Jump to content
tkdguy

In other news...

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Christopher said:

Considering the US has around 7 mass Shootings a week, by definition you will never have "time to talk about it". Really, what is so controversial about not wanting people killed by Firearms?

People claim it is a "Partisan issue", but by that Logic the Republicans want as many Americans as possible shoot by guns? If so, that would be utterly detestable view of the people.

 

Edited by me, because I posted on the 100% emotion I said I detested.

 

Let's just say, the reason for it is being accused of being evil because I am conservatives is a sensitive nerve of mine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

That sounds like a huge end run around due process, especially considering how 5150 holds work. Do you know the statute number/name?

 

California codifies firearm laws relating to mental health treatment in Welfare and Institutions Code, sections 8100-8108.

 

Here's an article about it:

 

http://www.calgunlawyers.com/youre-not-crazy-the-system-is-restoring-firearm-rights-after-a-5150-hold/

 

To quote a relevant summarization from the article:

 

Added in 1990, this provision provides that, when an individual is placed on a 72-hour hold on grounds of danger to self or others (but not grounds of grave disability) and admitted to a treatment facility, he or she is thereafter prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms for a period of 5-years.  As described in Welfare and Institutions Code section 5150

et seq., the process of involuntary inpatient psychiatric treatment in California begins with a 72-hour hold.  The hold is initiated when, based on a face-to-face evaluation, an authorized evaluator (a psychiatrist, a social worker, or a peace officer) determines that there is probable cause to believe that, as a result of a mental disorder, the individual poses a danger to self or others or is gravely disabled.  Once initiated, the 72-hour hold is not subject to any process of appeal or review, except when the hold has been placed “in the field” (e.g. by a peace officer).  In the latter case, the receiving clinician at the treatment facility decides whether to continue the hold and admit the patient, or terminate the hold and release the patient (sections 5151 and 5152).  California case law has established that the hold does not have meaning in terms of firearm possession unless the patient is admitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the issue of people bristling about being accused of being evil because they are conservative, all I can do is shrug. In modern america the conservative movement sure seems to be involved in a lot of evil stuff. One of the first things Trump did was to sign an executive order allowing coal companies to dump poison in water poor communities had to drink because having to keep local water safe to drink was costing the coal companies money. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-16/trump-signs-measure-blocking-obama-era-rule-to-protect-streams

 

Recently conservatives allowed funding for S chip to expire taking healthcare away from millions of poor children. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-chip-funding-20170929-story.html

 

The conservative government of Michigan has passed a law effectively ending democracy at the city level. When the public voted to repeal the "financial crisis management act" they simply put the law back into effect with a provision that the public could no longer vote it down. http://michiganradio.org/post/how-did-we-get-here-look-back-michigans-emergency-manager-law

 

Conservative governor Paul Lapage fought easy access to an anti overdose drug that can save people who OD on opioids because he felt keeping someone from during of an opioid of wasn't really saving a life. http://www.pressherald.com/2016/04/20/lepage-vetoes-bill-aimed-at-increasing-access-to-heroin-anti-overdose-drug/

 

So while some people may not like the idea of conservativism being labeled "evil" I have to say that from some perspectives a lot of people calling themselves conservatives are doing a lot of things a lot of people consider to be, well, not really all that good.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Tech priest support said:

As to the issue of people bristling about being accused of being evil because they are conservative, all I can do is shrug. In modern america the conservative movement sure seems to be involved in a lot of evil stuff. One of the first things Trump did was to sign an executive order allowing coal companies to dump poison in water poor communities had to drink because having to keep local water safe to drink was costing the coal companies money. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-16/trump-signs-measure-blocking-obama-era-rule-to-protect-streams

 

Recently conservatives allowed funding for S chip to expire taking healthcare away from millions of poor children. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-chip-funding-20170929-story.html

 

The conservative government of Michigan has passed a law effectively ending democracy at the city level. When the public voted to repeal the "financial crisis management act" they simply put the law back into effect with a provision that the public could no longer vote it down. http://michiganradio.org/post/how-did-we-get-here-look-back-michigans-emergency-manager-law

 

Conservative governor Paul Lapage fought easy access to an anti overdose drug that can save people who OD on opioids because he felt keeping someone from during of an opioid of wasn't really saving a life. http://www.pressherald.com/2016/04/20/lepage-vetoes-bill-aimed-at-increasing-access-to-heroin-anti-overdose-drug/

 

So while some people may not like the idea of conservativism being labeled "evil" I have to say that from some perspectives a lot of people calling themselves conservatives are doing a lot of things a lot of people consider to be, well, not really all that good.

 

 

But of course, as is Typical for Conservatives they leave all teh important change to Progressives. Patriot act was kind of nessesary after Bush kicked in that Hornets nest, just as Osama predicted. Bush Started the whole damn Iraq war and occupation, reviving Islamic Terrorism.
But people keep blaming Obama for having to deal with this shit. For having to use Drones Strikes in a attempt to stabilise that shitty situation he inherited.
And what exactly do Republicans do about more state surveilance? Are they rushing or running on removing it? Nope, they are running on removing Obamacare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, another thing about conservatives in America is they seem to have a very selective sense of economic responsibility. I mean, they say we "can't afford" healthcare reform, or college tuition reform. We can't afford education educational programs in prisons, we can't afford meals on wheels for disabled. 

 

But we can always afford a war. Like the war in Iraq which was based on lies and the fact bush was determined to find an excuse to invade and essentially steal the nation of Iraq from his first day in office? How much has the war in Iraq cost just in financial terms? Here are some estimates.  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/27/donald-trump/did-us-spend-6-trillion-middle-east-wars/

 

Another kinda not so good thing conservatives did was to hide the cost of the Iraq invasion and occupation by not listing it on the budget while bush was in office, then when Obama came in add the costs to the deficit and claim "Obama dunnit!”

 

So yeah, when a political party tells us we ”can't afford” to provide healthcare to the poor, can't afford to feed the needy, make education affordable, help poor children, etc but sure never has a problem paying billions or trillions to bomb countries and kill tens of thousands of people I kinda have to consider them a little removed from the " good" side of the moral spectrum.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BoloOfEarth said:

California case law has established that the hold does not have meaning in terms of firearm possession unless the patient is admitted.

 

So it sounds like the law doesn't take effect unless the person is actually admitted for being a threat to himself or others. Scanned the article. Seems lacking in due process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Old Man said:

I wonder if the gun control discussion belongs in the political thread.

 

I think it's drifted over there for the most part, and we just have some dying embers of follow up posts here.

 

Maybe a mod should slide the discussion over there? Might muck things up though, as far as the flow of conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WRT gun control, I support three things:

1. Keeping guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn't have them--criminals, domestic abusers and people who have been previously found to be a threat to themselves or others

2. Doing any research necessary to determine the best ways to achieve #1

3. If a side finding of the research is that certain weapons or weapon accessories are particularly more likely to impose a greater cost on society than the benefit they might provide, imposing appropriate restrictions on those

 

It may be the case that no specific restrictions on categories or types of weapons are necessary to achieve the primary goal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, megaplayboy said:

1. Keeping guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn't have them--criminals, domestic abusers and people who have been previously found to be a threat to themselves or others

2. Doing any research necessary to determine the best ways to achieve #1

Yes, that is literally what gun control is all about. Keeping guns away from people that should not have them.

 

9 hours ago, megaplayboy said:

It may be the case that no specific restrictions on categories or types of weapons are necessary to achieve the primary goal.  

Claim gun control is about regulating weapons is a Bullshit argument invented by people that do not understand how Gun Control Works.

 

Saying "Civilians do not get Fully Automatic Weapons" is just common sense. If you fail at solving your "problem" with a Semi-Automatic Weapon, giving you a fully automatic one just puts more people at risk from misses and ricochets. Every shoot you fire, is a danger for you and everyone around you in a 1 mile radius.

From there it is just "who do you not give a Firearms license" and "how solidly is the license enforced". In the US you have insane situations like a Free Gun Zone (the state) literally surrounding the City of Chicago with more restrictive rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 1:28 PM, Tech priest support said:

As to the issue of people bristling about being accused of being evil because they are conservative, all I can do is shrug. In modern america the conservative movement sure seems to be involved in a lot of evil stuff. One of the first things Trump did was to sign an executive order allowing coal companies to dump poison in water poor communities had to drink because having to keep local water safe to drink was costing the coal companies money. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-16/trump-signs-measure-blocking-obama-era-rule-to-protect-streams

 

Recently conservatives allowed funding for S chip to expire taking healthcare away from millions of poor children. http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-chip-funding-20170929-story.html

 

The conservative government of Michigan has passed a law effectively ending democracy at the city level. When the public voted to repeal the "financial crisis management act" they simply put the law back into effect with a provision that the public could no longer vote it down. http://michiganradio.org/post/how-did-we-get-here-look-back-michigans-emergency-manager-law

 

Conservative governor Paul Lapage fought easy access to an anti overdose drug that can save people who OD on opioids because he felt keeping someone from during of an opioid of wasn't really saving a life. http://www.pressherald.com/2016/04/20/lepage-vetoes-bill-aimed-at-increasing-access-to-heroin-anti-overdose-drug/

 

So while some people may not like the idea of conservativism being labeled "evil" I have to say that from some perspectives a lot of people calling themselves conservatives are doing a lot of things a lot of people consider to be, well, not really all that good.

 

 

 

Yeah, it has occurred to me, that I shouldn't be offended.  I have been going about it wrong,  I assume on things I disagree with liberals on, that their are thinking from a flawed standpoint, but not morally evil.  Don't know what has been wrong with me. 

 

Dehumanizing the opposition, IS politics. 

 

Edit:  Well, this is me on 100% emotion, now that I have calmed.  And studying I don't know if I am offended, so much as disappointed/angry/frustrated that I am not allowed the same benefit of the doubt, I try to give on the matter  (AKA flawed thinking instead of evil)

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 2:23 PM, dmjalund said:

"The love of money is the root of all evil" - Some Guy

 

Also, "he who is without sin, caste the first stone"- Another guy

 

In politics "throw the first stone before they realize you are just as guilty"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎9‎/‎2017 at 2:17 PM, Tech priest support said:

Yeah, another thing about conservatives in America is they seem to have a very selective sense of economic responsibility. I mean, they say we "can't afford" healthcare reform, or college tuition reform. We can't afford education educational programs in prisons, we can't afford meals on wheels for disabled. 

 

But we can always afford a war. Like the war in Iraq which was based on lies and the fact bush was determined to find an excuse to invade and essentially steal the nation of Iraq from his first day in office? How much has the war in Iraq cost just in financial terms? Here are some estimates.  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/27/donald-trump/did-us-spend-6-trillion-middle-east-wars/

 

Another kinda not so good thing conservatives did was to hide the cost of the Iraq invasion and occupation by not listing it on the budget while bush was in office, then when Obama came in add the costs to the deficit and claim "Obama dunnit!”

 

So yeah, when a political party tells us we ”can't afford” to provide healthcare to the poor, can't afford to feed the needy, make education affordable, help poor children, etc but sure never has a problem paying billions or trillions to bomb countries and kill tens of thousands of people I kinda have to consider them a little removed from the " good" side of the moral spectrum.

 

 

Actually about a pretty sizeable minority of conservative agree on some of those things, like wars (maybe not Obama).  They are more libertarian to be fair.  (something I have become more and more)

 

I think a lot of those for war, are of a misguided belief that the world should be forced democracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Christopher said:

Yes, that is literally what gun control is all about. Keeping guns away from people that should not have them.

 

Claim gun control is about regulating weapons is a Bullshit argument invented by people that do not understand how Gun Control Works.

 

Saying "Civilians do not get Fully Automatic Weapons" is just common sense. If you fail at solving your "problem" with a Semi-Automatic Weapon, giving you a fully automatic one just puts more people at risk from misses and ricochets. Every shoot you fire, is a danger for you and everyone around you in a 1 mile radius.

From there it is just "who do you not give a Firearms license" and "how solidly is the license enforced". In the US you have insane situations like a Free Gun Zone (the state) literally surrounding the City of Chicago with more restrictive rules.

 

Actually it is something we agree on, unfortunately both sides have quite a few of their constituents who don't get what we are describing as gun control.  You'd be surprised but I can get on the automatic weapon bandwagon to some extent, perhaps to a large extent.  But, their does seem to be too many liberals of whom also seem to think gun control=no guns.  That is what gets some conservatives nervous. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Badger said:

 

Yeah, it has occurred to me, that I shouldn't be offended.  I have been going about it wrong,  I assume on things I disagree with liberals on, that their are thinking from a flawed standpoint, but not morally evil.  Don't know what has been wrong with me. 

 

Dehumanizing the opposition, IS politics. 

 

Edit:  Well, this is me on 100% emotion, now that I have calmed.  And studying I don't know if I am offended, so much as disappointed/angry/frustrated that I am not allowed the same benefit of the doubt, I try to give on the matter  (AKA flawed thinking instead of evil)

 

 

 

 

8 hours ago, Badger said:

 

Actually it is something we agree on, unfortunately both sides have quite a few of their constituents who don't get what we are describing as gun control.  You'd be surprised but I can get on the automatic weapon bandwagon to some extent, perhaps to a large extent.  But, their does seem to be too many liberals of whom also seem to think gun control=no guns.  That is what gets some conservatives nervous. 

 

If it is only some of them and not a majority, what is the issue?

We germans have some people in our Liberal/capitalist party that think having ways to avoid taxes via tax havens is a good thing. Nessesary. "If they did not exist, they should be invented."
https://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article170381454/Es-ist-gut-dass-es-Steueroasen-gibt.html

 

We understand that not everyone Voting for the FDP is thinking the same way. That there are spectras & wings in parties. And we have no issue saying "that sounds stupid" in the same newspaper the day after:
https://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article170410587/Dieser-obszoene-Raub-der-Reichen-muss-aufhoeren.html

 

We understand there is a different between Corporate Democracts, Justice Democracts and all the other groups of Democrats. Why is America not capable of those distinctions?

 

5 hours ago, Tech priest support said:

Either the Cannae EM drive is a hoax that cannot be killed or we need to face the fact we may have to rebuild modern quantum physics again.

 

https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/10/pilot-wave-theory-suggests-trumpet-shaped-emdrive-would-have-more-thrust.html

Pretty sure that belongs into Space news. I copy it over there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Badger said:

 

Yeah, it has occurred to me, that I shouldn't be offended.  I have been going about it wrong,  I assume on things I disagree with liberals on, that their are thinking from a flawed standpoint, but not morally evil.  Don't know what has been wrong with me. 

 

Dehumanizing the opposition, IS politics. 

 

Edit:  Well, this is me on 100% emotion, now that I have calmed.  And studying I don't know if I am offended, so much as disappointed/angry/frustrated that I am not allowed the same benefit of the doubt, I try to give on the matter  (AKA flawed thinking instead of evil)

 

 

 

The extremists are running the conservative party in america. As long as they're running the party and moderate, non extreme conservatives are effectively irrelevant in the conservative party  I don't consider  them to be a factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×