If only there was something we could do...

[Cisco Kid]

It's never too late. With a public education program, we got rid of blasting caps in the 50's and let blacks use any bathroom in the 70's. If you don't live here, you really can't understand the persuasive power of American Marketing (propaganda) to alter the ability of the human brain to think rationally which is the goal of American Marketing. No matter what it is you heard, Tide will NOT make your white clothes a brighter white than your neighbors. But it worked to sell Tide.

[UkBCyeti]

Glad to hear that.
The historian inside me is leaning towards end of empire, culture being torn apart from within type stuff. Romans, Carthaginians etc.
TBH those of us from outside are well aware of the power of American Marketing, Nike, Jordan, McDonalds, Taylor Swift, and for those of us that follow rugby.. Louis Rees Zammit to NFL?????

[TBS]

While it’s a little dated, read Mindf*ck by Christopher Wylie, a founder of Cambridge Analytica. It describes how certain right-wing elements (Mercer, Bannon) used social media to influence the 2016 elections and the Brexit vote. Through mining Facebook data, they could create a complete profile of someone on the 5point personality scale (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Fi...onality_traits) and then target media to feed on their fears, phobias, etc.

No, not saying that -- just that it isn't the only option. Why should instant lethality be the first line of defense?

Because the 24/7 open carry folks are ‘fraidy cats scared of everything that isn’t white and stupid?

[nickwm21]

Long time lurker, first time poster in this thread. Just been enjoying the show ( the Leroy show, not the US mass shootings show, just to be clear), but finally ran out of popcorn, so I thought I'd chime in with some questions I had. This reminded me.
As a person who grew up in a country with strong gun control, and that has statistically had low to nil gun deaths because of it, how can some people even argue against the fact that less guns = less people killed by guns?
If gun control meant it was harder to get guns, wouldn't there be less crime related deaths, because people would have to use their hands/knives etc? Surely this means you have to actually feel the implement do the damage, rather than just pulling with your trigger finger from distance?

For those of you that believe gun control is the answer, is it too late?

Trying to get my head round the dilemma, when the answer seems obvious

Yes - in theory it’s that simple.

A few things that make it difficult for an outsider to understand.
- 100 years of media promoting a culture of “I need this thing to protect my family and property”.
- A political system that has evolved to focus on single issue voters.
- A government designed to regulate at the state level over national.
- 500 million of these things already out in the wild.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[UkBCyeti]

I hear you. The overall ability to make the change is a huge project with many hurdles it seems like. The first is the one I don't quite understand, and I think that's where the confusion comes in. People who claim to be decent people are for an implement designed to kill and nothing else, being available in a country that has vary unlikely odds of being invaded or terrorised by a foreign power.
That's some pretty incredible media power.

The polarisation of an electorate with a two part only system can't be helping either, as it makes that single issue voter more capable of being heard at a higher level within the system?

TBS, the Brexit vote was a perfect example of apathy from a populace being used to further an agenda as well. Not many of the younger generation even thought it worth voting on, as they couldn't see who would vote for it.

[Mazderati]

People who claim to be decent people are for an implement designed to kill and nothing else, being available in a country that has vary unlikely odds of being invaded or terrorised by a foreign power.
That's some pretty incredible media power.

It's at least as much a fear of domestic powers which is the real magic.

[Cisco Kid]

Glad to hear that.
The historian inside me is leaning towards end of empire, culture being torn apart from within type stuff. Romans, Carthaginians etc.
TBH those of us from outside are well aware of the power of American Marketing, Nike, Jordan, McDonalds, Taylor Swift, and for those of us that follow rugby.. Louis Rees Zammit to NFL?????

Our form of American Democracy based on the Constitution WAS supposed to protect against The End but it was based on the lawmakers have personal code of honor to the Constitution. The leader of our Senate had said Trump had broken Constitutional law for leading an insurrection attempt and then yesterday licked trumps balls by endorsing him to be president again. I have followed trump in the news since he and Jeff were doing cocaine at discos. Everything Trumps has has said translates to wanting to be like Kim, Vlad and the rest of the dictators. If I lived in Finland or Norway or now I'd be looking at the Ukraine and sweating bullets.

[UkBCyeti]

Doesn't seem like the Constitution is doing it's job then, eh?
Yeah I think there's some nervousness around what's next with all the big players in world politics. Vlad is on a bit of a mission, and it looks like Kim is going to be pissed the US and SK are playing games on his front lawn... and now the Chinese are no longer sharing their yearly government news conference.
To bring it back on track though.
That's pretty impressive to have that much fear of domestic powers in a democratic nation.

[Cisco Kid]

For starters, the writers of the Constitution never envisioned a president/leader who feels it's ok to put his fingers up a woman's pussy, and call POW's losers. It's worrysome to me.

[dan_pdx]

For starters, the writers of the Constitution never envisioned a president/leader who feels it's ok to put his fingers up a woman's pussy, and call POW's losers. It's worrysome to me.

I mean, I think the writers of the Constitution would have been fine with a president who engaged in a little digital intercourse. What they never could have imagined was a president who talked about it in a public setting.

💯 on the POWs

It has been interesting but not surprising to see how Trump reveals that all the things the right said they cared about (rule of law, supporting the pax Americana, etc) don't really matter to them as long as they can be bigoted against the people they hate

[::: :::]

Doesn't seem like the Constitution is doing it's job then, eh?
Yeah I think there's some nervousness around what's next with all the big players in world politics. Vlad is on a bit of a mission, and it looks like Kim is going to be pissed the US and SK are playing games on his front lawn... and now the Chinese are no longer sharing their yearly government news conference.
To bring it back on track though.
That's pretty impressive to have that much fear of domestic powers in a democratic nation.

when you have elected lawmakers trying to find the gameable weak spots in our governmental system to leverage their personal agendas, it starts to show its age quickly and how it fundamentally relies on the ethics of those who serve

[thedude2340]

I mean, I think the writers of the Constitution would have been fine with a president who engaged in a little digital intercourse. What they never could have imagined was a president who talked about it in a public setting.

Agreed, and,

In his defense (hard to write that), I believe he said grab them *by* the pvussy, not necessarily *in* the pvussy

Words are important after all, now back to pew pew. I’m honored to have contributed to this important thread.

[riser4]

now back to pew pew

We get laser guns?!?!? I want a laser gun!!!

[leroy jenkins]

Reading comp a problem? All those were in my home county.

Sad one. Sniper found their target.

https://www.fox13seattle.com/news/fa...unknown-gunman

The reading comprehension to see you said 50 a year repeatedly on a single highway and it ends up being 9 in one single year in a single county, which is a fluke and will not be repeated yearly?

[leroy jenkins]

No, not saying that -- just that it isn't the only option. Why should instant lethality be the first line of defense?

Ok, suggest something else and we'll talk about it. I'm not doing your homework for you.

[leroy jenkins]

For the record, I'd consider public policy that caused the adoption of swords and spears as common ways to defend oneself as wins. Misthrown spears seem like much less of a general hazard than missed firearm shots, nevermind carrying enough spears to create a mass casualty event.

And, while I'd prefer to avoid either, given the choice between someone with an AR intending to kill as many people as possible and the same person with a katana, I'll take option two.

I guess you don't care about women's safety at all. Firearms are the great equalizer. Mele weapons far less so.


If you really wnt mass casualties guns aren't the ideal. Poison or explosives.

[Cisco Kid]

Ask Santa for one this year.

[::: :::]

Ok, suggest something else and we'll talk about it. I'm not doing your homework for you.

jfc


Thoughtful decision-making
Groups of people
Move/walk/run away
Locked doors
Security systems
Law enforcement
Public places
Whistle
Spray irritant
Handful of dirt to eyes
Self defense classes
Knife/scissors
Short metal pipe/bat/baton
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider


But, but, but…what if a person is:
Dumb?
Alone?
Can’t walk?
Left door unlocked?
Forgot to turn on security system?
Isn’t in a police station?
Is in a remote forest?
Has asthma?
Is wearing a mitten?
Can’t go to a training class?
Is not allowed to run carrying a knife/scissors?
Has no arms?
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider

Very few people actually NEED guns
The fact is that people LIKE guns
Guns are dangerous because 1) they are so easy to misuse and so irreparably lethal; and 2) humans have shown over and over they are not trustworthy with lethal weapons — that is why they need to be well regulated

[dunfree]

We get laser guns?!?!? I want a laser gun!!!

wait till you see the power bill.

[toast2266]

I guess you don't care about women's safety at all. Firearms are the great equalizer. Mele weapons far less so.


If you really wnt mass casualties guns aren't the ideal. Poison or explosives.

Well, the constitution protects the right to bear arms, but "arms" isn't a defined term. Therefore, the general public needs access to *all* arms - anything less is unconstitutional.

Think of how safe women would be if they could mask up and deploy sarin gas against any would-be attackers! And if a good guy with a handgun is a deterrent to crime, think of how much *more* crime could be deterred if the good guys had RPG's. Better yet, if the good guys had some truly large armaments, we could effectuate a cold war on crime since the criminals would need to acknowledge the downsides of mutually assured destruction. We'd all be so safe!

(It always strikes me that the whole gun control debate is kind of silly. More or less everyone agrees that the majority of arms aren't appropriate for civilian ownership. Gun control advocates want to move the line of what's appropriate for civilians one small notch to the left. The gun nuts all cry constitutional foul, while ignoring that the vast majority of arms are already disallowed, apparently without infringing on the 2A.)

[dunfree]

jfc


Thoughtful decision-making
Groups of people
Move/walk/run away
Locked doors
Security systems
Law enforcement
Public places
Whistle
Spray irritant
Handful of dirt to eyes
Self defense classes
Knife/scissors
Short metal pipe/bat/baton
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider


But, but, but…what if a person is:
Dumb?
Alone?
Can’t walk?
Left door unlocked?
Forgot to turn on security system?
Isn’t in a police station?
Is in a remote forest?
Has asthma?
Is wearing a mitten?
Can’t go to a training class?
Is not allowed to run carrying a knife/scissors?
Has no arms?
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider

Very few people actually NEED guns
The fact is that people LIKE guns
Guns are dangerous because 1) they are so easy to misuse and so irreparably lethal; and 2) humans have shown over and over they are not trustworthy with lethal weapons — that is why they need to be well regulated

law enforcement does not have a duty to protect you. They are not to be relied on, and there are multiple victims who’s case law attests to this.

the problem with guns for self protection is the general time burden required to be proficient enough for self defense

[ex-powderbroker]

jfc why bother

https://www.thetrace.org/2016/05/gun...afer-debunked/

[::: :::]

law enforcement does not have a duty to protect you. They are not to be relied on, and there are multiple victims who’s case law attests to this.

the problem with guns for self protection is the general time burden required to be proficient enough for self defense

is it still in the lapd motto?

direct individual protection may not be the delegated duty per se, but collective "protection" is available through law enforcement as the service in civil society

[leroy jenkins]

I hear you. The overall ability to make the change is a huge project with many hurdles it seems like. The first is the one I don't quite understand, and I think that's where the confusion comes in. People who claim to be decent people are for an implement designed to kill and nothing else, being available in a country that has vary unlikely odds of being invaded or terrorised by a foreign power.
That's some pretty incredible media power.

The polarisation of an electorate with a two part only system can't be helping either, as it makes that single issue voter more capable of being heard at a higher level within the system?

TBS, the Brexit vote was a perfect example of apathy from a populace being used to further an agenda as well. Not many of the younger generation even thought it worth voting on, as they couldn't see who would vote for it.

The gun control bruu hah ha is used specifically and deliberately to increase polarization. If you want to decrease polarization, stop giving people like gavin newsome and his never going to go anywhere attempt to repeal the 2a. He knows this will never go anywhere but he used it deliberately to increase furor over guns to try and drum up outrage funding for his campaign.

This issue is used to divide us, create funding for both dem and gop candidates, but always establishment candidates.

Not everyone who is pro 2a has been brainwashed by the media. What an infantilizing masturbatory fart sniffing ridiculousness. Some people just disagree with you.

Less guns doesn't equal less deaths. LIke, your logic is sound less guns, less deaths, great, if we exist inside a little box, but if you acutally read history, the death tolls when unarmed populations are victimized by governments jumps into the hundreds of millions really quickly when shit goes that way, absolutely eclipsing the total numbers of all gun murders in democratic nations in the last hundred years.

But yea, the media lol. Cus the media is so pro gun? The largely anti gun media is brainwashing people? Or do you mean hollywood by the media? Their contradictory hard on for guns while being anti gun is odd, but really the media as a whole is anti gun.

[leroy jenkins]

jfc


Thoughtful decision-making
Groups of people
Move/walk/run away
Locked doors
Security systems
Law enforcement
Public places
Whistle
Spray irritant
Handful of dirt to eyes
Self defense classes
Knife/scissors
Short metal pipe/bat/baton
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider


But, but, but…what if a person is:
Dumb?
Alone?
Can’t walk?
Left door unlocked?
Forgot to turn on security system?
Isn’t in a police station?
Is in a remote forest?
Has asthma?
Is wearing a mitten?
Can’t go to a training class?
Is not allowed to run carrying a knife/scissors?
Has no arms?
Etc
Etc
Etc
Then gun as the fucking last thing to consider

Very few people actually NEED guns
The fact is that people LIKE guns
Guns are dangerous because 1) they are so easy to misuse and so irreparably lethal; and 2) humans have shown over and over they are not trustworthy with lethal weapons — that is why they need to be well regulated

Why are you ok with someone stabbing someone to death in self defense, but not ok with them using a gun? How is getting stabbed to death better? Its just more dangerous to the person defending themselves.

I get you have an emotional attachment to just, anything other than guns, but besides your feelings, what are you really getting at here? That people don't have the right to self defense? If so, we're just going to have to disagree on that one. I have the right to self defense. So do you.

Some of this shit is just rediculous. Handful of dirt to the eyes? Ok dale gribble. Thanks for the laugh.

There are 500 million guns in the USA in private hands. THere are 20k gun murders a year, 80% of which are drug related. Empirically, gun owners are trustworthy as a whole. I am not afraid of my fellows being armed.