Author Topic: US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP  (Read 6000655 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14280 on: February 22, 2018, 08:22:56 PM »
I just remembered that around the time I joined this forum, Cindi was considering becoming a hooker. Why am I letting her get me riled up at all?


 :lol


I just remembered that around the time I joined this forum, Cindi was considering becoming a hooker. Why am I letting her get me riled up at all?

Ah. Because circumstances can’t change.

Just what I expect from a Reset staffer.

I'm assuming you must have been banned there again

I don’t know if I’m unbanned. I haven’t been there.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14281 on: February 22, 2018, 08:25:05 PM »
Btw I know lots of cheeseburgers who say speech is violence. :lol
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14282 on: February 22, 2018, 08:27:12 PM »
Btw I know lots of cheeseburgers who say speech is violence. :lol

Oops, I said cheeseburger. This would get me post blocked on Facebook despite being....a cheeseburger.

How about black people who are post blocked for saying nicca?

The left is so, so open to other thoughts and ideas. So, so open.

:sabu
IYKYK

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14283 on: February 22, 2018, 08:27:24 PM »
Cindi switches sides and stances but never stops generalizing and building strawmen. How y’all so easy for her to rile up?

Cindi, aren’t you worried you’ll get up with fleas from lying down with us dogs?

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14284 on: February 22, 2018, 08:33:13 PM »
Looking forward to ancap or tankie Cindi, tbh.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14285 on: February 22, 2018, 08:35:55 PM »
Kitty-chan, what generalization? Is it not a fact that a large number of the left are anti-gun? The lefts problem with free speech is well documented. From communist Russia to “trigger warning”. Are you saying the left is generally pro-life as well? What are my generalizations?
IYKYK

Broseidon

  • Estado Homo
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14286 on: February 22, 2018, 08:37:11 PM »
ah yes that stalwart bastion of Leftism Facebook, Inc.
bent

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14287 on: February 22, 2018, 08:39:39 PM »
Girl, don’t take my post as “A New Challenger Appears” it’s more “Continue? [No]”

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14288 on: February 22, 2018, 08:39:57 PM »
To wit, I didn’t mention leftism. I did say the left, as a generic term for liberals and actual leftists. My bad. :(

Brb getting Nazi haircut because I’m apparently a Nazi now. :stop
IYKYK

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14289 on: February 22, 2018, 08:40:15 PM »
From communist Russia to “trigger warning”.

These Programmers Used Machine Learning To Write Subtitles For Made Up Regnery Books, Here Are The 17 Best

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14290 on: February 22, 2018, 08:43:35 PM »
Girl, don’t take my post as “A New Challenger Appears” it’s more “Continue? [No]”

I got it.
 
I completely understand. I should have labeled my posts with a Content Warning. :stop
IYKYK

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14291 on: February 22, 2018, 08:45:07 PM »
Brb getting Nazi haircut because I’m apparently a Nazi now.

ahahahaha, you really wanted someone to call you a nazi in this thread, didn't you?

and then nobody did so you were like "not gonna let that stop me"

Broseidon

  • Estado Homo
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14292 on: February 22, 2018, 08:45:40 PM »
Cindi what would be the criteria for the US government turning tyrannical? What would be the line in the sand where you would consider it justified to shoot and kill agents and/or members of said government with a firearm?
bent

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14293 on: February 22, 2018, 08:50:24 PM »
Brb getting Nazi haircut because I’m apparently a Nazi now.

ahahahaha, you really wanted someone to call you a nazi in this thread, didn't you?

and then nobody did so you were like "not gonna let that stop me"

Absolutely not. I am merely articulating how I’ve been called fascist, fascist  enabler, Nazi, and a combination of others by various people have trusted in the last year for merely stating that I don’t think violence against the alt right and neo Nazis is how we will win this. I had actual friends I trusted, whom I confided in and they in me, say they wanted nothing to do with me because I was concerned about their involvement of Antifa and the violent approach they were taking. I was accused of espousing “Christian hate.” I have been called all sorts of shit by every type of left person under the sun on and offline. After all, I’m a Nazi taco.  :popular
IYKYK

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14294 on: February 22, 2018, 08:51:14 PM »
Just a quick question, how far are we gonna stretch this routine? Like, if at some point Himu says water is dry, are we all gonna keep posting about how she's wrong and graphs and charts about covalent bonds and shit while she goes "Eh, I agree with parts of this, but nah, still dry"?

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14295 on: February 22, 2018, 08:53:09 PM »
As long as she's not doing anything unsafe in her real life, I'm just here for the jokes. Speaking of, what would be the funniest ideological hat for Cindi to try on next?

I want to say either Eisenhower Republican or DLC Democrat, cause they're so incompatible with the level of passion we've come to expect.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14296 on: February 22, 2018, 08:53:46 PM »
Cindi what would be the criteria for the US government turning tyrannical? What would be the line in the sand where you would consider it justified to shoot and kill agents and/or members of said government with a firearm?

This is entrapment, don't fall for it Cindi!

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14297 on: February 22, 2018, 08:53:48 PM »
Fuck it, team Cindi.

Nonviolence :rejoice

Empathy :rejoice

Examination of unmet needs instead of judgment :rejoice

Humanization of your enemy :rejoice



Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14298 on: February 22, 2018, 08:54:49 PM »
Cindi what would be the criteria for the US government turning tyrannical? What would be the line in the sand where you would consider it justified to shoot and kill agents and/or members of said government with a firearm?

If they try to come and take guns, a constitutional right is my number one. When the government waged war against its citizens would be number two.

Idk you’re the commie, I thought you lot felt Trump was a fascist tho?
IYKYK

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14299 on: February 22, 2018, 08:56:41 PM »
...nobody is even talking about taking your guns. Disarming 300mil guns is impossible. fuckouttahere
010

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14300 on: February 22, 2018, 08:57:47 PM »
Lmao @ himu adopting 'hippy' and 'commie' into go-to vocab. Have you been cramming All In The Family reruns or some shit?

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14301 on: February 22, 2018, 08:58:04 PM »
So hypothetically speaking, if the congress passed a bill to confiscate everyone's guns, you would open fire on federal agents?  :what

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14302 on: February 22, 2018, 08:59:21 PM »
Very close friend of mine had a guy he's known for like 20 years yell at him and call him a communist for defending (in a fairly mild way) kneeling NFL players. Dude was very riled up, my friend had to talk him down.

The best part is he's generally non-political. After it happened the first thing he said is "how the fuck did that just happen to me and not to you?"

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14303 on: February 22, 2018, 09:01:46 PM »
Fuck it, team Cindi.

Nonviolence :rejoice

Empathy :rejoice

Examination of unmet needs instead of judgment :rejoice

Humanization of your enemy :rejoice

My shift rightward comes from two things.

My defense for saying I wanted and buying a gun in light of increase hate crime. People judged me for doing so. I started to be skeptical of the left then but was still for the team.

When people started the punch a Nazi thing and I vehemently disagreed with it. I didn’t think it was a good idea to be violent to people who weren’t violent to us. People called me names on and offline. I really started to question my loyalty to the left then.

I’ve never voted republican in my life. The dominoes kept on falling. I still believe in single payer. I still believe in lgbt and racial minority rights. I still believe in legal weed and decriminalization of drugs. I still think we should put more into education and the working class. I didn’t leave the left, the left left me.
IYKYK

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14304 on: February 22, 2018, 09:03:40 PM »
...nobody is even talking about taking your guns. Disarming 300mil guns is impossible. fuckouttahere

If someone (especially someone I care about) is mulling a scenario where they get into a shoot-out with the feds, I'd much rather it be a daydream than something which might actually get them killed.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14305 on: February 22, 2018, 09:04:36 PM »
At first I was just disillusioned but no one seemed to care.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14306 on: February 22, 2018, 09:06:08 PM »
Also I resent being called a nutter who wants to go to war with the feds. I’ve never said that and the only ones who bring it up are you guys.

Phoenix you must be living in another dimension if you haven’t seen lots of people suggest bans.
IYKYK

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14307 on: February 22, 2018, 09:06:21 PM »
Yeah, I’m just not following the line from that experience to the aisle jump. Like, doesn’t it make more sense to engage the people whose views your views most closely resemble on their dismissive judgement bullshit?
« Last Edit: February 22, 2018, 09:11:21 PM by CatsCatsCats »

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14308 on: February 22, 2018, 09:12:46 PM »
Yeah, I’m just not following the line from that experience to the aisle jump. Like, doesn’t it make more sense to engage the people who views your views most closely resemble on their dismissive judgement bullshit?

Like I said. I befriended lots of conservatives after the election. Even though I didn’t agree with them I felt it best to talk to people. This changed my perspective and was outright ridiculed by many on the left. I just started to notice more and more that my left friends didn’t share my values of open dialogue and and my friends on the right did. Then there was the people on the left treating me like garbage. It was pretty organic but at the same time I can’t explain how it happened and I often say to myself,”I can’t beleife this is me” due to pure culture shock.

Reading stuff like Plato’s Republic helped. And reading things about capitalism vs socialism helped me rid myself of putting socialism on a pedestal.
IYKYK

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14309 on: February 22, 2018, 09:13:07 PM »
Fuck it, team Cindi.

Nonviolence :rejoice

Empathy :rejoice

Examination of unmet needs instead of judgment :rejoice

Humanization of your enemy :rejoice

My shift rightward comes from two things.

My defense for saying I wanted and buying a gun in light of increase hate crime. People judged me for doing so. I started to be skeptical of the left then but was still for the team.

When people started the punch a Nazi thing and I vehemently disagreed with it. I didn’t think it was a good idea to be violent to people who weren’t violent to us. People called me names on and offline. I really started to question my loyalty to the left then.

I’ve never voted republican in my life. The dominoes kept on falling. I still believe in single payer. I still believe in lgbt and racial minority rights. I still believe in legal weed and decriminalization of drugs. I still think we should put more into education and the working class. I didn’t leave the left, the left left me.

 :huh

I'm not a fan of punching a NAZI or ANTIFA's approach, but yeah, that seems a bit contradictory, no?
« Last Edit: February 22, 2018, 09:17:28 PM by Nola »

Broseidon

  • Estado Homo
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14310 on: February 22, 2018, 09:15:46 PM »
If they try to come and take guns, a constitutional right is my number one.

Would this mean only after the government had passed some legislation or before? For the former, would you only shoot and kill the actual individuals who came to your home to enforce some form of confiscation or would it be more wide-ranging? If the latter, would you use your firearm/s to resist any such legislation being passed?

For the sake of argument let's say the legislation in question has overwhelming public and political support.
bent

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14311 on: February 22, 2018, 09:16:40 PM »
So surrounding yourself with Republicans met more of your needs and thus you became one?

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14312 on: February 22, 2018, 09:20:54 PM »
Cindi’s fine by me as long as she’s still all about pigging out on dicks and chowing down on meat holes. Give em shit, Cindi!
serge

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14313 on: February 22, 2018, 09:22:17 PM »
Cindi’s fine by me as long as she’s still all about pigging out on dicks and chowing down on meat holes. Give em shit, Cindi!

Last I heard Cindi was celibate and angry that the sexual revolution had ruined the dating marketplace.

Broseidon

  • Estado Homo
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14314 on: February 22, 2018, 09:22:29 PM »
As long as she's not doing anything unsafe in her real life, I'm just here for the jokes. Speaking of, what would be the funniest ideological hat for Cindi to try on next?

I want to say either Eisenhower Republican or DLC Democrat, cause they're so incompatible with the level of passion we've come to expect.

A Sikh LaRouche acolyte
bent

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14315 on: February 22, 2018, 09:23:05 PM »
There's not a single major movement on the march to ban all guns or repeal the 2A. Feinstein wants to ban automatic weapons, which isn't going to happen. BUT it has happened before in the 90s and I don't seem to remember anyone's liberties being stolen, tyranny, etc. Gun crime went down during the ban too, btw, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence right. For the record I wouldn't support banning specific guns from being sold.

Side note: http://deadline.com/2017/06/ryan-coogler-michael-b-jordan-wrong-answer-math-cheating-scandal-new-regency-plan-b-ta-nehisi-coates-1202109192/
whewwwww

no child left behind :piss2
010

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14316 on: February 22, 2018, 09:23:27 PM »
So surrounding yourself with Republicans met more of your needs and thus you became one?

I wouldn’t say that. I became Christian again last year (if you can’t tell I’m really really bad at it) and that may have been an influence. A lot of my Jiu Jitsu friends are on the conservative side;etc.

I still persevered and they were fine with my left views. I was still left. I was for the team. And then in RCIA class we went over abortion. I was pro-life but also felt it was a woman’s right to choose, which is not different from Biden. That class made a really big influence on me and I couldn’t justify being pro-choice anymore. So yeah, abortion is probably the biggest influence.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14317 on: February 22, 2018, 09:24:52 PM »
Yeah, I’m just not following the line from that experience to the aisle jump. Like, doesn’t it make more sense to engage the people who views your views most closely resemble on their dismissive judgement bullshit?

Like I said. I befriended lots of conservatives after the election. Even though I didn’t agree with them I felt it best to talk to people. This changed my perspective and was outright ridiculed by many on the left. I just started to notice more and more that my left friends didn’t share my values of open dialogue and and my friends on the right did. Then there was the people on the left treating me like garbage. It was pretty organic but at the same time I can’t explain how it happened and I often say to myself,”I can’t beleife this is me” due to pure culture shock.

Reading stuff like Plato’s Republic helped. And reading things about capitalism vs socialism helped me rid myself of putting socialism on a pedestal.

But I thought you cut white people out of your life?

I do believe I said that I did this and I was wrong for it. Forgive me.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14318 on: February 22, 2018, 09:29:00 PM »
There's not a single major movement on the march to ban all guns or repeal the 2A. Feinstein wants to ban automatic weapons, which isn't going to happen. BUT it has happened before in the 90s and I don't seem to remember anyone's liberties being stolen, tyranny, etc. Gun crime went down during the ban too, btw, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence right. For the record I wouldn't support banning specific guns from being sold.

Side note: http://deadline.com/2017/06/ryan-coogler-michael-b-jordan-wrong-answer-math-cheating-scandal-new-regency-plan-b-ta-nehisi-coates-1202109192/
whewwwww

no child left behind :piss2

Gun crime did not go down under the ban. Your data is bad.

Correction, people say semi automatic ban. People have personally told me they want all semiauto guns banned. Which constitutes most modern guns because almost all modern guns that aren’t revolvers are semi auto.

Then there’s people on CNN cheering when Rubio says “that’d ban all semi auto rifles” and people cheered. Btw that would include hunting rifles.

Then there’s elements like Bloomberg. Children doing walk outs demanding  gun bans.

So yeah, no. There’s definitely an element that want guns banned and it’s precisely why gun owners refuse to give an inch.
IYKYK


Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14320 on: February 22, 2018, 09:34:40 PM »
I personally don't think the ban contributed that much, but that link doesn't say crime didn't go down.


CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14322 on: February 22, 2018, 09:39:10 PM »
I can certainly make sense of how you got there now, thanks for explaining. I’m afraid for me it brings back memories of my very brief stint with Christianity. I was invited to this church camp thing by my cousin when I was in middle school. It was sold to me as all about the pos fun times with the church welcoming everyone with open arms. They knew I didn’t believe and I was told that was fine. During the day, it was totally bitching. We stayed on house boats and did a bunch of cool water sports shit like tubing behind speed boats. At night they started in with the inspirational stories and analogies of Christ dying for us, how much he loves us, etc for the first few nights. That was fine, even heart warming. It felt good to taken in by these people who seemed so full of love, who cares if I didn’t believe what they did. Well one night we went in to a church, except my cousin and who were pulled aside and I was basically grilled for why wouldn’t I accept Christ’s love with all he’s done for me. They broke me. I cried hard and deeply, and then they sold me the solution for the pain I later realized they set me up for.

It lasted about a month, probably because I didn’t receive any further conditioning.

Really not making any judgement here. Just sharing my experience that led to a similar jump in thought 

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14323 on: February 22, 2018, 09:39:23 PM »
More stuff for liberals to read from sources you trust that will likely be ignored:

:gurl

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14324 on: February 22, 2018, 09:39:39 PM »
Very close friend of mine had a guy he's known for like 20 years yell at him and call him a communist for defending (in a fairly mild way) kneeling NFL players. Dude was very riled up, my friend had to talk him down.

The best part is he's generally non-political. After it happened the first thing he said is "how the fuck did that just happen to me and not to you?"

Maybe it’s just a sign of the times. I’m willing to be proven wrong.
IYKYK

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14325 on: February 22, 2018, 09:42:59 PM »
There's not a single major movement on the march to ban all guns or repeal the 2A. Feinstein wants to ban automatic weapons, which isn't going to happen. BUT it has happened before in the 90s and I don't seem to remember anyone's liberties being stolen, tyranny, etc. Gun crime went down during the ban too, btw, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence right. For the record I wouldn't support banning specific guns from being sold.

Side note: http://deadline.com/2017/06/ryan-coogler-michael-b-jordan-wrong-answer-math-cheating-scandal-new-regency-plan-b-ta-nehisi-coates-1202109192/
whewwwww

no child left behind :piss2
Yeah, there is no world where even if there was a base of support for its repeal, that there are 3/4th's of states willing to sign on to ratify the constitution to repeal the second amendment. So that fear is basically unfounded in any practical sense.
 
The real thing with the second amendment is how does the court change it's interpretation when it comes to cases like DC vs. Heller under a Democratic court?

I would say Cindi, if she takes the NRA interpretation of the 2nd amendment, which she clearly does, would have an argument there for that being uprooted. Since I think a liberal supreme court would likely overturn the Heller interpretation eventually. Taking us back to how the country saw the second amendment for much of its history.

But I would also say to Cindi, who is talking about pursuing a law degree through a political science undergrad in order to affect positive change in society, is going to have to come to terms that both the founding fathers, and 200 years of supreme court precedence did not come down on the side of the NRA's recent interpretation of the second amendment. At best you got conservative courts, like the Burger court, that saw it as a right that was subject to being "well regulated," same as the militia in the part of the sentence preceding it that the NRA likes to often leave off in their propaganda and arguments.


Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14326 on: February 22, 2018, 09:44:13 PM »
I can certainly make sense of how you got there now, thanks for explaining. I’m afraid for me it brings back memories of my very brief stint with Christianity. I was invited to this church camp thing by my cousin when I was in middle school. It was sold to me as all about the pos fun times with the church welcoming everyone with open arms. They knew I didn’t believe and I was told that was fine. During the day, it was totally bitching. We stayed on house boats and did a bunch of cool water sports shit like tubing behind speed boats. At night they started in with the inspirational stories and analogies of Christ dying for us, how much he loves us, etc for the first few nights. That was fine, even heart warming. It felt good to taken in by these people who seemed so full of love, who cares if I didn’t believe what they did. Well one night we went in to a church, except my cousin and who were pulled aside and I was basically grilled for why wouldn’t I accept Christ’s love with all he’s done for me. They broke me. I cried hard and deeply, and then they sold me the solution for the pain I later realized they set me up for.

It lasted about a month, probably because I didn’t receive any further conditioning.

Really not making any judgement here. Just sharing my experience that led to a similar jump in thought

Sorry about that. No one has grilled me or anything but I do have to have a lot of faith.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14327 on: February 22, 2018, 09:45:29 PM »
There's not a single major movement on the march to ban all guns or repeal the 2A. Feinstein wants to ban automatic weapons, which isn't going to happen. BUT it has happened before in the 90s and I don't seem to remember anyone's liberties being stolen, tyranny, etc. Gun crime went down during the ban too, btw, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence right. For the record I wouldn't support banning specific guns from being sold.

Side note: http://deadline.com/2017/06/ryan-coogler-michael-b-jordan-wrong-answer-math-cheating-scandal-new-regency-plan-b-ta-nehisi-coates-1202109192/
whewwwww

no child left behind :piss2
Yeah, there is no world where even if there was a base of support for its repeal, that there are 3/4th's of states willing to sign on to ratify the constitution to repeal the second amendment. So that fear is basically unfounded in any practical sense.
 
The real thing with the second amendment is how does the court change it's interpretation when it comes to cases like DC vs. Heller under a Democratic court?

I would say Cindi, if she takes the NRA interpretation of the 2nd amendment, which she clearly does, would have an argument there for that being uprooted. Since I think a liberal supreme court would likely overturn the Heller interpretation eventually. Taking us back to how the country saw the second amendment for much of its history.

But I would also say to Cindi, who is talking about pursuing a law degree through a political science undergrad in order to affect positive change in society, is going to have to come to terms that both the founding fathers, and 200 years of supreme court precedence did not come down on the side of the NRA's recent interpretation of the second amendment. At best you got conservative courts, like the Burger court, that saw it as a right that was subject to being "well regulated," same as the militia in the part of the sentence preceding it that the NRA likes to often leave off in their propaganda and arguments.

Political science grad school, not undergrad. And no law degree.
IYKYK

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14328 on: February 22, 2018, 09:48:52 PM »
The last assault rifle ban didn't really change the violence pattern. The idea that violence is linked to poverty is questionable as well. It's more linked to relative income disparity and honor-based cultural influence.  Large areas of poverty don't create the same crime rate or violent crime rate. However, areas with poverty and wealth do.  Alaska has the highest gun death per capita, but its largely suicides. The wilderness provides little relative wealth interactions. Chicago has impoverished areas and wealth.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14329 on: February 22, 2018, 09:54:42 PM »
Also I’m more of a SFA person. I don’t really support NRA and think of them as a necessary evil.

Here’s SFA’s stance on the Second Amendment.

https://www.saf.org/gun-rights-faq/

IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14330 on: February 22, 2018, 09:57:32 PM »
“To preserve Liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, and member of the first Continental Congress, which passed the Bill of Rights)”

The founding fathers were clear.

Harping on “militia” is straight balls.
IYKYK

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14331 on: February 22, 2018, 09:57:41 PM »
More stuff for liberals to read from sources you trust that will likely be ignored:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/mass-shootings-are-a-bad-way-to-understand-gun-violence/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-used-to-think-gun-control-was-the-answer-my-research-told-me-otherwise/2017/10/03/d33edca6-a851-11e7-92d1-58c702d2d975_story.html

I'm familiar with both pieces, I don't think what 538 is saying is any different from what most informed people on gun violence on the left openly acknowledge, but the second piece is kind of trash, which basically just uses the 538 piece as its own narrative crutch while being light on actual empirical studies to substantiate the narrative it pushes:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/4/16418754/gun-control-washington-post

With lines like this being particularly important in any discussion:

Quote
Last year, researchers from around the country reviewed more than 130 studies from 10 countries on gun control for Epidemiologic Reviews. This is, for now, the most current, extensive review of the research on the effects of gun control. The findings were clear: “The simultaneous implementation of laws targeting multiple firearms restrictions is associated with reductions in firearm deaths.”

The study did not look at one specific intervention, but rather a variety of kinds of gun control, from licensing measures to buyback programs. Time and time again, they found the same line of evidence: Reducing access to guns was followed by a drop in deaths related to guns. And while non-gun homicides also decreased, the drop wasn’t as quick as the one seen in gun-related homicides — indicating that access to guns was a potential causal factor.

Based on the other research, this actually isn’t a very surprising finding. Regularly updated reviews of the evidence compiled by the Harvard School of Public Health’s Injury Control Research Center have consistently found that when controlling for variables such as socioeconomic factors and other crime, places with more guns have more gun deaths.

You can do a lot of things when you cherry pick or ignore vast swathes of data, but when you look at the field of research on gun violence and gun control as a whole, time and again we see the clear connection between supply of guns and ease of access with a rise in all types of gun deaths. Other variables are factors and can play crucial roles, but the evidence is clear cut on that relationship.

I understand your personal feelings about safety, but on an empirical level, there is not much of an argument left.

Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14332 on: February 22, 2018, 09:59:36 PM »
I ain’t touching a Vox link on gun propaganda control ever again.

IYKYK

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14333 on: February 22, 2018, 10:11:07 PM »
“To preserve Liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, and member of the first Continental Congress, which passed the Bill of Rights)”

The founding fathers were clear.

Liberals harping on “militia” is straight balls.

You can cherry pick things from history all day Cindi, what ultimately matters is how the court interprets things.


----------------


For instance, when Alexander Hamilton was talking about it in the Federalist papers, he referred to it being impractical to train the "people at large" to a level of "tolerable expertness," saying that the most that could be "reasonably be aimed at" was "to have them properly armed and equipped" (and that even for that it would be "necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year"). He went on to say:

"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need."

He also said "the particular States are to have the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS" (his caps, not mine).

He explicitly argued that it wouldn't be practical for the people as a whole to be the militia, and said that it would have to be a "select corps of moderate extent" with officers appointed by the States.

---------------------

But what you will fail to find in the federal supreme court is any mention of the interpretation put out prior to Heller vs DC about the amendment being an explicit individual right to bear arms. And that largely has to do with how uncontroversial the interpretation of the amendment as being about militias was until the NRA(and black panthers) decided to try and re-interpret it as an individual right.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14334 on: February 22, 2018, 10:15:03 PM »
That quote's from an antifederalist argument in the context of why the US should not have a standing army, one of the supporting points being that professional soldiers tend to not have any property and thus can't be trusted.

Very much past-is-a-different-country territory.

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14335 on: February 22, 2018, 10:15:09 PM »
Jesus christ
püp

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14336 on: February 22, 2018, 10:19:00 PM »
I ain’t touching a Vox link on gun propaganda control ever again.



 Doesn't change or have any bearing on the underlying research referenced.


Himu

  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14338 on: February 22, 2018, 10:55:06 PM »
“To preserve Liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, and member of the first Continental Congress, which passed the Bill of Rights)”

The founding fathers were clear.

Liberals harping on “militia” is straight balls.

You can cherry pick things from history all day Cindi, what ultimately matters is how the court interprets things.


----------------


For instance, when Alexander Hamilton was talking about it in the Federalist papers, he referred to it being impractical to train the "people at large" to a level of "tolerable expertness," saying that the most that could be "reasonably be aimed at" was "to have them properly armed and equipped" (and that even for that it would be "necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year"). He went on to say:

"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need."

He also said "the particular States are to have the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS" (his caps, not mine).

He explicitly argued that it wouldn't be practical for the people as a whole to be the militia, and said that it would have to be a "select corps of moderate extent" with officers appointed by the States.

---------------------

But what you will fail to find in the federal supreme court is any mention of the interpretation put out prior to Heller vs DC about the amendment being an explicit individual right to bear arms. And that largely has to do with how uncontroversial the interpretation of the amendment as being about militias was until the NRA(and black panthers) decided to try and re-interpret it as an individual right.

:obama

Not bad. I’ll look into it. But why stop at Alexander Hamilton if you said it only mattered what court says and the court has deemed that it’s for individual rights? Is this not a contradiction of terms?
IYKYK

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: U.S. Politics Discussion Thread |OT| The Benji Memo
« Reply #14339 on: February 22, 2018, 10:58:05 PM »
Source PD:

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/14/sunday-review/the-assault-weapon-myth.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

Your link literally says gun crime went down, despite your claim that it did not. You're not even reading the sources you post. You're probably googling "pro gun reddit" and blindly posting what you find after skimming a couple paragraphs.

The article also points out that a study disputes whether the law itself played a role in the decline, to be fair. A comprehensive look at the ban would suggest that *both sides* (one of your favorite phrases) have been guilty of cherry picking data on the issue. Crime fell after the bill was passed, there's no question about it. But how much credit goes to the law is highly disputed.
https://www.factcheck.org/2013/02/did-the-1994-assault-weapons-ban-work/

I have said multiple times I don't support banning specific guns. I've also said multiple times that hand gun crime is higher, but no one ever talks about banning hand guns; CNN didn't even bring it up last night, from my understanding. There are a lot of different ways to reduce gun crime. The funny thing is:

1. None of them involve banning the 2A
2. Nearly all of them are opposed by the NRA

In short, gun advocates have created a fantasy world wherein The State is coming for their guns, and how it's not gonna work because xzy. Meanwhile they have little to say about actual policies that would reduce gun violence. Comprehensive background checks, perhaps including a mental health test. I'm not going to wade into the views expressed in the other thread but it's a fact that people who have been suicidal recently wouldn't qualify for gun ownership under such a system. A renewed focus on shutting down gun trafficking is another key issue. Conservatives love bringing up Chicago while ignoring the fact that most guns in Chicago illegally come from Indiana and other states/areas with lax or no gun control. Going after straw purchases and closing gun show loopholes makes sense too.

None of that even comes close to repealing the 2A. Yet all of of it is or has been opposed by the NRA, despite what Dana said last night. I'm not sure I've even seen you express views on any of that...because you're too busy waging war against strawmen. And frankly, because you don't seem to have a decent grasp of the issue anyway.
010