All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[babyblob]

That's a standard.

Yea the NRA with no guns at their conventions. it is almost as if someone is worried this responsible, smart law abiding Gun Owners may do something with those legal firearms?

[Username taken]

Of course it will. Alito already has this hypocrisy on full display. But for conservatives, displays of hypocrisy are often the point. They're a signal of strength, that they can get away with doing whatever it is they want on the flimsiest of justifications.

Between all the “replacement theory”, stripping people of their rights, policing people’s bodies, anti-welfare for worker policies and the stringent, corrupt support of the gun lobbies, it’s safe to say that conservative thinking and philosophy has become a gigantic problem for the US.

The kind of things they are pushing now are literally leading to people dying and real discontent and fear in the country.

[Tendrin]

Between all the “replacement theory”, stripping people of their rights, policing people’s bodies, anti-welfare for worker policies and the stringent, corrupt support of the gun lobbies, it’s safe to say that conservative thinking and philosophy has become a gigantic problem for the US.

The kind of things they are pushing now are literally leading to people dying and real discontent and fear in the country.

They want a fearful populace.

[Panfoot]

Republicans are the new Nazis

[CSTowle]

So is the answer then that only the government, police, and criminals are able to arm themselves? I'm not asking that sarcastically, I'm asking that legitimately.

And to counter your point...after 9/11 and the beefing up of homeland security, airport security has increased ten fold. It's a terrible experience going to an airport now, but it's safer.

The solution is to get rid of guns gradually over time, ideally in a way similar to Australia, but given the size of the US and just generally how the government works here, this is something that would take years, maybe even decades to do. As for the TSA, well, there is a reason people refer to it as "security theater", it really hasn't made flying that much more safer, it just makes it "feel" like it is.

Was going to say this, it's widely known and has been stated by experts that most of the checkpoints and rituals we go through are theater and are there to make the public feel safe. If they happen to catch a particularly inept terrorist wannabe, great (especially for optics). A very low percentage of flights with armed undercover air marshals (not to mention not wanting to use a gun on a plane in the air in the first place, even if it becomes necessary). And yes, we do need to work on getting rid of some types of firearms or at least regulating them slowly over time. It's just that one side sees every sensible measure supported even by their base and a majority of card-carrying NRA members as a slippery slope on the path to a total ban on firearms, despite all reason and logic (which is a theme with that party).

But in Australia, police, criminals, and government still have guns - just the people don't. Again, is that what people want?

I still believe in the principle behind the 2nd Amendment, which was to protect people from invading forces, other people who would harm them, and yes their own government. I would love to live in a utopian society where this wasn't necessary but relatively recent history (i.e. Nazis) tells me that there is still too much evil with people in power that exists for everyone in the US to just surrender their means to defend themselves. When something like today happens, it makes me doubt everything. But again, when the alternative is that we just blindly trust the government or police to protect us? It makes me very uneasy

The idea that the forefathers couldn't predict advances in weaponry at the time they drafted the Bill of Rights isn't rooted in logic. They may not have foreseen nuclear bombs or chemical weapons, but there's plenty of literature from that time that clearly indicates they knew of advancing technology and the impacts that would have on warfare.

I'm not opposed to heavier restrictions or backgrounds on guns or their owners, but I always found that argument flimsy.

It's not a flimsy one in a world in which we have not only a standing army (no guarantee at the time of the founding), but a navy, air force, space travel capability and satellite surveillance, infrared motion tracking, drones, ICBMs, chemical/biological/nuclear weapons, military treaties with most of the developed world and bases around the world, a fleet of aircraft carriers and submarines with nuclear launch capability patrolling the world's oceans, etc. etc. etc. and you're citing "the need to defend against a tyrannical government" as one of the reasons to continue flooding the country with firearms.

It's true, in the 18th century where cannons and muskets were the greatest weapons the world's militaries had to threaten their people with we could be on equal or reasonably competitive footing with a tyrannical government. Today, that's only a masturbatory fantasy of the far-right who lack the self-esteem and feeling of power that a firearm artificially gives them and dream of using it against the government and anyone else who threatens their concept of what "America" means (see women who aren't submissive, minorities, gays, immigrants, etc. etc. etc.). So the argument is, what do we value more? The self-esteem of people who can't develop their own sense of self-worth and need to rely on the ability to wield objects that people actually do fear and respect (and that doesn't go beyond those objects to the wielders anymore than it would if a chimpanzee or robot were wielding them), or the lives of our children and other citizens who are their frequent victims? I know where I stand there.

[Tendrin]

Montana health officials say transgender people can’t change their birth certificates even if they undergo gender-confirmation surgery, in defiance of a court order.

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Montana health officials say transgender people can’t change their birth certificates even if they undergo gender-confirmation surgery, in defiance of a court order that had blocked the Republican-controlled state’s bid to restrict transgender rights.

READ MORE: Texas Supreme Court to allow state to investigate trans youth parents

The state health department said late Monday in an emergency order that it would no longer record the category of “gender” on people’s birth certificates, replacing that category with a listing for “sex” that can be changed only in rare circumstances.

Sex is “immutable,” according to the order, while gender is a “social…construct” that can change over time.

“Sex is different from gender and an immutable genetic fact, which is not changeable, even by surgery,” said the order from Adam Meier, direct of Public Health and Human Services.

So, transphobia again.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...s-even-surgery

[CTTT]

We're averaging more than one mass shooting a day. No other country in the world has this problem. Stop with the inane justifications for the status quo. CTTT over here literally giving us the Onion's 'No Way To Prevent This Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens'.

I wasn't justifying anything. I'm simply saying no matter the restrictions that are put in, that some crazy loon some terrorist or terrorist group will find a way to get guns and shoot people, So, the argument will be "yes there's still shootings, but there's LESS shootings". I would like 0 shootings but that's not going to happen unfortunately.

[CTTT]

Republicans are the new Nazis

And Democrats are innocent? Please do tell.

[GindyPosts]

And it's getting worse. Here in a mostly Red state Indiana the legislature passed a bill in March that allows permitlesss carry and you can carry a gun in public without a permit. You can still get one if you travel to a state that requires one. If for some reason you have been prohibited from owning a gun before the law goes into effect, that will still be in effect or that individual. I think there are now about 20 states that are doing the same. I know Kentucky is another anyway.

Indiana has also been getting some pushback from Illinois because there are a number of guns that are purchased here in gun shows or in stores that end up in the hands of criminals in Chicago. A gun trace report in 2017 showed that about 1 in 4 guns picked up by the Chicago police came from 10 stores in Illinois and northern Indiana. Probably a lot of this involved straw purchases. I know one "sports" store not far from where I live is notorious for this. I would pass by there and see cars with Illinois plates there. The county fairgrounds has frequent gun shows. So when you have a situation like we have in the states where one state is adjacent a state that has very loose if any controls then you're going to have a problem. This country will never get a handle on the proliferation of guns in my lifetime. Sales were huge during the pandemic.

Every other month, the 1500 Gun and Knife Show takes place at the state fairgrounds.

It's hard for one state to reign in gun violence when others are making it ridiculously simple to get them.

[GindyPosts]

And Democrats are innocent? Please do tell.

Man, don't play this bad faith concern troll ****. The Democrats are spineless pussies but they aren't purposefully rewriting the country into a theocracy like the GOP.

[Panfoot]

And Democrats are innocent? Please do tell.

Democrats aren't the ones who tried to violently overthrow the government, continue to erode voting rights, and constantly strip civil rights and demonize minorities. **** off with your both sides bullshit.

[thwhtGuardian]

I wasn't justifying anything. I'm simply saying no matter the restrictions that are put in, that some crazy loon some terrorist or terrorist group will find a way to get guns and shoot people, So, the argument will be "yes there's still shootings, but there's LESS shootings". I would like 0 shootings but that's not going to happen unfortunately.

So because you can't have zero...you're opposed to ways to make it less?

[babyblob]

Dont worry guys. Guns are not the problem. Neither is racism. We still dont know the motive of the Buffalo shooting. You know Cruz is the voice of reason. Lets all just step back and do nothing about what happened and in a week we can all over react and hear the GOP tell us there is no issue and no problems and do this 20 more tomes by the end of the summer.

Game plan set right?

[Tendrin]

I wasn't justifying anything. I'm simply saying no matter the restrictions that are put in, that some crazy loon some terrorist or terrorist group will find a way to get guns and shoot people, So, the argument will be "yes there's still shootings, but there's LESS shootings". I would like 0 shootings but that's not going to happen unfortunately.

Again, with the unironic 'no way to prevent this'. The last mass shooting in Norway was in 2011. The last mass shooting in Australia was in 1996. The last mass shooting in Switzerland was in 2001. The last mass shooting in New Zealand was in 2019, after which they embraced new gun control laws. Other countries have shooting events, where perhaps a few people are killed or injured, once every *few years*. In America, they are *daily events* or even twice daily. It's insane that we allow this to continue, and people using the same arguments and logic as you declare that since we can't stop all of them, since criminals will still get guns, then it's better to arm everyone instead. Well, we've tried doing nothing, or arming even more people, and the answer is that we're less safe, less free, and more afraid than ever.

So, yes, you're doing exactly what I said you're doing: justifying a status quo because the alternative means 'only criminals will have guns', and we all know what *that* means. We've heard it all before from every conservative in public life, and every conservative who comes crawling out on these boards after a mass shooting to declare that gun control won't solve the problem.

Meanwhile, since between now and Buffalo's shooting, an additional 12 people were killed and 69 others injured in mass shootings across the country, just in the last two weeks.

https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/r.../mass-shooting

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/24/11010...ootings-so-far

Education Week has been tracking school shootings since 2018. According to its database, 119 such incidents have taken place since then.

A gunman killed at least 19 children and 2 adults at a Texas elementary school
NATIONAL
2 people were killed and several injured in a shooting at a Texas elementary school
There were 27 school shootings with injuries or deaths this year.

The organization tracks shootings where a firearm was discharged and where any person (other than the suspect) has a bullet wound resulting from the incident. Education Week also includes only incidents that happen on a K-12 school property or on a school bus and that occur when school is in session or during a school-sponsored event.

It doesn't track cases in which the only shots fired were from a school resource officer or police officer.

The U.S. has surpassed 200 mass shootings this year
The Gun Violence Archive, an independent data collection organization, has counted 212 mass shootings that have occurred so far this year, as of Tuesday. It defines a mass shooting as an incident in which four or more people were shot or killed, excluding the shooter.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

And Democrats are innocent? Please do tell.

Compared to Qpublicans who support white supremacists, had a hand in attempting to overthrow the 2020 election, are trying to turn the clock back a hundred years when it comes to civil rights and women’s rights while declaring open season on transpeople, yeah, Dems ARE innocent.