Jump to content

~*Official Thread of America's Return to Thoughts & Prayers Normalcy*~


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

The state has to allege a specific crime has been committed. How can they do that if they don’t believe a crime has been committed? 

 

cmonman.gif

 

 

 

After thinking it over, I'd be fine with a grand jury requirement in general. Seems to be the best balance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

It's the conservative version of sanctuary cities, really. 

 

You mean where conservatives cause a fucked up situation and then when people respond to how fucked up it is conservatives will then lie about the response in order to justify doing even more fucked up shit? 

 

Actually yeah it's just like that. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

 

You mean where conservatives cause a fucked up situation and then when people respond to how fucked up it is conservatives will then lie about the response in order to justify doing even more fucked up shit? 

 

Actually yeah it's just like that. 

 

No.  Sanctuary cities/states are basically telling the federal government they will not help enforce immigration law.  If the feds want to enforce immigration law, they are on their own.  

 

States who want to nullify federal gun laws are basically doing the same thing.  If the feds want to enforce federal gun laws, they are on their own.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

No.  Sanctuary cities/states are basically telling the federal government they will not help enforce immigration law.  If the feds want to enforce immigration law, they are on their own.  

 

States who want to nullify federal gun laws are basically doing the same thing.  If the feds want to enforce federal gun laws, they are on their own.   

 

Even if you could argue that it's the same in principle, which you're trying to do and also it's not; the actual details are not equivalent non-enforcement actions. Stop eliding the actual reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is closer to states not assisting the federal government in the enforcement of drug laws, but taken up many notches with the whole punishing LEOs that do assist in the enforcement of federal gun laws and the like.

 

It is also really dumb 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

In general, States should not be compelled to assist the federal government enforcing federal law outside of conditions of federal money but punishing officers for doing so is objectively hilarious from the blue lives matter crew

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nokra said:

 

 

 

Ugh this is just sick. Who needs so many kids? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:p 

 

 

"This is the future that conservatives want."

 

 

Couldn't be a more perfect contrast with that old meme if there was a burning cross in the background instead of a Christmas tree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/13/2021 at 1:56 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

It would only apply to cases where someone has died of non-natural causes. I don't see any ethical issues with forcing the state to go through a process that determines (if there is) culpability when someone dies. I'm not writing legislation here but in general citizens (jury members), not agents of the state(police/prosecutors), should decide culpability, but the state must facilitate the process.


 

You are aware that people can be sued for wrongful death right? If you kill someone with negligence you’re probably getting financially ruined. Sure it’s not jail time but its not like nothing will happen to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dodger said:


 

You are aware that people can be sued for wrongful death right? If you kill someone with negligence you’re probably getting financially ruined. Sure it’s not jail time but its not like nothing will happen to you.

Civil suits have a lower standard of proof and basically if you have few/little assets and no insurance the victim's family will get (often) nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if anyone was worried about health insurance companies going out of business, I guess we've got a good replacement. I guess party buses can be the next business that needs mass shooting insurance.

 

oakland-party-bus-0518.jpg?fit=722%2C406
WWW.NBCBAYAREA.COM

At least two people were killed and multiple people were injured after a party bus was shot up in Oakland overnight Tuesday, according to police.

 

I also didn't realize Sunday was such a busy day. Six mass shootings, including three in Georgia alone. All together, 3 dead and 27 injured. I guess Sundays are busy days for mass shooters. The 9th also had six mass shootings, including the Colorado Springs shooting. That makes it 11 dead that day along with 22 injuries injured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still remember me and my sister’s shock when we went to Austin in 2010. Walked down to pick up snacks and saw printed on all the doors “All handguns must be visible in holster” walking into our first Target store ever. I think that scared us more then knowing that everyone was probably carrying heat. So I shall keep that “no one carries a gun to a store here” mentality for as long as I can in my neck of woods in Canada 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2021 at 12:30 AM, Ghost_MH said:

Well, if anyone was worried about health insurance companies going out of business, I guess we've got a good replacement. I guess party buses can be the next business that needs mass shooting insurance.

 

oakland-party-bus-0518.jpg?fit=722%2C406
WWW.NBCBAYAREA.COM

At least two people were killed and multiple people were injured after a party bus was shot up in Oakland overnight Tuesday, according to police.

 

I also didn't realize Sunday was such a busy day. Six mass shootings, including three in Georgia alone. All together, 3 dead and 27 injured. I guess Sundays are busy days for mass shooters. The 9th also had six mass shootings, including the Colorado Springs shooting. That makes it 11 dead that day along with 22 injuries injured.


Oakland has gangs, and gang land shootings don’t count. I see you didn’t list suicides, which also don’t count as gun violence so thank you for that. 
 

As always what matters is that the rights of these gun owners were not infringed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, the way conservatives square that circle is just racism. They can't fathom the idea of a white person committing an unjustified murder, and they're not gonna treat this law as putting them in harm's way of black criminals because they're still gonna expect cops to shoot any black person holding a gun on sight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, mclumber1 said:

 

The stats don't bear that out in Constitutional Carry states.  Arizona has had it since 2011, and it's gun homicide rate is pretty much unchanged since then.

From the same website:

 

HOMICIDES
A 2017 study examined homicide rates in shall-issue states compared to may-issue states from 1991 to 2015. It found that shall-issue state laws were associated with statistically significant 6.5% higher homicide rates, 8.6% higher firearm homicide rates, and 10.6% higher handgun homicide rates.63

Similarly, a 2018 study examined the impact of public carry laws on firearm homicide rates in urban counties and found that counties in states with right-to-carry laws (states with either permitless carry or shall-issue laws) experienced a 7% increase in firearm homicide rates when compared to states with stronger concealed carry permitting laws (meaning the states had more restrictions on issuing concealed carry weapon permits).64


VIOLENT CRIME
An analysis published in 2019 by John J. Donahue and Abhay Aneja of Stanford Law School and Kyle D. Weber of Columbia University provides the most comprehensive analysis of shall-issue laws to date. The researchers analyzed data from the 33 states that enacted these laws from 1977 through 2014 using an array of different statistical methods and controlling for demographic, economic, and law enforcement factors. Each of the different statistical approaches found that the state enactment of shall-issue laws are associated with an increase in violent crime rates, and these effects increase over time. They estimated that 10 years after states enacted shall-issue laws, they experienced violent crime rates 13-15% higher than would have been expected if such a law was not enacted.65

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

Oakland has gangs, and gang land shootings don’t count. I see you didn’t list suicides, which also don’t count as gun violence so thank you for that. 
 

As always what matters is that the rights of these gun owners were not infringed. 

 

Much appreciated. This was another great weekend with 12 mass shootings. That's 10 dead, and 71 injured. Everyone's starting to throw parties again and it's just not ending well, apparently. I guess the party bus wasn't warning enough.

 

jersey-shooting-04.jpg?quality=90&strip=
NYPOST.COM

A 36-year-old man has been arrested in the New Jersey birthday party mass shooting that left two people dead and a dozen more injured, prosecutors said Monday.

 

ad3feb6c-5470-45e4-b890-34fff985c4e6-lar
ABCNEWS4.COM

Charleston County Coroner Bobbi Jo O’Neal has released the name of a teenager killed over the weekend when a mass shooting took place atan unauthorized neighborhood event in...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, thewhyteboar said:

From the same website:

 

HOMICIDES
A 2017 study examined homicide rates in shall-issue states compared to may-issue states from 1991 to 2015. It found that shall-issue state laws were associated with statistically significant 6.5% higher homicide rates, 8.6% higher firearm homicide rates, and 10.6% higher handgun homicide rates.63

Similarly, a 2018 study examined the impact of public carry laws on firearm homicide rates in urban counties and found that counties in states with right-to-carry laws (states with either permitless carry or shall-issue laws) experienced a 7% increase in firearm homicide rates when compared to states with stronger concealed carry permitting laws (meaning the states had more restrictions on issuing concealed carry weapon permits).64


VIOLENT CRIME
An analysis published in 2019 by John J. Donahue and Abhay Aneja of Stanford Law School and Kyle D. Weber of Columbia University provides the most comprehensive analysis of shall-issue laws to date. The researchers analyzed data from the 33 states that enacted these laws from 1977 through 2014 using an array of different statistical methods and controlling for demographic, economic, and law enforcement factors. Each of the different statistical approaches found that the state enactment of shall-issue laws are associated with an increase in violent crime rates, and these effects increase over time. They estimated that 10 years after states enacted shall-issue laws, they experienced violent crime rates 13-15% higher than would have been expected if such a law was not enacted.65

 

The only way anyone can get away form the undeniable fact that “more guns = more gun violence / deaths” is to contort the data to the point of uselessness.

 

”Suicides don’t count.”

 

“A lot of this is gang violence.”

 

”The threshold to cross for mass shootings seems arbitrary.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also just want to say that I get @mclumber1on this point: it sucks when you haven’t done anything wrong but something you enjoy is routinely slammed for being bad. You’re a good guy despite having the wrong opinion here :p 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I also just want to say that I get @mclumber1on this point: it sucks when you haven’t done anything wrong but something you enjoy is routinely slammed for being bad. You’re a good guy despite having the wrong opinion here :p 

 

I get this also. I’ve generally come to be of the opinion that the number of actually responsible gun owners is much lower than I had initially believed, but… I get it. Shooting guns is fun and I still kinda can’t believe how long ago we figured out how to make auto loading pistols… it’s brilliant design.

 

But we clearly cannot be trusted with the responsibility and the cost in human life and suffering isn’t worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

I also just want to say that I get @mclumber1on this point: it sucks when you haven’t done anything wrong but something you enjoy is routinely slammed for being bad. You’re a good guy despite having the wrong opinion here :p 

I agree. I just hate guns so much that I'm sure in gun-related topics I sound like an asshole. @mclumber1is cool. Guns just aren't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the same as saying most people are fine enough safe drivers, (and they are!) but that everyone has to drive for even basic functions of life almost anywhere in this country that even a small % of bad drivers (or gun owners) results in a truly massive number of deaths. It's why despite the "nInEtY-nInE pErCeNt SuRvIvAl RaTe" covid is extremely deadly, because it can affect so many people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...