Current Events, etc.

[Yankee4Life]

Gordo had to good idea to create a thread to talk about what has been in the news lately, namely those two senseless shootings in Texas and Ohio.

 

I think we can all talk about the problems that we have here in the United States that allows basically anyone to gain access to an assault rifle. Everyone's opinion on this website is welcome and is just as good as anyone else's. It doesn't matter if you're passionate about your beliefs as long as you remain respectful to everyone else's.

 

So, with that being said here we go.

 

 

I don't know how to deal with the shootings that take place but I do know that it has to start with taking away weapons like assault rifles and anything else like that from people that are not either in the military or the police. Those are the only people that need these weapons. There is no reason why a guy should have a small arsenal in his basement just because he has the right to bear arms.

 

All politicians do when something like the incidents in Texas and Ohio do is stand in front of the camera and look sad and offer condolences. When they are done doing that their job is done and they move on.

For a long time after September 11th I found it very easy to blame what ever catastrophe on the Muslims. I should say right now that this was an opinion that was 100% wrong. I mean all I had to do was look at the people holding the gun when these mass shootings took place.

 

The people holding the gun did not discriminate and what I mean by that is that no one seemed to be safe. There's been too many school shootings to even count. A nightclub in Orlando, people at a concert in Las Vegas and movie theaters were some places where many people lost their lives senselessly.

 

Minorities are always a target for these gunmen. I can recall the many black people were shot down dead in their church by a young white kid who wanted to start a race war. Muslims have been targeted too at mosques across the country and while they may not be a minority the Jewish people who were killed in cold blood in Pittsburgh simply because they were Jewish just shows that these killings can take place anywhere and to anyone.

 

What I would like to see is more background checks. I want there to be a way for the average person to be unable to get their hands on these weapons. I would like to have gun control that we see in other countries. We are an embarrassment to the world when things like this happen because everyone knows if we really wanted to we can put a stop to this.

 

 

Your thoughts? Discuss.

[Gordo]

The problem with background checks is that you're not going to catch everyone, not that you shouldn't do them, of course.  But there is absolutely no way you're going to legislate LESS senseless killing.  You indicate you want gun control that we see in other countries, as if less guns is equating to less craziness.... it doesn't.  With less guns in these certain countries, knife killings are up because a person hell bent on causing death and destruction will find or fashion a weapon if a gun is not available.  Look...if you need to screw in a screw and you don't have a screwdriver, you don't just say "fuck it".....  you find a substitute.  These people are maliciously driven, therefore the craziness needs addressing.

 

It will always seem like minorities are "always a target" if that's what you only pay attention to.   Of course, the motive can be race/racism, but that doesn't mean that it's always the motivation.  If you're going to make a statement/claim like this, you need to have legitimate facts from a reputable source.

 

Your paragraph about gunmen not discriminating sort of contradicts what you said about minorities.  What they don't seem to discriminate about it which relatively defenseless area they will attack.  This is, of course, why there is such a push to defend our schools more intelligently than having a bucket of rocks in the corner.  You can ban all the high assault rifles you want, and I'm not saying you shouldn't, but a terrorist attack by someone using something less powerful isn't going to deter them by going after sheep or fish in a barrel (no, I'm not being glib....just illustrative).

 

Of course, the whole notion of the politicians involve numerous books, articles and talk show appearances can cascade into a plethora of statements, arguments and discussions....so there is no point.

 

I think the bottom line is that regardless of what level of legislation we have, and we have a ton, things at the more immediate level have to happen as a deterrent to these incidents, i.e., we need to police ourselves ..... even to the point of enforcement a la the military officer who did what he could with the Walmart incident.  You should have seen his interview after the fact .... would break your heart how this affected him and how he wanted to do more.

[Yankee4Life]

5 minutes ago, Gordo said:

It will always seem like minorities are "always a target" if that's what you only pay attention to.   Of course, the motive can be race/racism, but that doesn't mean that it's always the motivation.  If you're going to make a statement/claim like this, you need to have legitimate facts from a reputable source.

 

A lot of it seems to be. The guy in El Paso was targeting Hispanics. But when you look at school shootings the gunman does not appear to care who he goes after.

 

9 minutes ago, Gordo said:

I think the bottom line is that regardless of what level of legislation we have, and we have a ton, things at the more immediate level have to happen as a deterrent to these incidents, i.e., we need to police ourselves ..... even to the point of enforcement a la the military officer who did what he could with the Walmart incident.  You should have seen his interview after the fact .... would break your heart how this affected him and how he wanted to do more.

 

I agree. We do need to police ourselves. I know I certainly do and I'm sure everyone in here does also.

[Kccitystar]

I don't think taking away everyone's guns is the right way to go, as it's embedded in our culture, to be honest. A lot of the attitudes revolving gun ownership are usually very black/white by the book among liberal towns.

I'm from NYC, which is probably one of the most liberal cities in the country next to...LA? San Francisco, maybe? but I have a ton of friends from all parts of the country (Hi, y'all), and the understanding I have from those who own guns is that they grew up with firearms because they hunted or someone in their family did, and in most cases, if there was trouble in their neck of the woods, someone they lived with had to handle it on their own.

 

I understand this as it was explained to me: America is huge. Not every town is a coastal metropolis, or even a metropolis in general. In middle america and in a lot of flyover states, you are likely run in to poor areas with limited resources. You're also going to run into small populations spread over a large area, and unfortunately that means police protection is, for all practical purposes, non-existent. If you do run into LEOs (be it a policeman, a sheriff, a state trooper) it's likely that you'll be told to arm yourself and keep a lookout. You usually know where your police stations are in your town, of course, but even at top speed, it's likely your town's response time would be in the range of 30 minutes. Things have improved in some areas since then, but with budget cuts and debt problems among smaller municipalities, you run into things like staff cuts, and things can go from bad to worse.

 

In those parts of the country, expecting someone else to handle your self-defense is often seen as a moral failing, tantamount to paying someone else to change the oil in your car or mow your grass. I'll freely admit that attitude of self-sufficiency is still an important part of a lot of people's character if you live in rural america, and I think a lot of Americans draw from a similar background, which is why I understand why a lot of people buy guns.

 

Constitutional questions aside, we have hunters that provide food for their families via these firearms, we have families that rely on the firearms for self defense, and in many of these families, one of the traditions of our young nation is the passing of firearms from one generation to the next. Heirloom weapons that previous generations used to hunt, or wielded in one of the United States armed conflicts. The laws to make larger magazines and certain ammunition illegal is similarly a moot point in my mind. The USA-Mexico border is nowhere near secure. Drugs, weapons, and illegal immigration are all big business on our southern borders. Making the magazines, guns, or ammunition illegal will not remove the guns from the hands of criminals, but rather take them out of the hands or law abiding citizens with a hobbyist or self defense motivation for owning the weapons. A person who wants an AR-15 with a high capacity clip will just buy one off the black market instead of obtaining it legally. There will still be bank robbers who will go in with assault weapons and armor piercing rounds, police will still walk into situations where they are outgunned.

 

So how do we stop gun violence? Well, it's not as easy as taking away everyone's guns.  I feel like as a country, we would not be here today if not for the gun culture that exists in our society. We had to conquer the "wild west" to get where we are. We had to defeat one of the most powerful armies in existence to gain our independence. I do think we have to look at a lot of factors that go into gun ownership and work on changing the way we perceive gun culture rather than demonize every single person that owns a handgun or a rifle responsibly, I mean, you really can't legislate away criminal behavior.

[sabugo]

First off, as you know, I am not an american. I live in a small country which was recently named the 3rd safest country in the world. That being said, through my job and through some friends (mainly from Brazil and other parts of South America), I'm very well aware of what daily and senseless violence is.

I am the one who said 'no guns = no violence'. I know this is not doable, specially in the US, where you are passionate about your right to bear arms.
To me, there are a few important issues:
- First off, I understand when Gordo is saying that bad people are always going to do bad stuff, and it will be incredibly hard to stop them. No argument there. If you want to do something really bad, chances are you're going to end up doing it. The problem is that if it's easy to have access to tools that can kill dozens of people, the higher the chance of something like that happening.
You can say that stabbings have gone up in places where people can't have guns. Not completely true in my point of view. Here in Europe stabbings by refugees have gone up exponentially, but that is whole different subject. And again, yes, if they didn't have access to knives, they'd do something else. Just last week some illegal pushed an 8 year old kid and his mother to the subway tracks in Germany. 
I just think that with the killing potential that a firearm has, we're just making it easy for the crazies to kill indiscriminately. 
If you start your barbecue with a flamethrower instead of a match, there's a bigger chance for burning, right?

- Then, you really have to check who can buy guns better. A lot better. Many of this spree killers or mass murderers have been diagnosed with mental conditions. Many are known to law enforcement or by some kind of authority as potential threats. These people simply cannot fall through the cracks. They need to be spotted and treated and if that fails, incarcerated - both for their own safety and for the public in general. Better training for teachers, social workers and even cops is a must. Prevention is key. 

- As for the places where you can't count on readily available law enforcement, I totally understand the necessity of having a gun. Or several. But there has to be a limit. If you feel so unsafe that you need to buy an AK-47 and an Uzi, then something has gone totally wrong somewhere - another different problem. People in Brazil don't do that and their homicide rate is way higher, I can tell you that.

I mentioned for example that in Australia, they had one terrible incident some 20 years ago and then changed the laws. They haven't had one since. A lot harder to do in the US, but surely something to think about. I read somewhere that there have been something like 280 mass killings in the US. Something needs to be done.
All these shooters are inadequate, pathetic losers who sometimes almost randomly pick an extremist point of view to support and validate their meaningless existence. 

I have been to the United States twice, both in the LA area. I didn't feel unsafe once. 

[Yankee4Life]

KC and Sabugo make some very good points and I won't even try to dispute them.

 

And I am glad that you did not feel unsafe in Los Angeles but I wonder if you would've said the same had you been in Chicago?

 

I agree that many of these mass murderers have serious mental conditions. Just look at the guy at Sandy Hook in 2012. If that wasn't someone who wasn't mentally deranged then I don't know what to say.

 

Now you got to look at what KC said about hunters using these guns to provide food for their families. That's another part of this discussion that is not brought up that much.

 

So I really don't have any definitive answers and I won't pretend that I do either. All I know is I don't want this to happen any longer and I don't want any of us in here to be in a place where some nut with a manifesto decides to finally act out.

 

 

[Kccitystar]

The right legislation can lessen gun violence. We can't eliminate it because it is impossible to control human nature and because of everything that I've mentioned above about our nation's culture.

 

What should be the goals of gun control? IMO there should be three main things: 

a) Lower the risk of mass shootings

b) Lower the risk of single person shootings (Domestic violence, criminals, etc..)

c) Allow people to responsibly enjoy the hobby of gun ownership.

How do we do this?

a) Treat mental health like the disease it is and create better support systems for people that need help.

b) Create a national background check system that every gun sale must pass through, even person to person. These records must be accessible to ALL police and federal agencies

c) Create a licensing program for gun owners. You must complete a background check, take classes, and renew the license on a regular basis. We already do this for drivers licenses so it's not a foreign concept.

d) Have a secure way for health professionals to report patients they feel are dangerous. These reports can be followed up by police and in specific scenarios, guns may be confiscated.

e) Being found guilty of certain violent crimes would also revoke your license and require sale or confiscation of your guns.

f) Responsibility for your firearms - If your gun is used in a crime, you can be held responsible. I wouldn't advocate jail time unless the person was complicit in the crime, but fines and/or revocation of your gun license would work.

[Gordo]

(d) is a very dangerous precedent.  You are counting on the veracity of that certain health professional and believe me, having worked in the field in various parts of the country, that is a slippery slope.  Don't assume that just because someone is a mental health or health professional that they always have the best judgment.  Plus these people typically have their own political agendas and by a highly significant LARGE percentage it is of a strong liberal bent in the mental health field.  

[bctrackboi11]

Kentucky (where I currently reside) has zero requirements for carrying, both concealed or open. No license, no training required. I don't see that being reversed here without a huge amount of resistance and open defiance.

[sabugo]

9 hours ago, Gordo said:

(d) is a very dangerous precedent.  You are counting on the veracity of that certain health professional and believe me, having worked in the field in various parts of the country, that is a slippery slope.  Don't assume that just because someone is a mental health or health professional that they always have the best judgment.  Plus these people typically have their own political agendas and by a highly significant LARGE percentage it is of a strong liberal bent in the mental health field.  

How would you tackle this problem then? I understand your concerns, and I agree that a lot of people in mental health care are way too liberal for their own good. Politics shouldn't play a role in this field, but it does. These are the people that create all these new-age agendas. 
You have to have some sort of screening, wouldn't you agree?

I pretty much agree with everything KC wrote.

[Kccitystar]

2 hours ago, sabugo said:

How would you tackle this problem then? I understand your concerns, and I agree that a lot of people in mental health care are way too liberal for their own good. Politics shouldn't play a role in this field, but it does. These are the people that create all these new-age agendas. 
You have to have some sort of screening, wouldn't you agree?

I pretty much agree with everything KC wrote.

 

We've struggled with attempting to compromise, so anything that either changes or takes away in favor of the greater good gets smacked down constantly.

 

It doesn't help that a lot of the laws the Democratic leadership tries to alter/repeal/remove/replace can easily be perceived as being done in bad faith rather than a genuine compromise because of some warped idea perpetuated by the media constantly that someone has to win and someone has to lose, rather than admitting some things you won't get and some things you will.

[Yankee4Life]

2 hours ago, Kccitystar said:

 

We've struggled with attempting to compromise, so anything that either changes or takes away in favor of the greater good gets smacked down constantly.

 

It doesn't help that a lot of the laws the Democratic leadership tries to alter/repeal/remove/replace can easily be perceived as being done in bad faith rather than a genuine compromise because of some warped idea perpetuated by the media constantly that someone has to win and someone has to lose, rather than admitting some things you won't get and some things you will.

 

Sadly that seems to be the case. The guy in office (and I won't even say his name) always wants to repeal or replace or get rid of things. With that guy there is no compromise because he has to win no matter what. This is something that is not perpetuated by the media. I know a lot of things are but not this.

 

What happened in El Paso with someone echoing his words about how bad and terrible Hispanic people are, something that we all know is NONSENSE. But that guy in El Paso took his words to heart and he acted on it in the worst way possible.

[Gordo]

9 hours ago, Yankee4Life said:

 

Sadly that seems to be the case. The guy in office (and I won't even say his name) always wants to repeal or replace or get rid of things. With that guy there is no compromise because he has to win no matter what. This is something that is not perpetuated by the media. I know a lot of things are but not this.

 

What happened in El Paso with someone echoing his words about how bad and terrible Hispanic people are, something that we all know is NONSENSE. But that guy in El Paso took his words to heart and he acted on it in the worst way possible.

 

 

I'll say his name.... Trump.  And since you brought him into the conversation, now it's fair game.   Okay... so apparently your guy, Obama, had 8 years .... 8 years.... to work out gun reform.  There were multiple, multiple mass shootings during his tenure, not to mention the debacles that are Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore and what exactly did he do to "compromise" and make this workable, reliable and safe?  I keep telling you, this is not something you can ultimately legislate.  Terrorists, killers and crazies will find their methods.  This is about being proactive, intel and self-defending.  

 

And saying someone is echoing his words about how "bad and terrible Hispanic people are" is just flat out rhetoric and nonsense ..... this is something this is CLEARLY perpetuated by the MSM.  Defending borders, following immigration laws and quite frankly continuing with the same tenets held by your guy has nothing to do with hate or racism or any other term of the day the left and the MSM want to levy during the day (hell, all year).  Blaming Trump on this directly or indirectly simply brings this conversation to a halt because it's just baseless repetitive liberal/leftist argument..... has zero merit.  This was largely not a Liberals vs. Trump conversation until you brought it up.

 

The Dayton shooter is documented as going to vote for Elizabeth Warren, was pro-ANTIFA and was a self-proclaimed socialist.  Are we going to blame Fauxahontas for this?  Bernie Sanders?  Of course not..... it's just idiocy.  Let me know when this conversation comes back to an intelligent level of discourse instead of same old/same old.  Sheesh!

[tinpanalley]

Only thing I can never understand is why anyone with opinion 'A' has to absolutely convince the person with opinion 'B' of what they think. Why does that matter? If I think one thing I couldn't care less what anyone else thinks. But even if what they think is something I'm against, why should that affect me? It doesn't change my opinion. It doesn't threaten my opinion. And if I get offended, well, then, tough. That's my problem for getting offended. But my being offended isn't that other person's fault. That's my inability to accept whatever it is that person thinks of me. I prefer to just let it go and accept that the way our brains are developed means finding people who DON'T think like me are going to be far far more likely than people who think exactly like me. But does that make people who disagree with me wrong? Nope. It's just their opinion. And unless they're forcing what they think on me, then all I want is to hear what they think so I can see how people think. But this, "i won't rest until that guy thinks like me or concedes his point" nonsense is pointless to me. Not saying anyone's doing that here, but just once I wish these conversations would go,
"I think this".

"Ok, I don't. I think this."

"Interesting, I don't think that at all, I think THIS".

"Ok, See ya!"..."See ya"..."Bye guys".

Maybe it's being an atheist, but I simply can't think of anything more fruitless than trying to get others to think like me or telling someone they're wrong because what they think isn't what I think. That's like liking steak, but not accepting that someone else prefers chicken. But again, that's just how I see it. And I think each of you has an opinion that is valid even if I do or don't agree with it.

That's all I have to say about that.

[Yankee4Life]

59 minutes ago, Gordo said:

I'll say his name.... Trump.  And since you brought him into the conversation, now it's fair game.   Okay... so apparently your guy, Obama, had 8 years .... 8 years.... to work out gun reform.  There were multiple, multiple mass shootings during his tenure, not to mention the debacles that are Chicago, Detroit and Baltimore and what exactly did he do to "compromise" and make this workable, reliable and safe?  I keep telling you, this is not something you can ultimately legislate.  Terrorists, killers and crazies will find their methods.  This is about being proactive, intel and self-defending.  

 

Ok Gordo, I think I understand what you mean here. In other words where there is a will there is a way.

 

But Obama did try with gun reform. It was the Republicans in Congress that stopped him.

 

1 hour ago, Gordo said:

 And saying someone is echoing his words about how "bad and terrible Hispanic people are" is just flat out rhetoric and nonsense

 

 

But this is exactly what happened.

 

1 hour ago, Gordo said:

 

The Dayton shooter is documented as going to vote for Elizabeth Warren, was pro-ANTIFA and was a self-proclaimed socialist.  Are we going to blame Fauxahontas for this?  Bernie Sanders?  Of course not..... it's just idiocy.  Let me know when this conversation comes back to an intelligent level of discourse instead of same old/same old.  Sheesh

That guy was wrong too. I don't care if you are on the left or right. If you have a gun and are going to harm innocent people then you are wrong and it doesn't matter what you believe in.

[Gordo]

Stop.  You're just spewing what you were told by Obama supporting networks (CNN, CNBC, MSNBC). Please post exactly what actual reforms Obama proposed.  In the meantime, check this out:  https://www.thoughtco.com/obama-gun-laws-passed-by-congress-3367595

 

Secondly, if you're saying the El Paso shooter did this because he held onto sentiments that Trump thinks that Hispanics are bad and terrible people, then all that does is show how insane and crazed he is.  Just from the political angle alone, why in the world would a sitting president or a candidate, especially in this day and age, purport that Hispanics are "bad and terrible" simply from the voting side alone?  Are you saying because he wants to secure the border between the US and Mexico that that equals he hates Hispanics?  Makes zero sense.

 

Lastly, he wasn't just wrong..... HE WAS INSANE!!  No sane person is going to carry out an act like this.  Minimally, you're just blatantly sociopathic even if you're considered to be competent.

 

This probably sums it up best (video at the top):

 

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/the-hunt-movie-deplorables

 

(and trust me, I'm not an ardent Fox News supporter)

[sabugo]

I feel we're getting a bit into a left vs right argument, which I don't think is a productive way to get somewhere. 
To me, that's just gang mentality. Either you're with us, or against us. It's just very limitative. In some things I'm more conservative, and in others I'm more liberal. As I think any normal self-respecting human being should be. You can't just put everything in a box.

I hope that my views as someone on the outside are taken as a nothing more than a different perspective as opposed to me telling you that you're wrong and I'm right.

Anyway, these guys - the shooters - are just going to pick whatever 'cause' or 'movement' that appeals to them for some particular reason. There's all kinds. Right wing, left wing, some are religion fueled, you name it. Saying that it was because of this guy or that may not be the entire story.
People in Europe love to hate Trump, they just love it. I think he's just like every other politician, except he could care less about what people think. He'll just say whatever he wants.
You could argue that some of his more inflamatory remarks fuel people to commit atrocities. But people will get their ideas from almost anywhere. The Son of Sam was taking orders from his dog, just to name one. 
While I think someone in his position could be a little more restrained because there is always a spolight on him, just blaming Trump seems easy and jumping to a conclusion.
Like it or not, Trump's words echo what a lot of americans think. 

Obama, contrary to what seems to be the general opinion, is not God. He is not the Devil either. He's just a politician and acts like all the other politicians. He's from CHICAGO, what the hell would you expect?! That he acted like mother Theresa?

[Yankee4Life]

11 hours ago, Gordo said:

Stop.  You're just spewing what you were told by Obama supporting networks (CNN, CNBC, MSNBC).

 

I watch CNN because they report on what that guy says and does and they don't go around pretending that everything he does is ok.

 

11 hours ago, Gordo said:

Secondly, if you're saying the El Paso shooter did this because he held onto sentiments that Trump thinks that Hispanics are bad and terrible people, then all that does is show how insane and crazed he is.  Just from the political angle alone, why in the world would a sitting president or a candidate, especially in this day and age, purport that Hispanics are "bad and terrible" simply from the voting side alone?  Are you saying because he wants to secure the border between the US and Mexico that that equals he hates Hispanics?  Makes zero sense.

He targeted Hispanic people - people who were doing nothing but minding their business and living their lives and his reasoning for doing it was based on that guy's words. And I agree with you 100%, that shooter was insane.

 

2 hours ago, sabugo said:

I hope that my views as someone on the outside are taken as a nothing more than a different perspective as opposed to me telling you that you're wrong and I'm right.

Your views are as good as anyone in here.

 

2 hours ago, sabugo said:

People in Europe love to hate Trump, they just love it. I think he's just like every other politician, except he could care less about what people think. He'll just say whatever he wants.
 

 

I do not blame them one bit. He insults people and bullies them and really does not care what he says or does just as long as the people cheer for him at his rallies.

 

2 hours ago, sabugo said:

Like it or not, Trump's words echo what a lot of americans think.

 

I do not believe that is true at all. I can  tell you right now he does not echo what I think.

 

 

[Gordo]

This was not going down a splintered political ideology path until Y4L brought in the "Trump bad man" rhetoric which gets us nowhere.  And I see that's not going to stop.  There's a reason why CNN is a failing network and why they "report" like they do (because of how they are funded).   And this is from Snopes who is clearly not a partisan site:  https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cnn-and-msnbc-ratings/

 

This has already gone off the rails.

 

By the way, if you want a straight up news story station, check out OANN.  Yes their commentary programs, the few that there are are conservative thought, but their news stories throughout the day are straight up reporting.   Check it out.... if you truly have an open mind.

 

I'm done.

[Yankee4Life]

23 minutes ago, Gordo said:

This was not going down a splintered political ideology path until Y4L brought in the "Trump bad man" rhetoric which gets us nowhere.  And I see that's not going to stop.  There's a reason why CNN is a failing network and why they "report" like they do (because of how they are funded).   And this is from Snopes who is clearly not a partisan site:  https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cnn-and-msnbc-ratings/

 

 

 

I am not someone who tries to sway people to his way of thinking. Not in sports of course. I am sure that you all believe that I am an irrational, impatient and nervous Yankee fan. That's because I probably am. Not all the time, but a lot.

 

I also do not try to change people's mind in politics either because here I am rational enough to realize that I do not know everything. I form my opinions on that guy directly from him and what he says. So, enough of him.

 

Getting back to what we started to talk about I have to wonder why that Mitch McConnell guy will not bring the bill for better background checks to the floor of the Senate? For what reason does he not want to do this? If it can help prevent more of these killings why not? Get the guns out of the hands of the crazies.

[Yankee4Life]

I think this opinion piece by S.E. Cupp says things a lot better than I can.