18 shot Walmart El Paso

Quote: AZDuffman

Not a valid example. The casino freely offers a membership to get me to play. The donut shop offers one donut to get me to buy more. They each do this on their own.

Reparations for slavery is money taken from some a the point of a gun to give to others based on skin color for something that happened decades before even the oldest involved was born.

But if you like reparations, you are free to sign the deed to your home if you own or the title to your car if you do not lease over to a random Black person. Are you willing to do that? Or do you support it by a special tax on "the rich?"

Im willing to sign over the deed to my car.

I take the bus anyway

Quote: darkoz

Seems safer than el paso texas right now

As a math based forum this is one of the most nonfactual comments in this thread.

El Paso is one of the safest cities in America (in fact most years it ranks as the safest city in America, for its size range....).

This is like somebody losing a huge bet on red on roulette and saying "outside bets are the most risky bets on roulette" (when they are the safest, at least as far as roulette bets go)....

Whereas right across the border is Juarez, one of the most dangerous cities in the world (thankfully there is a strong border there).... Debatably the most dangerous city in the world that is not involved in an active war, which makes El Paso even more impressive in its low violence rates.....

In 2018, 1247 confirmed homicides in Juarez (and that does not factor countless missing people that probably are dead somewhere from cartels), and that is not getting into rape, attempted murder, and general violence. In 2018, 18 homicides in El Paso. Now, El Paso is about half the population of Juarez, but even scaling per capita, the rates are nowhere close.....

Mass shootings are very uncommon, and El Paso will likely not experience another one for years if ever. Mass shooting do not correlate with overall violent crime in a city (generally they are lone wolf deranged people who are not involved with criminal elements, of course there are exceptions, terrorist-sponsored and mob/gang based shooting attacks that reach the level to be classified as a "mass shooting", but that is not the norm). Unfortunately this one incident is highly tragic, both morally and statistically, because more people were killed in one incident than in most years....

A lone wolf mass shooting with no local connections does not mean that there will be another in the same location. Just like a random win or loss will not change the outcome of the next spin.

I will say that I find it interesting the level of interest people have in a shooter's manifesto when it fits a certain narrative.

Nobody wants to take a shooter's narrative seriously when they say they are doing it for Islam or to fight oppressive policing.

But, when a shooter has political buzzwords about immigrants, suddenly everything he says needs to be taken for face value.

For the record, I always support believing people when they say they did something for a certain reason. If somebody shoots up a café because of a religious reason, I will take them at their word, if somebody shoots up a store because of some deranged narrative I will take them at their word.

This might be the first time certain outlets are more interested in the shooter than talking about firearms.... Which I suppose, in a perverse way, is a positive outcome for journalism, though I suspect it will be short-lived.

Quote: darkoz

Im willing to sign over the deed to my car.

I take the bus anyway

Cool. You want I should find a Black family could use it? I assume you own it free and clear?

Quote: AZDuffman

Cool. You want I should find a Black family could use it? I assume you own it free and clear?

Great, another uninsured/ under insured driver on the road.

Not racism, just betting the odds like an AP like Ozzy does for a living.

Somewhere Shaq is smiling.

I suppose it's possible I might find a large winning lottery ticket somewhere on my way to the police station after breaking out of my kidnapper's cell, but I am not crediting the kidnapper, and chances are I might still kill the M--- F--- if I saw him immediately after breaking out, and he would completely deserve it.

Sorry, Bobbartop, no jury would ever buy your point and i don't either.

And I meant quote of the day as in the sense of Osama bin Laden is man of the year on Time Magazine.

but thanks for your opinion.

I’m left-leaning.

The concept of reparations for people who were never slaves, are not the children of slaves, and indeed, are not even the grandchildren of slaves ranks very highly among the stupidest concepts I’ve ever heard.

I just did the Isidewith quiz again and it appears I’m only slightly left leaning and am a Centrist Libertarian. Ten years ago, anybody would have called me a Socialist, including me, but I don’t think my views have changed. I’ll probably be a Republican ten years from now, all whilst not changing a bit.

Quote: Boz

Great, another uninsured/ under insured driver on the road.

Not racism, just betting the odds like an AP like Ozzy does for a living.

Somewhere Shaq is smiling.

Hopefully he pays their insurance in the name of being fair.

Quote: Mission146

I’m left-leaning.

The concept of reparations for people who were never slaves, are not the children of slaves, and indeed, are not even the grandchildren of slaves ranks very highly among the stupidest concepts I’ve ever heard.

I just did the Isidewith quiz again and it appears I’m only slightly left leaning and am a Centrist Libertarian. Ten years ago, anybody would have called me a Socialist, including me, but I don’t think my views have changed. I’ll probably be a Republican ten years from now, all whilst not changing a bit.

I am left leaning in social issues. I am Neocon for an easy label.

But, reparations I would support if it was 1870, or if there were still living slaves. Reparations were appropriate (and long overdue for internment camps under FDR, ironically pushed for by Reagan)…. The government makes a lot of mistakes and needs to pay for them. However, slavery, is long gone. If anything I want to see reparations in the form of better schools for all children regardless of location, and better access to basic services (for all people). Throwing cash at people who may or may not be the decedents of slaves will solve nothing. (Also a portion of slave owners were African American, what if somebody comes from a family that owned slaves and were enslaved at various points?)

I believe in reparations for people who were wrongly imprisoned or wrongfully seized by the government (like internment camps, and some Native American land). I don't believe in reparations for a whole race based on an assumption that at some point one of their ancestors may have been enslaved.

I actually like Yang's UBI approach, make cash benefits equal to everyone and make healthcare equal to everyone and then nobody will need reparations.

Quote: Mission146

I’m left-leaning.

The concept of reparations for people who were never slaves, are not the children of slaves, and indeed, are not even the grandchildren of slaves ranks very highly among the stupidest concepts I’ve ever heard.

Well, that could be someone who just arrived here and became a citizen this year. Who is supporting that concept because I agree that is nonsense.

Quote: Gandler

As a math based forum this is one of the most nonfactual comments in this thread.

El Paso is one of the safest cities in America (in fact most years it ranks as the safest city in America, for its size range....).

This is like somebody losing a huge bet on red on roulette and saying "outside bets are the most risky bets on roulette" (when they are the safest, at least as far as roulette bets go)....

Whereas right across the border is Juarez, one of the most dangerous cities in the world (thankfully there is a strong border there).... Debatably the most dangerous city in the world that is not involved in an active war, which makes El Paso even more impressive in its low violence rates.....

In 2018, 1247 confirmed homicides in Juarez (and that does not factor countless missing people that probably are dead somewhere from cartels), and that is not getting into rape, attempted murder, and general violence. In 2018, 18 homicides in El Paso. Now, El Paso is about half the population of Juarez, but even scaling per capita, the rates are nowhere close.....

Mass shootings are very uncommon, and El Paso will likely not experience another one for years if ever. Mass shooting do not correlate with overall violent crime in a city (generally they are lone wolf deranged people who are not involved with criminal elements, of course there are exceptions, terrorist-sponsored and mob/gang based shooting attacks that reach the level to be classified as a "mass shooting", but that is not the norm). Unfortunately this one incident is highly tragic, both morally and statistically, because more people were killed in one incident than in most years....

A lone wolf mass shooting with no local connections does not mean that there will be another in the same location. Just like a random win or loss will not change the outcome of the next spin.

These are pretty interesting observations, thanks, but I disagree with one aspect.

These guys are no longer "lone wolf". They are no longer brooding alone. They have a strong virtual community.

They are members of dark forums and finding (and heavily influenced by) like-minded, resentful people who reinforce their grievances and prejudices.

They are isolated from socialization with people unlike them, which allows them to group those people as "other" and of lesser import.

They are immersing themselves for hours or days at a time in video games and RPGs that, regardless of the historical setting, use anything from axes to phasers to kill everything that is "other" and taught to feel triumphant and superior if they are the "Last Man Standing". They are desensitized to carnage and death, not just by watching it in many movies, but in the last 20 years in doing it themselves. And the more immersive the experience, the more brain receptors are activated.

They are told openly, now, in hundreds of ways, that their failures or low earnings or unhappiness or loneliness are NOT their own fault or responsibility, but instead the fault of women, minorities, immigrants, other external factors over which they have no control. This information is coming from their internet feeds, forums, Trump rallies, talk radio, right-wing news sources, RPG teams, other means, and reinforces itself in an increasing spiral.

How is parenting, religion, and socialization-in-person supposed to hold up against this virtual community of reinforced resentment and desensitization? It's attacking the minds of pre-teens and teens in their most formative and difficult societal years.

Lots more to say about this, but there's a start.

I do suggest for people who want to randomly shoot people, that we just put them together and let them shoot each other. Maybe someone needs to put a signup sheet on 4chan instead of a manifesto.

I've been in the family restaurant business for over 50 years in Texas. I think people are more weary of starting a fight or robbing someone when people conceal carry. I carry everyday.

Quote: beachbumbabs

These are pretty interesting observations, thanks, but I disagree with one aspect.

These guys are no longer "lone wolf". They are no longer brooding alone. They have a strong virtual community.

They are members of dark forums and finding (and heavily influenced by) like-minded, resentful people who reinforce their grievances and prejudices.

They are isolated from socialization with people unlike them, which allows them to group those people as "other" and of lesser import.

They are immersing themselves for hours or days at a time in video games and RPGs that, regardless of the historical setting, use anything from axes to phasers to kill everything that is "other" and taught to feel triumphant and superior if they are the "Last Man Standing". They are desensitized to carnage and death, not just by watching it in many movies, but in the last 20 years in doing it themselves. And the more immersive the experience, the more brain receptors are activated.

They are told openly, now, in hundreds of ways, that their failures or low earnings or unhappiness or loneliness are NOT their own fault or responsibility, but instead the fault of women, minorities, immigrants, other external factors over which they have no control. This information is coming from their internet feeds, forums, Trump rallies, talk radio, right-wing news sources, RPG teams, other means, and reinforces itself in an increasing spiral.

How is parenting, religion, and socialization-in-person supposed to hold up against this virtual community of reinforced resentment and desensitization? It's attacking the minds of pre-teens and teens in their most formative and difficult societal years.

Lots more to say about this, but there's a start.

Well, even if all of that is true, that does not make El Paso any more likely to have another attack than any other city. El Paso is still a very safe city (maybe the safest) and some people in this thread clearly do not understand how important that reputation is to El Paso.

I don't agree with all of your points however. Blaming Video Games seems a little 90ish.

As for the internet, yes the internet can be a place to spread good and bad ideas. Yes, there are dark forums, but many more good forums. Anonymity in my opinion allows people to say negative things (many people on here with fake names and avatars would never say the same kinds of things that they do to somebody's face).

However, that is a simplification of mass shooters. Many are not poor sex deprived men (well some may be), many are successful, have good jobs, or are in excellent schools (which in my opinion is more alarming). I agree that people in general do not like to accept responsibility for their failures, but I don't think that is the case of mass-shooters. Many are not failures (especially not in their minds).

We live in a world of free expression. That means you will be exposed to many ideas that you find repulsive. You or I may not like many media outlets, but I would much rather have free speech and free press, than live in a world where content is regulated to conform to a view. Yes, this means there will be fringe media outlets that resonant with some people, that is the cost of living in a free society.

Some people who gamble will ruin their lives gambling, but nobody here wants to limit casinos. The cost of freedom is some risk, some people are more susceptible to certain vices and emotions than others.

Quote: rxwine

I do suggest for people who want to randomly shoot people, that we just put them together and let them shoot each other. Maybe someone needs to put a signup sheet on 4chan instead of a manifesto.

Something everyone should be able to agree on. A true rarity here, or anywhere today.

Quote: Gandler

I am left leaning in social issues. I am Neocon for an easy label.

I would suggest that makes you a Libertarian, but then, I might just want more people on the Libertarian side.

Quote:

But, reparations I would support if it was 1870, or if there were still living slaves. Reparations were appropriate (and long overdue for internment camps under FDR, ironically pushed for by Reagan)…. The government makes a lot of mistakes and needs to pay for them. However, slavery, is long gone. If anything I want to see reparations in the form of better schools for all children regardless of location, and better access to basic services (for all people). Throwing cash at people who may or may not be the decedents of slaves will solve nothing. (Also a portion of slave owners were African American, what if somebody comes from a family that owned slaves and were enslaved at various points?)

Exactly, I wouldn't be opposed to reparations if any of the people in question are a direct victim of slavery. Could you make an argument that they are indirect victims of a combination of slavery as well as the tendency of society to self-replicate? Sure, you could make that argument. I don't think it's enough to rise to the level of justifying reparations on direct.

I agree with your general position on education, and assuming you mean healthcare as one of those, 'Basic services,' I would also agree with the need for basic access to healthcare for all people.

Quote:

I believe in reparations for people who were wrongly imprisoned or wrongfully seized by the government (like internment camps, and some Native American land). I don't believe in reparations for a whole race based on an assumption that at some point one of their ancestors may have been enslaved.

Any such, 'Reparations,' could/could have been handled in appropriate Courts of Claims' at the appropriate times.

Quote:

I actually like Yang's UBI approach, make cash benefits equal to everyone and make healthcare equal to everyone and then nobody will need reparations.

I'm not necessarily in favor of cash benefits for all simply because I don't see what justifies that. I would be more in favor of maintaining existing programs (healthcare, public housing, food stamps) and expanding on those programs as needed. For me, UBI is a bit of a stretch.

I think the violence on the border has to do with drug traffic. NAFTA made drug smuggling and human trafficking easier.

Also NAFTA destroyed Mexico's economy. Mexican industrial sectors were destroyed overnight. Before NAFTA, Mexico was a closed economy with 10% tarriff. What USA strived to be, a closed economy with I believe limited Chinese made goods. 1994 NAFTA had 2 million Mexican famers lose their jobs. Walmart and other chains exploded in Mexico. Before NAFTA, there was only one walmart in Mexico. If my memory is right, I read in a travel journal that Chinese goods in Mexico were hard to find before NAFTA. The common Mexican and American did not benefit from NAFTA. Only the corporate heads benefited. Also the wages went down on both sides of the border. In fact, you can make an argument that the illegal immigrants has lowered American construction wages. Mexico was under pressure to go with NAFTA because of high interest loans from the USA.

Much like war, the only winners are corporate heads, not the common American. That is another long story. I believe most of tax dollars are going unaudited to a black budget(classified military budget) in the trillions. secretary of state said on 2001, that trillions are missing. We pay more for gas in taxes than any other country. No politician has oversight on the black budget. We don't know where it goes and how much. Clinton was warned to leave it alone or end up like JFK. For every dollar on the war we get a fraction of a dollar back in oil. The war can't be only about oil. It's other industrial sectors that benefit from war.

I have to drive through a border check point 50 miles inside the USA. I had a uhaul bc my van broke down. It seemed they were disappointed that drugs were not inside.

Quote: Mission146

I would suggest that makes you a Libertarian, but then, I might just want more people on the Libertarian side.



Exactly, I wouldn't be opposed to reparations if any of the people in question are a direct victim of slavery. Could you make an argument that they are indirect victims of a combination of slavery as well as the tendency of society to self-replicate? Sure, you could make that argument. I don't think it's enough to rise to the level of justifying reparations on direct.

I agree with your general position on education, and assuming you mean healthcare as one of those, 'Basic services,' I would also agree with the need for basic access to healthcare for all people.



Any such, 'Reparations,' could/could have been handled in appropriate Courts of Claims' at the appropriate times.



I'm not necessarily in favor of cash benefits for all simply because I don't see what justifies that. I would be more in favor of maintaining existing programs (healthcare, public housing, food stamps) and expanding on those programs as needed. For me, UBI is a bit of a stretch.

No, I believe in foreign intervention at times, so libertarians do not like me. I used to be a member of some libertarian groups in college, but I lost them on foreign policy. I have many heavy libertarian friends (mostly in the tech sector, actually most of my close friends are libertarian), who want no government (borderline anarchists) but embrace social media control of many aspects of life. Which is why I just openly embrace NeoCon, even though most use it as an insult.

But, I think UBI, is a fair policy, and Yang makes good points about automation, many jobs will be cut, and even many skilled jobs will have aspects of them that become automated resulting in less pay or hours. UBI and medical care is one answer to make people secure going forward.

As for reparations in court, lets be honest, its hard to sue the Federal Government. Sometimes the government makes mistakes, and they need to pay. But, slavery is long a moot point. There is no current call for reparations that I support, I only say that as a matter of philosophy it can be appropriate at various points in history. Slavery should have been solved after the Civil war with the promised land payouts, but sadly that did not happen, so now we still have to talk about it.

Quote: beachbumbabs

These are pretty interesting observations, thanks, but I disagree with one aspect.

These guys are no longer "lone wolf". They are no longer brooding alone. They have a strong virtual community.

They are members of dark forums and finding (and heavily influenced by) like-minded, resentful people who reinforce their grievances and prejudices.

They are isolated from socialization with people unlike them, which allows them to group those people as "other" and of lesser import.

Mostly agree.

Quote:

They are immersing themselves for hours or days at a time in video games and RPGs that, regardless of the historical setting, use anything from axes to phasers to kill everything that is "other" and taught to feel triumphant and superior if they are the "Last Man Standing". They are desensitized to carnage and death, not just by watching it in many movies, but in the last 20 years in doing it themselves. And the more immersive the experience, the more brain receptors are activated.

We're going to blame video games and movies for real-world actions? Personally, I think that's not only a hell of a stretch, but what would the alternative be? Censorship? I'm not a fan of the Constitution, overall, but I'm certainly not opposed to the First Amendment.

Quote:

They are told openly, now, in hundreds of ways, that their failures or low earnings or unhappiness or loneliness are NOT their own fault or responsibility, but instead the fault of women, minorities, immigrants, other external factors over which they have no control. This information is coming from their internet feeds, forums, Trump rallies, talk radio, right-wing news sources, RPG teams, other means, and reinforces itself in an increasing spiral.

You mean like the people who reparations are being discussed for are told openly, now, in hundreds of ways, that their failures or low earnings or unhappiness or loneliness are NOT their own fault or responsibility buy are instead the fault of corporations, white men, Republicans or other external factors over which they have no control? This information is coming from their internet feeds, forums, liberal candidates, NPR, left-wing news sources, other means and reinforces itself in an increasing spiral.

Have to pick one.

I'm in support of the idea that individual situations come down to three things: The individual, a priori factors that led the individual to be born into the standing in which the individual was born and the surrounding environment/external factors.

With all of that said, the simple answer is to allow for fundamental human needs to be fulfilled in our country and to try to make future opportunities on as level a playing field as possible.

One example is hiring based on the merits.

The new season of OITNB (a very liberal program) actually does an excellent job touching upon this issue. Not to spoil anything, but in it, an African-American woman is promoted to warden despite being in way over her head and dreadfully under qualified compared to a few of her co-workers who applied for the same position. It is openly admitted that she got the position because she, "Ticked the right boxes." Personally, I appreciate the liberal admission that this sort of thing actually happens.

If you do NOT hire the best candidate because that candidate is a woman or minority, or if you DO hire a woman or minority who is NOT the best candidate; discrimination has occurred in either case. The answer is: Hire the best candidate. If that results in an all-male board of directors, or in the alternative, an all-female one...it doesn't matter. Whether there are no minorities on a board or the board is made up exclusively of minorities, doesn't matter, as long as the best candidate was hired in all instances. Make the hire and be prepared to defend your stance that they were the best candidate in the event of an anti-discrimination lawsuit.

Quote:

How is parenting, religion, and socialization-in-person supposed to hold up against this virtual community of reinforced resentment and desensitization? It's attacking the minds of pre-teens and teens in their most formative and difficult societal years.

Lots more to say about this, but there's a start.

Religion doesn't hold up against anything, unless you think that teaching kids to be single-minded, dogmatic, indoctrinated, brain-washed, illogical, unyielding and potentially having their fiddly bits diddled is going to help. The notion that concepts are reinforced in the virtual community but are apparently NOT reinforced by religion is nothing short of laughable. Religion also attacks the minds of children in their most susceptible years for such indoctrination as well as teens and preteens in their most formative and difficult societal years. It teaches them to be ashamed of themselves, their bodies and carnal desires (the desires themselves, not just acting upon them) which are a biological imperative necessary for the propagation of the human race.

If something should be done about the, "Virtual communities," so should something be done about organized religion.

You either have freedom of religion, organization and speech, or you don't. I'm not saying you shouldn't. I'm saying you can't blame one and not the other.

GTA V never sexually molested a child, I know that much.

Quote: jjjoooggg

I've been in the family restaurant business for over 50 years in Texas. I think people are more weary of starting a fight or robbing someone when people conceal carry. I carry everyday.

That may well be, but at least we're quite unlikely to kill one another (or anyone else inadvertently) if we're just throwing hands.

Quote: Gandler

No, I believe in foreign intervention at times, so libertarians do not like me. I used to be a member of some libertarian groups in college, but I lost them on foreign policy. I have many heavy libertarian friends (mostly in the tech sector, actually most of my close friends are libertarian), who want no government (borderline anarchists) but embrace social media control of many aspects of life. Which is why I just openly embrace NeoCon, even though most use it as an insult.

It's like anything else, you can't take one or a handful of things that are general principles and assume that they apply to everyone. I just say, "Libertarian," because I'm more Libertarian than anything else, there's also a concept of the Socialist Libertarian, which is something of an oxymoron, but there you go. That's really just a question of defining basic services and determining whether you think there should be a mechanism to ensure that they are provided.

I wouldn't say I want no Government, just one that has nothing to say about an individual's personal choices. It's not for anyone to say that gay people can't get married anymore than it is for me to say that organized religion should be abolished. I'm actually in support of businesses being permitted to refuse their services to whomever they wish to refuse, just as long as they have the knowledge that this is going to be openly broadcasted to others of the affected class. People can make their choices to patronize, or not patronize, that business accordingly.

As far as I'm concerned, the business is just unnecessarily reducing its own customer base. Unless, of course, they think virtue signaling will garner them greater revenues than they lose as a result of doing so. But, again, not my business; not my decision. I do know this: If I were a homosexual who was trying to plan a wedding reception, I wouldn't want your damn cake if you didn't want to sell it to me. I wouldn't grace your business by eating your damn cake, much less paying for it.

Quote:

But, I think UBI, is a fair policy, and Yang makes good points about automation, many jobs will be cut, and even many skilled jobs will have aspects of them that become automated resulting in less pay or hours. UBI and medical care is one answer to make people secure going forward.

I think that it may BECOME a good policy, at some point, but I think he's out way ahead of this one. Simply put, I don't think that it's really necessary or justifiable just yet. See me in twenty years and I might say otherwise.

Besides that, I prefer it to be in the form of other safety nets as opposed to cash-on-direct. That way, the money is at least theoretically going towards its intended purpose.

Quote:

As for reparations in court, lets be honest, its hard to sue the Federal Government. Sometimes the government makes mistakes, and they need to pay. But, slavery is long a moot point. There is no current call for reparations that I support, I only say that as a matter of philosophy it can be appropriate at various points in history. Slavery should have been solved after the Civil war with the promised land payouts, but sadly that did not happen, so now we still have to talk about it.

The Government paying is the same thing as taxpayers paying. The Government is not an entity unto itself such that it fiscally operates independently of the tax dollars that go into it. Therefore, any cash award that is paid for against the Government is a cash award that is paid for by the collective taxpayers; almost all of whom were not directly complicit to the event in question.

I agree with the rest of the paragraph.

The gang members in my town are cowards. They carry stolen firearms and do drive bys. I fired a gang member for poor work performance. He wanted to be above everyone. He does 6 drive bys. They tried to find a gun in my cars. Broke passenger window on both cars and opened glove box. Left valubables inside.

Scared my 4 year old cat that was born in my 3 acre backyard. Is missing for 11 days. Wish I knew how to insert pic.

The cops are not interested yet in the drive bys and sometimes murders. They have a tendency to say that the law abiding victim wronged someone.

I heard a case of rich people in Austin that were murdered. They found out 2 years later that those students owed alot of drug money. My family were gunned down without provocation. Just cops reluctant to do their job. Killer most likely paid off cop friend around 10k because they ruled a suicide on day 1, no investigation, even though suspect kept changing his story and contradicted what was in the newspaper. He later admitted that he was in the home and not a work when she was shot. Motive, she caught him cheating with coworker months earlier and decided to move to another city and died the next day. Also, witnesses were husband's family members but failed to call Aunt who raised her to the scene. If she talked of suicide for months how did he know that she was going to die that day and have his family show up.

Quote: jjjoooggg

The gang members in my town are cowards. They carry stolen firearms and do drive bys. I fired gang member for poor work performance. He wanted to be above everyone. He does 6 drive bys. They tried to find a gun in my cars. Broke passenger window on both cars and opened glove box. Left valubables inside.

Scared my 4 year old cat that was born in my 3 acre backyard. Is missing for 11 days. Wish I knew how to insert pic.

The cops are not interested yet in the drive bys and sometimes murders. They have a tendency to say that the law abiding victim wronged someone.

You may see it differently, but this highlights my opinion that we need more restrictive gun laws while those opposed to that view see it differently because the absence of gun laws creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. In short, easy access to guns results in the need for guns, ergo, the gun advocates can say, "We need guns."

Of course, that's neither here nor there because I'm not opposed to handguns in the first place. I think they should be documented and that the purchaser should be subject to a psychiatric evaluation AND held equally accountable for any actions committed by the weapon in the event the weapon is not properly secured...but that's about it.

Quote: Mission146

. [answer is: Hire the best candidate. If that results in an all-male board of directors, or in the alternative, an all-female one...it doesn't matter. Whether there are no minorities on a board or the board is made up exclusively of minorities, doesn't matter, as long as the best candidate was hired in all instances.

Do studies show that homogenous groups show implicit bias whether they want to or not, then I think it does matter.

Quote: AZDuffman

Cool. You want I should find a Black family could use it? I assume you own it free and clear?

I own it free and clear because it doesnt exist.

You got punked lol.

Its a ghost car.

I also got a part of the Brooklyn Bridge I own free and clear

Lazy here..... questions for UBI....

1. Start at birth or age 18 or 21?
2. Only for citizens or anyone on American soil?
3. I get it in addition to Social Security and my pension?
4. Even the super rich get it?

Any economist figure out what the expected inflation rate is? What the expected tax raises necessary are?

Quote: Mission146

You may see it differently, but this highlights my opinion that we need more restrictive gun laws while those opposed to that view see it differently because the absence of gun laws creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. In short, easy access to guns results in the need for guns, ergo, the gun advocates can say, "We need guns."

Of course, that's neither here nor there because I'm not opposed to handguns in the first place. I think they should be documented and that the purchaser should be subject to a psychiatric evaluation AND held equally accountable for any actions committed by the weapon in the event the weapon is not properly secured...but that's about it.

Criminals buy guns also through the black market. that may exist after guns are banned.

If guns were easy to access by criminals, they wouldn't be breaking my car window looking for one. They were going to scratch serial #s off.

Quote: rxwine

Do studies show that homogenous groups show implicit bias whether they want to or not, then I think it does matter.

Again, you would have to be prepared to defend your hiring decision in the event of a discrimination lawsuit. I assume any such lawsuit, even in a civil case, would invoke the right to a jury trial (in the unlikely event it got that far) so now you have a jury (some of whom might be of the affected class) and now you have to prove that you did not discriminate based on a preponderance of the evidence.

In other words, if you do discriminate, you may ultimately be forced to answer for it in front of a jury who, in part, may have an implicit bias that says you DID discriminate. So, have fun with that. Easy answer: Hire the best candidate.

Anyway, if you have an hire which, in any way, shape or form comes down to skin color, religion, marital status, gender, sexual preference etc. etc. etc then discrimination has either occurred against that person OR against everyone who was NOT hired and doesn't match the one who was hired in those categories.

Quite frankly, I don't understand how some people (not saying you) seem to think one is discrimination and the other isn't. "Look at this board, we really need to hire a woman from a minority race!" Okay, how is that not discriminating against ALL applicants who are not women of a minority race? Perhaps more importantly, how is it not also wasting their time putting in the resumes and undergoing the interview process? Obviously, the hiring ad can't say, "In need of minority woman," but if that's all you want for the position, then no other candidate has a chance.

I’m for more of so called non-lethal guns for the public self-defense. They can sometimes kill you but make you feel like you just got kicked by a horse. Good enough to stop most attacks. Better than the current situation in my opinion.

Quote: jjjoooggg

Criminals buy guns also through the black market. that may exist after guns are banned.

If guns were easy to access by criminals, they wouldn't be breaking my car window looking for one. They were going to scratch serial #s off.

1.) I didn't say anything to the effect of banning all guns. Like I said, I'm in favor of unrestricted firearms ownership for handguns and semi-automatic (but not automatic) handguns. I'm in favor of gun ownership for single shot weapons of other types intended for the purpose of hunting.

2.) I agree there would be a black market for other weapons. Eventually, these weapons would mostly be found and confiscated. Like anything else, this isn't going to be something that becomes both law and the actual case overnight.

3.) Obviously, they intended to scratch it off. However, your weapon was not in your vehicle unattended which indicates that you are very likely a responsible handgun owner. I have no objection to responsible handgun ownership whatsoever.

Anything that can hurt someone badly may sometimes kill them. But still better, Imo.

Quote: rxwine

I’m for more of so called non-lethal guns for the public self-defense. They can sometimes kill you but make you feel like you just got kicked by a horse. Good enough to stop most attacks. Better than the current situation in my opinion.

A family took in three workers and treated them like family. Dad came home to an gun ambush. He had to take all three gun armed workers down and died himself in the process. I have a carbine just for this case. I keep it locked up all the time. I used to carry a beretta 92 for this scenario. I really should. another restaurant owner is more gun happy than me.

I used to run an atm business. I feel more unsafe running a restaurant bc of the exposure.

I used to tell a friend that I wouldn't even own a gun if I didn't have a restaurant. But the way the world is now, you'd be borderline irresponsible for not having some kind of firearm. Yes, they are dangerous. But life is weighing risks.

A state trooper asked why I had a CHL and walked away. I bet his family has a CHL I lost count of robberies. 4 family members murdered for hatred and divorce. death threat for visiting detective. death threat for moving back to hometown. mugged 7 times.. employee talking of ambushing mom. The cops don't believe that our cases are real. But everyone in our industrial sector has been burglarized multiple times. cop said that I must have wronged someone. I didn't let a drug addict/ gang member burglarize and bully every manager. so I let him go. Cops don't think drive bys are important unless someone is dead not including pets (unless its a cop dog). Meanwhile , cops have put more effort into fraudulent charges on law abiding citizens.

Quote: Gandler

Well, even if all of that is true, that does not make El Paso any more likely to have another attack than any other city. El Paso is still a very safe city (maybe the safest) and some people in this thread clearly do not understand how important that reputation is to El Paso.

I don't agree with all of your points however. Blaming Video Games seems a little 90ish.

As for the internet, yes the internet can be a place to spread good and bad ideas. Yes, there are dark forums, but many more good forums. Anonymity in my opinion allows people to say negative things (many people on here with fake names and avatars would never say the same kinds of things that they do to somebody's face).

However, that is a simplification of mass shooters. Many are not poor sex deprived men (well some may be), many are successful, have good jobs, or are in excellent schools (which in my opinion is more alarming). I agree that people in general do not like to accept responsibility for their failures, but I don't think that is the case of mass-shooters. Many are not failures (especially not in their minds).

We live in a world of free expression. That means you will be exposed to many ideas that you find repulsive. You or I may not like many media outlets, but I would much rather have free speech and free press, than live in a world where content is regulated to conform to a view. Yes, this means there will be fringe media outlets that resonant with some people, that is the cost of living in a free society.

Some people who gamble will ruin their lives gambling, but nobody here wants to limit casinos. The cost of freedom is some risk, some people are more susceptible to certain vices and emotions than others.

I'm not saying that any of those factors are inherently bad, or the primary reason in themselves that we're seeing an escalation of mass shootings. I'm saying that, together, they create an echo chamber of solidarity and support for people who were formerly isolated and repressed in their expression of resentment.

I'm also.not saying that every RPG slaughterer is going to go out and swing a semi-automatic through a school. But there are more than enough damaged individuals to wreak havoc.

Today is the 216th day of 2019. Dayton was the 250th MASS shooting this year. Not to mention domestic and gang shootings.

The "50 deaths per year from mass shootings" Stat quoted above is misleading because it's over 10 years. EACH of the last 3 years, including the current one, has seen an escalation in shootings and deaths from the previous year.

I'm trying to evaluate other factors besides the proliferation of guns to find points worth addressing in taking action. Some of them are social, some physical, some cultural. I do think sensible gun laws need to be implemented. Mental health issues connected with psychosis and armament have to be a primary focus.

But just like you don't shout "fire" in a crowded theater, or joke about luggage bombs in the TSA line, we need to stop enabling behavior, culture, and methods of reinforcing suicide by cops and mass killings of innocents.

Quote: Mission146

2.) I agree there would be a black market for other weapons. Eventually, these weapons would mostly be found and confiscated. Like anything else, this isn't going to be something that becomes both law and the actual case overnight.

I wonder what makes you think this. Can you explain?

Your "eventually" is something I find very inaccurate. In our very long history of prohibitions I struggle to find a single one that was successful save slavery, which took war to solve and is still (arguably) contested to this day AND still has not been eradicated.

Are you aware that slam fire weapons can be made, with no machining, out of a tenner's worth of material at Home Depot? That 3D print plans are disseminated on the interweb? That machining is a hobby and garage guns have already flooded Cali due to its repressive legislation, and are not limited to rudimentary, one shot, flint lock-esque designs?

I am a walking infraction with enough in my house to put me away for god knows how long. I've a rifle that shoots 800rds a minute that I've had for every minute of the NYSafe Act. I still have every 30rd mag I've ever purchased. I have "ghost guns" due to inheritance, as their presence in my family predates gun laws themselves and I sure as hell didn't reg them myself. I have weapons obtained under straw purchase because I can't make it to every sportsman's show. If there is a firearms crime that can be committed without harming or endangering someone, you can just about guarantee I am and have been committing it for every single second of the last decade.

What has happened to me, he who has been vocally, textually, and video-ly disobedient as openly as possible as a display of defiance? The first Sheriff (neighboring county) who found out my activities commissioned me to find him one of those 800rd a minute rifles like I had, and I did find it, and he obtained it, in violation of the very law you say will solve the problem. The head Sheriff of my county stated flat out in a public address that he will not enforce the NYSafe Act, the bill passed to allow the confiscation you promote. A deputy Sheriff found out about me and how I roll and said that if ever the house is surrounded by Troopers to sit tight, the implication being that a posse would be formed and on the way....

I'm sorry if this post seems pointed; I don't intend to speak to you as if you're retarded. Rather, I feel I understand your brain and you have both the ability to expound as well as being one who might give me the time of day, so I'm addressing you specifically as an attempt to understand your side. Seems like it boils down to your belief that "prohibition works", whereas my proof has been rolling strong in rampant defiance for every single second of the last ten years.

Quote: Face

I wonder what makes you think this. Can you explain?

Your "eventually" is something I find very inaccurate. In our very long history of prohibitions I struggle to find a single one that was successful save slavery, which took war to solve and is still (arguably) contested to this day AND still has not been eradicated.

Are you aware that slam fire weapons can be made, with no machining, out of a tenner's worth of material at Home Depot? That 3D print plans are disseminated on the interweb? That machining is a hobby and garage guns have already flooded Cali due to its repressive legislation, and are not limited to rudimentary, one shot, flint lock-esque designs?

I am a walking infraction with enough in my house to put me away for god knows how long. I've a rifle that shoots 800rds a minute that I've had for every minute of the NYSafe Act. I still have every 30rd mag I've ever purchased. I have "ghost guns" due to inheritance, as their presence in my family predates gun laws themselves and I sure as hell didn't reg them myself. I have weapons obtained under straw purchase because I can't make it to every sportsman's show. If there is a firearms crime that can be committed without harming or endangering someone, you can just about guarantee I am and have been committing it for every single second of the last decade.

What has happened to me, he who has been vocally, textually, and video-ly disobedient as openly as possible as a display of defiance? The first Sheriff (neighboring county) who found out my activities commissioned me to find him one of those 800rd a minute rifles like I had, and I did find it, and he obtained it, in violation of the very law you say will solve the problem. The head Sheriff of my county stated flat out in a public address that he will not enforce the NYSafe Act, the bill passed to allow the confiscation you promote. A deputy Sheriff found out about me and how I roll and said that if ever the house is surrounded by Troopers to sit tight, the implication being that a posse would be formed and on the way....

I'm sorry if this post seems pointed; I don't intend to speak to you as if you're retarded. Rather, I feel I understand your brain and you have both the ability to expound as well as being one who might give me the time of day, so I'm addressing you specifically as an attempt to understand your side. Seems like it boils down to your belief that "prohibition works", whereas my proof has been rolling strong in rampant defiance for every single second of the last ten years.

Sounds like you got the perfect place for obtaining illegal firearms.

Knock you over the head and a whole cache of guns is for the taking.

Or maybe just wait till you go on vacation

Quote: beachbumbabs

I'm not saying that any of those factors are inherently bad, or the primary reason in themselves that we're seeing an escalation of mass shootings. I'm saying that, together, they create an echo chamber of solidarity and support for people who were formerly isolated and repressed in their expression of resentment.

I'm also.not saying that every RPG slaughterer is going to go out and swing a semi-automatic through a school. But there are more than enough damaged individuals to wreak havoc.

Today is the 216th day of 2019. Dayton was the 250th MASS shooting this year. Not to mention domestic and gang shootings.

The "50 deaths per year from mass shootings" Stat quoted above is misleading because it's over 10 years. EACH of the last 3 years, including the current one, has seen an escalation in shootings and deaths from the previous year.

I'm trying to evaluate other factors besides the proliferation of guns to find points worth addressing in taking action. Some of them are social, some physical, some cultural. I do think sensible gun laws need to be implemented. Mental health issues connected with psychosis and armament have to be a primary focus.

But just like you don't shout "fire" in a crowded theater, or joke about luggage bombs in the TSA line, we need to stop enabling behavior, culture, and methods of reinforcing suicide by cops and mass killings of innocents.

I never said 50 deaths per year, or commented at all about it, and the stats relating to El Paso were purely from 2018.
Mass Shootings are rising in recent years. '

I do not believe we have a culture that is reinforcing suicide? If we do I am missing it, we have more anti-suicide programs than ever before. Which makes the numbers strange.

However, even so, gun violence kills far more (which is often gang violence, as you say). The most common form of gun related deaths is suicide (over 60%), about 35% are homicides, which encompass everything from mass shootings, to domestic shootings, to gang shootouts. About 1% are shootings by police, and 1% accidental discharge shootings. Of the 35% less than 1% are "mass shootings". Even with the rise they are a statistically small number. Sadly they are tragic, and skew a local community's violence numbers for a year, but they are not the biggest problem as far as gun violence goes.

Whenever people see hard numbers on gun deaths (which can be alarming) people need to bear in mind the vast majority are suicides. And, of the homicides (35%) over 80% of that category are gang-related. And sadly, gangs and suicides are not easy problems to solve. And, they are far more pervasive problems than mass shooters, even if this year is an abnormally high year.

I agree that mental health is a huge issue (especially when it comes to suicides). But, even more so when it comes to mass shootings, I mean I am not a psychologist, but to target a random batch of people without knowing them or their beliefs, and not having anything financial or tangible to gain from the attack, what drives that? I know people are saying he is a White Nationalist, and it seems he probably was, but most of his victims were white people, which means he simply had the desire to randomly kill and chose an easy and busy place to do it, with no specific targets in mind, why?

Gang violence can at least be explained as far as motives go, it is for money, power, or status. Mass shooting are senseless violence.

Quote: SOOPOO

Lazy here..... questions for UBI....

1. Start at birth or age 18 or 21?
2. Only for citizens or anyone on American soil?
3. I get it in addition to Social Security and my pension?
4. Even the super rich get it?

Any economist figure out what the expected inflation rate is? What the expected tax raises necessary are?

I have been interested in UBI for some time. One reason I like Yang, is he is the first major candidate that is pushing for UBI as his primary platform. There are many approaches on different sites with different ideas. However, if you are asking about Yangs proposal.

I like the pure UBI that he proposes, meaning that everyone gets it (yes even the rich all receive the same monthly stipend). I think this is the best form of UBI.



1. American Citizens over the age of 18.
2. American Citizens.
3. Yes, it stacks with SS, even SSD. However, it does not stack with welfare benefits, if you are on federal welfare programs you have to choose the Freedom Dividend or staying on your current programs. This is the other way it will be paid, cutting back many expensive welfare subsidies. This does not apply to disability (either SSD or VA disability), but the goal is to get all able bodied people financially secure enough that they can work off of welfare and then start on standard UBI.
4. Yes every citizen gets it.

He proposes a VAT tax of 10% to cover the cost.

Here is a more detailed FAQ.

https://www.yang2020.com/what-is-freedom-dividend-faq/

Quote: jjjoooggg

A family took in three workers and treated them like family. Dad came home to an gun ambush. He had to take all three gun armed workers down and died himself in the process. I have a carbine just for this case. I keep it locked up all the time. I used to carry a beretta 92 for this scenario. I really should. another restaurant owner is more gun happy than me.

I used to run an atm business. I feel more unsafe running a restaurant bc of the exposure.

I used to tell a friend that I wouldn't even own a gun if I didn't have a restaurant. But the way the world is now, you'd be borderline irresponsible for not having some kind of firearm. Yes, they are dangerous. But life is weighing risks.

A state trooper asked why I had a CHL and walked away. I bet his family has a CHL I lost count of robberies. 4 family members murdered for hatred and divorce. death threat for visiting detective. death threat for moving back to hometown. mugged 7 times.. employee talking of ambushing mom. The cops don't believe that our cases are real. But everyone in our industrial sector has been burglarized multiple times. cop said that I must have wronged someone. I didn't let a drug addict/ gang member burglarize and bully every manager. so I let him go. Cops don't think drive bys are important unless someone is dead not including pets (unless its a cop dog). Meanwhile , cops have put more effort into fraudulent charges on law abiding citizens.

Did you find your cat?

Im a liberal but UBI sounds stupid and inconceivable

Not to mention it sounds like an STD

Quote: Mission146

I would suggest that makes you a Libertarian,

Libertarian = Neocon? Not even close. Are you kidding me?

Quote: bobbartop

Did you find your cat?

Not yet, day 11,

I consulted two pet detectives specializing in searching cats who are unavailable due to injuries. Took ebook course. Going down lists of things to do. ground searched 250 ft radius. Put game camera. Placed corrugated posters on sign posts. drone searched area. waiting for thermal scope. may have to place game camera at nearest ferral cat area. no smell of dead animal. Looking for vulchers. installing more surveillance cameras around property. turned off outside light so cat can come back. Left door open a couple nights with safety chain on.

Quote: Mission146

I just say, "Libertarian," because I'm more Libertarian than anything else, there's also a concept of the Socialist Libertarian, which is something of an oxymoron, but there you go..

In French we distinguish Libertaire, which is the leftist anarchist form of No State, and Libertarien, which is the American-style redneck 2d Amendment form of No State.

The former promote the group , the latter promote the individual.

Quote: jjjoooggg

Not yet, day 11,

I consulted two pet detectives specializing in searching cats who are unavailable due to injuries. Took ebook course. Going down lists of things to do. ground searched 250 ft radius. Put game camera. Placed corrugated posters on sign posts. drone searched area. waiting for thermal scope. may have to place game camera at nearest ferral cat area. no smell of dead animal. Looking for vulchers. installing more surveillance cameras around property. turned off outside light so cat can come back.

I'm so sorry. I hope it turns out ok for you both. Try to keep hope.

Quote: bobbartop

I'm so sorry. I hope it turns out ok for you both. Try to keep hope.

Thanks.

Face,

Let's just agree that all things between the two of us are, "No offense taken," then it won't need to be repeated! I always enjoy talking to you as you're one person who is willing to get into specifics. It seems like most posts are just trolling (not in a way that necessarily violates forum rules) where one side just makes blanket statements about the other. Kind of like I do when it comes to Religion, but at least I admit it.

Quote:

I wonder what makes you think this. Can you explain?

Your "eventually" is something I find very inaccurate. In our very long history of prohibitions I struggle to find a single one that was successful save slavery, which took war to solve and is still (arguably) contested to this day AND still has not been eradicated.

Just that eventually there would be fewer such weapons. Initially, and you're going to hate this, after a period of time for people to willingly relinquish any such weapons, there would have to be searches of residences and storage units belonging to those suspected of illegally possessing such weapons to uncover them. Of course, someone simply making the accusation would be sufficient enough to execute a search warrant, so in short, known owners of such weapons would mostly be reported. Within a certain period of time, I don't think they should face any sort of charges, just that they must relinquish the weapons.

I agree slavery hasn't been fully eradicated with human trafficking and all that, but the goal is to try to have no slavery, not that the goal will ever be reached. We're certainly closer to reaching that goal than when we made it a goal.

Quote:

Are you aware that slam fire weapons can be made, with no machining, out of a tenner's worth of material at Home Depot? That 3D print plans are disseminated on the interweb? That machining is a hobby and garage guns have already flooded Cali due to its repressive legislation, and are not limited to rudimentary, one shot, flint lock-esque designs?

That's fine, and those disseminating any such can enjoy their time in federal prison, if caught. I'm also aware that child pornography is illegal, even on the internet, but still exists. Get caught with it or disseminating it and a person is going bye-bye for a very long time.

I'd say make it a life sentence without possibility of parole, that should be an effective deterrent.

Quote:

I am a walking infraction with enough in my house to put me away for god knows how long. I've a rifle that shoots 800rds a minute that I've had for every minute of the NYSafe Act. I still have every 30rd mag I've ever purchased. I have "ghost guns" due to inheritance, as their presence in my family predates gun laws themselves and I sure as hell didn't reg them myself. I have weapons obtained under straw purchase because I can't make it to every sportsman's show. If there is a firearms crime that can be committed without harming or endangering someone, you can just about guarantee I am and have been committing it for every single second of the last decade.

Would you do it if the punishment was life without parole and the probability of your residence getting search quintupled within a period of a few months?

Even if so, I think there's a non insubstantial percentage of the population who abides the law simply because they abide the law, whether or not they agree with it. That would take any such weapons away from that segment immediately.

Quote:

What has happened to me, he who has been vocally, textually, and video-ly disobedient as openly as possible as a display of defiance? The first Sheriff (neighboring county) who found out my activities commissioned me to find him one of those 800rd a minute rifles like I had, and I did find it, and he obtained it, in violation of the very law you say will solve the problem. The head Sheriff of my county stated flat out in a public address that he will not enforce the NYSafe Act, the bill passed to allow the confiscation you promote. A deputy Sheriff found out about me and how I roll and said that if ever the house is surrounded by Troopers to sit tight, the implication being that a posse would be formed and on the way....

I'm not saying the law will solve the problem, I'm saying that such laws would reduce the problem. If laws solved problems, then you wouldn't need to have jails or prisons, because nobody would be breaking the law in the first place.

I like the last sentence because it implies the theoretical possibility of a small arms war between the Troopers and County about guns and, naturally, using guns. That may seem like an argument against my position, but the truth is that this small scale skirmish wouldn't be occurring because of the law (or lack thereof) but rather because the guns are there in the first place. You can't kill someone with a gun that doesn't exist.

---

Anyway, I think that prohibition would at least be an improvement, and I imagine you noticed earlier that I am not 100% anti-guns. Every citizen of age who has passed a psychological evaluation can open carry a semi-automatic .380 pistol for all I care. There are places in this country such that I would not enter unless I was packing, though I do not currently own a firearm.

I also understand the trepidation of gun advocates who are responsible with their weapons, and I do want to say a couple of things there:

1.) It's NOT fair to responsible gun owners, collectors or sportsmen. I 100% agree that it is not fair to those who enjoy weapons and use them safely and responsibly. It's not fair for those who wish to build their own weapons, automatic or otherwise, and are committed to doing so responsibly.

Unfortunately for them, this is just one of many laws that are unfair to a particular class of people. It's not fair that men, who have no possibility of ever becoming pregnant, have ever had any control whatsoever over whether or not a woman can have an abortion when she chooses. The laws aren't always fair, but they are designed (theoretically) to promote the greater social good, whatever the majority (or those in power) think is the greater social good at the time.

2.) The majority of gun owners are well-intentioned and responsible with their weapons. Unfortunately, as with so many other things, the many end up being punished for the actions of the few. That said, we need to restrict the ability for one person to take out scores of people, within minutes, to as great an extent as we practically can.

And, that also comes back to fairness. It's not fair for people to lose what are currently their rights, but nor is it fair for innocent people to lose their lives because of those rights. The events yesterday, Mandalay Bay, those people didn't die to protect gun owners' rights...they were shopping at a WalMart or attending a concert...they weren't fighting for anything at all.

3.) While my views are what my views are, I'm really more concerned with the psychological evaluations and the accountability of gun owners over their weapons (whether or not they were the one to use those weapons) more than anything else. Restricting the weapons themselves is kind of secondary to me, though I am in favor.

4.) As always, the #ConstitutionSucks, but I think it's a fair position to take, arguing within a Constitutional framework, that the Founding Fathers could not have forseen the weapons capabilities we have today when drafting the 2nd.

Quote: kubikulann

In French we distinguish Libertaire, which is the leftist anarchist form of No State, and Libertarien, which is the American-style redneck 2d Amendment form of No State.

The former promote the group , the latter promote the individual.

It's really tough because I'm Big Government in some ways and essentially No Government in others.

Quote: Mission146

It's really tough because I'm Big Government in some ways and essentially No Government in others.

Most people like that are not secure in themself or their abilities.

Quote: Mission146

It's really tough because I'm Big Government in some ways and essentially No Government in others.

That is how I am which is why I either call myself a NeoCon or an extreme moderate (both generally out of jest).

I think the government plays a role in protecting society, both in terms of military and social policy (that is why I support UBI and medical care).

But, I support personal rights as far as social activities. I think drugs should be legal, I support all adult consensual sex.

I still do not fully understand the differences in libertarianism. I understand one is more of a communal group of people caring for each other without a government (but wouldn't that essentially become a government?.....) And, the more mainstream one is simply less government, the most extreme being anarchists (anarcho-capitalists to be specific as opposed to anarcho-communists which though strange to me I assume that is closer to the communal group you were describing, which still makes no sense to me, its just a government under a different name with no property rights.....) . All libertarian groups I was formerly active in were Ron Paul type libertarian (as little government as possible, no taxes, no regulations, etc....)

Quote: MaxPen

Most people like that are not secure in themself or their abilities.

More likely, it's because I look at things on an issue-by-issue basis rather than parroting everything that the party under which I'm registered tells me to parrot.

Furthermore, most people are the same way, it's just that most of those people are also hypocrites. Both sides. The left wants the Government out of the bedroom, right? However, at the same time, the Left demands that private business owners provide their services to everybody regardless of whether or not doing same conflicts with the business owner's religious beliefs. The right wants the Federal Government to mostly stay out of their pockets, to restrict entitlement programs, but at the same time is perfectly fine with the Federal Government to determine the reproductive rights of the very children that they don't want their tax dollars helping to pay for.

Here's a newsflash for them: Abortions are cheaper than eighteen years of life. Hell, abortions are cheaper than the birth process itself.

Anyway, it's a bunch of hypocrisy, conflicting values, or both.

When I say, "No Government," I'm referring mainly to social stuff or the way in which private business is conducted.

I don't think it has anything to do with being insecure in myself. I think it has more to do with trying to be both nuanced and non-dogmatic, but I could see where an insecure person might see those two traits as being insecurities.

Quote: beachbumbabs

They are told openly, now, in hundreds of ways, that their failures or low earnings or unhappiness or loneliness are NOT their own fault or responsibility, but instead the fault of women, minorities, immigrants, other external factors over which they have no control. This information is coming from their internet feeds, forums, Trump rallies, talk radio, right-wing news sources, RPG teams, other means, and reinforces itself in an increasing spiral.

Sounds like when your party tells people the same about Trump, the GOP, and "white privilege."

I'm not saying, I'm just saying.