It’s a fucking existential crisis for the poor sods killed by your guns innit?
You know I’m Australian too, right?
At the point where you start winning elections. Holy shit.
You understand the concept of a losing issue, right? Gun control is a losing issue. If you run on gun control, you greatly increase your chances of losing the election. Then, hey, you can’t actually enact your gun control policies because you lost. You can’t oppose their agenda when you’ve lost the election. You view losing and being right (by your own standards) as some heroic outcome rather than poor planning. Please, please stop losing elections with this nonsense.
Democrats seem pathologically incapable of understanding that there’s a difference between “this is something I think is right” and “this is something that I think is good political strategy”
There are so many issues that you can run on that are winning issues - improving the economic situation for the common person, expanded access to health care, a hundred others. Issues that appeal to people.
But since you are so fucking addicted to losing, I’m sure this election will be about gun control and transgender bathrooms.
How are you going to oppose their agenda when you lose the election, and just like the various state where they’ve won a majority and then changed the rules to keep themselves in permanent power, they do that at the national level? You have to win the election by running on issues that are going to win the election. Gun control is not that issue. EVEN IF YOUR GOAL IS GUN CONTROL, shut up about it and do it after you’re elected, because the more you talk about it the less likely you ever get elected.
I can’t believe that democrats don’t understand the idea that something can be something they want to do, but also be a bad idea for their electoral chances, but this attitude is exactly why they keep losing over and over again despite nominally having a majority support on almost every issue. This, here, your attitude, exactly this. This is how democrats always lose.
A coup that is also financed in part from fascist enemies like Putin.
They don’t stop financing those fascists that like to see more guns, and they clearly don’t mind much when the current way to do things conveniently gets rid of people that oppose that gun violence.
That won’t matter to the GOP, the victims are the good kind of darkies . The shooter was the bad kind of darkie. For the GOP, dead children are either a resource to be exploited, or if that is not possible, a reason to change the subject and talk about Hunter Biden’s laptop. They have no morality.
From the outside looking in, I’d agree.
The level of poverty and homelessness in a first word country is ridiculous. I did a serious double take at the nice orderly seated lineup of beggers in Vegas last time I was there. Let’s not mention the Tenderloin in Frisco.
Guns are a tool. Reduce access to that tool you reduce deaths but you don’t fix society. Likewise, Republicans aren’t the devil anymore than Democrats are the Angels. Both are just political parties, with strengths and flaws. In a democracy, with a mainly sane population, no political party that is inherently evil is going to get around 50% of the vote.
Does more need to be done regarding school shootings? Of course it does. But what exactly? Here is where so many will differ. Mental health treatment is such a low priority in this country and for many years I witnessed this first hand as a police officer. We cannot spend our way out of mental health issues. We also cannot legislate our way out of this issue involving mental health and guns in school shootings. If the US said as of right now no further guns can ever be sold to everyone then this will not fix the issue. We can’t even day we’re going to confiscate all guns from everyone as we already know what will happen here. People will lie and hide their guns and/or countless deaths will occur to law enforcement who will be the ones forced to go and take these guns.
But let’s say we stop the sale of all guns. What happens to the millions of guns already legally in the hands of homeowners? Some may be stolen and a few will be used by those with mental health issues. But the black market will rage on no matter what and in this will ramp up to levels likely never seen before. This article is not new but it has some good info. I get the need and desire to stop all these school shootings, which statistically are very few all things considered, but even one is too many. So what the hell do we do? We certainly do not try and take the weapons from legal gun owners. frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS
Well said; I agree with you completely.
This. But the point is, IMHO ,that if you point out this mechanism and the fact that one of the parties at the table is a bad-faith actor, YOU will be the one to start the shit. The conundrum isn’t vastly different from what Chamberlain was facing in his days, and at least for me, it keeps becoming clearer that there isn’t really a way out of this kind of situation. When I grew up as a kid there was all kinds of judgment in historical writing on appeasement with the benefit of hindsight. From the other end of the war, so to speak. But not appeasing wouldn’t have prevented that war from happening, either. Apparently, so it goes.
In addition to this (and I’m Canadian btw) we don’t fetishize a second amendment (if we even have anything similar but by another name), and I would say that we don’t even fetishize our constitution. We don’t have the same religiosity as the US seems to about guns or the constitution.
My own WAG is that most Canadian gun owners are either hunters or farmers/rural dwellers and perhaps hobbyists with memberships to ranges. I suspect that if I were to poll 1000 random co-workers in my office in Montreal and asked if they had any guns I suspect maybe 20 would say yes and that most others would probably ask “why the fuck would I want a gun”? Again this is a big WAG but that’s my gut feeling. There is simply a critical attitude difference between our two countries when it comes to guns.
After looking at history for more than 40 years, I will have to say that it would not have prevented that war, but it would have limited it a lot IMHO. Having a Czechoslovakia not de-fanged early on would have put a lot of a delay on what Hitler wanted to do. IIRC even Hitler commented on how bloody it would had been if the allies not had given him the Sudetenland.
You could be right. However that could have changed the narrative in terms of good guys/bad guys for years to come. And I think that last element is at play here.
Well, they might get too expensive for an 18 year old to get, and people who have them might keep them safer, if they were irreplaceable.
Honestly, its the mental health thing that is infuriating. Schools are continually being asked todo more and more community services with fewer and fewer resources. Five hundred students and one guidance counselor is normal. It should be a gudance counselor for every 250 students PLUS a full time social worker PLUS access to a licensed therapist.
But shit like this won’t even inspire the powers to be to pay for that, that pittance, and y’all think gun control is even a vague possibility?
Im so sick.
I will have to say that the anti-gun control people in reality do not want to see mental health being funded properly, because then a good number of gun owner parents would be really inconvenienced to find that their precious kids should never be close to guns.
Even on that I disagree, Hitler wanted war to get his “living space” The German leadership were the bad guys already. One should remember that Hitler’s support of the fascist Dictator of Spain was still going on when Hitler wanted a piece of Czech.
They could have concocted a story about being oppressed and exploited by esp. France after WWI. And taking up arms against that oppression. Of course it would have been BS, but white Republicans pushing their persecution ideas while oppressing and killing everybody else is not exactly plausible, either. And the above story WAS what got Hitler elected, mind you. A lot of people are willing to buy crap if they feel the world has f*cked them over.
What if 30-50 feral hogs run into my back yard while my kids are playing outside?
Unless Americans learn to fire bullets out of their fingertips, yes.
Buyback programs, make it illegal to carry guns out in public, guns cannot be inherited and must be turned in when their registered owner dies (unless the inheritor can get permission for their own gun), ban owning multiple firearms (existing owners of multiple firearms are grandfathered in but when they die their inheritors can only get one, or a small reasonable number, of guns).
Pass these laws and you can greatly reduce the number of guns in a generation without actually rounding them up.
Following that analogy, no, other countries did not vote for Hitler, nor he was elected in Germany, it is a bit more complicated, but getting about 40% of the German parliament was enough.
(A number suspiciously close to the number of current Americans that would not mind voting for fascists authoritarians in the US.)
Exactly. The Weimar republic wasn’t a workable democracy, partly because the center had been hollowed out. A frightening parallel if you ask me. And you’re right, the details are different. The forces at play, I fear, not so much.