Jump to content

TrickstaPriest

HERO Member
  • Posts

    1,262
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by TrickstaPriest

  1. Yeah, I know they happen. I'd need to dig out the data to see how common they are, how often they have numbers that high... but again, that's not what problems are currently the ones I'm most interested in addressing 😕
  2. Thanks for the start! And yes, I think we can say that Stewart's tactics (and more importantly information) isn't right here. I appreciate him, but do know he's just as liable as anyone else to do bad things. Or use bad information. Or simply be wrong. Yeah, but that's damage to an individual person. I'm not sure how much damage a knife can effectively inflict on a crowd. Like at a nightclub. There have been 'stabbing frenzies', but I don't think they are as common. Anyway it's not a conversation about whether we should allow knives or guns, it's a question of whether a knife is more dangerous than a gun. A knife is very hard to use to seriously injure a dozen people. It's very easy to improvise a weapon and coordinate with a group. You are likely to get stabbed or hurt grabbing a knife, but rushing a firearm from a distance away is quite a different prospect. Though as I said before, my priorities lie elsewhere. And in general I'm quite willing to be wrong on an issue I don't know much about... >_> but I think we, as a country, are a real outlier on this subject, so I'm also willing to push back a little more too. Right now my biggest concern is... well, the fostering of more violence and death in this country by major politicians. My second biggest is how this chaos is going to be exasperated by serious poverty being created by resource extraction of the American public. And then from lack of resources and food and water due to overuse and climate change that will collapse any kind of reconciliation or revival. And how technology can be leveraged by a government in such times to have a death-grip on society and the major suffering that can cause...
  3. Best thing I can suggest is to find good video footage of the events. There are some sources I've found but I have nary the time to dig through it. https://thepatr10t.github.io/yall-Qaeda/map.html
  4. Yep, knew this was going to happen. While they say at the same time 'next time it'll be with guns'. 😕
  5. Normally I like the bringing up of issues and the providing of information but I don't like the proposed solutions. Stewart's interview is probably a reverse of that - there are great ways we could correct for these problems and make it more viable to solve gun-related crimes (including gang violence) through methods like marking of bullets (if it's effective) So while I don't agree on his child-death rate point (as per some of the provided information), it's still a set of solutions that I think are generally reasonable.
  6. Yup, and I can appreciate the perspective difference too. There's stuff I'm intractable on, and there are things on 2A that I believe must happen (risk appetite rants before), but I'm more interested in working solutions than nonworking ones. That often means less rewriting of rules - one of the things I wholly agreed with John Stewart's latest interview on some of this, is we -did- have a period where there was registration, tracking, and so on of firearms. I don't think bringing that back will be a great infringement of rights. But that's a 'belief', and my beliefs are tractable with evidence, research, et cetera. There's a lot we need to do that infighting won't help on.
  7. Unfortunately for 2A rights, I do have to agree that the greater presence of guns in our culture and society has a marked effect on it - that is to say, the greater amount of deaths by guns. It's just not my priority right now one way or another. 😕
  8. Yar. I guess I'm interpreting this past conversation on guns, versus lets say trans or gay rights. Mostly cause SB1443 is on the brain
  9. Related: https://legiscan.com/TX/bill/SB1443/2023 part I and on are the relevant bits. Same sex attraction would be banned in school books entirely.
  10. Yeah, I do consider things like a 'minimum standard of rights' to kind of go beyond local government though. ie- the primary benefits of having a 'Constitution' are to set a minimum standard (a public benefit for those living there) and a set of rules and agreements so we don't 'Sengoku Jidai' every time a leader dies off (a reason why the constitution/country doesn't get destroyed every decade or two, aka stability). So public benefit + stability are a pretty decent motivation to follow a constitution, which sets a third benefit (ie a reason to fight or defend a country other than to protect another politician's career/riches) So I guess what I'm suggesting is that while we can debate what some quantifications of a 'minimum standard' are, my interpretation is that those rights aren't just a set of rules but the entire reason people/public abide by them to begin with. Interpreting it as a 'minimum standard' is kind of the point.
  11. Some light reading https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23691846-2023-02-27-redacted-dominions-answering-brief-in-opp-to-smj69 Would love to get more official documentation, records, data on this
  12. Particularly when the media makes money on the very opposite of that thing. Literally eroding the country for cash... which is a thing we've seen in many other venues, this is just one more of them...
  13. When I was walking around Canada as a teen I had someone pass me by raising his fist, shaking it, and cheering 'rahowah!' I cheerfully responded back. It look me years later to understand he was chanting for a racial holy war.
  14. Not even sure who responded to a poll. Like, botting an online poll can happen at the best of times. Or paying/having people respond to your own service poll, if the agency giving the poll is malicious. There's so much I can do to fake something like this without even trying.
  15. Was this an online poll? https://www.mediamatters.org/daily-wire/daily-wire-host-you-have-ban-transgenderism-entirely Kansas leading the way to ban all forms of transgenderism "to push back against the woke left" Never was 'about protecting the children'
  16. Unfortunately the perception of him might be more important for re-election. Propaganda works. 😕 I also know people who've been struggling and honestly did better financially under Trump. They may not like Trump, but they admit that. I'm not about to tell them 'their experience is wrong' any more than I'd tell someone else that. I don't really believe MSNBC's opinion of it because, unfortunately, they are propaganda on 'our side', but at least the jobs report seems to suggest an improvement. I'm not sure I know any people who have been financially desperate who've been doing better now, though. So much like polling, I have to take it with a grain of salt. My concern is that Biden is just going to depress the Dem vote (particularly the young or impoverished vote) at a time when it could literally get a lot of people killed. The DNC could try and build up a new candidate, but this move makes it pretty clear to me they aren't going to do so.
  17. I know a number of people who won't be voting during the presidency this time around because of Biden (and the DNC). They'll only vote for candidates that might help impoverished people more significantly 😕 So in the shadow of a country starting a war because of a major politician wanting to build his reputation and base of power as he dies... I watch another one risk allowing a literal insurrectionist and openly anti-trans genocidal leader winning because he feels he's the best candidate. Is he? Maybe, maybe not. But to me it looks like a race to the bottom fostered by politicians seeing opportunity in disaster. I don't have any faith in Biden to garner a lot of votes. If only because the Fox News machine has had its time to work on him.
  18. The DNC change to put South Carolina first in the primary indicates to me that Biden wants to run again 😕
  19. Biden's playing politics to try and boost himself while everyone else watches the other likely candidate talk about destroying the trans community (and if you pay attention, wrapping up any and all gay/bi people in his statements as well) Next few years are going to be just great.
  20. Not a surprise - the media apparatus behind them preys on mental illness.
  21. Nope. I am mixed on this - my brother was threatened at gunpoint at his high school by one of the other kids, but I don't know that the JR-15 rifle 'itself' is more than a note on the significant cultural issues around gun ownership that produce regular shooting. ie- it's a symptom, its not really going to be a cause (of much)
  22. I've been following his content for a few months now
  23. Perun does good work. I'd also argue that's a common thread in a lot of politics... which is why they tend to destroy anything they become invested in.
  24. Meanwhile, the most likely presidential candidate overall has still been reposting people calling for civil war and to literally 'fight and die for him, lock and load'. Given how... problematic things are for Biden, and how short memory/disinterested public are... am I going to be hearing about how the fed or military has to deal with 'that abusive California state' in 2025? If he wins, are people going to 'stand up to tyranny and protest' and have him 'justifiably' crack down on the protests (extra violently? like they 'should have done' to those 'race rioters'?) You would not believe how many people I run into think that the george floyd protests should have been met with machine guns. These are the opinions of the mildly conservative people I know. If he loses, how much are the shootings going to go up? How many more times are friends of mine going to literally be skirted with death? There's no outcome where things aren't going to get worse. With poverty, the limits of water usage now, and soon climate change? The future of a united states (as in the states uniting to not engage in war) are looking grim to me. 😕
×
×
  • Create New...