monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@hightor,

interesting that Paul Ryan issued a news release this a.m. about the drop in the stock market

who is he trying to tell
who is he blaming

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

No. It's that your argument doesn't make sense.

Now you're obligated to explain why you're okay with the focus being on rifles when the majority of mass shootings are done with handguns. Good luck rationalizing that to me.

2 Replies

Quote:

Why are US mass shootings getting more deadly?
By Tara McKelvey, 7 November 2017

Three of the worst five shootings in modern US history have happened in the last 16 months.

It began - more or less - with 13, the number killed in 1949 in Camden, New Jersey, one of the earliest mass shootings in the US. An army veteran, Howard Unruh, killed his neighbours.

Over the next several decades, the numbers went up: 16 in Austin, Texas, on a campus in 1966, and 21 slain at a McDonald's in San Ysidro, California, in 1984.

The past month or so have been especially brutal, as two attacks unfolded - in Las Vegas (58 dead) and Sutherland Springs, Texas (26). They followed a June 2016 assault in an Orlando nightclub in which 49 people were killed. [...]

Here analysts discuss some of the factors that may lie behind the grim numbers:

Weapons are more powerful - and shoot faster

The shooters have increasingly been using guns with high-capacity magazines, allowing them to fire off dozens of rounds without having to reload.

"There are more people being shot in a shorter amount of time - with more bullets in them," explained Harvard School of Public Health's David Hemenway. [...]

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
No. It's that your argument doesn't make sense.

Now you're obligated to explain why you're okay with the focus being on rifles when the majority of mass shootings are done with handguns. Good luck rationalizing that to me.

Maybe you should go back to the founding of the nation. I mean muskets killed a ton of people back in the day! Why all this focus on handguns and high powered rifles. It’s muskets we should be focused on.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Quote:

Good luck rationalizing that to me.

I don't have to "rationalize" anything to you. Look at the response from olivier5, which backs up what I've been telling you all along.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

The only possible outcome of muddling the gun control debate is more innocent kids killed. So why do you do it? You want more kids randomly killed?

You didn't direct that at anyone. But the only people here who are trying to muddle anything are the gun control people.

They do it because they enjoy violating civil rights for no reason.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

No. It's that your argument doesn't make sense.

No. It's that you dislike what the facts are on this issue.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You think this is funny? You think it's a game that you need to win?

Gun suckers never propose anything positive -- instead they keep arguing stupid technicalities forever just for the pleasure of muddling the debate. Who cares if more kids die, huh? As long as gun suckers can talk forever about their obsession, their obscene objects of desire, their alternate manhood, their soddin' guns.

1 Reply

Quote:

Berkshire Bank has announced that they will no longer provide financing to Sig Sauer, the maker of Semi-automatic rifles.

1 Reply

Quote:

“There are more complexities here than in brain surgery,” Mr. Carson said in an interview last week. “Doing this job is going to be a very intricate process.”

NYT
Duh. Maybe it would have been better to have chosen someone for his administrative skills and familiarity with housing and urban development issues instead of a someone with zero experience with an appealing biography.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

You think this is funny?

Notice that I posted facts and not jokes.

Olivier5 wrote:

You think it's a game that you need to win?

No game. But yes I'm going to win. When people try to violate my civil rights for fun, winning is kind of imperative.

Olivier5 wrote:

Gun suckers never propose anything positive

Nonsense.

Olivier5 wrote:

instead they keep arguing stupid technicalities

Facts and civil rights are not stupid technicalities.

Olivier5 wrote:

just for the pleasure of muddling the debate.

Pointing out facts is not muddling anything. The only people who are trying to muddle the debate are the gun control people.

Olivier5 wrote:

Who cares if more kids die, huh?

Certainly not the gun control people. All they care about is violating civil rights for fun.

Olivier5 wrote:

As long as gun suckers can talk forever about their obsession, their obscene objects of desire, their alternate manhood, their soddin' guns.

We're not going to allow our rights to be violated. Sorry if you don't like that.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

interesting that Paul Ryan issued a news release this a.m. about the drop in the stock market

who is he trying to tell
who is he blaming

part le deux

Quote:

NPR
1 min
"We are extremely worried about the consequences of a trade war and are urging the White House to not advance with this plan," AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan, said in a statement.

1 Reply

@hightor,

Quote:

I don't have to "rationalize" anything to you.

That's true. However, if you wish to maintain your credibility, you're going to have to explain why you're choosing to focus on rifles when handguns are the favored choice of mass shooters. So, go ahead and rationalize that.

2 Replies

@Glennn,

Muskets Glenn. Muskets.

Focus on muskets. Muskets are about as relevant to the last 10 years of mass shootings as handguns are.

Additionally, you’re using the FBI description for mass shooting to get that 5:1 number. The NRA has said that number is not important because it’s mostly
gang bangers doing drive-bys

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Personally, I think hes ineducable

Yes, I think so too. This is a personality or cognitive trait I find very interesting.

0 Replies

@Glennn,

Perhaps in the past handguns were used by mass shooters more than assault types of weapons. However, in the past couple of shootings and the major one in Newtown, an assault type weapon was used. If the handgun is as capable as to shoot more than 10 rounds without pause or reloading then ban those too or just ban the magazines which turns ordinary weapons into assault military type weapons. Add to that ban any accessory or part which would do the same function in ordinary weapons.

1 Reply

@Glennn,

Quote:

Oh I think you just don't like having the inconsistent nature of your reasoning exposed when it comes to guns used in mass shootings.

Once again, you are pushing a tu quoque fallacy. This isn't a matter of consistency.

For example, distracted driving causes the greatest percentage of auto accidents. For legislators to work on curbing alcohol/drug use while driving would not be logically inconsistent. Investigating/correcting signage would not be inconsistent. Increasing driver training would not be inconsistent.

If you'd like to elucidate why/how you are not committing the tu quoque fallacy, I'd be interested in hearing your explanation. Do you have one?

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Quote:

Focus on muskets. Muskets are about as relevant to the last 10 years of mass shootings as handguns are.

Fortunately, you have the right to believe that handguns play no bigger part in the mass shootings of the last ten years as muskets have. But I would recommend that you review mass shootings of the last ten years and see if any muskets were used.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

This time really is different. And boy, the right wing media aligned with NRA ideas is hell bent on demeaning those school kids.

0 Replies

Just like with so many other encroachments on rights—I’m thinking specifically of the mental health realm and in education—as you make adjustments to solve individual problems, you begin with the least restrictive steps.

Going straight to the banning of a particular weapon is overreach—and also, doesn’t address the primary cause of mass shootings.

Wrong on two counts.

Find the greatest common factor. It is not that specific weapon.

3 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know