Another day, another shooting in the US

[Ed Oscuro]

Ah crap, you got me Bryan. I forgot about that wording of the amendment.

Yeah, we had sharecropping for a long time after emancipation, too, and chain gangs after that. Today there's a lot of laws being passed in the area of "workfare" and reducing poor peoples' ability to escape poverty that could easily morph into involuntary servitude. I think we should also take note that the US Constitution doesn't actually have the strong protections against slavery that you'd get in some other country where the procedural challenges to making slavery legal are higher.

@ rancor: As far as I knew it, the traditional argument for gun ownership is that it doesn't affect other people, so it is a victimless act unless the owner commits a crime (and then enters the traditional criminal justice system). This is why so many people have been keen to show that anthropogenic climate change isn't real, because if human activity isn't harming other people we shouldn't need to regulate it. So I'm not forced to pay much if you decide to own a gun and keep it reliably.

On the other hand, we know that smokers not only directly impact the health of others, they also cost hundreds of billions of dollars in healthcare system and in lost productivity, which everybody else has to pay for. That's crazy expensive, like we're fighting another war.

[Ed Oscuro]

New post, been sitting on a few articles for a while now, and just got a chance to read them...I realize they're both directly related to this discussion in one way or another.

These political scientists may have just discovered why U.S. politics are a disaster - polarization being driven by inequality. So there's another set of factors driving the issue aside from authoritarianism.

This doctor says violence is contagious, and we should treat it like a disease - but this thinking would require losing the moralistic perspective on crime and misdeeds, and an effective health net could be costly. But we're already headed that way in many developed nations with an increasing number of care workers, and these workers need not have all of a doctor's specialist skills. The doctor argues that we need gradations of care, something between "nothing" or "super-everything," mirroring public health successes in areas where fully trained doctors have to delegate care tasks to some hires in the face of huge amounts of need.

and finally...
The truth about thieves - typically young and underdeveloped, and not masterminds

[ED-057]

the media would have told us right?

No, the media is worthless. I keep telling you guys that.

These political scientists may have just discovered why U.S. politics are a disaster

No, I don't think so. The article is overly obsessed with the two party system. Republicans this, Democrats that, blah, blah, blah. This is the other thing I keep telling you guys. The two party system is what is the disaster.

The media is worthless. The two party system is a disaster. Try to remember these two things. They are interrelated.

Have you heard the predictions about how many billions are going to be spent on campaigns during the upcoming election? Where does that money go? A large part of it goes to the big media corporations, to run stupid political ads. Partisan mudslinging is a GOLD MINE for them.

They are big corps. They are in it for the money. Where is the money? Reporting of relevant news that may lead to solving problems and challenging the status quo? Hahaha... no. Keeping the Dem vs. Rep feud going loud and strong is where the money is.

"George Bush became president because black people in Florida weren't allowed to vote."

See, this is what you need to realize. Florida alone doesn't determine who the president is. The fact is that, throughout the country, there were many people who voted for GWB. On purpose.

I know, it sounds dumb. "Why would anyone vote for GWB?"

The reason is that they believed, if they didn't vote for a Republican, that would mean voting for a Democrat. "But surely, Democrats are less bad than Republicans?" you are saying. It seems that way to you and me, but not to everyone everywhere. It can't be. The media can't allow it. If people became too agreeable, if people started to realize that the two parties are two halves of one giant turd, then the jig would be up.

[Skykid]

^ Knowledgable and informed post.

You appear to have completely accepted these views; I seem to remember in the past you were leaning in the general direction of calling bullshit on the bullshit systems in which we live, but were still half-on-the-fence.

Sign of the times I suppose, it's natural people will come to these conclusions sooner or later. It's not like things are getting better.

[CIT]

Not sure why people are even still discussing this topic.

For some reason, and despite any sort of common sense, being able to own a gun without virtually any restrictions is super important to a large proportion of Americans and they have taken the country way beyond the point of no return regarding firearms regulation. Mass shootings are simply the price our country must pay for this policy and they're not going to go away. So think of it as a luxury tax on firearms, paid for in innocent human lives, hope you're never on the line, and move on.

[BryanM]

No, the media is worthless. I keep telling you guys that.

Not worthless. Actively harmful.

Like leaving your kid in the care of the wrong kind of catholic priest.

[Ed Oscuro]

Whoa there, ED-057, whoaaaa.

Earlier I thought you wanted to see some alternate explanation for partisan differences than authoritarianism, so I shared this.

Sure, perhaps the article title oversells the findings here, but you didn't read the article - it's not saying remotely what you say it does. It says the two-party system is a disaster, so that's not different from your summary. (The comment about it being "obsessed" with the two parties makes no sense because then ED goes on to complain about just that.) The study says that income inequality is linked to political polarization, with more unequal states trending to be more Republican. This is not the first study to make that guess.

Likewise, you didn't drop a bomb on us by pointing out that the media is self-interested

If you read even more deeply into the article, you see that the study, and the media, and ED # are all agreed that the money is the issue. What the researcher (not the media) puts forward as failed (or at least not as good) explanations are gerrymandering or other local political features.

The article is not saying that the media has no role in creating polarization. In fact it says that the article isn't saying why there is this link between money and polarization.

Complaining about "the media" is irrelevant; the study was independent. It just happens that a media blogger picked it up and summarized it, but there's not much spin apart from the title.

It isn't talking about Citizens United or the media, and it's (obviously) not going to fix the world's problems. That's not what a study (or a news blogger's post) is meant to do, nor should you expect it to. Otherwise random people spouting off on Internet forums would have solved the world's problems long ago.

More bluntly...What do you think your role in this thread is? You're just randomly shitting on things and not bothering to read the posts.

[ED-057]

it's not saying remotely what you say it does.

You've misconstrued my post as being directly related to the article, which it wasn't. The only thing I wrote regarding the article is that it is overly obsessed with the two party system. The reason I said this is because it perpetuates the myth that politics is one-dimensional. It works from the unsaid premise that you can be a D or an R, Red or Blue, and those are your only choices.

I don't believe in this myth. Looking for explanations for partisan differences is barking up the wrong tree. Partisanship is an artificial construct that needs to die. Politics is not one dimensional. You don't have to be an R or a D.

The RELENTLESS framing of EVERYTHING as being part of the D vs. R feud, is an act of deliberate sabotage. This is my whole point, and is pretty much the only reason I've been posting in these political threads recently. (Well that, and the fact that the US gov is guilty of war crimes.)

[Skykid]

it's not saying remotely what you say it does.

You've misconstrued my post as being directly related to the article, which it wasn't.

I didn't take it as being directly related to the article either, rather more in and of itself.

Either way, you're making sense.

[MintyTheCat]

Mass shootings are simply the price our country must pay for this policy and they're not going to go away. So think of it as a luxury tax on firearms, paid for in innocent human lives, hope you're never on the line, and move on.

Yes, we both agree. I see it more as a Tithe though than a Tax per say.

It is amusing how some of these mostly american members completely ignore the posts related to the topic. I dare say it is safer to box yourself up than to deal with it.

[Skykid]

Mass shootings are simply the price our country must pay for this policy and they're not going to go away. So think of it as a luxury tax on firearms, paid for in innocent human lives, hope you're never on the line, and move on.

Yes, we both agree. I see it more as a Tithe though than a Tax per say.

It is amusing how some of these mostly american members completely ignore the posts related to the topic. I dare say it is safer to box yourself up than to deal with it.

I think they're probably just sick of Europeans taking the moral high ground and wagging fingers about it when there's very little they can actually do to instigate change.

There's a member here called RealPlumpBox who whenever posting in the Awesome Stuff Just Bought thread tends to include handguns and ammunition with his gaming quota. I'd like to get him in this thread.

[Ed Oscuro]

The RELENTLESS framing of EVERYTHING as being part of the D vs. R feud, is an act of deliberate sabotage.

Did you not notice the Trump thread at all? Everybody agrees on this. The article isn't propaganda; it's inherently framing the issue as a problem, and it's very strange that you keep implying that it's not.

So sure, I agree with you that we shouldn't get too wrapped up in two-party analysis of politics. That's why I made a post to that effect on Yglesias.

But that doesn't mean we can ignore the details of the system. Any new political ideas have to swim with the rabid sharks of the current political climate, because most political issues really are one-dimensional, even just a binary choice between picking winners and losers.

And as far as most of the comments here go, many of the specific criticisms about the two parties is that they really are no different on many important issues, so zero-dimensional.

[rancor]

I think they're probably just sick of Europeans taking the moral high ground and wagging fingers about it when there's very little they can actually do to instigate change.

Minty's self righteousness in this thread is off-putting to say the least.

It is amusing how some of these mostly american members completely ignore the posts related to the topic. I dare say it is safer to box yourself up than to deal with it.

Area Man’s Intelligence Probably Just Too Intimidating For Most Women

There's not really much to debate when your opponent has very strong feelings about something they've never taken part in or experienced.

[Ed Oscuro]

There's not really much to debate when your opponent has very strong feelings about something they've never taken part in or experienced.

Like statistics of gun violence?

I'll give you that, it's true as far as it goes, but that's a double-edged sword

[rancor]

statistically non-suicide gun deaths aren't even in the top-ten of preventable deaths in the US. So all of the world saving heroes who cant get through a morning shower without a good cry may want to focus your energies on things such as tobacco, obesity, alcohol, drug abuse, auto accidents, drownings, and sexually transmitted diseases.

[Ed Oscuro]

Statistically, nuclear weapons aren't even in the top-ten of preventable deaths in the US. So all of the world-saving heroes should yadda yadda, your argument is superbly fruity. You know what they say - one lost bomb ruins the party (and property values) for everyone.

Almost all the things in your list have fairly stringent regulations (or "sin" taxes) related to them, or will soon have, and those aren't even the things that are being associated with murder You're not really helping the cause of trying to put firearms on a pedestal by pointing out a bunch of things that are regulated.

For example, how many lives do you think are saved by putting a "don't eat this, it's toxic" label on the sides of paint cans? Labelling requirements for things that nobody ever eats, collectively, soak up millions of dollars before we could even claim any lives are saved. So, I guess your vision is that we should just do away with those labeling requirements because people die in different ways.

People aren't being totally unreasonable by pointing out that firearms use doesn't seem like it's in the same class as driving an automobile. (At least, I'm not aware of people demanding justifications for driving a car.)

But ehh, yeah, in general I'm in favor of people not overhyping risks (see: my last posts in the Annoyances thread)

[rancor]

Statistically, nuclear weapons aren't even in the top-ten of preventable deaths in the US. So all of the world-saving heroes should yadda yadda, your argument is superbly fruity. You know what they say - one lost bomb ruins the party (and property values) for everyone.

Agreed. Apocalyptic, world-ending asteroids are a better topic of conversation. The most passionate people in this thread will have exactly the same effect on them as they will on American firearm laws.

For example, how many lives do you think are saved by putting a "don't eat this, it's toxic" label on the sides of paint cans? Labelling requirements for things that nobody ever eats, collectively, soak up millions of dollars before we could even claim any lives are saved. So, I guess your vision is that we should just do away with those labeling requirements because people die in different ways.

That sort of labeling is exactly why "bath salts" are legal. "Not our fault he smoked this shit, went crazy, and ate someones face - it specifically says on the packaging "not for human consumption".

Almost all the things in your list have fairly stringent regulations (or "sin" taxes) related to them

I'd love to know what the specific "sin" taxes are on fat people, illegal / prescription drugs, automobiles, recreational water sports, and sex. That's almost all of what was on my list.

You're not really helping the cause of trying to put firearms on a pedestal by pointing out a bunch of things that are regulated.

I'm not attempting to put firearms on a pedestal - hell, I moved from America to Japan - if guns were really that important to me, I never would have left... I'm just being a pragmatist about this. I'm not a black male, and I don't have any black male friends... And according to statistics (page 11, if you please) the likelihood of me being involved in gun violence of any sorts on either side is infinitesimally small, and therefore akin to wearing a helmet and full safety-gear as I as/descend stairways. Do people die? Of course. Is it awful? No doubt. Mass murders and killing will happen as long as there are humans on this earth - and shockingly, it doesn't even require a gun to do so! Is it a problem? sure.. but it's not even in the top 20 of things I believe we should be concerning ourselves with. This thread reminds me of stomping on ants while the house is on fire.. you'll never convince me otherwise, and I assume the same for you, so I'll continue to watch from afar.

[MintyTheCat]

'm not attempting to put firearms on a pedestal - hell, I moved from America to Japan - if guns were really that important to me, I never would have l

But as a Texan, Rancor as you have proclaimed to need guns isn't that a bit turn and run to take that tact now?

I understand you love guns, Rancor.

I simply have an issue with people being shot and so does Obama the chap who got elected as your president.

People tend to get all high and mighty when preventable death is the subject which includes tobacco which as we know the US has made large scale changes to address that problem.

If some of you chaps could argue a point it might get us some traction.

All I hear is "guns rule" and "nothing anyone can do" from most of you and a couple of little snide remarks about Europeans and "people who are not even US citizens".

You can be passive, defeatist or constructive on this but snide comments will get you a spank

[MintyTheCat]

I'm not attempting to put firearms on a pedestal - hell, I moved from America to Japan - if guns were really that important to me, I never would have l

But as a Texan, Rancor as you have proclaimed to need guns isn't that a bit turn and run to take that tact now?

I understand you love guns, Rancor.

I simply have an issue with people being shot and so does Obama the chap who got elected as your president.

People tend to get all high and mighty when preventable death is the subject which includes tobacco which as we know the US has made large scale changes to address that problem.

If some of you chaps could argue a point it might get us some traction.

All I hear is "guns rule" and "nothing anyone can do" from most of you and a couple of little snide remarks about Europeans and "people who are not even US citizens".

You can be passive, defeatist or constructive on this but snide comments will get you a spank

There's not really much to debate when your opponent has very strong feelings about something they've never taken part in or experienced.

Then this may come as a shock to you to find that an inordinate number of teenage males are obsessed with sex... Sorry, just had to yank your chain there, Rancor.

[CIT]

Mass shootings are simply the price our country must pay for this policy and they're not going to go away. So think of it as a luxury tax on firearms, paid for in innocent human lives, hope you're never on the line, and move on.

Yes, we both agree. I see it more as a Tithe though than a Tax per say.

It is amusing how some of these mostly american members completely ignore the posts related to the topic. I dare say it is safer to box yourself up than to deal with it.

Well, I'm American myself. But as I said, most Americans really, really, really want to be able to own guns freely. Which is fine. I'd just prefer if they didn't act like it has no impact on society.

[MintyTheCat]

Mass shootings are simply the price our country must pay for this policy and they're not going to go away. So think of it as a luxury tax on firearms, paid for in innocent human lives, hope you're never on the line, and move on.

Yes, we both agree. I see it more as a Tithe though than a Tax per say.

It is amusing how some of these mostly american members completely ignore the posts related to the topic. I dare say it is safer to box yourself up than to deal with it.

Well, I'm American myself. But as I said, most Americans really, really, really want to be able to own guns freely. Which is fine. I'd just prefer if they didn't act like it has no impact on society.

Cool, I had you down as a local Berliner - good to have you on-board.
Yes, there are a few US contributers who are anti-guns but then there are also some who are pro-guns all the way like our Rancor.

I think that several factors have been exposed and considered at least in part during these discussions; one being the loophole on second-hand gun sales.

Making it tight and having necessary control on hazardous/lethal items is all part of each civilisation's development which is why no one uses DDT bought from DIY stores, Uranium infused cough medicines from their local Pharmacy/Drug Store or indeed Opium through mail-order - hell there was once a time when you could buy Cocaine from your local Pharmacy in Germany but they changed that

[Ed Oscuro]

Shorter rancor: Just kidding, guys!

Almost all the things in your list have fairly stringent regulations (or "sin" taxes) related to them

I'd love to know what the specific "sin" taxes are on fat people, illegal / prescription drugs, automobiles, recreational water sports, and sex. That's almost all of what was on my list.

FOR REAL?

Do you understand what "or" means? You can't snip out the other part of this sentence, either, and pretend it has the same meaning. The point here is that there are either regulations or moves to regulate most of these things, in one way of another. (You were better off with "drownings" than "recreational water sports," many of which are regulated by way of motorboat and fisheries / wildlife. STDs obviously will get you in hot water, if you knowingly infect somebody, but there are regulations for STDs beyond just going to jail for infecting somebody, though this is an interesting case because generally there doesn't seem to be a requirement for treatment or notifying a partner ahead of time - just jail time if you infect others.)

Yes, some European countries have a fat tax (on foods), and New York city had a shot at that as well. There's also the serious possibility of decreasing health insurance premiums for healthy people (or increasing them for obese people - it'd be equivalent).

If you seriously expect me to explain to you how stringently regulated cars are...well, no, I'm not going to waste my time on that, other than noting in the States you can't even drive a polluting car unless it's a member of some narrow exemption classes. (Incidentally, firearms already have a roughly equivalent exemption for antiques/curios.) But also, this, if you remember it, was a great case of the "don't regulate us" crowd ending up pushing de facto regulation on everybody else (since it barred interested people from taking part in a program aimed at them).

If you don't think there's strong regulations surrounding prescription drugs and marijuana...I...I really don't know how far up your ass I'd have to holler for you to hear me. It's a goddamn maze of regulation. If there's anybody who has a reason to complain about regulations, it's the people who got marijuana bans repealed in their states, complied with all the laws, used it for medical purposes only, and still ended up slapped with fines / had their stuff confiscated.

the likelihood of me being involved in gun violence of any sorts on either side is infinitesimally small

Shorter rancor, again: It's not my problem when it's other people getting killed, especially other people who are black.

Well, yes, so far as it goes, that's true. But that doesn't mean anything to people who are in the middle of those problems.

Again, really not helping your cause here.

BTW, if you're not trying to keep firearms deregulated, what viewpoint are you trying to push? Aside from just having a general whine about the amount of regulations in modern countries, that is.

You can be passive, defeatist or constructive on this but snide comments will get you a spank

This, all the way.

[CIT]

Cool, I had you down as a local Berliner - good to have you on-board.

Nah man, I'm way to friendly to be a real Berliner.

[rancor]

STDs obviously will get you in hot water, if you knowingly infect somebody

Much like if you knowingly murder someone with a firearm? I'm not sure where you're going with this..? As I said before - sex is not regulated, but there are consequences for rape.

many of which are regulated by way of motorboat and fisheries / wildlife.

As with above, I'm talking about "A", and you're off on a tangent with "B". Yes, motorboats and fishing and jet skis et al are regulated. I'm talking about people + water = drowning, and somehow you're adding parasailing + hi-octane leisure craft. Swimming in a lake or pool / leaving your kids in a bathtub is not a regulated activity.

If you don't think there's strong regulations surrounding prescription drugs and marijuana...

This illustrates my point perfectly. Yes - there is regulation surrounding prescription and illegal drugs. large, toothless regulation that does absolutely nothing. Police and law enforcement say they are "winning" when the prices of illegally gotten drugs increase in price. Almost across the board, drugs are falling in price:

http://streetrx.com/

Do you have any idea how easy it is to get a fistful of Oxycontins in the US? Shockingly. Either through legal or illegal methods. The same goes for marijuana. The only people who cant get these items are the squares that follow the law to a "T". The same goes with firearms regulation. There are so many out in the wild at the moment that any regulation put forth will only constrain law-abiding citizens. A mentally ill brony with a hatred towards sorority girls that wont give him hand-jobs doesn't give a fuck, and can easy get anything he needs.

...and New York city had a shot at that as well...

...There's also the serious possibility...

could'a, would'a, should'a doesnt count in your argument that these things are regulated.

BTW, if you're not trying to keep firearms deregulated, what viewpoint are you trying to push? Aside from just having a general whine about the amount of regulations in modern countries, that is.

Not sure myself... A chance to interact with native English speakers? I'm lacking stimulation over here.

[MintyTheCat]

Cool, I had you down as a local Berliner - good to have you on-board.

Nah man, I'm way to friendly to be a real Berliner.

I should not laugh but I know EXACTLY what you mean by this

[MintyTheCat]

One person has been shot dead and two others wounded in a shooting incident at Tennessee State University in Nashville, US police say.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34613033

Rancor, your arguments are failing.
I have nothing against you, we have exchanged some messages these past five or so years and such but I honestly find your pro-gun arguments and attempts to cloud the gun law discussion to be rather lacking.

There is the notion of being liberal but that is not an open ticket to "do what you want, when you want, to who ever you want and how you want".

As you have skillfully assessed sex is not regulated in the civil populace and you feel that because someone might get a disease or be raped that you would argue with the same logic for guns.

The thing is though that guns are not a natural part of human life - I can only put this down to you having some hardline ideas or having literally been given a gun in your hand as your mother breastfed you for anyone to believe that a gun is something natural.

I have refuted most of your arguments and you have barely tackled any of mine but that doesn't matter. What matters is that any idiot in the US with a gun is able to shoot whoever they want regardless of how you, me or anyone else feels or thinks about it. This is the issue here, so stop dressing it up and trying to play down the real issue: innocent people are being killed for absolutely no justified reason.

I am glad you are over Japan because it is a safer place to be but don't let that feeling of safety cloud your judgement. It is your citizens who are literally on the firing line here.

I think you can have a spank for that once again, Rancor

Cheers.

[trap15]

I think they're probably just sick of Europeans taking the moral high ground and wagging fingers about it when there's very little they can actually do to instigate change.

Minty's self righteousness in this thread is off-putting to say the least.

[MintyTheCat]

I think they're probably just sick of Europeans taking the moral high ground and wagging fingers about it when there's very little they can actually do to instigate change.

Minty's self righteousness in this thread is off-putting to say the least.

Cheers, Trap.

I love how you do these little posts.

[Icarus]

Topic split. Sister catch-all topic is here. Now you get the best of both worlds.

(God, you people are annoyingly whiny sometimes.)

[neorichieb1971]

Going viral on facebook -


https://www.facebook.com/FilmingCops/vi ... 652744397/