nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I don't know if anyone looked at the scatter plot I put up on gun deaths versus gun ownership by state. The obvious conclusion seems to have been not so obvious for many.
The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter The Tariff King
- Start date
I don't know if anyone looked at the scatter plot I put up on gun deaths versus gun ownership by state. The obvious conclusion seems to have been not so obvious for many.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I wanted so say something on Sarah Sanders being asked to leave by the restaurant owner. Imo one of the worst things about Trump is the way he disrespects people, including people who work for him. I like to think that the people who support him have examined their consciences about supporting and defending someone like that. But I also think it is a mistake (and also ethically wrong) to descend to his level. Just like it is wrong to descend to the level of anyone who is misbehaving. You oppose their behavior but you don't descend to their level. So if I owned a restaurant and Trump or any of his supporters stopped by for a meal, I like to think I would treat them like any other customer.
sturg33
I
Absolutely
sturg33
I
I think a business owner can do whatever they want.
I would absolutely not refuse service to a political opponent...
But I don't think I would serve someone with a swastika on his face or something like that
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
So you can look at the number and distribution of firearm deaths and injuries nationwide, compare it to peer nations, and say "yep, this is ok."
I'm struggling to comprehend your relationship to the data you claim to be informed by. You are unmoved by thousands of senseless gun deaths and injuries per year, because "they don't affect the meta," yet you are like a dog with a bone on 55% of liberal Dartmouth undergrads saying they wouldn't date a conservative. Which one of those things has more tangible, real-world consequences?
sturg33
I
I don't think I've ever said "firearm deaths are OK"
From an ideology standpoint, I feel very strongly in the freedom to be able to protect ourselves using firearms. And I also believe that liberty has a cost. We can become a nanny state, or we can be free.
Further, statistically speaking it makes perfect sense we would have the most firearm deaths because we have the most firearms in general. The macro data showing violent crime is much more favorable to us than simply cherry-picking firearm incidents.
Finally, it really baffles me how so many people have succumbed to blaming the gun and not the person. It's so strange to me that we make an org like the NRA a bigger villain than the actual gunman. And likewise never give nearly the same amount of media attention for mass murderers who DON'T use a gun as choice. And of course NEVER get a national story about a gun saving a life.
The Dartmouth study was that democrats wouldn't even be FRIENDS with conservatives, let alone date them. Granted, small sample and all, and hopefully meaningless... but that info is staggering to me that people can think that way. There's not a single person on this board I wouldn't get a beer with or hang out with (Sav - I'm planning an August Atlanta trip if you're around)... But then you see the Maxine Waters video above, and my own personal experiences, and I'm starting to think that survey is more representative than I'd like it to be
Frankly, I think there is much more real world tangible threat to suppressing free expression of thought than upholding the 2nd amendment.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I think it's perfectly fine to give government officials a piece if your mind if you see them in public.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
I would think that you would be generally friendly towards the idea that politicians and appointees (i.e. Big Government) not being so insulated from the people that they represent that they're immune to any personal, nonviolent, consequences for their actions.
Honestly, as much as this might offend the--highly insulated--political elite and some of the people who cover them, I think there's a disproportionate amount of pearl-clutching going on about this. Disproportionate in that being chanted at in a restaurant or denied service on the basis of choices is a lesser evil than some of the things that are being protested. I mean, it's not my style, but damn...inhumanity is worse than incivility. It could be argued that the veneer of "civility" is part of what's allowed us to tolerate inhumanity at times.
For the last 18 months I've been reading sympathetic takes on Trump voters suggesting that Trumpism is a reaction to a perceived loss of power and agency. If you subscribe to that theory, it's hard to argue against this kind of thing when applied in a different direction.I'm genuinely conflicted about it, but I understand and think it's worth considering the different facets here.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Yeah, I think this is an excellent summation. I read the Twitter thread from the immigration lawyer quoted in this article a few days ago, and found it pretty illuminating.
A couple of things, though. First, it's made quite clear in the article, and it's worth underscoring, that no matter how much introspection may be due Obama supporters, it's a categorically different thing either to a) support these policies proactively or b) cynically change the conversation to 2008-2016 without recognizing the concrete differences in the approach and mentality of the two administrations.
Speaking for myself, I don't need to be reminded how many people were deported under Obama. I was aware of that before Trump was a blip on the Predidential radar. That's not an inoculation against the bigger picture issues here.
Finally, I think it's worth noting, again, that the reason nothing positive has been done legislatively about the issue boils down to the fact that the immigration hardliners have essentially had a veto on policy within the GOP. As the author of the piece suggested, America has less an immigration problem than a humanitarian problem, and people should be willing to get on the right side of that, politics aside.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
lol
again republicans saying they can play by one set of rules and the other side should play by a different set
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
faux freedom boy is so full of **** you shouldn't be shocked by his stance
sturg33
I
I agree
sturg33
I
I'm fine with peaceful protest.
I'm not fine with indiscirimantly declaring a group of people "aren't welcome anywhere" simply due to political differences.
This is starting to manifest itself on both sides throughout the country, and this rhetoric simply ups the anty
sturg33
I
Lol you're a trip man.
I posted a tweet of a congresswoman saying the people who work for the administration are no longer welcome anywhere.
I didn't take a stance.
https://twitter.com/KenidraRWoods_/status/1011143243181027330
once again, this is exactly the kind of thing trump's rhetoric brings on in people's every day lives.
pretend racism isn't emboldened all you want. but people who have done nothing wrong are being harassed simply because of the color of their skin. shockingly this doesn't seem to bother some people. people who claim all they care about is "freedom," which should have the caveat "..as long as you're white, and especially if you have money."
once again, this is exactly the kind of thing trump's rhetoric brings on in people's every day lives.
pretend racism isn't emboldened all you want. but people who have done nothing wrong are being harassed simply because of the color of their skin. shockingly this doesn't seem to bother some people. people who claim all they care about is "freedom," which should have the caveat "..as long as you're white, and especially if you have money."
following the constitution only applies sometimes. it's only worth getting up in arms about it sometimes.
if not following it harms immigrants, it's totally OK.
57Brave
Well-known member
This is why I find it ludicrous bringing up Obama in terms of deportations. I disagreed then and now over Obama's deportation policies. But did he ever publicly float the idea of suspending due process ?
In the round up of people of color it is documented that many many US citizens held with out cause (other than not being white) with the access of due process rights their only fall back. Even one is an assault on all of our rights
Let it also be considered, Obama's first act in office was Lily Ledbetter, his defining accomplishment was ACA and DACA exec order.
Quite a bit of political capital -- thus the lack of pointed outcry.
Be that right or wrong, it is/was the political reality
Trumps political capital ?
Muslim ban
Wall -rapists
expelling Jorge Ramos on national TV
Arpaio
**** hole countries
"I dont care - do u"
........................
so here we are, back to context --- what is the context of the level criticism aimed at Trump Admin vs the level of criticism aimed at Obama Admin ?
Bear in mind, Trump's history also includes the Central Park 5
In the round up of people of color it is documented that many many US citizens held with out cause (other than not being white) with the access of due process rights their only fall back. Even one is an assault on all of our rights
Let it also be considered, Obama's first act in office was Lily Ledbetter, his defining accomplishment was ACA and DACA exec order.
Quite a bit of political capital -- thus the lack of pointed outcry.
Be that right or wrong, it is/was the political reality
Trumps political capital ?
Muslim ban
Wall -rapists
expelling Jorge Ramos on national TV
Arpaio
**** hole countries
"I dont care - do u"
........................
so here we are, back to context --- what is the context of the level criticism aimed at Trump Admin vs the level of criticism aimed at Obama Admin ?
Bear in mind, Trump's history also includes the Central Park 5