The US Politics |OT|

[KLAMarine]

the-pi-guy said:

KLAMarine said:

"It has nothing to do with everyone having a gun or banning all guns. It is merely a nullification of NRA rhetoric."

>And I think you actually strengthened NRA rhetoric: the gun as a non-factor means banning guns will achieve nothing with regards to deaths. You stated earlier

"The point is that if you proclaim that people are the problem (not gun), then you must also claim people are the solution (not gun). It's basically a nullification of the NRA rhetoric."

>If I were an NRA member, I'd add "Yes! I will happily claim guns are neither the problem nor solution: they're a non-factor! So leave guns out of this topic! Don't even bring them up!"

"You first decided to use the nullification tangentially as a means to suggest we should all have guns (which was not the point)."

>When did I suggest we should all have guns? Could you copy-paste the exact point where I suggested such a thing?

You're focusing on the people part of the equation.  His joke is about the gun part.  The point of the joke is that guns are nonconsequential.  So the argument that guns shouldn't be banned because they are used to protect people literally flies in the face of the same logic that the NRA touts with their claim that "guns don't kill people".  

And yes the NRA does argue about the people part of the equation, but the crucial part of their campaign is that guns are essential, which according to their logic they aren't.

Snoopy said:

According to that graph, the economy was better when Republicans controlled both the house and the presidency. Thank you for proving my point I guess. Don't know why you would do that for.

According to the graph:

-Unemployment started declining from 2009.

*2010 elections, would lead to 2011 Republicans controlling the house*

-Unemployment continues to decline the same way it did before.

So basically since the trend was constant, but since Republicans were in charge during part of it, it's all thanks to them.  

It's like watching a baseball team start scoring 3 runs every single inning, and then giving all the credit to the one guy who joined during the 3rd inning.

Not to mention, you are literally giving credit to the coach who only came in the 8th inning.  

Because according to you, everything that is good that happens during a Republican or a Democrat (anything in charge) is thanks to a Republican.  

And conversely everything bad is thanks to a Democrat, regardless of who's in charge.  

The frustrating thing about this, is that you're the only one claiming that your side is good and the other side is bad.  No one else has claimed that every economic success was thanks to Democrats, and every economic failure is because of Republicans.

I think the NRA would be okay with calling guns inconsequential: they neither kill nor protect people thus no reason to ban them and it would take more work to ban them than to allow their unrestricted distribution.

Take path of least resistance.

sundin13 said:

KLAMarine said:

So you can punish behavior that is undesirable. Murder is undesirable hence we have laws against it.

I think it is a little more complicated than that. Laws serve both a proactive and a reactive function. They exist both to punish people and to prevent additional crimes from occurring.

Proactive function is one of the important and overlooked aspects of gun control legislation in my opinion. It essentially allows creates a situation where the police are able to intervene before an incident occurs. For example, if an individual is stockpiling illegal weapons to use in a shooting, the fact that these weapons are illegal allow the police to step in and arrest this individual. If these weapons were made legal, the police would be unable to act without further information. This is also one of the goals of "red flag" laws.

Your description sounds reactive: police are reacting to a law being broken, in this case possession of illegal weapons.

Proactive would be someone not possessing illegal weapons to begin with because they're illegal.

I think it's easier to tally up cases of the former than the latter.