Author Topic: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man  (Read 213392 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2345 on: March 24, 2021, 05:58:00 PM »
Stads...I would gladly help you with that 10 year plan.

That's just one person Ben.   Then that one slips by, what if there are others you can stop?  Why not go through a longer process to help stop some killing?

Also, It's extremely hard to take someone alive in those situations.  People always say shoot the person in the leg.  1st, they are not trained to do that and 2, if you miss you leave the chance for others to be killed.  You are taught to shoot where you will most likely hit the target. A high percentage shit, and that is center mass.

Yup, I also understand that.

The more I read about this incident and the suspect at hand. It screams Mental Issues.

Again, the focus should be on the Mental Issues and what made this young man of 21 years shoot up a grocery store. What triggered him to lash out and act out on his thoughts and feelings. How was his family life, how was he as a child. These things are really important to understand the situation. They're important to find out the intent.

It's unfortunate that people do die when these people lash out.

It's another issue altogether why these people do not want to get that treatment. Either because of the backlash of being labeled psychotic, the idea of being someone who is uncapable of being left alone, these things are just some the issues of getting to understand Why.

Just because we can implement a Mental Health evaluation law before you purchase a gun, doesn't mean that people will get that Mental Evaluation. And this is where, you get into the 2nd Amendment and the "Right to bear arms" argument of peoples liberty and freedoms.
In general I agree, but I think you need to differentiate between mental and emotional issues. Mental issue suggests some kind of pathological condition. I think we're going to find that this guy was simply an asshole and a loser; same as the rest of them. And therein lies the problem. Mental issues are easy. You get diagnosed with something and you wind up in a little red "CRAZY" book. Emotional issues are far more difficult to sort out. More importantly, while mental problems only apply to a select few, these emotional issues apply to damn near the entire country at this point. "Solve the mental health problem!" makes for a great poster. You change that poster to read "Americans are assholes and losers!" and you'll find yourself dodging the bullets you seek to prevent. As a society we're great a pointing fingers, but awful at looking within.


It's been found out that he has a history of Mental Issues...Hence the issue and focus should be on Mental Health. Not Guns....Yes they should be considered. But that's not the root cause for why people choose to act upon those thoughts that Mental Issues escalate...

Also, they dragged him out and he was just in his Boxers. It's not like he decided "You know what, today feels like a good day to shoot this grocery up."...There's lots and lots of thoughts and feelings that go into a person making this decision.

Also, another issue with the Mental Health is the access to this care. It's not like a family can easily go without financial worry to a therapist or psychologist.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2346 on: March 24, 2021, 06:07:22 PM »
Quote
   I know two families that lost kids in Sandy Hook; a guy I lived (and worked) with in the 90's lost his niece, and a guy I went to high school with and played hockey with lost his son.  I don't see them enough to do this, and I wouldn't anyway out of respect and simple human compassion, but I'd love to ask them:  do you feel any resentment, any anger at the politicians that parade you and those like you around to garner votes, but have done NOTHING in the name of your children to ACTUALLY solve the problem?

I get the vibe you're pushing here, and in a sense agree, but for me it seems every time they unearth this discussion it's immediately met with vitriol and a chorus of 'partisan gun grab' and all that other bullshit. It literally happened yesterday. Now I'm not deluded enough to think that the dems would crush it through unopposed, shit Joe Mansion alone would stop that shit like he fucked it up after Sandy Hook. And at the core, and to your point, it's a political posturing for soundbites, neither side actually cares about enacting any semblance of real reform.

In the end, random mass murders are an accepted part of American society, and nothing effective will ever be done to rectify it. All we can hope is that none of us ever end up in the blast radius.

But my discussion ISN'T a gun grab.  My discussion has nothing to do with guns.  I don't think guns are the problem, frankly.  They're part of it, to be sure, and I've elsewhere conceded that was I king, I would compromise by doing both, but I think the answer lies within us. I think the answer is that which works to systemically improve the self-esteem of this country.   Somewhere in the Guns Are Icky thread (I think) I posted several links that seem to indicate that a plethora of problems we're facing here in the states are from a common cause.  My discussion is "target that common cause".

I know....I'm agreeing with you goddammit. I know it's rare, but hey, broken clock is right twice a day. We both agree on universal background checks, shit, 90% of the population does. The only place that isn't reflected is the place that can actually fucking do something about it. I'm also with you on common cause, which to me seem to range from toxic masculine culture, a horrid mental health system and the stigma that goes with it, a horrid health system in general, online bully culture, and yes, an overinflated and completely bizzare infatuation with guns (can't deny our culture has a sad, sad relationship with firearms, it's fucking scary). This is a massive cultural undertaking of which a few regulations won't fix, which really means dick since the 100 people in washington can't even enact those. Enacting something as massive as what our country really needs to heal is so far out of the question it's laughable. So just let it play out. See who dies next. Just saw that a dude in Atl was busted going into a grocery store with guns, who knows what his intent was. Meanwhile....I'm off to go work in a grocery store myself right now. Is my store next? Spin the wheel, let's see where it lands man. The train is off the fucking rails and it's going to take out a ton of lives before it stops.

This is something then if the ones aren't listening, to protest about.

Use the Mental Health issue as the main focus of the protest. And then the 2nd priority will be the gun purchasing problem.

And to tell you the truth. If someone ticks and doesn't have a gun...If they are very unstable mentally, they will just as likely ram their car into the grocery store.

Again, life isn't guaranteed because we are not sure that someone won't explode and end up mass killing with whatever they can find. Be it a gun, car, flamethrower, or Fire Extinguisher.

You can either live in the fear or face it and live with no fear of dying that very day. It's the message of Carpe Diem. Live each day like it's your last.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2347 on: March 24, 2021, 06:17:23 PM »
I'm still going to work, arent I?

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2348 on: March 24, 2021, 11:01:33 PM »
I'm still going to work, arent I?

It wasn't necessarily directed at you. My response was an extension of what you posted. I do hope that nothing like that happens to you, and your store wins this lotto.

Quote
This is a massive cultural undertaking of which a few regulations won't fix, which really means dick since the 100 people in washington can't even enact those. Enacting something as massive as what our country really needs to heal is so far out of the question it's laughable. So just let it play out. See who dies next.

This is a reason why I think people should really be protesting about. How these 100 people whom represent us, don't listen to what us people are agreeing to. Why not just leave it up to a vote? Let us people decide instead of spending forever arguing about it. This needs to addressed now and something must be done. It should be a high priority. So people that work in the grocery industry and other highly populated areas, and the people whom frequent it, won't have to worry about some nut coming in like that.

I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2349 on: March 25, 2021, 12:16:50 AM »
Made it through tonight...though we all have to sit through a 20 minute active shooter training video now. Fuckers.

Offline TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 49178
  • Gender: Male
  • Kip Rolled
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2350 on: March 25, 2021, 05:58:44 AM »
Made it through tonight...though we all have to sit through a 20 minute active shooter training video now. Fuckers.

We have an active shooter video that we have to watch too. I think they introduced it about 5 years ago.
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2351 on: March 25, 2021, 06:58:59 AM »
Made it through tonight...though we all have to sit through a 20 minute active shooter training video now. Fuckers.

We have an active shooter video that we have to watch too. I think they introduced it about 5 years ago.

We had to watch it at hiring, they're just making us watch it again. Because corporate.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2352 on: March 25, 2021, 10:10:26 AM »
There's nothing there I can really argue with you about. I do want to ask, though, do we need to focus so much on the cause and effect of every specific idea we come up with? Can't we just say that it's too easy for any and everybody to go out and buy a gun with little to know oversight, and act on that basis? I know you hate common sense, but I'm not really sure what the better description is for this. Isn't it just common sense to make sure you can't buy and AR15 and 5000 rounds of ammo without somebody, anybody looking to see if you're crazy or homicidal? I don't see why this is something that needs to be examined, then studied, then evaluated, then studied again, and then challenged through 15 different legal cases. We should know who's buying a gun. It just seems painfully obvious to me.

Well, you're combining two issues.  To me, "cause and effect" is the ONLY thing we should concentrate on.  Isn't this just like drugs or alcohol?  Sure there's going to be some jackass that tries to smoke his entire stash in one night, or that tries to lace his stash with gasoline to see if he can get higher, or - like a couple of my friends one time - use the courtesy breathalyzer at the door of the bar they're at to see how high they can blow.  But the cost, the effort, the maintenance of keeping all the millions of other law-abiding users doesn't outweigh the benefit.   Why would we do ANYTHING 'just because'?   

The other issue is the "shouldn't we know who's buying a gun?".  I have no disagreement there at all.   For 100 reasons - none of which is really about "the issue of gun violence in our country" - I think we should have reasonable restrictions on the purchase and registration of guns.   That's not common sense to me; that's practicality.

Quote
As for your examples, shouldn't we be forcing people to keep their guns away from the kiddos? Especially kiddos with known mental problems? Shouldn't we be banning devices that circumvent already in place bans on prohibited weapons? Do we need to resist every single idea based on the idea of a slippery slope?

"Forcing"?  No.  "Holding accountable"?  Sure.  Had she lived, I'd've charged Mrs. Lanza with 100 counts of murder and attempted murder.   I'm not sure what you mean by "banning devices", but again, sure, if the device - regardless of whether it's on a gun or not - is meant to break the law.  Again, this isn't what I have a problem with.  It's the fanciful knee-jerk reactions to these things, it's the notion that "common sense" can be the connection between one person's outrage and the violation of someone else's rights, with no discernable, documentable compelling benefit to the state.  Sorry to mix in the legalese there.

Quote
Also, the NRA is a target because they own half of our representatives. Republicans are afraid to take a leak in the Capitol head without the NRA's position, and the NRA's position is invariably "No legislation at all, no matter how sensible or innocuous it may be." Their role in this country is to sell more guns, after all.

Yes, but that's red herring.  If the NRA stood for "National Refried Beans Association", they'd still be a target.  Its' not the guns that are the issue with them, it's the lobbying. As I said above, the same representative that's voting against a bumpstock ban is also, likely, voting against Obamacare, against a $82/hr minimum wage, against an expanded hate crimes bill, against a rigorous climate change package, against turning America into a sanctuary country.... you get the point (and I'm trying to be funny, not disrespectful to those issues, some of which I agree with).

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2353 on: March 25, 2021, 10:24:11 AM »
Quote
   I know two families that lost kids in Sandy Hook; a guy I lived (and worked) with in the 90's lost his niece, and a guy I went to high school with and played hockey with lost his son.  I don't see them enough to do this, and I wouldn't anyway out of respect and simple human compassion, but I'd love to ask them:  do you feel any resentment, any anger at the politicians that parade you and those like you around to garner votes, but have done NOTHING in the name of your children to ACTUALLY solve the problem?

I get the vibe you're pushing here, and in a sense agree, but for me it seems every time they unearth this discussion it's immediately met with vitriol and a chorus of 'partisan gun grab' and all that other bullshit. It literally happened yesterday. Now I'm not deluded enough to think that the dems would crush it through unopposed, shit Joe Mansion alone would stop that shit like he fucked it up after Sandy Hook. And at the core, and to your point, it's a political posturing for soundbites, neither side actually cares about enacting any semblance of real reform.

In the end, random mass murders are an accepted part of American society, and nothing effective will ever be done to rectify it. All we can hope is that none of us ever end up in the blast radius.

But my discussion ISN'T a gun grab.  My discussion has nothing to do with guns.  I don't think guns are the problem, frankly.  They're part of it, to be sure, and I've elsewhere conceded that was I king, I would compromise by doing both, but I think the answer lies within us. I think the answer is that which works to systemically improve the self-esteem of this country.   Somewhere in the Guns Are Icky thread (I think) I posted several links that seem to indicate that a plethora of problems we're facing here in the states are from a common cause.  My discussion is "target that common cause".

I know....I'm agreeing with you goddammit. I know it's rare, but hey, broken clock is right twice a day. We both agree on universal background checks, shit, 90% of the population does. The only place that isn't reflected is the place that can actually fucking do something about it. I'm also with you on common cause, which to me seem to range from toxic masculine culture, a horrid mental health system and the stigma that goes with it, a horrid health system in general, online bully culture, and yes, an overinflated and completely bizzare infatuation with guns (can't deny our culture has a sad, sad relationship with firearms, it's fucking scary). This is a massive cultural undertaking of which a few regulations won't fix, which really means dick since the 100 people in washington can't even enact those. Enacting something as massive as what our country really needs to heal is so far out of the question it's laughable. So just let it play out. See who dies next. Just saw that a dude in Atl was busted going into a grocery store with guns, who knows what his intent was. Meanwhile....I'm off to go work in a grocery store myself right now. Is my store next? Spin the wheel, let's see where it lands man. The train is off the fucking rails and it's going to take out a ton of lives before it stops.

See, I don't see it as that far-fetched or "massive".  It's like anything else; it starts grass roots.

Pick something else you're passionate about:  do we not tackle racism because "it's too massive"?  Funny thing is, there are studies - don't make me repost them; they are here within the last couple pages - that root both of them to a similar place.  You can kill two birds with one stone!     

It's a matter of willpower.   It's a matter of getting those that CARE, those that really want to effect change, and doing it.  Instead of lecturing my 10th grader on her "privilege" and handing out 19th century paintings and asking the kids to spot all the "racism" in it (true event), maybe take that class session and have the school psychologist come in and start talking, not in platitudes, but in real life ways, about the benefits of exercising and taking care of your EMOTIONAL well-being as well as your physical; since racism is important (it is) throw in a section about how the roots of racism are borne out of insecurity and emotional instability.   Instead of assigning a guidance counselor, assign a wellness counselor.   Instead of (well, in addition to) having your physical and all your vaccines before school, have a three-session experience with a psychologist as well.  Instead of busting kids playing hooky and making them do community service, maybe make them do five sessions with a local psychologist.    Instead of Anderson Cooper and Sean Hannity taking easy pot shots at the 'lunatics' every time one of these happens, why have them do stories on the downsides and upsides of proper mental wellness?

And INB4 the "who's going to pay this psychologist", it's the same premise as defund police.  You reallocate monies that would otherwise be spend either not solving or perpetuating the problem to nipping the problem in the bud.

Make it a part of the vocabulary, like we have with "gas-lighting" and all the other new terms we have that serve little purpose other than further dividing and subclassifying (and thereby alienating) our population.

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2354 on: March 25, 2021, 10:31:24 AM »
There's nothing there I can really argue with you about. I do want to ask, though, do we need to focus so much on the cause and effect of every specific idea we come up with? Can't we just say that it's too easy for any and everybody to go out and buy a gun with little to know oversight, and act on that basis? I know you hate common sense, but I'm not really sure what the better description is for this. Isn't it just common sense to make sure you can't buy and AR15 and 5000 rounds of ammo without somebody, anybody looking to see if you're crazy or homicidal? I don't see why this is something that needs to be examined, then studied, then evaluated, then studied again, and then challenged through 15 different legal cases. We should know who's buying a gun. It just seems painfully obvious to me.

Well, you're combining two issues.  To me, "cause and effect" is the ONLY thing we should concentrate on.  Isn't this just like drugs or alcohol?  Sure there's going to be some jackass that tries to smoke his entire stash in one night, or that tries to lace his stash with gasoline to see if he can get higher, or - like a couple of my friends one time - use the courtesy breathalyzer at the door of the bar they're at to see how high they can blow.  But the cost, the effort, the maintenance of keeping all the millions of other law-abiding users doesn't outweigh the benefit.   Why would we do ANYTHING 'just because'?   
I don't really get your distinction. What's the cause and effect of knowing who's buying a gun and whether or not they might be unstable? You think that's a reasonable step, but what,  you object on legal grounds? I don't get it. To me that's just something that anybody would put in place, and not really something we should be vehemently objecting to. Whether or not it prevents another Columbine doesn't really factor into it.


Quote
"Forcing"?  No.  "Holding accountable"?  Sure.  Had she lived, I'd've charged Mrs. Lanza with 100 counts of murder and attempted murder.   I'm not sure what you mean by "banning devices", but again, sure, if the device - regardless of whether it's on a gun or not - is meant to break the law.  Again, this isn't what I have a problem with.  It's the fanciful knee-jerk reactions to these things, it's the notion that "common sense" can be the connection between one person's outrage and the violation of someone else's rights, with no discernable, documentable compelling benefit to the state.  Sorry to mix in the legalese there.
For one thing, charging Landa's mom is fixing the gate after the horse has left. Moreover, I'm pretty sure "the right to leave guns laying about so that anybody can use them" is not part of the 2nd amendment. Keeping your weapons secure is something that will absolutely save lives and is not an infringement on anybody's rights. We compel people to do things in the name of safety all the time. Particularly when it comes to the safety of others (wearing masks excluded, of course). Forcing somebody to lock up their guns is not unreasonable. If you want to call it a kneejerk reaction that's fine, but so is jerking your knee back when somebody's beating it with a damn stick.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2355 on: March 25, 2021, 10:51:41 AM »
There's nothing there I can really argue with you about. I do want to ask, though, do we need to focus so much on the cause and effect of every specific idea we come up with? Can't we just say that it's too easy for any and everybody to go out and buy a gun with little to know oversight, and act on that basis? I know you hate common sense, but I'm not really sure what the better description is for this. Isn't it just common sense to make sure you can't buy and AR15 and 5000 rounds of ammo without somebody, anybody looking to see if you're crazy or homicidal? I don't see why this is something that needs to be examined, then studied, then evaluated, then studied again, and then challenged through 15 different legal cases. We should know who's buying a gun. It just seems painfully obvious to me.

Well, you're combining two issues.  To me, "cause and effect" is the ONLY thing we should concentrate on.  Isn't this just like drugs or alcohol?  Sure there's going to be some jackass that tries to smoke his entire stash in one night, or that tries to lace his stash with gasoline to see if he can get higher, or - like a couple of my friends one time - use the courtesy breathalyzer at the door of the bar they're at to see how high they can blow.  But the cost, the effort, the maintenance of keeping all the millions of other law-abiding users doesn't outweigh the benefit.   Why would we do ANYTHING 'just because'?   
I don't really get your distinction. What's the cause and effect of knowing who's buying a gun and whether or not they might be unstable? You think that's a reasonable step, but what,  you object on legal grounds? I don't get it. To me that's just something that anybody would put in place, and not really something we should be vehemently objecting to. Whether or not it prevents another Columbine doesn't really factor into it.

I'm sorry, this is my fault, but I'm not sure what you're asking.  I'm distinguishing between knowing who is buying a gun, and arbitrarily limiting who can buy a gun and how many/what type.  Sort of the may issue/shall issue distinction (but not quite).   I see multiple benefits, with no corresponding infringement on rights (and I'm not necessarily limiting to 2nd Amendment) with having a registry, or having a permitting process.   I see no benefits - here's where the cause and effect comes in - in banning guns, banning types of guns, limiting the number of guns, limiting the types of guns, and a huge infringement of rights.  We can and regularly do the former all the time - driver's licences - and I'm adamant about not doing the latter, at least based on "common sense".

My issue with that, Bart, is simple:  I'm not a fan of doing things because they sound good.  Not for any high intellectual reason, though that too, but I'm a cynic when it comes to politics.  There are simply far too many examples (many esoteric, but being in the environmental field at the early part of my career, it was prevalent) of "out of sight, out of mind", or more correctly "out of term period, out of mind" when it comes to legislation and regulation.  Obamacare is just the biggest and one of the more recent ones.  We pass these huge laws on the premise "it's a start!" and NOTHING ever gets done. There are still, to this day, aspects of the Superfund laws (from 1980) that haven't been fully fleshed out.  If the lives of our kids are that important, then do it right or don't do it at all.

Quote
For one thing, charging Landa's mom is fixing the gate after the horse has left. Moreover, I'm pretty sure "the right to leave guns laying about so that anybody can use them" is not part of the 2nd amendment. Keeping your weapons secure is something that will absolutely save lives and is not an infringement on anybody's rights. We compel people to do things in the name of safety all the time. Particularly when it comes to the safety of others (wearing masks excluded, of course). Forcing somebody to lock up their guns is not unreasonable. If you want to call it a kneejerk reaction that's fine, but so is jerking your knee back when somebody's beating it with a damn stick.

Maybe; is there anything you do because well, you're just not interested in the punishment?   I'm 90% sure I'd be a LOT bigger weed user had it been legal when I was in college.  I've gone almost 30 years now with the mindset that it's just not worth potentially losing my job or my law license over a joint, when I can have a nice tall glass of legal Tito's, with some soda, a splash of ginger ale and a fresh lime.   For me, that was a deterrent.  Not relevant what they are, but I've made other bigger decisions with my kids based on the potential for punishment/liability.  It's not perfect, but it does establish a duty that heretofore maybe hasn't existed.

I think the devil is in the details here.  How do you enforce that kind of thing other than in hindsight?  I'm not for having weekly inspections of your weapons.  I'm not for having proactive (or even third party) locks on guns unless and until.  We're not 10 years old, or at least the VAST majority of gun owners aren't acting like they're 10 years old.   Wouldn't the net effect of the restrictions you're asking for be the same?  Ultimately just a way to punish when the horse has left the barn?

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2356 on: March 25, 2021, 11:35:27 AM »
@stads...I'm all for way more counselor /therapist intervention in k-12 grade levels. This feeds into my ideas of making mental health much more normalized... I agree it'll have a great effect on so many of the things I listed above. My main concerns are not about payment, but about curriculum and direction. Getting the sides to agree on that will be about as fruitful as getting them to agree on the initial issues at hand. I mean, can you see hippie granola mom from Berkeley and evangelical Jesus mom from rural Mississippi agreeing on what direction that'll take?

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2357 on: March 25, 2021, 12:41:17 PM »
There's nothing there I can really argue with you about. I do want to ask, though, do we need to focus so much on the cause and effect of every specific idea we come up with? Can't we just say that it's too easy for any and everybody to go out and buy a gun with little to know oversight, and act on that basis? I know you hate common sense, but I'm not really sure what the better description is for this. Isn't it just common sense to make sure you can't buy and AR15 and 5000 rounds of ammo without somebody, anybody looking to see if you're crazy or homicidal? I don't see why this is something that needs to be examined, then studied, then evaluated, then studied again, and then challenged through 15 different legal cases. We should know who's buying a gun. It just seems painfully obvious to me.

Well, you're combining two issues.  To me, "cause and effect" is the ONLY thing we should concentrate on.  Isn't this just like drugs or alcohol?  Sure there's going to be some jackass that tries to smoke his entire stash in one night, or that tries to lace his stash with gasoline to see if he can get higher, or - like a couple of my friends one time - use the courtesy breathalyzer at the door of the bar they're at to see how high they can blow.  But the cost, the effort, the maintenance of keeping all the millions of other law-abiding users doesn't outweigh the benefit.   Why would we do ANYTHING 'just because'?   
I don't really get your distinction. What's the cause and effect of knowing who's buying a gun and whether or not they might be unstable? You think that's a reasonable step, but what,  you object on legal grounds? I don't get it. To me that's just something that anybody would put in place, and not really something we should be vehemently objecting to. Whether or not it prevents another Columbine doesn't really factor into it.

I'm sorry, this is my fault, but I'm not sure what you're asking.  I'm distinguishing between knowing who is buying a gun, and arbitrarily limiting who can buy a gun and how many/what type.  Sort of the may issue/shall issue distinction (but not quite).   I see multiple benefits, with no corresponding infringement on rights (and I'm not necessarily limiting to 2nd Amendment) with having a registry, or having a permitting process.   I see no benefits - here's where the cause and effect comes in - in banning guns, banning types of guns, limiting the number of guns, limiting the types of guns, and a huge infringement of rights.  We can and regularly do the former all the time - driver's licences - and I'm adamant about not doing the latter, at least based on "common sense".

My issue with that, Bart, is simple:  I'm not a fan of doing things because they sound good.  Not for any high intellectual reason, though that too, but I'm a cynic when it comes to politics.  There are simply far too many examples (many esoteric, but being in the environmental field at the early part of my career, it was prevalent) of "out of sight, out of mind", or more correctly "out of term period, out of mind" when it comes to legislation and regulation.  Obamacare is just the biggest and one of the more recent ones.  We pass these huge laws on the premise "it's a start!" and NOTHING ever gets done. There are still, to this day, aspects of the Superfund laws (from 1980) that haven't been fully fleshed out.  If the lives of our kids are that important, then do it right or don't do it at all.


This makes more sense. From what I've seen over the last couple of days, though, nobody here has been talking about banning guns, or even supporting AR bans, though. That's what threw me. I've long been of the opinion that they're amazingly dumb and pointless. My point was about very sensible background checks. That said, of course we get into the may/shall issue aspect. John Hinkley never gets to own another gun. A guy who beats up his old lady doesn't get to, either. Banning certain individuals from gun ownership is part and parcel with knowing who buys them, and is not particularly controversial, aside from the NRA and its store bought government.

Quote
Quote
For one thing, charging Landa's mom is fixing the gate after the horse has left. Moreover, I'm pretty sure "the right to leave guns laying about so that anybody can use them" is not part of the 2nd amendment. Keeping your weapons secure is something that will absolutely save lives and is not an infringement on anybody's rights. We compel people to do things in the name of safety all the time. Particularly when it comes to the safety of others (wearing masks excluded, of course). Forcing somebody to lock up their guns is not unreasonable. If you want to call it a kneejerk reaction that's fine, but so is jerking your knee back when somebody's beating it with a damn stick.

Maybe; is there anything you do because well, you're just not interested in the punishment?   I'm 90% sure I'd be a LOT bigger weed user had it been legal when I was in college.  I've gone almost 30 years now with the mindset that it's just not worth potentially losing my job or my law license over a joint, when I can have a nice tall glass of legal Tito's, with some soda, a splash of ginger ale and a fresh lime.   For me, that was a deterrent.  Not relevant what they are, but I've made other bigger decisions with my kids based on the potential for punishment/liability.  It's not perfect, but it does establish a duty that heretofore maybe hasn't existed.

I think the devil is in the details here.  How do you enforce that kind of thing other than in hindsight?  I'm not for having weekly inspections of your weapons.  I'm not for having proactive (or even third party) locks on guns unless and until.  We're not 10 years old, or at least the VAST majority of gun owners aren't acting like they're 10 years old.   Wouldn't the net effect of the restrictions you're asking for be the same?  Ultimately just a way to punish when the horse has left the barn?

I think you answered your own question there. There are things I do because of the legal deterrent. That would apply equally to the preventative aspect of forcing people to lock up their guns and the retroactive aspect. John Law doesn't need to have a weekly inspection. He finds contraband all the time through any of the 700 various exceptions we've carved out of the 4th.

But here's the other thing. You and I both remember when it wasn't cool to wear a seatbelt. And then it became mandatory and we all said "who the hell is the government to force me to wear one!" Over the last 40 years it's just become accepted. Now you're not so much cool as you are a dumbass. Similarly, you and I have both driven home from places long after we'd had too much to drink at some points in our lives. While we're still dinosaurs, and suspicious of the hows and whys of enforcement and liberty, we're still far more mindful of it than we were. We recognize the importance. More importantly, we've been supplanted by a couple of generations that consider driving after any amount of drinking to be tantamount to banging toddlers. How long has it been since the last time you cursed and muttered about the price of lightbulbs while standing in Target? We just buy fluorescent bulbs where needed and get on with our lives. They honestly are better.

My point here is that perhaps it's not so much about the enforcement of a particular law, but rather the impetus for change a law may provide, at the same time it's serving its statutory purpose.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2358 on: March 25, 2021, 01:02:45 PM »
@stads...I'm all for way more counselor /therapist intervention in k-12 grade levels. This feeds into my ideas of making mental health much more normalized... I agree it'll have a great effect on so many of the things I listed above. My main concerns are not about payment, but about curriculum and direction. Getting the sides to agree on that will be about as fruitful as getting them to agree on the initial issues at hand. I mean, can you see hippie granola mom from Berkeley and evangelical Jesus mom from rural Mississippi agreeing on what direction that'll take?

Haha, I can only imagine.  I am hoping (perhaps naively) that it will be less about curricula and more about making the time, but I think you may be right; there will always be SOMEONE that opposes it. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2359 on: March 25, 2021, 01:14:07 PM »
This makes more sense. From what I've seen over the last couple of days, though, nobody here has been talking about banning guns, or even supporting AR bans, though. That's what threw me. I've long been of the opinion that they're amazingly dumb and pointless. My point was about very sensible background checks. That said, of course we get into the may/shall issue aspect. John Hinkley never gets to own another gun. A guy who beats up his old lady doesn't get to, either. Banning certain individuals from gun ownership is part and parcel with knowing who buys them, and is not particularly controversial, aside from the NRA and its store bought government.

Well, that's sort of my bad; I'm seeing a lot of it up here, and certainly, with Richard Blumenthal and Chris "These are real tears!" Murphy as my Senators, I'm aware that an AR ban is absolutely on the table.  Because after all, what does someone need... you know the drill.

But you wrote my worry about the may/shall.   Okay, we agree on the guy who tunes up his wife for sport.  No question (in Connecticut, I'm out right there, it's not up for discussion).  But what about an NRA member?  Ask around here, I'm sure it wouldn't take one pass through Octavarium to find somone to support that.  What about a Trump supporter?  We've got three, maybe five posts calling them "bat shit crazy" over the last couple weeks.  I didn't, but if I participated in a peaceful protest on January 6, am I out?   I have zero interest in making perhaps the hottest-button political issue even hotter with some town administrator (at least in Connecticut, in some towns you can apply to either the chief of Police or the First Selectman) deciding that I'm unfit to carry because I don't share the same morals and ideals as those "on the right side of history".   Snarky, but you get the point.

Quote
I think you answered your own question there. There are things I do because of the legal deterrent. That would apply equally to the preventative aspect of forcing people to lock up their guns and the retroactive aspect. John Law doesn't need to have a weekly inspection. He finds contraband all the time through any of the 700 various exceptions we've carved out of the 4th.

But here's the other thing. You and I both remember when it wasn't cool to wear a seatbelt. And then it became mandatory and we all said "who the hell is the government to force me to wear one!" Over the last 40 years it's just become accepted. Now you're not so much cool as you are a dumbass. Similarly, you and I have both driven home from places long after we'd had too much to drink at some points in our lives. While we're still dinosaurs, and suspicious of the hows and whys of enforcement and liberty, we're still far more mindful of it than we were. We recognize the importance. More importantly, we've been supplanted by a couple of generations that consider driving after any amount of drinking to be tantamount to banging toddlers. How long has it been since the last time you cursed and muttered about the price of lightbulbs while standing in Target? We just buy fluorescent bulbs where needed and get on with our lives. They honestly are better.

My point here is that perhaps it's not so much about the enforcement of a particular law, but rather the impetus for change a law may provide, at the same time it's serving its statutory purpose.

I can't argue with any of that.  You're spot on (even down to the lightbulbs, though for me it was Wal-mart.  It's so CONFUSING now! :))

So then the next question, not for either of us to answer, is how do we get otherwise reasonably smart people like Blumenthal and Murphy to put their high and mighty sanctimony away for five minutes, and make a cogent, bipartisan argument to that effect?  Stop trying to beat us with their morals and their sanctimony and get down to pragmatics. Practice a little of that diplomacy that people talk about.  I can't even listen to these clowns at this point AND I AGREE WITH A LOT OF WHAT THEY'RE SAYING!  It's exasperating, because the part I don't agree with is a dealbreaker, but they just can't seem to get past it.

There was a discussion in the COVID thread and someone, might have been Harmony, asked if there weren't a subset of people that weren't interested in giving up their fear and paranoia about COVID, and I think she's spot on, but I've thought that a while about bigger issues.  I don't think we have ANY real desire to solve the bigger issues facing us - guns, racism - because there's too much invested in the fight.  It's what sets us apart.  It's what MOBILIZES.  It's what rationalizes what is otherwise an ambiguous anger.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2021, 01:20:59 PM by Stadler »

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2360 on: March 25, 2021, 01:16:09 PM »
@stads...I'm all for way more counselor /therapist intervention in k-12 grade levels. This feeds into my ideas of making mental health much more normalized... I agree it'll have a great effect on so many of the things I listed above. My main concerns are not about payment, but about curriculum and direction. Getting the sides to agree on that will be about as fruitful as getting them to agree on the initial issues at hand. I mean, can you see hippie granola mom from Berkeley and evangelical Jesus mom from rural Mississippi agreeing on what direction that'll take?
The problem is they'll also fail to make a distinction between mental health and atypical personalities. We've seen this happen before. The roll of counselors in schools will be to pinpoint the loaners who dress all in black. I suspect that'll be counterproductive from a school shooting perspective. That said, if you see schools as a means of replacing individuality with doctrinal conformity, as I do, it'll be an absolute boon.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2361 on: March 25, 2021, 01:33:03 PM »
This makes more sense. From what I've seen over the last couple of days, though, nobody here has been talking about banning guns, or even supporting AR bans, though. That's what threw me. I've long been of the opinion that they're amazingly dumb and pointless. My point was about very sensible background checks. That said, of course we get into the may/shall issue aspect. John Hinkley never gets to own another gun. A guy who beats up his old lady doesn't get to, either. Banning certain individuals from gun ownership is part and parcel with knowing who buys them, and is not particularly controversial, aside from the NRA and its store bought government.

Well, that's sort of my bad; I'm seeing a lot of it up here, and certainly, with Richard Blumenthal and Chris "These are real tears!" Murphy as my Senators, I'm aware that an AR ban is absolutely on the table.  Because after all, what does someone need... you know the drill.

But you wrote my worry about the may/shall.   Okay, we agree on the guy who tunes up his wife for sport.  No question (in Connecticut, I'm out right there, it's not up for discussion).  But what about an NRA member?  Ask around here, I'm sure it wouldn't take one pass through Octavarium to find somone to support that.  What about a Trump supporter?  We've got three, maybe five posts calling them "bat shit crazy" over the last couple weeks.  I didn't, but if I participated in a peaceful protest on January 6, am I out?   I have zero interest in making perhaps the hottest-button political issue even hotter with some town administrator (at least in Connecticut, in some towns you can apply to either the chief of Police or the First Selectman) deciding that I'm unfit to carry because I don't share the same morals and ideals as those "on the right side of history".   Snarky, but you get the point.
Isn't that what the courts are for? While I'd suggest that it may well be one, the NRA is not deemed a terrorist organization. Membership is a first amendment protected right. Ditto with supporting a bat-shit crazy ex-president. Zero chance in a billion either one of those survives any level of scrutiny. The rally/insurrection is probably the best example. Attendance is protected, right up until the point that you commit a criminal act, and the nature of that act will determine whether or not you're allowed to own guns. The distinction is an act vs an expression. And truth be told, I'd guess that an awful lot of these things have already been decided by the courts. Felons and wife beaters have certainly both challenged their prohibition on gun ownership at some point and lost. Let the Trump cultists and the seditionists do the same and see what the legal outcome is.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2362 on: March 26, 2021, 09:44:16 AM »
@stads...I'm all for way more counselor /therapist intervention in k-12 grade levels. This feeds into my ideas of making mental health much more normalized... I agree it'll have a great effect on so many of the things I listed above. My main concerns are not about payment, but about curriculum and direction. Getting the sides to agree on that will be about as fruitful as getting them to agree on the initial issues at hand. I mean, can you see hippie granola mom from Berkeley and evangelical Jesus mom from rural Mississippi agreeing on what direction that'll take?
The problem is they'll also fail to make a distinction between mental health and atypical personalities. We've seen this happen before. The roll of counselors in schools will be to pinpoint the loaners who dress all in black. I suspect that'll be counterproductive from a school shooting perspective. That said, if you see schools as a means of replacing individuality with doctrinal conformity, as I do, it'll be an absolute boon.

Yeah, I don't want any of that.  I'm thinking more along the lines of licensed, trained psychologists being available, not the watered-down version of a counselor that a school would provide.  I'm talking documented "medical" training here.  Not feel good hand-holding.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2363 on: March 26, 2021, 10:13:42 AM »
This makes more sense. From what I've seen over the last couple of days, though, nobody here has been talking about banning guns, or even supporting AR bans, though. That's what threw me. I've long been of the opinion that they're amazingly dumb and pointless. My point was about very sensible background checks. That said, of course we get into the may/shall issue aspect. John Hinkley never gets to own another gun. A guy who beats up his old lady doesn't get to, either. Banning certain individuals from gun ownership is part and parcel with knowing who buys them, and is not particularly controversial, aside from the NRA and its store bought government.

Well, that's sort of my bad; I'm seeing a lot of it up here, and certainly, with Richard Blumenthal and Chris "These are real tears!" Murphy as my Senators, I'm aware that an AR ban is absolutely on the table.  Because after all, what does someone need... you know the drill.

But you wrote my worry about the may/shall.   Okay, we agree on the guy who tunes up his wife for sport.  No question (in Connecticut, I'm out right there, it's not up for discussion).  But what about an NRA member?  Ask around here, I'm sure it wouldn't take one pass through Octavarium to find somone to support that.  What about a Trump supporter?  We've got three, maybe five posts calling them "bat shit crazy" over the last couple weeks.  I didn't, but if I participated in a peaceful protest on January 6, am I out?   I have zero interest in making perhaps the hottest-button political issue even hotter with some town administrator (at least in Connecticut, in some towns you can apply to either the chief of Police or the First Selectman) deciding that I'm unfit to carry because I don't share the same morals and ideals as those "on the right side of history".   Snarky, but you get the point.
Isn't that what the courts are for? While I'd suggest that it may well be one, the NRA is not deemed a terrorist organization. Membership is a first amendment protected right. Ditto with supporting a bat-shit crazy ex-president. Zero chance in a billion either one of those survives any level of scrutiny. The rally/insurrection is probably the best example. Attendance is protected, right up until the point that you commit a criminal act, and the nature of that act will determine whether or not you're allowed to own guns. The distinction is an act vs an expression. And truth be told, I'd guess that an awful lot of these things have already been decided by the courts. Felons and wife beaters have certainly both challenged their prohibition on gun ownership at some point and lost. Let the Trump cultists and the seditionists do the same and see what the legal outcome is.

How do I say this nicely?  :) :) :)    Given the level of misinformation and hyperbolic reaction I've encountered (and remembering that I don't see one side as having a monopoly on "crazy") I see this being an issue.  I'd be interested to ask Gina Carano or any of those attendees that didn't commit a crime about the difference between an "act" and an "expression".   I offer this not as argument, but to explain where I'm coming from.   Of course, you're right, that's what the courts are for.  So there IS a remedy.

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1591
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2364 on: March 28, 2021, 05:07:18 PM »
In case any of you missed Jen Psaki's interview with Chris Wallace regarding the crisi...sorry, the "situation" at the border, I have summarised the key takeaway below:

"This Administration is fully commited to transparency just as soon as the situation looks nothing like it does right now"
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, 26th September 2018.

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2365 on: March 28, 2021, 10:03:52 PM »
In case any of you missed Jen Psaki's interview with Chris Wallace regarding the crisi...sorry, the "situation" at the border, I have summarised the key takeaway below:

"This Administration is fully commited to transparency just as soon as the situation looks nothing like it does right now"

 :lol

That's the vibe I'm getting. So they'll be transparent in never.

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1591
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2366 on: March 29, 2021, 05:41:15 AM »
I especially love how "Covid concerns" has replaced "National security concerns" as the new all-purpose excuse for any form of undemocratic shitbaggery. 

"Can we see inside the facilities?"
"Sorry, we can't risk your spreading Covid-19 to the migrants"
"We'll keep our distance and be in full protective clothing"
"That would spook the children and cause a panic"


First the UK using the pandemic to push through changes in public demonstration laws, now the US using it as a convenient and patently nonsensical excuse to keep the press away from things it doesn't want it to see. Never let it be said politicians don't have an eye for an opportunity.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, 26th September 2018.

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2367 on: March 29, 2021, 07:46:05 AM »
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 10470
  • Gender: Male
  • Inglourious Basstard
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2368 on: March 29, 2021, 08:47:04 AM »
Democracy dies in darkness.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2369 on: March 29, 2021, 08:58:31 AM »
And who thought that it would change?...Not I...

And who thought that they would use Covid as an excuse to implement their agenda....I certainly was aware of it.

And it's happening world-wide...

Regardless where this disease started. What is the worst part are the people that are doing exactly that and using it as a crutch, excuse, and reason to implement their own agendas and ideologies.

These people know about Cause, Reaction, Solution...

You create a Cause, and wait for the Reaction, then based on the Reaction, Implement the Solution.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2370 on: March 29, 2021, 09:15:18 AM »
I gave Trump a pass on this, and I'm giving Biden a pass on this.  At some point, SOMEONE has to recognize that this is both bigger and more complicated than either "Let's give them sanctuary" or "Let's strand them behind a wall" can solve.  It's also far more complex than can be adequately communicated in quippy tweets or in static, staged photo ops.


Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20002
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2371 on: March 29, 2021, 09:34:53 AM »
I gave Trump a pass on this, and I'm giving Biden a pass on this.  At some point, SOMEONE has to recognize that this is both bigger and more complicated than either "Let's give them sanctuary" or "Let's strand them behind a wall" can solve.  It's also far more complex than can be adequately communicated in quippy tweets or in static, staged photo ops.

Quick, get some lotto tickets folks, Stads and I agree on something. And the last line, it's so much at the core of it. I bet with enough digging we could find quotes from the recent GOP visit to the border that are an exact match to one's from the Dems two years ago.

Goddammit.

Offline jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 34907
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2372 on: March 29, 2021, 09:54:25 AM »
I gave Trump a pass on this, and I'm giving Biden a pass on this.  At some point, SOMEONE has to recognize that this is both bigger and more complicated than either "Let's give them sanctuary" or "Let's strand them behind a wall" can solve.  It's also far more complex than can be adequately communicated in quippy tweets or in static, staged photo ops.

Quick, get some lotto tickets folks, Stads and I agree on something. And the last line, it's so much at the core of it. I bet with enough digging we could find quotes from the recent GOP visit to the border that are an exact match to one's from the Dems two years ago.

Goddammit.

Twice in one week!!!  Somewhere in the world, someone is getting hit by lightning, while being eaten by a shark.
Fox = drip-feeding dumb people with rage-porn. CNN = drip-feeding smug assholes with moral reassurance.
I'll do my best, but this? The guy's getting Llamathrust.
Happy is the dog that stops and licks his balls.

Offline TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 49178
  • Gender: Male
  • Kip Rolled
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2373 on: March 29, 2021, 09:00:02 PM »
I gave Trump a pass on this, and I'm giving Biden a pass on this.  At some point, SOMEONE has to recognize that this is both bigger and more complicated than either "Let's give them sanctuary" or "Let's strand them behind a wall" can solve.  It's also far more complex than can be adequately communicated in quippy tweets or in static, staged photo ops.

Quick, get some lotto tickets folks, Stads and I agree on something. And the last line, it's so much at the core of it. I bet with enough digging we could find quotes from the recent GOP visit to the border that are an exact match to one's from the Dems two years ago.

Goddammit.

Twice in one week!!!  Somewhere in the world, someone is getting hit by lightning, while being eaten by a shark.

 :lol
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 43525
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2374 on: March 30, 2021, 08:52:49 AM »
I gave Trump a pass on this, and I'm giving Biden a pass on this.  At some point, SOMEONE has to recognize that this is both bigger and more complicated than either "Let's give them sanctuary" or "Let's strand them behind a wall" can solve.  It's also far more complex than can be adequately communicated in quippy tweets or in static, staged photo ops.

Quick, get some lotto tickets folks, Stads and I agree on something. And the last line, it's so much at the core of it. I bet with enough digging we could find quotes from the recent GOP visit to the border that are an exact match to one's from the Dems two years ago.

Goddammit.

Twice in one week!!!  Somewhere in the world, someone is getting hit by lightning, while being eaten by a shark.
It was me, and frankly, I don't appreciate it.

So cut it out.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2375 on: March 30, 2021, 11:09:01 AM »
Hey Stads...Have you read about this yet?...


Quote
The report, "Averting Targeted School Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Analysis of Plots Against Schools," found that students who plotted attacks shared many similarities with students who carried out violent attacks.

The students who plotted the attacks had "histories of school discipline and contact with law enforcement," they experienced "bullying or had mental health issues" and "used drugs or alcohol."

The report concluded, "School violence is preventable when communities identify warning signs and intervene."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-service-national-threat-assessment-center/#app
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2376 on: March 30, 2021, 12:58:43 PM »
Hey Stads...Have you read about this yet?...


Quote
The report, "Averting Targeted School Violence: A U.S. Secret Service Analysis of Plots Against Schools," found that students who plotted attacks shared many similarities with students who carried out violent attacks.

The students who plotted the attacks had "histories of school discipline and contact with law enforcement," they experienced "bullying or had mental health issues" and "used drugs or alcohol."

The report concluded, "School violence is preventable when communities identify warning signs and intervene."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-service-national-threat-assessment-center/#app
Man, I'd have expected better from the US Secret Service. That report is terrible. Seems to have been written with an eye towards being misrepresented, or, perhaps, instigating an agenda. If you read the actual report it starts to look pretty silly.

Quote
histories of school discipline and contact with law enforcement

Thirty-seven and thirty percent respectively, making this a piss-poor indicator of future violence. Moreover, the causes for school discipline include everything, including talking too loudly and dress code violations. I'd honestly be amazed if that isn't less than the overall average. Anybody here never have any school disciplinary action?

Quote
they experienced "bullying or had mental health issues"

Sixty-seven percent, here, making it a much better indicator. Or at least it would be if the criteria didn't include anger, depression, nightmares, feelings of insecurity, suicidal thoughts, or anxiety. In other words, typical adolescent turmoil. As for bullying, forty-seven percent. Just under the national average. Again, poor indicator.

Quote
used drugs or alcohol

Thirty-three percent of them, and that includes alcohol. Again, we might actually be under the national average here, and it's still only a third of potential maniacs.

There actually is one pretty decent indicator in there. A fascination with violence does factor into it, go figure, and the study doesn't define it so broadly to include everybody.

Quote
Two-thirds of plotters (n = 29, 67%) had an interest in violence evidenced by their planning behaviors (e.g., researching prior attacks or other violent themes), communications, having an unusual or inappropriate interest in consuming violent content (e.g., serial killers, terrorist attacks, assassinations, violent or graphic media)

Seems to me that this should be dumped into the "well, no shit" column, but it actually does appear to be a reasonable indicator.

I do want to include a caveat in here. All of those percentages include a significant "unknown" percentage. Usually around half. Frankly, it seems to me that if half of each of your indicators can't be ascertained, then you probably shouldn't be trying to sell what you've got. But, if their intention is to make a fuss about the third of wannabe maniacs that had drug or alcohol use in their past, then that's the number that should be scrutinized. At best I'd say that this was just a completely worthless study with too many unknowns and generalizations. At worst I'd go back to that agenda thing I first referred to. If you want to foster an environment where everybody is always on the lookout for the weird kids, this is a pretty good step.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28239
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2377 on: March 30, 2021, 01:59:39 PM »
I think El Barto brought up some good points, but the two that struck me the most was that "unknown" level, and the comparison with "norms".  That was a big red flag for me as I read that report.

I mean, it's a start though; the more data we can get and the more information we can collect, the better we'll be.  But there were simply too many times reading that where I thought "Yeah, they did "X" before they did "Y", but did EVERYONE (or most of the people) that did "X" go on to do "Y"?"

Offline Ben_Jamin

  • Posts: 12380
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm just a man, thrown into existence by the gods
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2378 on: March 30, 2021, 02:53:06 PM »
I kinda laughed when I saw that too. I was all really, that's the Secret Service we have. I had to dig through a couple of articles and landed on this one to post. All had this Agenda type of feel to them...But as Stads said, it's a start, although a small leap forwards.

It at least sheds light into how These Children all MENTALLY have these thoughts. Which I think, it stems from some past trauma they experienced in their childhood, which is usually at the home, the environment they were raised in. All mental problems have roots that begin at the home, during the upbringing in childhood. And once we hit the age where we start to perceive the world for what it really is, these problems can escalate as they become more suppressed. Which is when these kids usually act out on those thoughts and feelings and decide to plan to shoot the school up.

I don't care how or if there is a Gun easily accessible to them. Although, I think, they do help the child make their decision easier to implement and act upon. What I care about, is why they feel the need to shoot up the school? Why do they want to go out and kill people they likely don't even know either, and could be having the same problems they are going through?

What I think is, We need to talk and listen to the children, and understand their feelings and thoughts of what is going on, how do they feel about Mommy or Daddy being away from them so much, How do they feel about Mommy or Daddy being mean to them and hitting them all the time.  And also, let them know as well, there is someone out there who is thinking and going through the same bullshit they are, and they are not alone in these thoughts, and that the only difference is most don't act upon these thoughts or feelings. And to teach them ways in which they can vent this all out, some do sports, some do music, some are in karate, some work on building things, there are various ways to help these children mentally vent those feelings, and escape those thoughts. 

What's sad about it is, children go through this not at a fault of their own. It's a cycle of abuse and trauma. If that's all someone knows, it's what they will do, because it's all they know. And this reveals how Society really is....where the mentality of children is being affected by the amount of time parents are away from their kids. It seems like they do not have the time to sit down with their kids, to listen to what they have to say, and spend time with them. Be it the parent(s) whom are struggling to work to make money, or the crack addicted parent who abuses and mistreats their child. Both are not taking the time to be with their child, all an effect of Society, that is affecting their mentality...

Maybe this is also why we have a lot of the supposed "Antifa" crowd. All you have to look at is their age range. The ones I see look my age, and younger, and we are a part of this society and its effect on our mentality.
I don't know how they can be so proud of winning with them odds. - Little Big Man

"We can't rewrite history. We can learn our own history, and share it with other people. While, we learn, from them, their history." -Me,Myself,I

Offline El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25679
  • Bad Craziness
Re: P/R side chat thread, v. I am not a number I am a free man
« Reply #2379 on: March 30, 2021, 03:23:13 PM »
What is this mental problem that you think they all have? You've gone so far as to link it to childhood trauma now, as if you have an understanding of what their problem is. How does it manifest itself? Simply that they don't share the accepted values of the nation as a whole? I don't get it.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson