• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
GaWx said:
Good point but the problem is that whereas there are strict gun laws in Chicago and Illinois in general, surrounding states don't have these. If the entire country had strict gun laws, would Chicago's murder rate drop? Nobody knows but I think it should be considered a possiiblity.
Click to expand...
I answered that indirectly in my very next post.... you'd also have to completely secure the border. I'll be honest, we are only kidding ourselves if we think in a country as large as ours, with over 350 million people, that we can keep all weapons off the streets. It's not going to happen. Similar to the old "the lock is for the honest man" concept, gun laws will only effect law abiding citizens.
 
Last edited:
metwannabe said:
I answered that indirectly in my very next post.... you'd also have to completely secure the border. I'll be honest, we are only kidding ourselves if we think in a country as large as ours, with over 350 million people, that we can keep all weapons off the streets. It's not going to happen. Similar to the old "the lock is for the honest man" concept, gun laws will only effect law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...

Of course not all and very likely not nearly all, but wouldn't it be possible for a net reduction with stricter US laws, especially if the border is secured? If you somehow knew this, would you be open to any new laws?
 
What are some examples of stricter gun laws? That term gets thrown around a lot, but the only ideas I ever hear are: Ban guns completely, ban assualt assault weapons, ban ammo, reduce magazine sizes, extend waiting periods for weapons purchases, and more comprehensive background checks.

What else would be possible?
 
Rain Cold said:
What are some examples of stricter gun laws? That term gets thrown around a lot, but the only ideas I ever hear are: Ban guns completely, ban assualt assault weapons, ban ammo, reduce magazine sizes, extend waiting periods for weapons purchases, and more comprehensive background checks.

What else would be possible?
Click to expand...

Further to this, would those who do not want any new gun laws be open to anything in RC's list? Even just one thing? I can't help but think there's something that can be done nationally in combo with securing our borders to result in a net reduction of gun related deaths. The stat comparison between the US and countries like Australia and many European countries is VERY stark. So, is there ANY open-mindedness for ANY change? We need more compromise in this country imo. The two sides being so extreme is ridiculous.
 
GaWx said:
Of course not all and very likely not nearly all, but wouldn't it be possible for a net reduction with stricter US laws, especially if the border is secured? If you somehow knew this, would you be open to any new laws?
Click to expand...
In a word, no. It's far more complicated than that and remember my initial statement was to remove any reference to the 2nd amendment for this argument sake. I say that just because as an avid 2nd amendment defender my answer is no based off of our rights until that right is change through the proper process, doubtful that will ever happen.

However you said net reduction and conceded that you still would not get all guns off the street. My point remains, those who do not abide by the laws will still get access to the guns even after a net reduction. strict gun laws do not affect those who do not follow laws in the 1st place. Another point I always make also is evil is real and evil will find a way. There's absolutely nothing to stop an individual who's driving a 2 ton truck, sees a group of individuals they hate and decides to run them down. We need to address the real problems at the root And stop targeting the weapon of choice.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
metwannabe said:
In a word, no. It's far more complicated than that and remember my initial statement was to remove any reference to the 2nd amendment for this argument sake. I say that just because as an avid 2nd amendment defender my answer is no based off of our rights until that right is change through the proper process, doubtful that will ever happen.

However you said net reduction and conceded that you still would not get all guns off the street. My point remains, those who do not abide by the laws will still get access to the guns even after a net reduction. strict gun laws do not affect those who do not follow laws in the 1st place. Another point I always make also is evil is real and evil will find a way. There's absolutely nothing to stop an individual who's driving a 2 ton truck, sees a group of individuals they hate and decides to run them down. We need to address the real problems at the root And stop targeting the weapon of choice.
Click to expand...

I agree "evil" is real and hard to stop. But is there way more evil per capita in the US than in countries with much, much, much lower gun related murder rates like in Britain, Germany, and Australia? If so, why?
 
GaWx said:
Further to this, would those who do not want any new gun laws be open to anything in RC's list? Even just one thing? I can't help but think there's something that can be done nationally in combo with securing our borders to result in a net reduction of gun related deaths. The stat comparison between the US and countries like Australia and many European countries is VERY stark. So, is there ANY open-mindedness for ANY change? We need more compromise in this country imo. The two sides being so extreme is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Larry let me ask you a question. If we were somehow able put up a 50' impenetrable wall and guaranteed not one single gun was smuggled into our country and then we're able to confiscate the 300 million guns at a currently on the streets and guarantee that not a single person other than military and law enforcement had weapons would that absolutely prevent someone who has so much hatred for another, would it prevent them from killing that individual? Or do you think they would find means to carry out that act? And then how would I be able to defend myself or my family? serious questions and forgive the text I'm doing speak text and it doesn't understand my Southern accent.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
GaWx said:
I agree "evil" is real and hard to stop. But is there way more evil per capita in the US than in countries with much, much, much lower gun related murder rates like in Britain, Germany, and Australia? If so, why?
Click to expand...
Population? And this is not in any way shape or form a knock on immigration, I understand the role immigration played in our country and my ancestors were obviously immigrants. but we also are a country like no other that has allowed all individuals of all backgrounds regardless of personal beliefs, cultures, religions, the melting pot of the world.... And unfortunately due to the sinful nature of mankind, This great thing about our country also comes with problems.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
metwannabe said:
Larry let me ask you a question. If we were somehow able put up a 50' impenetrable wall and guaranteed not one single gun was smuggled into our country and then we're able to confiscate the 300 million guns at a currently on the streets and guarantee that not a single person other than military and law enforcement had weapons would that absolutely prevent someone who has so much hatred for another, would it prevent them from killing that individual? Or do you think they would find means to carry out that act? And then how would I be able to defend myself or my family? serious questions and forgive the text I'm doing speak text and it doesn't understand my Southern accent.
Click to expand...

I absolutely do not want to have all guns confiscated. That is the opposite extreme and is a nonstarter for me. I'm talking about some of the other things in RC's list or perhaps something else not known to me. I'm looking for compromise between the two sides. Somewhere between doing nothing and confiscating all 300 million guns and nowhere even close to that second extreme. And securing the borders in combination with any gun law changes.
 
metwannabe said:
Population? And this is not in any way shape or form a knock on immigration, I understand the role immigration played in our country and my ancestors were obviously immigrants. but we also are a country like no other that has allowed all individuals of all backgrounds regardless of personal beliefs, cultures, religions, the melting pot of the world.... And unfortunately due to the sinful nature of mankind, This great thing about our country also comes with problems.
Click to expand...

To clarify, I of course mean stats incorporating adjustments for population differences. Some folks on the left leave these adjustments out to make it look worse than it is. However, even after these signficant adjustments, the US stats are still much worse (much higher per capita gun murder rates). But the other things you mention are valid imo.
 
GaWx said:
I absolutely do not want to have all guns confiscated. That is the opposite extreme and is a nonstarter for me. I'm talking about some of the other things in RC's list or perhaps something else not known to me. I'm looking for compromise between the two sides. Somewhere between doing nothing and confiscating all 300 million guns and nowhere even close to that second extreme. And securing the borders in combination with any gun law changes.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that and not everyone thinks like you do unfortunately. Most on the left if you ever opened the door to changing gun laws it's never enough and eventually it leads to confiscation, some of them have already been transparent about that. with that said there are laws place now, waiting periods and background checks are there. Unfortunately oftentimes information entered into the database is either outdated not completed or sometimes the system just fails. I have serious concerns about the banning of any so called assault style rifles. Who defines what assault style is? And then where does the ban end?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
GaWx said:
To clarify, I of course mean stats incorporating adjustments for population differences. Some folks on the left leave these adjustments out to make it look worse than it is. However, even after these signficant adjustments, the US stats are still much worse (much higher per capita gun murder rates). But the other things you mention are valid imo.
Click to expand...
Larry, I've enjoyed this little mini debate, but now I've got a goat barn to work on

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
hmmm just being reported tonight

An autopsy found that financier Jeffrey Epstein sustained multiple breaks in his neck bones, according to two people familiar with the findings, deepening the mystery about the circumstances around his death.

Among the bones broken in Epstein's neck was the hyoid bone, which in men is near the Adam's apple. Such breaks can occur in those who hang themselves, particularly if they are older, according to forensics experts and studies on the subject. But they are more common in victims of homicide by strangulation, the experts said.
 
The left are saying that the Philadelphia shooting is highlighting the need for gun contro"l. Shocker! The only facts we know as of now from yesterday are; this guy Was in the act of committing a felony, was a convicted felon with a record dating back nearly 19 years that includes firearms charges. That tells me he possessed the weapons he had illegally.
Short of confiscating every single weapon in this country and guaranteeing beyond a shadow of a doubt that no weapon could ever be smuggled into this country, tell me what law or gun control measure would have stopped this maniac?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
metwannabe said:
The left are saying that the Philadelphia shooting is highlighting the need for gun contro"l. Shocker! The only facts we know as of now from yesterday are; this guy Was in the act of committing a felony, was a convicted felon with a record dating back nearly 19 years that includes firearms charges. That tells me he possessed the weapons he had illegally.
Short of confiscating every single weapon in this country and guaranteeing beyond a shadow of a doubt that no weapon could ever be smuggled into this country, tell me what law or gun control measure would have stopped this maniac?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I love how certain people were rushing to judgment yesterday before facts were even known
 
GaWx said:
The good thing for Biden getting hit hard now is how early it is, still 7 months before the Iowa caucuses. If this had occurred, say, 6+ months later, it likely would have been harder to recover from it. But now he has plenty of time to recover. He is a true moderate, the only Dem with a very long moderate record. There’s no consistent moderate record from Harris. The Dems best chance is to convince enough swing and independent voters to go Dem. Biden would be the perfect candidate for that.

Keep in mind that the polls and betting sites, just like the stock markets, tend to overreact in knee jerk reactions. Therefore, I expect a correction of some of that overreaction in the weeks to come.

It can’t hurt that folks like civil rights activist John Lewis are defending Biden. Hopefully, he and other civil rights folks will keep up this defense.
Click to expand...

And Biden, indeed, comes all the way back up as Harris falls back (actually even sooner than I expected). Prior to the late June debate, he had been way up on Harris. then Harris had her moments against Biden and he fell to only 5% above Harris. Now, he's back to being a whopping 24% above her (29% vs 5%) and being back to being up 14% over all other Dems:

"CNN Poll: Joe Biden regains double-digit lead over 2020 Democratic field" (The short video in there illustrates this well).

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...0-democratic-field/ar-AAG3Y69?ocid=spartanntp
 
GaWx said:
And Biden, indeed, comes all the way back up as Harris falls back (actually even sooner than I expected). Prior to the late June debate, he had been way up on Harris. then Harris had her moments against Biden and he fell to only 5% above Harris. Now, he's back to being a whopping 24% above her (29% vs 5%) and being back to being up 14% over all other Dems:

"CNN Poll: Joe Biden regains double-digit lead over 2020 Democratic field" (The short video in there illustrates this well).

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...0-democratic-field/ar-AAG3Y69?ocid=spartanntp
Click to expand...
If Biden gets the nomination, the Trump 2nd term landslide will surpass Reagan's ...
 
pcbjr said:
If Biden gets the nomination, the Trump 2nd term landslide will surpass Reagan's ...
Click to expand...

I don’t know, Phil. I’m thinking the opposite as I think the best chance to beat Trump is with a more moderate Dem like Biden who can get more crossovers, independents, and moderates than someone like the far left Warren. His long history is evidence that he’s a moderate at heart who prefers to work with the GOP to come up with compromises rather than fight them tooth and nail. I’ve been following him since he was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee some 30 or so years ago. I think in his heart he’s for America first rather than Dems first.

Of course, the biggest factor will likely be the economy a year from now. It’s the economy, stupid.
 
GaWx said:
I don’t know, Phil. I’m thinking the opposite as I think the best chance to beat Trump is with a more moderate Dem like Biden who can get more crossovers, independents, and moderates than someone like the far left Warren. His long history is evidence that he’s a moderate at heart who prefers to work with the GOP to come up with compromises rather than fight them tooth and nail. I’ve been following him since he was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee some 30 or so years ago. I think in his heart he’s for America first rather than Dems first.

Of course, the biggest factor will likely be the economy a year from now. It’s the economy, stupid.
Click to expand...

The biggest factor will be his stamina and the ability to make 2 coherent sentences back to back, if it's the 2 of them ...

Not taking sides, just looking at reality ...
 
pcbjr said:
The biggest factor will be his stamina and the ability to make 2 coherent sentences back to back, if it's the 2 of them ...

Not taking sides, just looking at reality ...
Click to expand...

But that’s part of the Uncle Joe charm. ;)
 
GaWx said:
I don’t know, Phil. I’m thinking the opposite as I think the best chance to beat Trump is with a more moderate Dem like Biden who can get more crossovers, independents, and moderates than someone like the far left Warren. His long history is evidence that he’s a moderate at heart who prefers to work with the GOP to come up with compromises rather than fight them tooth and nail. I’ve been following him since he was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee some 30 or so years ago. I think in his heart he’s for America first rather than Dems first.

Of course, the biggest factor will likely be the economy a year from now. It’s the economy, stupid.
Click to expand...
Yeah Biden is definitely not as extreme as Warren. The Democratic party would be stupid to choose her because they'll be asking for what happened in 2016 to Hillary. Bernie would only win young Democrats mostly and would fail as well. Biden would be the best bet for them.

For the economy, yeah it's anyone's guess, but if the recession happens to show up before November of 2020 you might as well count on Trump losing as the economy being strong right now he takes credit for. If it goes sour then he's losing his strongest point for being re-elected. If it stays strong for the remainder of the time, he's probably going to still have to put that fight up against Biden assuming he's the nominee.
 
Haha I hope creepy old man is the Dems pick. The only hope the Dems have is that the US does go through the normal recession. I still think Trump can’t be stopped like him or not. He’s a asshole and people love it. It’s going to fun to watch. Georgia economy is doing great. My economy is doing great. I like the path we are on and don’t want to see it derailed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
NoSnowATL said:
Haha I hope creepy old man is the Dems pick. The only hope the Dems have is that the US does go through the normal recession. I still think Trump can’t be stopped like him or not. He’s a asshole and people love it. It’s going to fun to watch. Georgia economy is doing great. My economy is doing great. I like the path we are on and don’t want to see it derailed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Think the one in the White House now has some real serious issues, Medal of Honor, really!
 
So happy to see my county remove the Confederate memorial in front of the courthouse. It is a participation trophy for the losing side and nothing more. If it was a statue of Sherman I'm pretty sure it would offend the same people who want to keep it
 
Heelyes said:
So happy to see my county remove the Confederate memorial in front of the courthouse. It is a participation trophy for the losing side and nothing more. If it was a statue of Sherman I'm pretty sure it would offend the same people who want to keep it
Click to expand...

History is history, it tells the story of America good or bad. You shouldn’t be offered by it, you learn from it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
NoSnowATL said:
History is history, it tells the story of America good or bad. You shouldn’t be offered by it, you learn from it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
If it was just about history, why is there no monuments for world war I, world war II, Vietnam, Korea or the revolutionary war? I will tell you why. The statue was put up by bitter racist people who wanted to keep the past alive. It's not a statue that honors all veterans of the great war, just "our Confederate heroes". They were traitors
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top