• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

Raf said:
What about giving the green light to kills Osama? Does that count too?
Click to expand...

Big time. In fact, were I him, I would start all my speeches with that. "My fellow Americans, on this holiday season, I take time out to pardon two turkeys. But you know who didn't get a pardon. Osama bin Laden. I sent Navy Seals to pop a cap in his ass. . . "

"Climate change is a pressing issue for our country and our planet. You know who isn't feeling any warmer? Osama bin Laden. I sent the Navy Seals to pop a cap in his ass and he is literally sleeping with the fishes. Thank you." *drops the mic and walks off, waving hands up high like he doesn't care* Whoop whoop!


Got one more ;)

"Here is the Rose Garden, on a nice day like this, I am reminded. Of the day I got Osama. See these beautiful rose bushes. These are just some of the bushes that didn't get Osama bin Laden. That is what is called 'Mission accomplished, bey-otches!"
 
AG74683 said:
Did you know of Chick-fil-a before the move down here? It really is one of the best "fast food" places out there. I don't have any nearby, closest one is nearly a half hour away. When I go up that way I end up spending like 15-20 bucks on it!
Click to expand...

michaelskis said:
Yes. I was traveling to a conference in Ohio some years ago and my friends and I stopped at one. It was awesome and I was blown away by the customer service. When they announced that one was going into Grand Rapids, I was excited, but the timeline got delayed. I got a lot of grief from my local business owner friends to which I responded that I will always support locally owned businesses, but people should really take a page from the CFA customer service manual. It has been exceptional EVERY time I have gone and national ranking and statistics have backed up the idea that they are truly the best fast food joint.

I now hear that there will be one in Lansing too.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't set foot in a Chik-fil-a. We learned during the 2012 presidential election they were donating millions to anti-LGBT organizations. That kinda thing might play well in the Bible belt but less so in these parts.
 
Maister said:
I wouldn't set foot in a Chik-fil-a. We learned during the 2012 presidential election they were donating millions to anti-LGBT organizations. That kinda thing might play well in the Bible belt but less so in these parts.
Click to expand...

I think they have lost that battle, thank God. Just as Hobby Lobby does, they need to reflect on their outward appearance, and decide if they want to be a church or a business. I hope they stick with business, because they do have good fries, and they give you the big ketchups which I appreciate. And their customer service is top notch. I would rather eat there then McDonald's or Burger King. With that said, I don't agree with their decisions or positions.
 
Maister said:
I wouldn't set foot in a Chik-fil-a. We learned during the 2012 presidential election they were donating millions to anti-LGBT organizations. That kinda thing might play well in the Bible belt but less so in these parts.
Click to expand...

"They" are the owners of the corporation. From what I understand, it is a franchise and most of the locations are locally owned. One of the local locations has someone who is openly gay working there as an assistant manager. He lives down the hall from us and he says that they have never said anything negative towards him and while he does not agree with the corporation owners views, it is a terrific work environment and he said that the customer service training is going to be awesome after he finishes his master's degree in public relations.
 
AG74683 said:
Meh, I don't care too much about that. It's food, not a political statement.
Click to expand...

And that's the problem. For years a lot of folks happily gave their patronage probably not realizing that the company was pouring money into political organizations that promote an agenda that runs counter to most of our beliefs. YOU don't intend the act of buying a chicken sandwich as any sort of political statement, but that company certainly does, and a portion of the proceeds from every chicken sandwich you ever bought there ended up supporting some pretty unsavory political groups. Depressing I know, but I'm sure you didn't intend it.

I would be depressed/destroyed if I ever found out that buying Bell's Beer was somehow contributing to Donald Trump's campaign fund, but at the same time I would sadly have to stop buying their beer if I found out that was the case. Fortunately it's not:D
 
Maister said:
I wouldn't set foot in a Chik-fil-a. We learned during the 2012 presidential election they were donating millions to anti-LGBT organizations.
Click to expand...

Not CFA - the two foundations associated with CFA and the Cathy family (and, yes, I realize that's just a slight distinction) - there's not a single documented instance of the restaurants discriminating themselves against the LGBT community (that I know of). And, by 2014, donations from the foundations to organizations that some consider to be anti-gay were down to a single $25k grant to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. But, folks on both sides of the aisle still view either eating there or not eating there as political statements.

Maister said:
That kinda thing might play well in the Bible belt but less so in these parts.
Click to expand...

:r:

Eh, the best scenes from the height of the protests in Atlanta were the restaurant employees distributing free food and drinks to the protesters in the restaurant parking lots.
 
Bubba said:
Not CFA - the two foundations associated with CFA and the Cathy family (and, yes, I realize that's just a slight distinction) - there's not a single documented instance of the restaurants discriminating themselves against the LGBT community (that I know of). And, by 2014, donations from the foundations to organizations that some consider to be anti-gay were down to a single $25k grant to the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. But, folks on both sides of the aisle still view either eating there or not eating there as political statements.
Click to expand...
Even so, I think it serves as an important lesson. CFA may have (mostly) retreated from business of politics, but years later they're still feeling the repercussions of Mr. Cathy's actions. With luck, they'll continue to experience that unfortunate association for a few years to follow and serve as a cautionary tale for any other CEO's out there that might choose to go that rout.
 
If we all made our choices of where we eat/shop whatever based upon the politics of the corporation an awful lot of people would be sitting at home in an empty house. You did deep enough you'll find a connection somewhere that a corporation has to some issue you disagree with.

I see the one here at lunchtime and the parking lot is total gridlock and the line is out the door. That's almost every single day. They have a good product(s), their customer service is outstanding and people appreciate that. They aren't hurting at all for the owner's view on gay marriage. From what I understand, they don't discriminate against gays or others, they just don't agree with gay marriage. That's their right. You are still allowed to think whatever you want in this country. Until they start refusing to hire or serve a certain segment of the population they can keep on making me those delicious chicken sandwiches.
 
Maister said:
And that's the problem. For years a lot of folks happily gave their patronage probably not realizing that the company was pouring money into political organizations that promote an agenda that runs counter to most of our beliefs. YOU don't intend the act of buying a chicken sandwich as any sort of political statement, but that company certainly does, and a portion of the proceeds from every chicken sandwich you ever bought there ended up supporting some pretty unsavory political groups. Depressing I know, but I'm sure you didn't intend it.

I would be depressed/destroyed if I ever found out that buying Bell's Beer was somehow contributing to Donald Trump's campaign fund, but at the same time I would sadly have to stop buying their beer if I found out that was the case. Fortunately it's not:D
Click to expand...

If this is the case, I fully expect you to never shop at a big box again. They destroy small town America.

But let's look at this a bit more for a moment. Is the corporation, by default, an extension of the will of the owners of the corporation?
 
Last night, an extremist conservative friend and I got into a discussion about equality and race relations in the US.

He is of the belief that the "Black Lives Matter" motto is just as racist as "White Lives Matter". I am on the fence about it, he went into explaining how "white power" groups are classified has hate groups by many, but "black power" are seen as promoting equality and how there is a massive double standard. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with the black lives matter motto.

What are your thoughts?
 
Really...??

HUH? You cannot be serious???

I suppose if you're willing to discount or outright ignore two plus centuries of bad treatment, slavery, suppression, racist banking, illegal experimentation, white privilege and a host of other nasty things.....you could put blacks and whites on an even playing field and pretend that non-whites are just a bunch of whiners.

I'm not.

I just threw up a bit in my mouth for stooping to the level of responding to those posts.....:wall::facepalm::trollface:
 
The One said:
HUH? You cannot be serious???

I suppose if you're willing to discount or outright ignore two plus centuries of bad treatment, slavery, suppression, racist banking, illegal experimentation, white privilege and a host of other nasty things.....you could put blacks and whites on an even playing field and pretend that non-whites are just a bunch of whiners.

I'm not.

I just threw up a bit in my mouth for stooping to the level of responding to those posts.....:wall::facepalm::trollface:
Click to expand...

Yea... so it looks like we agree on this topic? (I am trying to understand the tone of your post as I am not positive if you are trying to argue with me, or my extremest friend... who is voting for Trump and has me telling him that he is an idiot every time he tries to convince me to follow suit.)
 
Nope....

michaelskis said:
Yea... so it looks like we agree on this topic? (I am trying to understand the tone of your post as I am not positive if you are trying to argue with me, or my extremest friend... who is voting for Trump and has me telling him that he is an idiot every time he tries to convince me to follow suit.)
Click to expand...

Just pointing out what SHOULD be the obvious to your extremest friend :D
 
Yet another mass shooting. This country has to get over its absurd fetish with guns.

I'm not hopeful.
 
Gedunker said:
Yet another mass shooting. This country has to get over its absurd fetish with guns.

I'm not hopeful.
Click to expand...

I looked at a few different sources, and something seems strange about this one. CNN noted that the 3 assailants had AK-47's and body armor. AK is not as popular as the AR platform so that is surprising. Additionally, body armor and a getaway vehicle? Finally, the location and timing, holiday party at a mental health facility, seems a bit off to me. I also would be interested to know if they were the semiautomatic or automatic AK-47. The semiautomatic is very inexpensive to build or acquire. The automatic you need special permits from the ATF to own.

The others have been mostly a single individual who had an emotional or political agenda and showed signs of not being fully stable. 3 individuals working together is a bit bigger of a deal. This was not just a mass shooting, I would put this as a form of terrorism, domestic likely, but everything about this seems quite a bit more advanced than most of the other shootings.

The situation is tragic and I hope they catch the guys who did this, but I think this is something bigger than most of the other shootings that have occurred.
 
:wall::facepalm:
Richmond Jake said:
Fourteen people are confirmed dead at this time and you're wondering what type of rifles they used? :facepalm: :wall:
Click to expand...

He dunker went political by talking about gun fetish, Damn right I want to know what weapons were used. Some are easier to get than others. It is a bigger deal than just 14 people dead if it was a full automatic weapon. Mainly because those are illegal for me and many people to own.

You see 14 dead, I see a situation far worse than just 14 dead. But hey, if you want to just marginalize this as general gun violence, you go ahead and do that. :wall: :facepalm: :r:
 
Living Wage

Some on the right want to abandon the term "living wage." I say hell no. It has been around since at least 1933 and we appear to be repeating history.

“It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By "business" I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.” Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1933
Citation: Franklin D. Roosevelt: "Statement on N.I.R.A.," June 16, 1933. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=14673
 
Suburb Repairman said:
Looks like signs point to this incident being an argument at some kind of workplace event.
Click to expand...

That would be some crazy fast prep time. He leaves the party and returns with his wife and possibly one other individual in full tactical gear, go-pro cameras, and several explosives including pipe bombs and IED's? I almost wonder if he was preparing for something else, but a work argument resulted in a change of plans.

The FBI is still exploring the possibility that this may be a terrorist attack. I am not saying it is, or is not. But there are way too many things that don't add up to classify in the same way as other mass shootings.
 
The problem I'm seeing is that 14 people are dead. It doesn't matter what you classify it as, 14 people are dead because someone had access to firearms that shouldn't have. The politicians need to stop praying for people and start doing something to slow this down. We've already gone over this debate a few times in this thread so I'm not going into what guns should and shouldn't be allowed or who should or shouldn't get access to guns or registration or any of the potential solutions. Just start taking that first step toward a solution and stop creating BS excuses that justify more guns which we know will be coming soon. It's part of the mass shooting pattern and it's sad that we even have a pattern of behavior for these things. I hate to say it, but damn near every Republican lost my vote because they won't step up to the plate and protect families against gun violence.
 
In my opinion, any planned mass casualty, regardless of purpose/intent, is an act of terrorism.

I suspect this might be planned workplace violence terrorism. I think he was planning to do something to target his coworkers, and used this as his opportunity.

So much doesn't add up though... other employees have indicated there was not an indication of trouble, one even saying that he appeared to be living the American dream. The two of them had a six month old child. The only slight oddity is that he went to Saudi Arabia to get his wife.

If it does turn out to be a case of Islamic radicalization, then we're looking at another example of home-grown terrorism.
 
dvdneal said:
The problem I'm seeing is that 14 people are dead. It doesn't matter what you classify it as, 14 people are dead because someone had access to firearms that shouldn't have. The politicians need to stop praying for people and start doing something to slow this down. We've already gone over this debate a few times in this thread so I'm not going into what guns should and shouldn't be allowed or who should or shouldn't get access to guns or registration or any of the potential solutions. Just start taking that first step toward a solution and stop creating BS excuses that justify more guns which we know will be coming soon. It's part of the mass shooting pattern and it's sad that we even have a pattern of behavior for these things. I hate to say it, but damn near every Republican lost my vote because they won't step up to the plate and protect families against gun violence.
Click to expand...

DVD, let me ask you what differently should have been done to prevent him from having guns? California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. You can't just go into a Wal-Mart and walk out with a semiautomatic pistol. (LINK to Anti-gun site) I don't know all the details, but he legally bought the guns in CA, which required a full comprehesive background check. CNN states that there was no prior criminal history or indication that this person should not have had a firearm. There is also the issue of explosives too. The facility was also a gun free zone, but that did not seem to prevent 14 innocent people from losing their lives.

So yes, tell me in all your gun violence wisdom, what realistic approach do you have that would have saved these 14 people? Because in all seriousness, other than having an armed police officer inside of all gun free zones, I don't have one.

Suburb Repairman said:
In my opinion, any planned mass casualty, regardless of purpose/intent, is an act of terrorism.

I suspect this might be planned workplace violence terrorism. I think he was planning to do something to target his coworkers, and used this as his opportunity.

So much doesn't add up though... other employees have indicated there was not an indication of trouble, one even saying that he appeared to be living the American dream. The two of them had a six month old child. The only slight oddity is that he went to Saudi Arabia to get his wife.

If it does turn out to be a case of Islamic radicalization, then we're looking at another example of home-grown terrorism.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything that you just said and I fear this is just the tip of a far larger issue.
 
michaelskis said:
:wall::facepalm:

He dunker went political by talking about gun fetish, Damn right I want to know what weapons were used. Some are easier to get than others. It is a bigger deal than just 14 people dead if it was a full automatic weapon. Mainly because those are illegal for me and many people to own.

You see 14 dead, I see a situation far worse than just 14 dead. But hey, if you want to just marginalize this as general gun violence, you go ahead and do that. :wall: :facepalm: :r:
Click to expand...

I did not call it a fetish. I called it an absurd fetish. And that is what it remains until we have the courage to change it. I'm still not hopeful.
 
Gedunker said:
I did not call it a fetish. I called it an absurd fetish. And that is what it remains until we have the courage to change it. I'm still not hopeful.
Click to expand...

I don't own a gun and I probably never will...but I do enjoy shooting when I get the chance. Several of my coworkers and extended family members own guns and hunt, and I do also enjoy eating the fruits of their labors. Is that an absurd fetish (or any sort of fetish)?
 
michaelskis said:
DVD, let me ask you what differently should have been done to prevent him from having guns? California has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. You can't just go into a Wal-Mart and walk out with a semiautomatic pistol. (LINK to Anti-gun site) I don't know all the details, but he legally bought the guns in CA, which required a full comprehesive background check. CNN states that there was no prior criminal history or indication that this person should not have had a firearm. There is also the issue of explosives too. The facility was also a gun free zone, but that did not seem to prevent 14 innocent people from losing their lives.

So yes, tell me in all your gun violence wisdom, what realistic approach do you have that would have saved these 14 people? Because in all seriousness, other than having an armed police officer inside of all gun free zones, I don't have one.



I agree with everything that you just said and I fear this is just the tip of a far larger issue.
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know the answer. I can give the standard extreme of saying no guns which would solve the problem, but I think we can come up with something better. Plus extreme answers are never the best answer to me, but with the number of shootings I see I'm getting closer to saying just get rid of the guns. My problem is more with the inactivity of our politicians. There is an obvious problem in our country and there are a lot of people demanding a solution so do your job and start figuring out a solution. I can only do my part and discourage crazy NC planners not to buy more guns. :D We all know if planners weren't a bunch of socialists we'd all have more guns and there would be a lot more workplace shootings for the crap we deal with (plus a lot fewer NIMBYs).
 
Bubba said:
I don't own a gun and I probably never will...but I do enjoy shooting when I get the chance. Several of my coworkers and extended family members own guns and hunt, and I do also enjoy eating the fruits of their labors. Is that an absurd fetish (or any sort of fetish)?
Click to expand...

I say absolutely not, but there are many others who would say yes.

dvdneal said:
I honestly don't know the answer. I can give the standard extreme of saying no guns which would solve the problem, but I think we can come up with something better. Plus extreme answers are never the best answer to me, but with the number of shootings I see I'm getting closer to saying just get rid of the guns. My problem is more with the inactivity of our politicians. There is an obvious problem in our country and there are a lot of people demanding a solution so do your job and start figuring out a solution. I can only do my part and discourage crazy NC planners not to buy more guns. :D We all know if planners weren't a bunch of socialists we'd all have more guns and there would be a lot more workplace shootings for the crap we deal with (plus a lot fewer NIMBYs).
Click to expand...

Hey hey hey... I have not purchased a gun since I have moved. Heck I have not even applied for my concealed carry licence since I moved. More so, I won't be buying anything until after we are in a new house. But then I do have my eye on a few options.

I am complete agreement that something needs to be done. But here you have CA, with some of the strictest gun laws in the nation (NY is another one), and with the exception of 2 times, every mass shooting in the US since 1950 has occurred in a gun free zone. Same thing last week at Planned Parenthood. The door stickers don't work. The guy yesterday was able to get through the background checks if he bought them legally.

I do think that we still need background checks. There is no question about that. But I think it needs to be sold to the public in a far better way to explain to people that it will not hold up their ability to purchase a weapon if they have a clear background check and it can be done electronically at the gun store. It's like being carded to buy alcohol at that point. However that would not have stopped the situation from yesterday. We have seen repeatedly with terrorist activities (which this sounds like it might be at some level and even Obama is coming around to agree) people live a very low key simple lifestyle without any criminal activity until it's time to do something horrible.

I also have to ask myself, what if someone in the party had a weapon? Could they have saved a couple of people? We will never know the answer to that. I think that if someone goes through an advanced level of training and advanced background checks with annual shooting certification, they should have the ability to conceal carry anywhere. Before I moved here, there was a set of meetings that I carried at over the past 3 years. There is an anti-gun person who was also on that commission with me. She did not know I carried until I left, which is the way it should be unless a situation warrants a person to draw their gun.

*She did make the comment that while she trusts me, she would be worried that someone else might get my gun. I responded if she didn't know I had a gun on me, how would anyone else.
 
And I thought I was doing some good lowering the gun economy by talking you out of that new Glock.

I think things like the gun free zone are a weak attempt, but at least someone tried to do something. Not that they'll be very effective. Putting a no gun sign on the door isn't going to stop someone who has every intent to take his gun in there and shoot up the place. They don't care about gun free or not, they just want to shoot someone. I just want to see Congress take some action beyond praying. Expand background checks, make people register, treat it like a DMV and fewer people will want to go through the crap to be licensed to carry. Seriously local congressman, just do something other than pray for people so you don't offend the wrong person.
 
dvdneal said:
And I thought I was doing some good lowering the gun economy by talking you out of that new Glock.

I think things like the gun free zone are a weak attempt, but at least someone tried to do something. Not that they'll be very effective. Putting a no gun sign on the door isn't going to stop someone who has every intent to take his gun in there and shoot up the place. They don't care about gun free or not, they just want to shoot someone. I just want to see Congress take some action beyond praying. Expand background checks, make people register, treat it like a DMV and fewer people will want to go through the crap to be licensed to carry. Seriously local congressman, just do something other than pray for people so you don't offend the wrong person.
Click to expand...


Tell you what, I will not buy that Glock. (I personally don't like the feel of glocks)

As for your suggestions, I think that they are valid. Depending on the process, I might even support it. In parts of Michigan, getting a driver's licence is simpler and quicker than getting a CPL.
 
michaelskis said:
Tell you what, I will not buy that Glock. (I personally don't like the feel of glocks)

As for your suggestions, I think that they are valid. Depending on the process, I might even support it. In parts of Michigan, getting a driver's licence is simpler and quicker than getting a CPL.
Click to expand...

I don't know anyone that actually likes glocks.
 
Hink said:
http://www.vox.com/2015/10/15/9540747/video-second-amendment-musket

Click to expand...

:facepalm::no::wall:

Where was the bayonet, his side arm flintlock pistol and his sword? (Weapons of that era) And if you want to get all extreme, the musket was an advanced weapon for that era. Today, a firearm isn't that big of a deal compared to many of the tools used by the military. Today we also have drones, long range missiles, railguns, and far worse.

BTW, how the hell did he get past that no gun sticker? I mean come on, it's a gun free zone. How dare he ignore the law and walk right in with a weapon!
 
France banned guns and look what happened there recently.

The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good with a gun. Unless we want to turn the country into a police state with policemen or armed guards in every business and public place, the only solution is to allow people to arm and defend themselves EVERYWHERE. And I agree, there should be a process...you should have to be properly screened, trained, qualified, and ultimately licensed to get that concealed carry permit. But once you are (and continue to meet the qualifications through some sort of renewal process), you should be allowed to carry EVERYWHERE. Believe me, I am so sick and tired of innocent people being gunned down like this, whether it's by some drugged-up mental nutcase, violent criminals, or scumbag foreign or domestic terrorists, most often in "gun-free zones". Unfortunately, you can't control everyone's behavior and you can't predict when someone will do something like this. People hellbent on violence and killing people have proven themselves to be very resourceful, from building their own guns, acquiring them illegally, building explosive devices using common household items, resorting to mass stabbings, and everything under the sun. The only solution I see is to allow people to defend themselves everywhere they go, so that should an active killing commence, they can use force to kill the active killer more swiftly to hopefully reduce the carnage and the body count. Or put armed guards and policemen everywhere, which isn't very practical.
 
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.

Ain't America just the sh'+s. :-{
 
otterpop said:
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.
Mass Murder. Talk. No Action.

Ain't America just the sh'+s. :-{
Click to expand...

[sarcasm on] The politicians Tweeted their "thoughts and prayers to the victims." What more can we ask for? [/sarcasm off]
 
Local ABC station says that Federal Investigators are saying that one of the shooters has been in contact with Islamic Terrorists.

Not random gun violence.

I am going to say this again. There should be a method, an advanced program to allow citizens to carry everywhere. Full comprehensive background checks, shooting tests, annual review, and minimum range time. But it would permit someone to carry in a hospital, stadium, school, planned parenthood clinic, or other location and have the capability and opportunity to lessen or stop a mass killing. It would need to be concealed but there will need to be a protection to permit them to carry without fear of being fired or charged.

There will be anti-gun crazies who will not offer any real solutions. Gun free zones don't work, background checks help, but are not enough, there is zero chance of taking guns away from all civilians. People are able to get guns illegally, and now there is a new form of terrorist that hides in plain sight. He or she will ignore our laws and target at the most sensitive locations. Wouldn't you rather have a teacher with 500 hours at the range last year and perfect marksman scores have the option of having a gun on him or her if someone barges into your child's classroom with an AR-15? Maybe if that person knew that the teacher was packing, they might might reconsider.

I rather have a fighting chance... Others rather be sheep hiding in the corner hoping that they are not next.



In a few months people are going to be whining about the militarization of our police department. Personally, I think it worked out damn well for the people of SB because they had more than enough ammo, pipe bombs, and weapons to carry out a bigger attack if they were not taken out first.

Finally, I pray for those involved. If that offends you, I pray for you too.
 
1. Getting a rescue dog from our local humane society is more difficult than buying a firearm. I fill out an application, they review it, come by the house to make sure its safe and good living conditions for the dog, then do an unannounced follow up within the next 6 months.

I stopped in a pawn shop yesterday and there were four people looking at pistols. I heard one individual say they were there because of what happened in Cali & Colo. The person behind the counter told me I could get my permit right then and have a new Christmas present.


2. Carly Fiorina actually said people on the terror watch list should still be able to buy guns.


3. Bubba makes a great point. Deer season is big here and I get to enjoy some of my hunter friends fortune.


Man do we have some priorities mixed up.

No response needed, these are just observations.
 
michaelskis said:
Finally, I pray for those involved. If that offends you, I pray for you too.
Click to expand...

The prayers are not the problem. I expect everyone to send prayers and love to the victims. At the same time I'm not expecting anyone on this board to take action beyond voting or talking to some politicians if they feel like it. I do expect my elected officials to take some action beyond what amounts to saying, "I'm sorry, that sucks for you to go through that, I'm not going to take a stronger stance to help you because that could jeopardize getting elected."

You really can't compare France with us. France has had about 3 horrific mass shootings involving actual terrorism. We have had 355, granted I think this may have been terror motivated, so do we knock it down to 354 and say it's okay? You're not going to eliminate all violence. Even in countries with no guns allowed people will find a way to get guns and commit horrific crimes. At least we can try to cut it down from 355.

It's also easy to claim an armed society would make this a safer world, but have you seen our society? We recently had a guy shoot himself in the leg in a theater because he put his gun in his pocket rather than a holster and obviously forgot the safety. The last thing we need when bullets are flying are more bullets fired from an inexperienced shooter. It's not just marksmanship, it's identifying targets. Having done a little of that training, it takes more than you think to keep a steady hand and head in a firefight. I'm not worried about some people I know are level headed gun owners, it's the people around here (my state, not cyburbia) that scare me. They would just whip out the gun and start shooting anything that moves.
 
dvdneal said:
The prayers are not the problem. I expect everyone to send prayers and love to the victims. At the same time I'm not expecting anyone on this board to take action beyond voting or talking to some politicians if they feel like it. I do expect my elected officials to take some action beyond what amounts to saying, "I'm sorry, that sucks for you to go through that, I'm not going to take a stronger stance to help you because that could jeopardize getting elected."

You really can't compare France with us. France has had about 3 horrific mass shootings involving actual terrorism. We have had 355, granted I think this may have been terror motivated, so do we knock it down to 354 and say it's okay? You're not going to eliminate all violence. Even in countries with no guns allowed people will find a way to get guns and commit horrific crimes. At least we can try to cut it down from 355.

It's also easy to claim an armed society would make this a safer world, but have you seen our society? We recently had a guy shoot himself in the leg in a theater because he put his gun in his pocket rather than a holster and obviously forgot the safety. The last thing we need when bullets are flying are more bullets fired from an inexperienced shooter. It's not just marksmanship, it's identifying targets. Having done a little of that training, it takes more than you think to keep a steady hand and head in a firefight. I'm not worried about some people I know are level headed gun owners, it's the people around here (my state, not cyburbia) that scare me. They would just whip out the gun and start shooting anything that moves.
Click to expand...

What state are you in again? I want to make sure I don't visit.

I agree 100% that not everyone should have a gun. At a minimum people should have training. When people ask me what kind of gun they should get, I always tell them they should get a lesson and then try out a few options after that. I think even less people should be permitted to carry a gun outside of their homes, and even less people should be able to carry a gun in sensitive area like arenas, hospitals, malls, and such. That is why I would support a progressive system requiring different levels of background checks and training depending on how often you will carry a gun.
 
michaelskis said:
I agree 100% that not everyone should have a gun. At a minimum people should have training. When people ask me what kind of gun they should get, I always tell them they should get a lesson and then try out a few options after that. I think even less people should be permitted to carry a gun outside of their homes, and even less people should be able to carry a gun in sensitive area like arenas, hospitals, malls, and such. That is why I would support a progressive system requiring different levels of background checks and training depending on how often you will carry a gun.
Click to expand...

A lot of the frustration is that most people expect that there will be pro-gun rights politicians from rural areas who don't want more restrictions. If those politicians were like you and tried to think of some common sense compromises people wouldn't be so upset with congress. Its that most politicians refuse to discuss any reasonable alternative to the status quo after so many mass shootings that is making people pull their hair out. If you were a member of congress, you would be labeled a RINO before losing your next primary for not being an extremist.
 
Seabishop said:
A lot of the frustration is that most people expect that there will be pro-gun rights politicians from rural areas who don't want more restrictions. If those politicians were like you and tried to think of some common sense compromises people wouldn't be so upset with congress. Its that most politicians refuse to discuss any reasonable alternative to the status quo after so many mass shootings that is making people pull their hair out. If you were a member of congress, you would be labeled a RINO before losing your next primary for not being an extremist.
Click to expand...

Common Sense Politician = Unicorn.
 
Seabishop said:
A lot of the frustration is that most people expect that there will be pro-gun rights politicians from rural areas who don't want more restrictions. If those politicians were like you and tried to think of some common sense compromises people wouldn't be so upset with congress. Its that most politicians refuse to discuss any reasonable alternative to the status quo after so many mass shootings that is making people pull their hair out. If you were a member of congress, you would be labeled a RINO before losing your next primary for not being an extremist.
Click to expand...

This is my state, people like Mskies would get shot for their leftest rants. The general belief here is that there's no problem carrying a gun around. Then again people here don't leave their small town and Topeka is considered a BIG city. I enjoy putting them in their place and reminding them the population of the Phoenix metro is basically double of the whole state. If you're out on the farm no ones cares if you have a gun. It's when you're in a crowd of any kind that it becomes a problem and these big city problems don't really hit the rural politicians who have no frame of reference to understand the issue.

I do like the idea of progressive registration of some kind, but how about we just start by lifting the research ban and maybe expand some background checks. Can we at least do that much? Baby steps people.
 
We get that crap a lot in Texas... that guns are an important part of our 'rural' culture yada yada yada...

Meanwhile, more than 80% of Texans live in urbanized areas.

Washington won't even take baby steps in ANY direction. They just sit in their fancy leather chairs with thumbs in their asses while special interest checks roll into their PACs.

Personally, I think progressive registration would be a good target for initial first steps in trying to respond to gun violence. It is so hard to be proactive though because it is clear we have an underlying cultural issue in this country that simply doesn't value human life as it should and lacks empathy.
 
Yup

Two words: Delusional and Fantasy

It is now generally accepted that we have about as many guns as people in this country. Yet the number of times a "good guy" returns fire could be counted on one hand (when compared to number of gun deaths). = Delusional impact of having more guns available.

The idea that you could carry 100% of the time, be willing to return fire 100% of the time and be ready for anything 100% of the time (even in your own home) = Fantasy
 
The One said:
Two words: Delusional and Fantasy

It is now generally accepted that we have about as many guns as people in this country. Yet the number of times a "good guy" returns fire could be counted on one hand (when compared to number of gun deaths). = Delusional impact of having more guns available.

The idea that you could carry 100% of the time, be willing to return fire 100% of the time and be ready for anything 100% of the time (even in your own home) = Fantasy
Click to expand...

Where are your stats for the first comment regarding the number of times a good guy returns fire? The second one is accurate though. Even SWAT teams are not 100% ready 100% of the time.

Here are some stats regarding gun myths.
Here are 12 examples of where it did matter.

The media does not cover the stories of crimes stopped, they cover crimes committed.

On a related note, CNN says that the shooter pledged allegiance to ISIS. I have been saying from the beginning that something wasn't quite right about it. Now a liberal news organization backs that claim.

Now ask yourself, if one person was armed, could they have saved at least one life?

More so if this can happen in San Bernardino CA... where there are some of the strictest gun laws in the country, who is to say it can't happen in other locations? Who is to say that it won't happen at a school, library, arena, or government building in your community?
 
Back
Top