U.S. Politics 2017 (split fm US Election: 2016)

[Bird_Gunner45]

Nice picture - Al Jolson - a white guy in black face taking a knee and singing "Swanee". Hmmm.  >

:cheers:

While I generally agree with the protest, by definition the players are in the wrong according to the Flag code.

According to the Flag code of 1923, section 8 "No disrespect should be shown to the flag of the United States of America; the flag should not be dipped to any person or thing. Regimental colors, state flags, and organization or institutional flags are to be dipped as a mark of honor". IAW section 301:

Conduct During Playing. — During a rendition of the national anthem —

(1) when the flag is displayed —
(A) all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart;
(B) men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold the headdress at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and
(C) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note.

(2) When the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed.

However, then people should note that section 8 (d) states, " The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red below, should be used for covering a speaker’s desk, draping in front of the platform, and for a decoration in general."

https://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30243.pdf

 

[McG]

I wouldn't be so quick to superimpose the Canadian ...

Nobody did any such thing.  Rather, someone associated a change with the American condition as being the same as stripping of weapons from Canadians.  The reality is that the US system could become uniformly much more restrictive and US citizens could still have quicker and easier access to firearms than exists in Canada.

 

[Kat Stevens]

You have those weapons legally under Canadian law.  This thread is about the US.  Nobody is talking about doing anything to your guns.  But, your post does seem to suggest it is still possible for a law abiding citizen to own the firearms that they want to own even with greater control/regulation than exists in the US.

Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

 

[kkwd]

Should I be afraid when I see someone on the street with a gun on their hip? Should I be scared when I know that many more people concealed carry? There are 14 and half million permits in the United States with many more carrying in states with no permit required. Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses? I have heard many times "If having guns tightly controlled saves just one life them I am all for it". I have a different take, "If having guns readily saves just one life then I am all for it".

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/07/new-study-14-5-million-concealed-handgun-permits-last-year-saw-largest-increase-ever-number-permits/

 

[McG]

Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

Okay.  You quoted the whole post which made many comments about US statistics and philosophies on gun culture.  Your intent to focus on only one sentence was ambiguous to me. 

Regardless, you own those firearms you want in this more regulated country.  That would seem to suggest there is room for the US (which this thread is about) to sustain availability even with increased regulation.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

Clearly people can own semi-automatic rifles without going on a killing spree, so "swing and a miss" back at ya. They are unnecessary for self defence or hunting, so I don't know what your point proved. I have shown statistically that guns and access to them increase suicide. Shown that gun deaths and murder in the US are exceedingly higher than anywhere else in the world due to its lax gun laws. Shown that contrary to Fox news reports, 70-80% of gun murders aren't gang related. Even shown that more people were killed in gun related deaths due to "Love triangles" than were killed in France, South Korea, and Japan combined.

You have no reason to own a semi-automatic rifle outside of sport shooting. Asking for some level of control over these weapons, in the face of constant mass shootings and gun violence shouldn't be a radical departure. The POS who committed the Las Vegas shooting had 23 semi-automatic rifles in the hotel room and another 19 in his house. Do you think that this is something that should be considered normal?

Further, as MCG noted, you have those weapons in Canada where there is gun control and only 173 gun related deaths. You basically proved the point that you can have gun control and still have guns.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Should I be afraid when I see someone on the street with a gun on their hip? Should I be scared when I know that many more people concealed carry? There are 14 and half million permits in the United States with many more carrying in states with no permit required. Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses? I have heard many times "If having guns tightly controlled saves just one life them I am all for it". I have a different take, "If having guns readily saves just one life then I am all for it".

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/
https://crimeresearch.org/2016/07/new-study-14-5-million-concealed-handgun-permits-last-year-saw-largest-increase-ever-number-permits/

Depends if you agree with the statistical analysis of people firing weapons, which is the weakness of this whole argument. If you read "On Killing" and "On Combat" than you will see that historically the vast majority of soldiers (90% in some studies) never fired their weapons or fired them ineffectively due to the psychological instinct to not kill other people. the 10% that would fire fell neatly into the rate of sociopaths or fired due to being in a team (MGs) or being in machines that took away the human face of killing (airplanes). By adapting training regimens the US army was able to raise this to 90% in Vietnam and modern conflict.

Why is this valid to the argument that if everyone has guns than we're safer? Well, if the average US citizen is untrained than they would still fall into the 90% of people who wouldn't kill. The people who commit mass murders, such as the LV shooter, clearly fall into the 10% of sociopaths. How many of these mass shootings have there been in states with lax gun regulations (Nevada for example) and how many times have we seen anyone actually fire back (which is the whole thesis of the argument)? The average US citizen will not statistically fire a weapon in anger unless they are trained to do so over the course of years, so them having a weapon only serves to create more tension, escalate situations, and increase chaos for no actual benefit. Moreover, research has shown that right-to-carry laws don't make anyone safer. In fact, statistically the opposite is true. Yes, the Atlantic is a left-ist publication, but the studies are echoed in other places and the research is academic based.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/06/right-to-carry-gun-violence/531297/

As for the "Can someone point me to news stories with examples of law abiding gun carriers committing crimes in masses" this is a misnomer. No one is a criminal until they commit a crime (it's in the name) same as no one is a mass shooter until they commit a mass shooting so the statement is meaningless. Up until the LV shooter started spraying bullets he wasn't a criminal and hadn't been convicted of a crime. So, by your parameters, then he was actually an example of a non-criminal law abiding gun carrier committing a crime in masses.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Nice one, but swing and a miss. My post was in reply to Bird Gunners statement that semi autos are unnecessary, and by extension, could/should not be allowed because they are an immediate threat somehow. My point was that I’ve owned semis for quite some time and am yet to kill anyone with one. Canada or US is irrelevant to my reply.

While I don't think anyone in the Liberal government is happy this happened I can imagine for some  it's the same sort of relief that came from Trump getting elected and their using it as an excuse not to make good on the peacekeepers to Africa promise. Only in this case it gives them momentum to push their gun control ideas.

I think the speed they're capitalizing on it in terms of pushing their gun control promises (before everyone was even out of the ICU) speaks volumes.  What happened in the US will definitely affect Canadian gun owners.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

I think the speed they're capitalizing on it in terms of pushing their gun control promises (before everyone was even out of the ICU) speaks volumes.  What happened in the US will definitely affect Canadian gun owners.

But you can say the same thing for the NRA and gun supporters who came out with the "its not guns fault" almost immediately after the shooting. Neither side has a monopoly on using tragedy to push a narrative.

 

[PuckChaser]

But you can say the same thing for the NRA and gun supporters who came out with the "its not guns fault" almost immediately after the shooting. Neither side has a monopoly on using tragedy to push a narrative.

One side blames an inanimate object for a murder, the other blames the individual. Which one is out of touch?

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

One side blames an inanimate object for a murder, the other blames the individual. Which one is out of touch?

The one who refuses to see that massive amounts of guns + individuals = mass shootings? As a meme I posted said earlier, if someone was able to kill 52 people and wound 500 with knives from 1200 feet I would absolutely call for knife control.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

One side blames an inanimate object for a murder, the other blames the individual. Which one is out of touch?

Great video on gun arguments...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0

 

[Kat Stevens]

Clearly people can own semi-automatic rifles without going on a killing spree, so "swing and a miss" back at ya. They are unnecessary for self defence or hunting, so I don't know what your point proved.

*SNIP FOR CLEAR UNDERSTANDING*

You have no reason to own a semi-automatic rifle outside of sport shooting. Asking for some level of control over these weapons, in the face of constant mass shootings and gun violence shouldn't be a radical departure. The POS who committed the Las Vegas shooting had 23 semi-automatic rifles in the hotel room and another 19 in his house. Do you think that this is something that should be considered normal?

Further, as MCG noted, you have those weapons in Canada where there is gun control and only 173 gun related deaths. You basically proved the point that you can have gun control and still have guns.

Yes, I own semi autos, quite a few in your opinion would be my guess. Yes again, they are primarily used for putting many big holes in pieces of paper. I also live in a rural county in the godless wilds of Alberta, with the nearest cop (singular) 24 km away. If you were me, and you lived in a country where you didn’t have to open three different locks in two different rooms and take time to load a shotgun in order to defend your loved ones and yourself, which would you choose, my dad’s old side by side double barrel, the Remington pump, or the semi auto? Bearing in mind that most home invaders out here travel in pairs, of course, and yes many of them are armed with something. I know my choice, so yes, semi autos are damn skippy the go to for defence.

I have every reason to own them, I like them and I don’t kill people with them, ergo, clearly it’s a software issue, not a hardware one. Agreed the shooter in question was a turd of the rankest aroma, of that we agree completely.

As McG alluded to, yes I own those guns in a regulated country, but do you think it’s those rules that stop all of us gun owners from going full metal shitbird, or do you think it’s, again, a software issue, not a hardware one? As noted, this is a US issue, and therefore I have dispensed all the shits I’m willing to expend on it. Enjoy.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Yes, I own semi autos, quite a few in your opinion would be my guess. Yes again, they are primarily used for putting many big holes in pieces of paper. I also live in a rural county in the godless wilds of Alberta, with the nearest cop (singular) 24 km away. If you were me, and you lived in a country where you didn’t have to open three different locks in two different rooms and take time to load a shotgun in order to defend your loved ones and yourself, which would you choose, my dad’s old side by side double barrel, the Remington pump, or the semi auto? Bearing in mind that most home invaders out here travel in pairs, of course, and yes many of them are armed with something. I know my choice, so yes, semi autos are damn skippy the go to for defence.

I have every reason to own them, I like them and I don’t kill people with them, ergo, clearly it’s a software issue, not a hardware one. Agreed the shooter in question was a turd of the rankest aroma, of that we agree completely.

As McG alluded to, yes I own those guns in a regulated country, but do you think it’s those rules that stop all of us gun owners from going full metal shitbird, or do you think it’s, again, a software issue, not a hardware one? As noted, this is a US issue, and therefore I have dispensed all the shits I’m willing to expend on it. Enjoy.

The self defence argument is silly. Who are you defending yourself from, ze Germans?  The fact they're locked up means that they're not of much value in self defence, unless the threat gives you time to get them. The threat then being someone coming to kill you? Also living in a rural area, the main crimes are minor theft, property damage, and drugs.

The ONLY reason you want guns us because you like them. Registering guns and saying some controls are necessary isn't saying one can't have them- it's an admission that they can kill large numbers of people quickly in the wrong hands. Like how we don't allow 5 year olds to drive cars. The self-defence and lowering crime arguments are disproven excuses to justify a hobby.

 

[PuckChaser]

The one who refuses to see that massive amounts of guns + individuals = mass shootings? As a meme I posted said earlier, if someone was able to kill 52 people and wound 500 with knives from 1200 feet I would absolutely call for knife control.

I get it, you do not believe in holding the person to account for their own actions. You also don't seem to believe that murderers won't use another means to do what they want if we just ban all the guns. Ted Bundy used blunt force trauma and strangulation. Timothy McVeigh made a giant truck bomb. Al-Qaeda used airplanes. In the UK they're using trucks and machetes. If you take away one method, it does not deter those who want to commit murder.

 

[Kat Stevens]

The self defence argument is silly. Who are you defending yourself from, ze Germans?  The fact they're locked up means that they're not of much value in self defence, unless the threat gives you time to get them. The threat then being someone coming to kill you? Also living in a rural area, the main crimes are minor theft, property damage, and drugs.

The ONLY reason you want guns us because you like them. Registering guns and saying some controls are necessary isn't saying one can't have them- it's an admission that they can kill large numbers of people quickly in the wrong hands. Like how we don't allow 5 year olds to drive cars. The self-defence and lowering crime arguments are disproven excuses to justify a hobby.

If you would be so kind as to point out to me where I have ever, once, EVER said that gun ownership should be a free for all, I’d appreciate it.  There are rules, and I live by them because I’m not batshit crazy most of the time. As an aside, your condescension and snarky tone are neither warranted nor appreciated. To that end, go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut (US spelling, seeing as how it’s a US topic). Now I’m truly done.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I have shown statistically that guns and access to them increase suicide.

Bollocks.  If you're so inclined, seriously so, you'll use whatever method is at hand.  It won't increase your desire to go that route "just because".

 

[mariomike]

Ted Bundy used blunt force trauma and strangulation. Timothy McVeigh made a giant truck bomb. Al-Qaeda used airplanes. In the UK they're using trucks and machetes.

Here is another you can add, Puckchaser. You are probably too young to remember, but an arson job at Happyland in the Bronx  killed 87 people. A higher body count than Vegas. But, on the other hand "only" 6 non-fatal injuries, compared to 489 non-fatals in Vegas.

‘Active Shooter: America Under Fire’ on Showtime teaser:
http://www.sho.com/active-shooter

This is another one I remember. I'm sure the LV shooter did too.
http://www.towerdocumentary.com/

Next week back to keeping up with the Kardashians. 

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Bollocks.  If you're so inclined, seriously so, you'll use whatever method is at hand.  It won't increase your desire to go that route "just because".

Not bullocks.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/guns-and-suicide/

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

If you would be so kind as to point out to me where I have ever, once, EVER said that gun ownership should be a free for all, I’d appreciate it.  There are rules, and I live by them because I’m not batshit crazy most of the time. As an aside, your condescension and snarky tone are neither warranted nor appreciated. To that end, go take a flying frig at a rolling donut (US spelling, seeing as how it’s a US topic). Now I’m truly done.

Condescension and tone? You started "swing and a miss", correct?