Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 232: Jay Inslee Is Too Pure For This World

(+) Yeah! (+)

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.

Lets be COMPLETELY honest here. Even if the Democrats got 100% on-board with this, and it passed a bi-partisan House...the Senate would strip out all of the gun control provisions, essentially rewarding the terrorist by giving him a violent attack to use for marrying gun control to his own racist rhetoric. You KNOW this would happen.
---

So if an Eco-Terrorist uses a background check loophole to get a gun and then murders 30 people, you think itd be ok for AOC to pass a bill closing that background check loophole AND pass the Green New Deal in the same bill?
---

https://twitter.com/ericbradner/status/1158216987908218882
( short clip of video version: https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/1158347897886380033 )

beto can stick around if he stays like this
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

So if an Eco-Terrorist uses a background check loophole to get a gun and then murders 30 people, you think itd be ok for AOC to pass a bill closing that background check loophole AND pass the Green New Deal in the same bill?

It is not politically savvy at all really since her bill can't even muster support in her own party, but she could add that to her signature legislation she wants to pass. It wouldn't hurt her bill, I'd think.
---

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.

Lets be COMPLETELY honest here. Even if the Democrats got 100% on-board with this, and it passed a bi-partisan House...the Senate would strip out all of the gun control provisions, essentially rewarding the terrorist by giving him a violent attack to use for marrying gun control to his own racist rhetoric. You KNOW this would happen.

Then the republican senators would be shown to have turned down both immigration reform and gun reform. If that is the case, it would torpedo in Trump's face, and I hope every single republican senator resigns that killed it.

You can't just strip out the gun reform part and pass it.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.

Lets be COMPLETELY honest here. Even if the Democrats got 100% on-board with this, and it passed a bi-partisan House...the Senate would strip out all of the gun control provisions, essentially rewarding the terrorist by giving him a violent attack to use for marrying gun control to his own racist rhetoric. You KNOW this would happen.

Then the republican senators would be shown to have turned down both immigration reform and gun reform. If that is the case, it would torpedo in Trump's face, and I hope every single republican senator resigns that killed it.

You can't just strip out the gun reform part and pass it.

I think youre giving WAY too much credit to the American people and the media. They keep the Immigration and Gun Control title, strip out all the gun control, and let it die when the Democrats rightfully vote against it, and they can say DEMOCRATS killed gun control. Anyone saying otherwise is just making excuses. And a sizable portion of the electorate (right-wingers and independents) will buy that.
---

Corrik7 posted...

JeffreyRaze posted...

Espeon posted...

While I think hes being a pedantic jackass, Corriks extremely literal interpretation of events is correct. Its not really capitulating to a terrorist to continue to push an agenda you were already pushing, even if said agenda was what inspired the terrorist to attack in the first place.

I do agree with this. That said, I'd be good if he made some kind of statement that legal immigrants are Americans regardless of skin, and anyone who goes on a killing spree is unamerican and doing things wrong or something along those lines.

I agree that I wish he stressed all Americans are Americans and valued citizens regardless of race, gender, and so on. And, made it super clear to those who can't seem to grasp it on both sides that he is referring to illegal immigrants with his comments regarding to the border, with no reference implied to race, gender, and so on.

Its hard to do things like that when he directly states that someone like AOC is not from here because shes Hispanic
---

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.

Lets be COMPLETELY honest here. Even if the Democrats got 100% on-board with this, and it passed a bi-partisan House...the Senate would strip out all of the gun control provisions, essentially rewarding the terrorist by giving him a violent attack to use for marrying gun control to his own racist rhetoric. You KNOW this would happen.

Then the republican senators would be shown to have turned down both immigration reform and gun reform. If that is the case, it would torpedo in Trump's face, and I hope every single republican senator resigns that killed it.

You can't just strip out the gun reform part and pass it.

I think youre giving WAY too much credit to the American people and the media. They keep the Immigration and Gun Control title, strip out all the gun control, and let it die when the Democrats rightfully vote against it, and they can say DEMOCRATS killed gun control. Anyone saying otherwise is just making excuses. And a sizable portion of the electorate (right-wingers and independents) will buy that.

I mean, I think the populace is relatively ignorant. And the media falsely makes narratives. However, that seems like hell of a stretch there to go with. I don't see that as a very realistic outcome there.

I don't think Republicans would have the balls to do it against Trump's wishes either in those numbers if it had Dem support.
---

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/05/politics/kevin-mccarthy-mass-shootings-video-games/index.html

"We must stop the glorification of violence in our society," Trump said in remarks from the White House Monday morning as part of a list of efforts he believes the nation must take. "This includes the gruesome and grisly video games that are now commonplace."

He added, "It is too easy today for troubled youth to surround themselves with a culture that celebrates violence. We must stop or substantially reduce this and it has to begin immediately."

Probably one of the few things that could get his online troll army to think twice

Theyd still find a way to justify supporting him on this even though they love video games, but it would take them a minute to figure out how
---

On a related note, in my honest opinion, I dont think Trump gives a shit one way or the other about gun control. I think his instinct is probably actually to ban guns when they become an issue he has to deal with because hes impulsive and seeks the least nuanced solution to any problem.

Its one of the few issues where I think the party leads him instead of the party contorting itself to fit his values because hes the only nationally popular Republican. I think this shows the obscene lobbyist power of the NRA.
---

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik7 posted...

Espeon posted...

Corrik, What youre describing is the equivalent of if George W. Bush came out in the wake of 9/11 and pushed for a bill combining airport security with a complete withdrawal of all defenses, funding, and support from Israel.

Did George Bush push for a complete withdrawal for all defenses, funding, and support from Israel his entire term?

Stop making false equivalences. It isn't even close.

Trump is simply putting gun reform to immigration because it is politically savvy (tho it would torpedo in his face if Republicans killed it over the gun reform part themselves).

Democrats see this and are trying to do anything to denounce this before it can happen cuz they don't want to be forced to side against gun reform and immigration together.

Lets be COMPLETELY honest here. Even if the Democrats got 100% on-board with this, and it passed a bi-partisan House...the Senate would strip out all of the gun control provisions, essentially rewarding the terrorist by giving him a violent attack to use for marrying gun control to his own racist rhetoric. You KNOW this would happen.

Then the republican senators would be shown to have turned down both immigration reform and gun reform. If that is the case, it would torpedo in Trump's face, and I hope every single republican senator resigns that killed it.

You can't just strip out the gun reform part and pass it.

I think youre giving WAY too much credit to the American people and the media. They keep the Immigration and Gun Control title, strip out all the gun control, and let it die when the Democrats rightfully vote against it, and they can say DEMOCRATS killed gun control. Anyone saying otherwise is just making excuses. And a sizable portion of the electorate (right-wingers and independents) will buy that.

I mean, I think the populace is relatively ignorant. And the media falsely makes narratives. However, that seems like hell of a stretch there to go with. I don't see that as a very realistic outcome there.

I don't think Republicans would have the balls to do it against Trump's wishes either in those numbers if it had Dem support.

I feel like, if the Dems supported it, that would just make it easier to fuck with and reject. Just tell Trump that the bill they sent from the House was awful, and do you really think hes gonna question that, or care?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

On a related note, in my honest opinion, I dont think Trump gives a shit one way or the other about gun control. I think his instinct is probably actually to ban guns when they become an issue he has to deal with because hes impulsive and seeks the least nuanced solution to any problem.

Its one of the few issues where I think the party leads him instead of the party contorting itself to fit his values because hes the only nationally popular Republican. I think this shows the obscene lobbyist power of the NRA.

I think he wants gun reform but Republicans and his base would possibly revolt, and it scares him off of it.
---

"We must stop the glorification of violence in our society," says man who glorifies violence against his political opponents and brown people.
---

Just tell him how Obama wanted gun reform but couldnt get it, and it would really show how much better Trump is if he did
---

Corrik7 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

On a related note, in my honest opinion, I dont think Trump gives a shit one way or the other about gun control. I think his instinct is probably actually to ban guns when they become an issue he has to deal with because hes impulsive and seeks the least nuanced solution to any problem.

Its one of the few issues where I think the party leads him instead of the party contorting itself to fit his values because hes the only nationally popular Republican. I think this shows the obscene lobbyist power of the NRA.

I think he wants gun reform but Republicans and his base would possibly revolt, and it scares him off of it.

His base will never revolt against him.
---

Like, this happened to a degree with Obama too but its really highlighted by Trump because he revels in it.

Both men have a very strong, loyal base that follows the cult of personality of their preferred President. Both had to tell them what they wanted to hear to suck people in, but now that theyre established, the herd follows their positions and will tie themselves into knots to justify everything no matter how contradictory
---

Its easier to come to terms with murdering a group of people when someone with a global platform calls what you assume to be said group of people racists, murderers, and gang members.

But you know, not Trump's fault in the slightest.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Like, this happened to a degree with Obama too but its really highlighted by Trump because he revels in it.

Both men have a very strong, loyal base that follows the cult of personality of their preferred President. Both had to tell them what they wanted to hear to suck people in, but now that theyre established, the herd follows their positions and will tie themselves into knots to justify everything no matter how contradictory

I don't actually think Obama had much of a cult of personality. Not more than average for a president.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Like, this happened to a degree with Obama too but its really highlighted by Trump because he revels in it.

Both men have a very strong, loyal base that follows the cult of personality of their preferred President. Both had to tell them what they wanted to hear to suck people in, but now that theyre established, the herd follows their positions and will tie themselves into knots to justify everything no matter how contradictory

except droning, which people got upset over

and his mass deportations caught flak from the left

and people were upset that he didnt try harder to close Gitmo

and his naivity was lamented when compromising on obamacare

also the financial bailout and failure to adequately punish those responsible really pissed off progressives

and
---

Im talking about THE BASE

Like the people that love Biden solely because he was Obamas VP
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Im talking about THE BASE

Like the people that love Biden solely because he was Obamas VP

That might be retroactive thinking though.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Like, this happened to a degree with Obama too but its really highlighted by Trump because he revels in it.

Both men have a very strong, loyal base that follows the cult of personality of their preferred President. Both had to tell them what they wanted to hear to suck people in, but now that theyre established, the herd follows their positions and will tie themselves into knots to justify everything no matter how contradictory

I don't actually think Obama had much of a cult of personality. Not more than average for a president.

Jimmy Carter didnt get merchandise
---

NFUN posted...

and his naivity was lamented when compromising on obamacare

I dislike this framing from the left because the alternative to obamacare at the time was complete shit and no health care for a large number of americans. Is Obamacare perfect? No. But it was a hell of a good start to get us better health care. Its a talking point used to divide the left when it should be a rallying cry to come together for something even better.
---

Obama's polling numbers were pretty bad and then rose through the 2016 election when people saw what their alternatives were.
---

oh hey it is time for both sides to start bringing up video games again. Just great.
---

As is well known, only Americans play lots of video games and therefore only America has a huge mass shooting problem!

Just like how only Americans experience mental illness or loneliness or x or y or z

---

Honestly there is no simple answer to why American mass shooting rates are so high, but I have to guess that it has a lot to do with the glorification of the gunman. I hate to "blame" media/society, but I wonder how many other cultures have the badass gun-toting action star as their cultural icons? I feel like Asian heroes use martial arts and European heroes exclusively play soccer. America elevates the man with the gun (both good and bad) more than any other archetype.
---

There is a very simple answer to why we have mass shootings and other countries dont.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country
---

red13n posted...

There is a very simple answer to why we have mass shootings and other countries dont.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

But that's really not the reason, as much as you want to push the narrative. There's no correlation outside of the US being #1 in both metrics.
---

Anyway, I didn't come in here to argue about guns. I do genuinely think there is something in our culture that makes these loser white kids want to shoot people in order to feel like big badasses that doesn't exist in other countries.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

There's no correlation outside of the US being #1 in both metrics.

you are literally trying to say there is correlation but we're going to ignore that one correlation?

We're literally more than 2 to 1 outlier over every country in the world that has an actual population.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Anyway, I didn't come in here to argue about guns. I do genuinely think there is something in our culture that makes these loser white kids want to shoot people in order to feel like big badasses that doesn't exist in other countries.

You don't think the fact that it is easier for them to get guns is in anyway correlated to their likelihood of using them?
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Anyway, I didn't come in here to argue about guns. I do genuinely think there is something in our culture that makes these loser white kids want to shoot people in order to feel like big badasses that doesn't exist in other countries.

You don't think the fact that it is easier for them to get guns is in anyway correlated to their likelihood of using them?

So you're saying there is the same percentage of kids in Japan who want to murder people to feel like rock stars but just can't because they don't have access to guns?
---

I think access to and glorification of guns both play a part. I think there are plenty of mentally disturbed people in other countries. There are plenty of examples of knife attacks in Japan for example where someone will begin stabbing innocent people for much the same reason as some of the mass shooters here.
---

Also a lot of these people leave manifestos or at least give indications of their motives, and very few of them vocalize the need to feel like rock stars as one of their motivating factors.
---

I don't think all these shooters are mentally disturbed.
---

Okay then disregard the access to guns part so we can have a focused conversation. As someone who has never lived in another country, I am wondering how the US compares in its glorification of gunmen vs other places--and what the drivers of that culture is (Colonial roots? Westerns? The military industrial complex?)
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Also a lot of these people leave manifestos or at least give indications of their motives, and very few of them vocalize the need to feel like rock stars as one of their motivating factors.

By leaving a manifesto, they are clearly trying to cement their legacy and bring about change through their actions. Pretty much every action movie is about a man using a gun to single-handedly bring about change.
---

Like, I think an underlying part of your argument (if I'm understanding right) is that guns are glorified in the US which makes disturbed or evil individuals want to use them. I don't think anyone on the left who is for control really disagrees with that! But also ease of access seems like another logical factor. If you want to hurt as many people as possible, would you use a gun or a knife? Now, will someone in the US have an easier time procuring a gun than someone in Japan? To me, that is one very logical explanation for why mass shooting are common in the US while mass stabbings are more common in Japan.
---

Corrik7 posted...

I don't think all these shooters are mentally disturbed.

Well that depends on your definition of mentally disturbed, but yes I would agree.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Like, I think an underlying part of your argument (if I'm understanding right) is that guns are glorified in the US which makes disturbed or evil individuals want to use them.

Yeah, I am genuinely curious as to what originated this uniquely American culture (or if it's really even that unique). Not saying we need to ban any kind of art or entertainment, but it would be interesting to pinpoint what is encouraging these deeds.
---

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik7 posted...

I don't think all these shooters are mentally disturbed.

Well that depends on your definition of mentally disturbed, but yes I would agree.

Stephen Paddock is a perfect example of someone who seemed perfectly sound of mind. Planned his attack. And carried it out. Cold and calculated.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Like, I think an underlying part of your argument (if I'm understanding right) is that guns are glorified in the US which makes disturbed or evil individuals want to use them.

Yeah, I am genuinely curious as to what originated this uniquely American culture (or if it's really even that unique). Not saying we need to ban any kind of art or entertainment, but it would be interesting to pinpoint what is encouraging these deeds.

Its baked into the culture from the beginning. When white Europeans and their descendants tamed the wild frontier, guns were a major part of that. Most other western nations are too old to have been established with guns.

Like, there was never a point in English or French history where in their homelands there were both A.) Unclaimed areas to conquer and B.) Guns with which to do so
---

Of course I think youd have to be disturbed to realistically want to kill a mass number of people.

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Of course I think youd have to be disturbed to realistically want to kill a mass number of people.

Were the 9/11 bombers disturbed?
---

Corrik7 posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Corrik7 posted...

I don't think all these shooters are mentally disturbed.

Well that depends on your definition of mentally disturbed, but yes I would agree.

Stephen Paddock is a perfect example of someone who seemed perfectly sound of mind. Planned his attack. And carried it out. Cold and calculated.

Again, that goes into what you mean by mentally disturbed. Sure he wasn't wearing a bucket on his head and screaming gibberish. But to shoot into a crowd not caring who you hit, to me that is mentally disturbed regardless of how planned out it may be. You can have an agenda, be evil or however you want to define it, and still be mentally disturbed.
---

Corrik7 posted...

PerfectChaosZ posted...

Of course I think youd have to be disturbed to realistically want to kill a mass number of people.

Were the 9/11 bombers disturbed?

I would say clearly yes. But disturbed doesnt mean mentally ill.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Like, there was never a point in English or French history where in their homelands there were both A.) Unclaimed areas to conquer and B.) Guns with which to do so

Where was all this unclaimed land in America, and if it was "unclaimed" why did people need guns to "conquer" them?
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Suprak the Stud posted...

Like, I think an underlying part of your argument (if I'm understanding right) is that guns are glorified in the US which makes disturbed or evil individuals want to use them.

Yeah, I am genuinely curious as to what originated this uniquely American culture (or if it's really even that unique). Not saying we need to ban any kind of art or entertainment, but it would be interesting to pinpoint what is encouraging these deeds.

Its baked into the culture from the beginning. When white Europeans and their descendants tamed the wild frontier, guns were a major part of that. Most other western nations are too old to have been established with guns.

Like, there was never a point in English or French history where in their homelands there were both A.) Unclaimed areas to conquer and B.) Guns with which to do so

That's true. I wonder to what extent this applies to Canada then? I assume Latin America doesn't fit that mold since most people there are racially mixed and don't have that exclusively positive view of manifest destiny.
---