legislation to give easier access to them, etc.
The NRA does not manufacture or sell guns.
Quote:They advocate pushing more and more guns in to our communities. There. Done. Proof. They have some responsibility. That was easy. Hell, that's without even getting in to the lobbying so that we can't even STUDY guns to understand their true effects on our society.
No proof at all, just an intellectually lazy statement. Do they advocate gun VIOLENCE? NO!
Nice try, but you need to go back study a bit, develop your argument.
Don't you believe people are responsible for their own actions?
Should they blame drunk driving on beer commercials?Quote: AZDuffmanYeah, and AAA is responsible for deaths in auto accidents?
Perdue commercials for drug addiction?
Car adds for traffic deaths?
Should they blame WOV for gambling ?
Oops, someone else posted while I was typing.
Quote: petroglyphShould they blame drunk driving on beer commercials?
Perdue commercials for drug addiction?
Car adds for traffic deaths?
Should they blame WOV for gambling ?
Oops, someone else posted while I was typing.
Have to be 21 to drink. Thanks to the NRA, you only have to be 18 to buy an assault weapon.
Have to get a license to drive. You have to prove you know how to drive. Thanks to the NRA, you don't have to prove you know wtf you are doing when you buy an AR-15, at 18 years old.
You have to be 21 to gamble. Thanks to the NRA, you only have to be 18 to buy an assault weapon.
To say the NRA does not share some responsibility for this problem is NONSENSE.
Had it not been for the NRA's influence, money, and lobbying, that kid would NOT have been able to purchase an AR-15 at 18 years old. Liberals are NOT saying that he wouldn't of found some other means. He likely would've. Maybe. We don't know. But those other means would not have been as effective. Lives would've been saved if we still had an assault weapons ban in place. Period. There's a reason why this weapon is the preferred instrument of mass shooters. It's accurate and extremely deadly. A weapon of war. NOT a weapon that any regular citizen who is not part of a militia (it's 2018, so that means everybody) should have.
So yes, they share some responsibility. This isn't difficult.
You're basically saying that the NRA wastes millions of dollars on political contributions because they have NOTHING to do with the problem. If that was true, and you were an NRA card carrying member, I'd start demanding some of your club dues be reimbursed immediately.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year
That's why you see the rate dropping for the last 80 years.
But when you have one party who decides anything that doesn't fit their narrative and ideological views is #fakenews, and that same party despises information, it's no wonder we can't make progress on things that matter. We live in a country where 65% of us don't want something (tax reform), which gets done, while 97% of us want something (expanded background checks), and it doesn't get done.
Why that doesn't piss each and every one of us off? /facepalm
Quote: SteverinosHave to be 21 to drink. Thanks to the NRA, you only have to be 18 to buy an assault weapon.
Have to get a license to drive. You have to prove you know how to drive. Thanks to the NRA, you don't have to prove you know wtf you are doing when you buy an AR-15, at 18 years old.
You have to be 21 to gamble. Thanks to the NRA, you only have to be 18 to buy an assault weapon.
To say the NRA does not share some responsibility for this problem is NONSENSE.
So what? 18 is an adult. Maybe we need to raise the age to 60?
Quote:So yes, they share some responsibility. This isn't difficult.
No, they do not. No more than INBev is responsible if a 21 year old gets drunk and kills someone.
Quote:You're basically saying that the NRA wastes millions of dollars on political contributions because they have NOTHING to do with the problem. If that was true, and you were an NRA card carrying member, I'd start demanding some of your club dues be reimbursed immediately.
The NRA does not support gun violence. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
BTW: Do you hold NOW responsible for the hundreds of thousands of abortions each year?
