Current Affairs The " another shooting in America " thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 28206
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Pettifogger said:
Guns are now aligned with conservative ideology in the United States. One is a proxy for the other. So yes, it's definitely "because I can" somewhat (the general I here). It's a political fashion statement, I'd say, or at least the AR-15 craze is.

I'm from the South, so long before this started, it was extremely normal for people to own firearms. Rifles and shotguns for hunting, sidearms for collecting/personal defense (or hunting). Personal protection too, of course. We have a lot of brazen crime in the states. Peoples' doors get kicked in by gun wielding criminals, so there is definitely a "if all the criminals have guns, I want a gun too" thing. I don't find that particularly irrational, although I do fully recognize that the need for defensive use is relatively unlikely.
Click to expand...
They also get kicked in by gun wielding cops and not uncommon for them to shoot the confused armed house-owner who thinks they are criminals - even if the house is the wrong one.

Anyway not looking like any gun legislation is in store anytime soon, Republicans are going to try and slow walk until the news cycle moves on ...until the next one.
 
magicjuan said:
So to some degree there is a fashion element, one thst is supported and promoted by organisations such as the NRA, who, by their very nature have a need to fulfill that other right, to profit.
The promotion in a glamourous sense or of fear, has embedded itself in the American psyche over many decades, probably from the get go to defend against the indigenous population would you say? And that is why it is seen as a 'right'?
Is it male dominated? And if so is there an element of 'penis extension'. Genuine point.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by profit with regard to the NRA. I might say "stay relevant."

I do think it's embedded in the American psyche, yes. That's not why I would see it as a "right" but they're connected, certainly.

I'm sure it is male dominated, but there is a growing female contingent. And yes, there are plenty who see gun ownership as a badge of masculinity, or see it as a way to compensate. One common example is that a lot of "gun guys" aren't professionals, they're laborers, blue collar guys. Not all of course, a ton of professionals are obsessed with guns too. But anyway, I think there is a certain superiority that cuts across schooling, wealth, etc. as between gun guys (who are blue collar) and guys who are not (who may be professional).

It's seen beyond guns too. A car mechanic often puffs out his chest when the doctor comes in clueless about his vehicle.
 
We may well be horrified/bewildered by the gun culture in Merica. But it is what it is; an acceptance that guns are part o the fabric of their culture. From that, from the initial reason for the 2A, protection of you and your family, has resulted in the proliferation o them 200 years later.

To change that would be like getting Brits to stop drinking gin.
 
LinekersLegs said:
They also get kicked in by gun wielding cops and not uncommon for them to shoot the confused armed house-owner who thinks they are criminals - even if the house is the wrong one.

Anyway not looking like any gun legislation is in store anytime soon, Republicans are going to try and slow walk until the news cycle moves on ...until the next one.
Click to expand...


Don't get me started on no knock warrants or militarization of the police in America.
 
BirkenheadBlue said:
You know what would be required way less if there were less guns...?
Click to expand...

So now we're acknowledging the goal is to take away the guns, then? Because people promised me that wasn't the goal.

Anyway, sure, you're probably right to some extent. Of course, the average NRA member isn't the reason for no knock warrants and police militarization (neither of which are truly needed anyway). Which touches on a major issue for confiscation proponents. The people most likely to voluntary rid themselves of guns are ones least likely to engage in violent crime, I suspect. So what about all the guns in the hands of people who don't comply with the law?
 
Pettifogger said:
Guns are now aligned with conservative ideology in the United States. One is a proxy for the other. So yes, it's definitely "because I can" somewhat (the general I here). It's a political fashion statement, I'd say, or at least the AR-15 craze is.

I'm from the South, so long before this started, it was extremely normal for people to own firearms. Rifles and shotguns for hunting, sidearms for collecting/personal defense (or hunting). Personal protection too, of course. We have a lot of brazen crime in the states. Peoples' doors get kicked in by gun wielding criminals, so there is definitely a "if all the criminals have guns, I want a gun too" thing. I don't find that particularly irrational, although I do fully recognize that the need for defensive use is relatively unlikely.
Click to expand...

No they aren't. The NRA is though.
 
:oops:
Pettifogger said:
So now we're acknowledging the goal is to take away the guns, then? Because people promised me that wasn't the goal.
Click to expand...
Oooooh, you almost trapped me in your clever web of words.

While I personally would have little problem with guns being removed en masse, no, that isn’t the main goal.

I was simply pointing out the irony in the fact that something you seem to cherish so deeply is in large part to blame for those two thing you listed that you clearly don’t care for.

That said, if the “sensible” reforms were put in place they would certainly - over time - result in fewer guns in circulation.

Anyway, sure, you're probably right to some extent. Of course, the average NRA member isn't the reason for no knock warrants and police militarization (neither of which are truly needed anyway). Which touches on a major issue for confiscation proponents. The people most likely to voluntary rid themselves of guns are ones least likely to engage in violent crime, I suspect. So what about all the guns in the hands of people who don't comply with the law?
Click to expand...
“We can’t solve all gun deaths by reducing the number of guns, so let’s not bother trying to solve any of it”

You know what most illegally owned weapons start out as? Legally owned ones. Again, OVER TIME, the flow over illegal weapons would be hugely curtailed.

And no, not “just like the flow of drugs is?”. Drugs are infinitely easier to smuggle than guns, and to my knowledge no one can get pharmacologically addicted to AR-15’s (though occasionally I wonder)
 
BirkenheadBlue said:
:oops:
Oooooh, you almost trapped me in your clever web of words.

While I personally would have little problem with guns being removed en masse, no, that isn’t the main goal.

I was simply pointing out the irony in the fact that something you seem to cherish so deeply is in large part to blame for those two thing you listed that you clearly don’t care for.

That said, if the “sensible” reforms were put in place they would certainly - over time - result in fewer guns in circulation.


“We can’t solve all gun deaths by reducing the number of guns, so let’s not bother trying to solve any of it”

You know what most illegally owned weapons start out as? Legally owned ones. Again, OVER TIME, the flow over illegal weapons would be hugely curtailed.

And no, not “just like the flow of drugs is?”. Drugs are infinitely easier to smuggle than guns, and to my knowledge no one can get pharmacologically addicted to AR-15’s (though occasionally I wonder)
Click to expand...

So is the idea here that by raising age limits and adding waiting periods and the like, we're going to lessen the number of new guns that law-abiding citizens buy and therefore fewer of those guns get stolen, thus reducing gun crime?

While I don't think the premise is without logic, I think it'll fail to put a dent in the problem, and then, we move on to more aggressive gun control measures, as discussed a lot already. You guys are quick to point out that America has what, 300 million guns? How do the "sensible" reforms really impact that?

And something I cherish (guns I assume) aren't "largely to blame" for the two things I dislike (militarization of police and no knock warrants).
 
Ruairi77 said:
Seems like the NRA have more power in Georgia than Delta. Atlanta can wave goodbye to Amazon HQ2
Click to expand...


Delta will now probably put a hold on that massive hiring of flight attendants they were in the middle of no doubt or lay some random people in random roles to offset the losses like most companies do.

But yeah i am betting other companies will think hard about Georgia especially tech seen as most of the younger growing companies are run by lefty types
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top