|
Geoff Peterson posted:Curious how you see this turning out. Assuming we implement your plan - Does the economy create "college-level" jobs for all of these people who previously would have stopped their education after high school, or does the un(der)employment rate of recent college graduates spike? Do parents who are unable to afford paying six figures accept that options for their children are restricted to a limited number of increasingly crowded schools? Do those who construct the class gates give up and accept our egalitarian society? Or does the new "standard" language from HR departments on job postings shift to "advanced degree required"? Does the economy create "full time jobs" for people who haven't completed community college yet? If it can why isn't it doing that now? Do tutting pseudoprogressives ever stop "sucking lemons" about the idea of poor people getting anything without "earning" it? If holding down a job conflicts with excelling in school, can students put "scare quotes" around things for extra credit, or do they have to write essays about magical fantasy lands where subsidized tuition for even a year of college isn't far beyond the reach of associate degree holders trying to make ends meet on a hair shirt work-study job? "I'm okay with poor people getting free stuff, but I don't want it to be as good as my stuff."
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
McDowell posted:Yup - I make the argument that there should be legal liability if you own a gun just like owning a car. I live in NJ and because of the population density we have very strict gun laws. I would rather see it easier to buy an Ak47 - but I need to register and insure it. Having a gunsafe is just a common sense precaution in a system where you need to buy insurance that relates to liability if the gun is stolen and used in a crime. If my gun is stolen lying around outside the safe my insurer will be unhappy and I could be brought to court for criminal negligence. If I have a good insurance arrangement I am covered if someone tries to find me civilly liable. I had a 1911 pistol stolen from me by family. long story short, I kept my guns at my grandmothers house, there is a safe. I left this one out in case of a break in. By out I mean well hidden in the room but not in the safe. My grandma wanted to make a photo bigger I was living out of town and i told her to get her brother in law to bring his youngest grandson over to print a bigger photo. The little poo poo tossed the room found the pistol came out and said he could print the photo. Then left with it. Later he showed it off to people who work for my family. (was honestly told "we didnt know it was yours" by them). They failed to relieve him of the pistol. So a six teen year old has a hand gun what does he do with it. Does he shoot up his school? Rob a store? Kill him self? no the fucker sells it to a mexican national. Who gets pulled over by the CHP. He serves jail time and then gets deported. When the CHP came by to verify the gun wasnt in possession. They didnt give a poo poo about how it was stored, who took it, or how pedro got it. (yes that was his name). The attitude honestly was "whelp we got our mexican" Part of me kinda wishes there was some attention or focus my failings in the matter, or the fact I was burgled by family.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
max4me posted:I had a 1911 pistol stolen from me by family. Hey you know who should have gone to jail in this story? It's not the child.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:53
|
|
|
When do we get smart guns that only fire with a nfc enabled ring?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
hmm yes, I left a gun out where a sixteen year old could find it with a cursory search and he sold it to Pedro from Mexico, I am blameless hereratbert90 posted:When do we get smart guns that only fire with a nfc enabled ring? The New Jersey company that developed them recently shut down due to abortion doctor-level death threats if I remember right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
One of Obama's gun things is to put money/effort towards investigating smart gun technology in the context of federal agencies. Re: Bundy FWD Amazing how the entire text of the thing doesn't mention the arson guys even once
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:
 This country makes me sad sometimes. Wasn't that what the NRA wanted 20 years ago? Or am I remembering wrong?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:FB fwd:fwd:fwd about the yallqaeda folks As a rancher whose family leans heavily on the government for support and tells it to gently caress off when it's time to pay up let me tell you about Are Nation...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:
There's a law in New Jersey that once a smart lock is on the market, all guns in the state have to be equipped with them. So they're trying to prevent that from happening at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:There's a law in New Jersey that once a smart lock is on the market, all guns in the state have to be equipped with them. So they're trying to prevent that from happening at all. You'd think the NRA would jump on a chance to sell gun stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:12
|
|
|
My 23 year old colleague said he would never vote for a Democrat after Obama's executive order. I questioned him as to why he wouldn't make a similar claim about Republicans who want to deport 10 million people and he walked himself back, but quote "I don't have much of an issue on what he DID but the precedent it set". I am pretty sure he gets his political info from r/pol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
Heard Smith and Wesson stock got an 11% boost due to Obama's gun control proposal on NPR Marketplace earlier, got a good laugh out of that. On a sad note: heard an African respondent on BBC World News saying how if America's gun deaths happened in Africa people would point to it as an example of Africa's backwardness and barbarism. To him, America is an uncivilized country among civilized western countries.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
Logikv9 posted:Thanks for this, but I made a mistake and I wasn't clear on this in my post. I was actually thinking about what the courts would think. I swear I read something that quoted some Supreme Court decisions from the 1800s that shot down the guns for everybody concept. You are almost certainly thinking of this WaPo opinion piece written by John Paul Stevens. In which one of the justices who authored one of the two dissents refutes this (bolded) claim directly: Numlock posted:The DC vs Heller decision covers it in great detail but its clear from a simple logical analysis of the text and comparison to similar text in the constitution itself, that the 2nd Amendment does two things, gives the people a right to bear arms and the States to organize a militia. These two clauses are not dependent on one another. Notably even the dissenting judges in the case did not disagree with this interpretation as their dissent focused on other issues. By saying this: John Paul Stevens posted:For more than 200 years following the adoption of that amendment, federal judges uniformly understood that the right protected by that text was limited in two ways: First, it applied only to keeping and bearing arms for military purposes, and second, while it limited the power of the federal government, it did not impose any limit whatsoever on the power of states or local governments to regulate the ownership or use of firearms. In fact, he thinks the 2nd Amendment should be changed to make the dependence of the clauses clearer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:30
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:*dances into thread* Lumping the mentally ill in with mass murderers doesn't help reduce the stigma against seeking diagnosis or treatment. This might be counterproductive. *dances out of thread* This is very true and a real problem thanks for pointing it out. Talmonis posted:Mass murderers are pretty universally mentally ill though? Generally diagnosed after the fact with technically insufficient evidence because they often happen to be unavailable to take standard diagnostic tests due to being either dead or on trial, but it makes people feel better, so these red herrings* get press. Weird! There are, generally speaking, two things that actually can reduce gun** deaths:
*please imagine I had the patience to wade through the GIS results to pick a decent image macro from Clue for this and accept my sincerest apologies that I didn't. Also go watch the feature film Clue - it's great **Yes, I understand this also technically applies to whatever other weapon you're thinking of trying to turn into a smug counter-example but it's probably either way less deadly to others or significantly more dangerous to the user than a gun. If you were about to make a post to this effect, you are a bad person and I hope that you die in a fire while simultaneously drowning as soon as possible, thanks! Munkeymon fucked around with this message at 07:33 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
Moktaro posted:The primary difference here is that there's no Big Defib openly trying to shove their product into the hands of as many (white) people as possible. Holy crap - I may be the only CCW carrier who has a DeFib in his car! (Used to be a diving instructor)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Smith and Wesson et al. should really be major Democratic candidate fundraisers. Obama has done more to (indirectly) increase gun manufacturer revenue and stock prices than any other President I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:01
|
|
|
An unusual and insightful post on the New York Review's daily blog ~ Obama as Literary Critic, on the college-aged Obama's analysis of T.S. Eliot (from a letter to his then-girlfriend). Excerpt below, it's a short post and worth clicking through for the read. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:06
|
|
|
max4me posted:I had a 1911 pistol stolen from me by family. That's a lot of words to say "I'm an idiot with guns."
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:09
|
|
|
rscott posted:It does come down to the calculations for family contributions to a large extent but that sounds like a substantial improvement over the status quo Yeah I'm reserving judgement till I see that. Although some parents are poo poo and won't support their kids even if they can so I don't like that provision at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I'm just saying I'm not convinced she isn't the type that thinks otherwise it'd be something for nothing. This is a woman who used to volunteer at a free daycare as a high school student and who founded a giant charity that gives away stuff for nothing all over the world because it's the right thing to do. She did post graduate studies in child development and has given many speeches about the rights of young people to an education. Right. Not privilege. Of course it's triangulating. The mental gymnastics to attribute it to anything else are exhausting to contemplate. And yes, it will get votes that otherwise wouldn't be forthcoming. Plenty of republicans have kids they love and want to go to college but have been trained to refuse "free stuff" so a token work requirement gets around their mental block.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 08:38
|
|
|
Tiny Brontosaurus posted:Does the economy create "full time jobs" for people who haven't completed community college yet? If it can why isn't it doing that now? Do tutting pseudoprogressives ever stop "sucking lemons" about the idea of poor people getting anything without "earning" it? If holding down a job conflicts with excelling in school, can students put "scare quotes" around things for extra credit, or do they have to write essays about magical fantasy lands where subsidized tuition for even a year of college isn't far beyond the reach of associate degree holders trying to make ends meet on a hair shirt work-study job? I'm deducting marks for missing a perfect opportunity for brogressive. I'm also not sure how you've decided that I'm an Alger acolyte, but rage on. My first set of questions were on the political reality of instituting the plan. Given what we've seen in the last 8 years, I do believe that cracking the door wide open on college accessibility will lead to a spike in un(der)empolyment of college graduates, given that the early job market for that set tends to be zero sum. I believe that's a small price to pay for providing those beneath the poverty line one of the strongest tools for class mobility, but then again I'm minimally impacted by credential inflation and a filthy lib to begin with so I'm isolated from personal costs. Take those who are dissatisfied with that outcome, add to them a large chunk of the parents and students who were planning on private institutions, and combine them with the Norquist types, and you've got a strong coalition who want to see Ron Jeremy's plan burn. But those who were already going to get their bachelor's degree aren't the ones who are really hurt by the cliched "bachelor's degree is the new high school diploma" that this would add weight to, it's the ones who can't afford to delay joining the job market for 4 years. Recent studies show that nearly a third of those who drop out of high school do so to work. This group is more likely than their dropout peers to be nonwhite, to be first generation immigrants and to be below the poverty line. 11% of them are the primary breadwinner of the household, while around 25% provide at least 1/3 of the household income. This is a group who is turning down free education and gaining a social/career stigma because of their need to help support their family. How much larger is the set who can't afford to wait until 22 to contribute to the household? They're the ones who are actually getting hosed by devaluing bachelor degrees and high school diplomas. But please, tell me more about how I'm not a real progressive because I don't really care about the poors. I never tire of seeing the impoverished trotted out as props for ideological purity circlejerks. I think you've got my community college idea backwards, as well. It's not the entirety of a reform plan-broader higher education changes are obviously necessary-but it'd be a portion of it. All students who are interested and academically eligible receive 60 credit hours (to be used in 2 years) of free community college and/or vocational education-from institutions who are certified under a new regulatory regime to ensure that their credits transfer to traditional 4 year institutions. The plan acknowledges that 2 years of full-time education isn't feasible for everyone who'd like an associate's degree-but rather than trying to make up for it with grants and workstudy jobs, it instead extends the length of time over which these can be used. Someone who works 20 hours at any job can use their credits over 4 years, 40 hours would get you 6. Of course it'll still be a burden to get the additional credits needed for a bachelor's degree, but it'll be a hell of a lot easier for most folks to earn the money for tuition than it would have been at 18 with a diploma and minimal work experience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:There are, generally speaking, two things that actually can reduce gun** deaths: Although you have good taste in cinema, I'd disagree with you on this part. Both are doable. A whole lot of gun deaths are suicides, and with those even minor impediments can have a significant impact. e: Talking about more than just regulatory stuff here, it's an area where in my experience whatever safety guidance is offered completely fails to give the issue the attention it deserves. eviltastic fucked around with this message at 09:29 on Jan 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
max4me posted:I had a 1911 pistol stolen from me by family. You and your family, coupled with the authorities mentioned in the story, are a pretty decent example of a big problem with the country as a whole.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 09:23
|
|
|
The insurance Im talking about is primarily about compensating victims of robberies/shootings conducted with stolen guns. Like in the example that poster gave maybe his brother could be charged with an illegal gun sale, but if Pedro didn't hurt anyone it isn't that big of a deal (although your insurer would note the incident and it would affect your rate)
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
max4me posted:I had a 1911 pistol stolen from me by family. So you should have been held criminally negligent if that gun had been used in a crime because you are too stupid to put a gun in a safe when you aren't home?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Re: Bundy FWD They're trying to distance themselves from that because (a) those guys don't want nothing to do with them and (b) that's not what they're really mad about anyhow. This is one of those things where the narrative is layered like an onion - it's only ever been peripherally about the arsonists.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:So you should have been held criminally negligent if that gun had been used in a crime because you are too stupid to put a gun in a safe when you aren't home? That does honestly seem to be what he's saying, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Good thing you can't break into a safe then. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D33T4GOtB-U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8ViUdd-2LM
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:Although you have good taste in cinema, I'd disagree with you on this part. Both are doable. A whole lot of gun deaths are suicides, and with those even minor impediments can have a significant impact. e: Talking about more than just regulatory stuff here, it's an area where in my experience whatever safety guidance is offered completely fails to give the issue the attention it deserves. Gun advertising is pretty nasty in this area as well. A lot of it is steeped in masculinity and promises you'll be more a man if you own X weapon. That's really appealing to someone having emotional troubles which they feel are making them less a man. When you combine that with a lot of alcohol advertising having a similar message and you've got the deadly conditions we currently have for men with depression.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:So you should have been held criminally negligent if that gun had been used in a crime because you are too stupid to put a gun in a safe when you aren't home? Or maybe he's saying they should have expressed concern at all for the process by which it went from his possession to the criminal's.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:Gun advertising is pretty nasty in this area as well. A lot of it is steeped in masculinity and promises you'll be more a man if you own X weapon. That's really appealing to someone having emotional troubles which they feel are making them less a man. When you combine that with a lot of alcohol advertising having a similar message and you've got the deadly conditions we currently have for men with depression. Preying on insecurities has become the biggest gun advertising tactic over the decades. It's part of why their diehard supporters are trained to reject any attempt to regulate them as an attack on their very identity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Good thing you can't break into a safe then. Welp, might as well pass no laws ever agrees congress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 14:57
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Good thing you can't break into a safe then. Indeed, since gun safes provide no protection at all guns should not be allowed into anyone's hands lest they end up in the hands of criminals instead, a good pro gun ban argument. 
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
These highly trained superstrong safe cracking teens always defeat our gun grabbing arguments 
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
The Bundy standoff got magical overnight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Welp, might as well pass no laws ever agrees congress. More like "Get no safes ever"- agrees mother whose toddler just shot their sibling with gun dug out of her purse RevKrule posted:The Bundy standoff got magical overnight. Anyone else miss blanket forts? Kudos for these guys finding the magic again
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
To me it fits right along side the "you can kill someone with a butter knife too" argument. Tools are all meaningless, everyone can do anything they want with or without them no matter what, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Might as well ban all cars!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
Lol who needs a gun to feel more like a "Man". I don't own any weapons and love life. Something is seriously wrong with people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
Might as well not bother locking your doors at night, videos on youtube exist and show they can get in anyway!
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2016 15:12
|
|
