Will the NRA's grip on the GOP diminish in your lifetime? (Y/N)

calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

calbear93 said:


There is something seriously wrong with the media (regular and social) exposure that's turning these folks into dehumanized killers. We had mass murders before but not to this extent. Hollywood and social media companies and players that the left love so much and will not criticize haven't taken one lick of responsibility. What are people's suggestions on how we limit the negative influences that are warping the minds of the people living here? If we think limiting guns is the only solution needed, we are not thinking any more clearly than the gun waiving fools.

Occam's Razor time. The Assault Weapons Ban was left to expire in 2004. Notice how all these high death toll massacres involve the AR-15, which had been banned prior to 2004? Look to that and not tv.

Other compounding factors: the existence of 357 million fire arms in the US and an NRA-controlled Congress that does everything in its power to do the least anount possible to curb unfettered access to guns.


This is a simpleton way of thinking. Yes, there is no reason for people to have semi-automatic guns. But have you gone beyond your thinking to actually look into why these people are using these weapons of mass destruction? Is the only thing keeping you from killing children your ability to get a gun? What is causing these people to seek fame and glory from causing mass destruction? Just mental illness? Is that it? And nothing about the social media and disengagement are causing this?
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
93, would you support the government increasing funding for gun violence research from its currently comically low levels to help provide a scientific basis to help shape policy? That would be an useful investment, no? Seems to me that some groups with deep pockets are scared of some potentially unprofitable truths seeing the light (see cigarette industry in recent decades).


[Source: Business Insider]
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

Trump called out mental illness in his words today. Interesting because a year ago he "quietly signed a bill into law... rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun." [Source: NBC]

Empty words vs actions (signed in the Oval Office).
So, if he signed that bill, all of this madness would end?
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

93, would you support the government increasing funding for gun violence research from its currently comically low levels to help provide a scientific basis to help shape policy? That would be an useful investment, no? Seems to me that some groups with deep pockets are scared of some potentially unprofitable truths seeing the light (see cigarette industry in recent decades).


[Source: Business Insider]
Fund gun violence research? What more do we ****ing need? Stop wasting money and thinking hiring someone to do research will solve something we already know, We need to get rid of semi-automatic weapons, embrace strong morals and family values, stop with relative morality, stop with glamorizing social media and tech companies, and bring back basic human decency. Sexual harassment, domestic violence, and mass murder are the result of ****ed up human beings and ****ed up human morality. I am not where I am because I didn't have access to guns. It is not a political thing as much as it is tempting to think that if it weren't for Trump, we would have a utopia.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

This is a simpleton way of thinking.
A weapon that has orders of magnitude greater killing capability can kill orders of magnitude more people. Call me a simpleton, but the truth is simple sometimes.

Stephen Paddock shot more than 500 freaking people in Las Vegas using a perfectly legal modification of his rifles to function as automatic weapons. Nothing about how Paddock was able to shoot as many as nine rounds per second is illegal right now. Even if we did everything we could culturally, socially, and medically to prevent a Vegas shooting, I think it's the morally right thing to legally ban the tools to conduct such mass carnage. If it means 5 or 50 people instead of 500 people are shot, deal me in.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:


Fund gun violence research? What more do we ****ing need? Stop wasting money and thinking hiring someone to do research will solve something we already know, We need to get rid of semi-automatic weapons, embrace strong morals and family values, stop with relative morality, stop with glamorizing social media and tech companies, and bring back basic human decency. Sexual harassment, domestic violence, and mass murder are the result of ****ed up human beings and ****ed up human morality. I am not where I am because I didn't have access to guns. It is not a political thing as much as it is tempting to think that if it weren't for Trump, we would have a utopia.

93, if getting rid of semi-automatic weapons is part of the solution and everyone knows this, who are the Republicans who are actually saying this? On last count, it was pretty close to zero. Sometimes studies (see cigarette industry) can cut through all the rhetoric and make it harder to lie.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

calbear93 said:


Fund gun violence research? What more do we ****ing need? Stop wasting money and thinking hiring someone to do research will solve something we already know, We need to get rid of semi-automatic weapons, embrace strong morals and family values, stop with relative morality, stop with glamorizing social media and tech companies, and bring back basic human decency. Sexual harassment, domestic violence, and mass murder are the result of ****ed up human beings and ****ed up human morality. I am not where I am because I didn't have access to guns. It is not a political thing as much as it is tempting to think that if it weren't for Trump, we would have a utopia.

93, if getting rid of semi-automatic weapons is part of the solution and everyone knows this, who are the Republicans who are actually saying this? On last count, it was pretty close to zero. Sometimes studies (see cigarette industry) can cut through all the rhetoric and make it harder to lie.
Why the **** am I required to defend the Republican party? Can you please ****ing think outside of political lines? I don't know why someone would want to defend it. I already said it is indefensible. Is your takeaway from the whole tragedy that you have another quiver to shoot at Republicans? Is that all you have? You think someone who won't be swayed by dead children would be swayed by a 100 page memo? Again, unhelpful and useless.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

calbear93 said:

This is a simpleton way of thinking.
A weapon that has orders of magnitude greater killing capability can kill orders of magnitude more people. Call me a simpleton, but the truth is simple sometimes.

Stephen Paddock shot more than 500 freaking people in Las Vegas using a perfectly legal modification of his rifles to function as automatic weapons. Nothing about how Paddock was able to shoot as many as nine rounds per second is illegal right now. Even if we did everything we could culturally, socially, and medically to prevent a Vegas shooting, I think it's the morally right thing to legally ban the tools to conduct such mass carnage. If it means 5 or 50 people instead of 500 people are shot, deal me in.
Thank goodness you don't have a gun. Since that is the binary reason for why someone shoots children, you would be killing kids if you had a gun. It must be that simple. While no reason why we should allow any person to have semi-automatic weapon, it is just typical whistling in the dark to think that the solution is as simple as JUST more gun control. Maybe we should have a study on how Silicon Valley and Hollywood are damaging our morality? No? You don't want to fund that?
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

calbear93 said:

This is a simpleton way of thinking.
A weapon that has orders of magnitude greater killing capability can kill orders of magnitude more people. Call me a simpleton, but the truth is simple sometimes.

Stephen Paddock shot more than 500 freaking people in Las Vegas using a perfectly legal modification of his rifles to function as automatic weapons. Nothing about how Paddock was able to shoot as many as nine rounds per second is illegal right now. Even if we did everything we could culturally, socially, and medically to prevent a Vegas shooting, I think it's the morally right thing to legally ban the tools to conduct such mass carnage. If it means 5 or 50 people instead of 500 people are shot, deal me in.
Thank goodness you don't have a gun. Since that is the binary reason for why someone shoots children, you would be killing kids if you had a gun. It must be that simple.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
93, I think this is where you and I have probably reached the limits of how productive our dialogue can be due to the nature of this medium and the intensity of the subject matter. Both of us want something to be done and neither of us want to settle for doing nothing.

The people below died yesterday and you and I both agree that it is worth our nation's time and energy to focus on finding solutions to prevent this from happening with such frequency:

okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

93, would you support the government increasing funding for gun violence research from its currently comically low levels to help provide a scientific basis to help shape policy? That would be an useful investment, no? Seems to me that some groups with deep pockets are scared of some potentially unprofitable truths seeing the light (see cigarette industry in recent decades).


[Source: Business Insider]
Fund gun violence research? What more do we ****ing need? Stop wasting money and thinking hiring someone to do research will solve something we already know, We need to get rid of semi-automatic weapons, embrace strong morals and family values, stop with relative morality, stop with glamorizing social media and tech companies, and bring back basic human decency. Sexual harassment, domestic violence, and mass murder are the result of ****ed up human beings and ****ed up human morality. I am not where I am because I didn't have access to guns. It is not a political thing as much as it is tempting to think that if it weren't for Trump, we would have a utopia.

The people who have been the most vocal about the decline of morality and family values in this country also happen to be the most passionate supporters of Donald Trump, who is the antithesis of morality and family values. Heck, Trump and the Republicans recently supported an accused child molester. And the Trump White House, and Trump himself, have gone out of their way to defend and shield a wife beater. Oh, and the president himself has admitted to sexually attacking women.

I wonder if the decline of our country in recent years is tied to the religious right's embrace of such a morally unscrupulous person like Donald Trump. The same religious right that -- while they don't have to agree with him politically -- considered the morally upright family values former President Barack Obama as the living embodiment of Satan.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sorry but you are a muppet. It doesn't matter what the substance of the debate is, your response is and will be "Trump." Yes, Trump is the reason for all evil in this world, including your dull thinking.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You and I are both incredibly furious and disgusted that the kids are being butchered and people want political quiver. I am so sick of our politicians faking sympathy and not doing anything that impacts their special interest. Both ****ing parties.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://petitions.moveon.org/sign/reasonable-gun-control
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
While mental illness, media influence, moral decline/relativism, racism/xenophobia/sexism, political polarization, are all problems and may have been factors in one or multiple of these mass shootings, those things also all exist in other countries, and those other countries have nowhere near the frequency of massacres that we do. If you're looking for the biggest single reason the USA has more shootings, it's the guns.

Reposting this link for supporting evidence:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

I'd encourage everyone to read the whole thing, all the way to the end. It's not just an argument to "take away the guns." It says that stricter regulations on who can own a gun can also have an effect, which would fairly allow law-abiding and responsible gun owners to maintain their rights.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Banning assault weapons and large capacity magazines are seen by experts across the spectrum as the two most likely things that would reduce shooting "massacres" (defined as six or more killed). Feinstein's proposed ban would limit magazines to 10 rounds (as in the original Assault Weapons Ban) and allow current owners of banned weapons to keep them.

okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Sorry but you are a muppet. It doesn't matter what the substance of the debate is, your response is and will be "Trump." Yes, Trump is the reason for all evil in this world, including your dull thinking.

I'll reiterate: You know you've lost the argument when you resort to name-calling.

You bring up "strong morals and family values," which are words chiefly associated with the religious right.

I bring up that the religious right has become chiefly associated with Donald Trump, who has weak morals and weak family values.

Whether you like it or not, when you say "we need to embrace...strong morals and family values," you cannot ignore the fact that Trump is the leader of our country. He's one of the main people our kids look up to for strong morals. He sets the tone for family values and morals in the United States of America.

And your response -- because you can't argue back -- is to call me a "muppet."

Thanks for admitting I was right!

And please call me another name to prove my point. Thanks.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The "muppet" reference is weak af.

I'm just saying

Nothing wrong with saying IDGF what you or anybody else says lol
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
From what I have seen Gun owners/carrying people are have a complex due to the power they weld.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:

calbear93 said:

Sorry but you are a muppet. It doesn't matter what the substance of the debate is, your response is and will be "Trump." Yes, Trump is the reason for all evil in this world, including your dull thinking.

I'll reiterate: You know you've lost the argument when you resort to name-calling.

You bring up "strong morals and family values," which are words chiefly associated with the religious right.

I bring up that the religious right has become chiefly associated with Donald Trump, who has weak morals and weak family values.

Whether you like it or not, when you say "we need to embrace...strong morals and family values," you cannot ignore the fact that Trump is the leader of our country. He's one of the main people our kids look up to for strong morals. He sets the tone for family values and morals in the United States of America.

And your response -- because you can't argue back -- is to call me a "muppet."

Thanks for admitting I was right!

And please call me another name to prove my point. Thanks.
Or sometimes the categorization is accurate.

OK, I'll play your brilliant game. I hear people talk about all of the divisiveness and violence today,. These are the same people who supported Obama and Hillary so they can't really say anything. I can't really make a connection but I will use the names Obama and Hillary to show how much of a good political soldier I am.

I didn't and don't support Trump, I didn't mention politics, and for your rejoinder to be another cross-reference to Trump is beyond idiotic. What, you are going to tell us how much you also hate cancer to show how compassionate you are? I am impressed.

Thanks for the scintillating discussion.
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

While mental illness, media influence, moral decline/relativism, racism/xenophobia/sexism, political polarization, are all problems and may have been factors in one or multiple of these mass shootings, those things also all exist in other countries, and those other countries have nowhere near the frequency of massacres that we do. If you're looking for the biggest single reason the USA has more shootings, it's the guns.

Reposting this link for supporting evidence:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

I'd encourage everyone to read the whole thing, all the way to the end. It's not just an argument to "take away the guns." It says that stricter regulations on who can own a gun can also have an effect, which would fairly allow law-abiding and responsible gun owners to maintain their rights.


Our culture values diversity and independence of thought. Almost all other countries are more homogenous and community-based. This is part of the reason we have more crime, single parent families, extremist groups, and school shootings.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Interesting that the FBI has now admitted they didn't follow up on a tip that this kid was going to shoot things up. More interesting because these school killers do fit a broad pattern- young males with a cult like affection for Columbine from which they learn, a pattern of alienated anti social, violent behavior, tipping off what they are going to do and a glorification/ death wish to go down in flames.

Florida Governor calling on the FBI Director to resign and Sessions criticizes the Bureau as well. Another one bites the dust?
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

sycasey said:

While mental illness, media influence, moral decline/relativism, racism/xenophobia/sexism, political polarization, are all problems and may have been factors in one or multiple of these mass shootings, those things also all exist in other countries, and those other countries have nowhere near the frequency of massacres that we do. If you're looking for the biggest single reason the USA has more shootings, it's the guns.

Reposting this link for supporting evidence:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

I'd encourage everyone to read the whole thing, all the way to the end. It's not just an argument to "take away the guns." It says that stricter regulations on who can own a gun can also have an effect, which would fairly allow law-abiding and responsible gun owners to maintain their rights.


Our culture values diversity and independence of thought. Almost all other countries are more homogenous and community-based. This is part of the reason we have more crime, single parent families, extremist groups, and school shootings.


Read the article.

Quote:

Racial diversity or other factors associated with social cohesion also show little correlation with gun deaths. Among European countries, there is little association between immigration or other diversity metrics and the rates of gun murders or mass shootings.


Quote:

Americans sometimes see this as an expression of deeper problems with crime, a notion ingrained, in part, by a series of films portraying urban gang violence in the early 1990s. But the United States is not actually more prone to crime than other developed countries, according to a landmark 1999 study by Franklin E. Zimring and Gordon Hawkins of the University of California, Berkeley.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Certainly there does seem a correlation between immigration, diversity and mass acts of terrorism in Europe and beyond. Hamburg was a feeder for 9/11. Paris and Brussels slums and prisons have been radicalizing and producing terrorists for years-many of them French nationals. Same with attacks in Great Britain.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?




http://dailym.ai/2o2sr3m
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Why was the initial bill finally signed in the final weeks of Obama presidency?
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

When the Baby Boomers (on average) came out against Vietnam and for civil rights many thought they were about progress, but time has shown their motivating force has always been individual selfishness


Thank God the Millennials are so selfless and made of very stern stuff. Basically a generation made of iron.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FACT: Countries with gun regulation laws have greatly fewer incidents of mass murder shootings.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I believe Millenials will transform this nation for the better the way the Greatest Generation did. Of course, I've been a fan of the book Generations: A History to America's Future for over 25 years now.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

dajo9 said:

When the Baby Boomers (on average) came out against Vietnam and for civil rights many thought they were about progress, but time has shown their motivating force has always been individual selfishness


Thank God the Millennials are so selfless and made of very stern stuff. Basically a generation made of iron.
They're sharper than you think. Millennials have consistently shown low rates of crime and drug use and high rates of education, throughout their lives.

It's not their fault that they entered the workforce in the face of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

bearister said:

dajo9 said:

When the Baby Boomers (on average) came out against Vietnam and for civil rights many thought they were about progress, but time has shown their motivating force has always been individual selfishness


Thank God the Millennials are so selfless and made of very stern stuff. Basically a generation made of iron.
They're sharper than you think. Millennials have consistently shown low rates of crime and drug use and high rates of education, throughout their lives.

It's not their fault that they entered the workforce in the face of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

The best part of most of them dribbled down their dads' legs.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nothing personal bearister, but your generation will go down as one of the worst on history.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have little doubt Millennials will take care of business when it's time. It's not really a choice when push comes to shove. The Greatest Generation had little say about that because of the draft and the Axis threat was real. The Greatest Generation however responded, and won one big freakin' world war.

The question really is more about what the challenge will be for Millennials. Man-made climate change? Russian Hacking? Anti-democracy? Terrorism?




MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.