|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm asking DV to provide people with some reason to feel hopeful rather than scolding them for feeling hopeless. A bunch of gun control laws were passed just in the last year. I know we've had this conversation before, and I know you know I have provided a whole effortpost description of how this framing is used to derail discussion of policy change, including specific examples from the NRA. I also know you know that setting "reason to feel hope" as a standard for proof shuts down discussion because it's unfalsifiable, just like shifting your standard to "meaningful" legislation is. It's also why blaming "politicians" is nonsense when, as we've also already covered, it's overwhelmingly the Republicans and specifically their control of the courts that are keeping gun control laws from happening.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 05:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
I have probably mentioned this in other threads but every victim of gun violence got together to form a lobby and bribed every pro gun politician one dollar more than the NRA then gun reform would happen the next day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 05:27
|
|
|
Madkal posted:I have probably mentioned this in other threads but every victim of gun violence got together to form a lobby and bribed every pro gun politician one dollar more than the NRA then gun reform would happen the next day. The gun lobby isn't particularly driven through donations- they have been effective through tying themselves to right wing cultural issues such that their constituency serves as a conservative voting bloc. That is, again, why there is such a concerted effort to tie the issue to other culture war elements that had served as wedge issues, a pattern that emerged with the revolt at Cincinnati in 1977. Pro-gun politicians are concerned that they will lose elections for compromising on gun control, far more than that they will lose dollars. The industry itself is too unstable financially- which is part of why its power has continued to weaken, helped by the NRA's gradual self-destruction. ...I should do some effortposting on feedback forces and radicalization in trade associations sometime, the NRA's instructive of broader phenomena. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 05:35 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 05:31
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:A bunch of gun control laws were passed just in the last year. I know we've had this conversation before, and I know you know I have provided a whole effortpost description of how this framing is used to derail discussion of policy change, including specific examples from the NRA. I also know you know that setting "reason to feel hope" as a standard for proof shuts down discussion because it's unfalsifiable, just like shifting your standard to "meaningful" legislation is. It's also why blaming "politicians" is nonsense when, as we've also already covered, it's overwhelmingly the Republicans and specifically their control of the courts that are keeping gun control laws from happening. I'm not asking you to prove anything. Because yeah, of course hope isn't something you can prove. I'm not trying to have a debate with you. Just... have a normal conversation, please. I promise I'm not trolling you or whatever. I know that you're concerned about the feeling of futility being spread. I believe you. The problem though, as I see it, is that you're not helping to stop it. Sarcastically dismissing genuine concern as repeating gun lobby lines doesn't make anyone feel like things aren't futile, and it might just have the opposite effect. It's good that new gun control legislation is being passed. But it's obviously not enough, because mass shootings and gun deaths are still outrageously high. Again, just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that we should give up on this. We both want the same thing, but where we disagree is on how quickly it should come about. I think that more pressure needs to be placed on politicians to pass more and better legislation. Especially on democrats, not because lol dems suck or whatever, but because they can actually be pressured. And if gop control of the courts is hampering progress, then something needs to be done about that. I know that you are very knowledgeable on legal matters. But I'd politely ask that you consider that knowledge isn't everything. There are many intangible, unquantifiable things, like hope, that are nonetheless important in driving political action.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 06:24
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I'm not asking you to prove anything. Because yeah, of course hope isn't something you can prove. I'm not trying to have a debate with you. Just... have a normal conversation, please. I promise I'm not trolling you or whatever. "I'm too doomerized to bother with evidence, so please don't interrupt when I make forlorn shitposts" is, unfortunately, not a new one in this thread (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 06:48
|
|
|
That opening paragraph to the article is a doozy:quote:Several high-profile mass shootings and a sustained rise in gun violence across the United States in 2022 have spurred law enforcement officials and lawmakers to push for more gun control measures. Afaik none of the weapons used in mass shootings are untraceable. Even if they were, mass shooters usually end up surrendering or committing suicide/suicide by cop so idk why traceability would even matter. Many of those legislations include "ghost guns" which idgaf about. Most mass shooters really don't care about getting caught, they usually plan to kill themselves anyway. At this point mass shootings are so common they're rarely the top story (if they even make national news) unless there's something weird about it like uvalde. I looked through most of those legislations and very few of them seemed particularly helpful in preventing them. Even raising the age of semi-auto firearms purchasers is kind of worthless when parents buy the weapons for their kids.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 06:54
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:That makes some of their voters get a sad, which must be avoided at all costs. Which of their voters? Despite the frankly pathetic efforts of their non-piece of poo poo friends and family to try to explain away the clear and present evil of the Republicans they happen to love, I honestly don't think there would be a single one who gave a gently caress at this point. What is there left of the mask?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 08:39
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Which of their voters? Despite the frankly pathetic efforts of their non-piece of poo poo friends and family to try to explain away the clear and present evil of the Republicans they happen to love, I honestly don't think there would be a single one who gave a gently caress at this point. What is there left of the mask? People vote for evil poo poo telling themselves they're good people. Even if that fig leaf is paper thin. The slight distance of not saying it out loud matters to those people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 08:47
|
|
|
Also can't be emphasised enough that the right cares about aesthetics and vibes an order of magnitude more than actual action and policy. 'Virtue signalling', while in part accurately identifying a lot of liberal behaviour, is also wild projection of their own behaviour. Hypocrisy is their comfort zone, the cruelty is the point, their professed ideals exist solely as a trap to make you waste your time and effort on trying to punch fog.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 08:53
|
|
|
Name Change posted:"I'm too doomerized to bother with evidence, so please don't interrupt when I make forlorn shitposts" is, unfortunately, not a new one in this thread That's not what Fister was saying. They were trying to appeal to DV's humanity while complimenting them on their decisive and thoroughly logical approach, while suggesting that being more empathetic in their prose would improve DV's arguments by making them more palatable and more understandable to a wider audience. Cpt_Obvious posted:At this point mass shootings are so common they're rarely the top story (if they even make national news) unless there's something weird about it like uvalde. I looked through most of those legislations and very few of them seemed particularly helpful in preventing them. Even raising the age of semi-auto firearms purchasers is kind of worthless when parents buy the weapons for their kids. I may be simple, but it seems the answer to the problem is the one every other country did. Ban the guns. Just because the right thing is unpopular doesn't make it wrong. Ghost Leviathan posted:Also can't be emphasised enough that the right cares about aesthetics and vibes an order of magnitude more than actual action and policy. 'Virtue signalling', while in part accurately identifying a lot of liberal behaviour, is also wild projection of their own behaviour. Hypocrisy is their comfort zone, the cruelty is the point, their professed ideals exist solely as a trap to make you waste your time and effort on trying to punch fog. I think everyone cares about aesthetics. Probably to a larger degree than seems reasonable. Studies have consistently shown that people hear about something and then look to thought leaders (or people they think are thought leaders) to decide what they think about it, even if they never look into the matter with any kind of depth whatsoever. There's an appeal to being a right-thinking person because it gives you social status and is very useful in getting people you don't like angry (or shutting them down).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 12:25
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It’s a well-established principle that republicans only care about something when they have a strong personal connection to it, and, well, a lot of them have children in school Yeah, but they usually have their kids in "good" / private schools. I mean, I don't have the numbers so correct me if I'm wrong, but the schools getting shot up are your bog standard public schools, aren't they? Not usually the schools in the rich neighborhoods where a politician is going to have their kids.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 12:33
|
|
|
One of the kids killed in Nashville was the child of a radiologist who works with my wife. Green Hills is not a poor area
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 12:39
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Yeah, but they usually have their kids in "good" / private schools. I don’t have numbers on me but the most recent school shooting—the one kicking off this conversation—was a private religious school. So that’s at least one non-public school that got shot up. JesustheDarkLord posted:One of the kids killed in Nashville was the child of a radiologist who works with my wife. Green Hills is not a poor area Yeah I saw a video of the neighborhood the shooter—who attended the school—lived in, and it definitely appeared to be upper-middle-class. Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 13:03 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 12:54
|
|
|
the_steve posted:Yeah, but they usually have their kids in "good" / private schools. Maybe they were referring to the voters instead of the politicians? Either way they literally don't give a slightest poo poo about dead children who are not theirs, and honestly don't seem to care that much about their own children either considering the recent years. Jaxyon posted:People vote for evil poo poo telling themselves they're good people. Even if that fig leaf is paper thin. I feel like there has been so much poo poo said out loud lately that they would find a way to cope with this too. Empathy is largely a weakness for Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 13:14
|
|
|
The large problem with "stopping" shootings is that you can't, at least not entirely. There are dozens of things you can do to minimize shootings such as safe storage laws, domestic violence gun revocation, and mental health services expansion. But none of those truly *prevent* shootings one hundred percent and that makes them sound like half measures, meaning they get very little play. Ultimately if someone is motivated enough then they could do it, because it is a cultural problem, not a legislative one. People don't want to hear "this will cut shootings by 80%", because that isn't far enough. But even if you go full on "the police keep us safe, melt all privately held guns in America" confiscation (which will never happen) then there will *still* be at least some shootings from the people who are still allowed to have guns. The only way to actually fix this is a fundamental shift in how we interact with firearms as a culture and good loving luck on that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 13:20
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It's worth emphasizing that gun control is generally popular- the issue is the distribution of Republican voters on the subject. This is definitely a factor, in fact Nashville itself was gerrymandered to hell a few years ago. Not that it was ever the deepest of deep blue areas, and not to say this only happens in places with tight gun laws because people can easily cross state lines anyway... but for what it's worth, it got truly eviscerated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 13:26
|
|
|
In somewhat funny news, abortion is legal in Wyoming again because of an anti-obamacare law. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/24/wyoming-abortion-ban-blocked-due-to-obamacare-era-amendment.html Short version 1. Years ago Wyoming passes an anti-ACA constitutional amendment that says that citizens have the fundamental right to make decisions over their own Healthcare. 2. Judge says "Abortions can only be performed by doctors, so they're healthcare, and the constitution says that citizens can make their own decisions about that." 3. Abortion legal again (at least for now)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:09
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:That opening paragraph to the article is a doozy: Would you mind please including a link to the source material when you quote it? I agree with your overall point. Although, ghost guns are being frequently used in shootings involving drugs and crime. According to the ATF, several cities had up to 20% of their shootings involve ghost guns in 2021. However, you're right that they aren't being used very often at all for mass shootings. According to ABC, there have been 4 school shootings that involved ghost guns in the last two years and one non-school mass shooting in Sacramento. https://abcnews.go.com/US/ghost-guns-showing-school-shootings-experts-fear-trend/story?id=83346844
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:15
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:The large problem with "stopping" shootings is that you can't, at least not entirely. There are dozens of things you can do to minimize shootings such as safe storage laws, domestic violence gun revocation, and mental health services expansion. But none of those truly *prevent* shootings one hundred percent and that makes them sound like half measures, meaning they get very little play. Ultimately if someone is motivated enough then they could do it, because it is a cultural problem, not a legislative one. I’m confused on who your post is directed at. Are you directing this at a poster ITT or saying that the populace don’t care about gun safety if it’s not 100% effective, but otherwise would? Or someone else?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:25
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Would you mind please including a link to the source material when you quote it? Discendo Vox posted:A bunch of gun control laws were passed just in the last year. I know we've had this conversation before, and I know you know I have provided a
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:The large problem with "stopping" shootings is that you can't, at least not entirely. There are dozens of things you can do to minimize shootings such as safe storage laws, domestic violence gun revocation, and mental health services expansion. But none of those truly *prevent* shootings one hundred percent and that makes them sound like half measures, meaning they get very little play. Ultimately if someone is motivated enough then they could do it, because it is a cultural problem, not a legislative one. I don't think anyone thinks that they will stop 100% of shootings. Even places like Japan (which is an island nation making it very difficult to smuggle in guns, has incredibly strict gun control, no civilian gun culture, and very strict laws about gun sales and imports) have a few occasional gun deaths. But, you can reduce them dramatically (especially the school shootings and domestic shootings that are usually only enabled because of the ease of having a gun that someone can just take or pick up in the house) by doing what every other country did: - Ban the sale and manufacture of most handguns. - Have a voluntary gun buyback. - Confiscate and destroy all guns used in crimes or found during any investigations. - Disallow inheriting guns that aren't antiques and ban private sales and gifts. - Wait 10 years for most of the remaining guns to eventually filter out of the system. You don't have to go door to door and confiscate everyone's guns or consider an 85% reduction in gun deaths a failure. Most other countries who implemented major gun control saw reductions between 50% and 80% and they are generally considered successful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:35
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I’m confused on who your post is directed at. Are you directing this at a poster ITT or saying that the populace don’t care about gun safety if it’s not 100% effective, but otherwise would? Or someone else? It was more of a comment of "why can't these things stick" in relation to several posts above. My point is that proactive ideas tend to get more play than "limit these things and then hope for the best". Harm reduction is something that everyone knows it good from a logical standpoint but when there are bodies on the ground the question becomes "we already have these laws, why didn't they prevent this entirely". It might be a strange thing to say, but I think that the reason why "arm teachers/more cops in schools" gets so much play in media goes beyond "more guns is safer" and goes into the idea of it being an active thing. If we accept that zero is not an achievable number then we can actively have armed people around and those people can actively stop the shooter. It's all smoke and mirror horseshit that implies that everyone is John Wick, but it *feels* better. On the other hand, a 80% reduction in shootings would be amazing but preventative laws tend to not be as...interesting? As other ones because they involve slamming a gate down and hoping it stops most people. "Gun control/dealing with shooters" is a vague idea that most people like but the right engages with it from an emotional angle while the left engages from a statistical angle, as it always does, and it hampers the passage of laws as an effect. It's difficult for legislators to go in front of people and go "we'll cut down a lot on shootings but we can't do everything", even if it's a gigantic reduction and the best option. CuddleCryptid fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:36
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:It's difficult for legislators to go in front of people and go "we'll cut down a lot on shootings but we can't do everything", even if it's a gigantic reduction. It's significantly more difficult when they never bother to demonstrate or argue or even make an empty promise that it would be a gigantic reduction, it's usually "and it might do something maybe, every little bit helps right?". At least from what I've encountered in New England, the actual narrative being sold tends to make even meaningful gun control legislation feel anemic and symbolic, and driven primarily by the need to "do something" rather than by any belief that the something being done will actually help the problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
CuddleCryptid posted:In somewhat funny news, abortion is legal in Wyoming again because of an anti-obamacare law. Legal, but still a royal pain in the rear end to get. The only functioning clinic is in Jackson, a ski resort town one of the wealthiest communities in the country. Another one is under construction in Casper, but that's been halted because of recent arson.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:47
|
|
|
These poll results aren't really new and are kind of infamous, but the trend of the last 30 years or so where large majorities of Americans desperately want completely contradictory things is still holding strong. Huge majorities of people want to: - Cut spending overall. - Increase spending in every category, except for foreign aid. - Cut taxes. - Balance the budget. all at the same time. https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1641059731417513984 I'm kind of amused that the AP pretty much just lays it out in the first sentence: quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — In the federal budget standoff, the majority of U.S. adults are asking lawmakers to pull off the impossible: Cut the overall size of government, but also devote more money to the most popular and expensive programs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:47
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:It's significantly more difficult when they never bother to demonstrate or argue or even make an empty promise that it would be a gigantic reduction, it's usually "and it might do something maybe, every little bit helps right?". At least from what I've encountered in New England, the actual narrative being sold tends to make even meaningful gun control legislation feel anemic and symbolic, and driven primarily by the need to "do something" rather than by any belief that the something being done will actually help the problem. "Symbolic but not effective" tends to be the general vibe, yeah. I do think that gun control advocates need to meet gun owners on the same level as well. Putting aside the "you just want a gun to feel like rambo" hyperbole, there's several laws that could be passed that most gun owners entirely agree with. One big one that is being pushed in Michigan right now are safe storage laws, which yeah, if you own a gun then keep it secured. No brainer, most gun owners already do that, the nature of enforcement is in question but basically everyone that isn't completely lead brained can say that it's a good idea. And it would definitely lead to a reduction in shootings due to unsecured firearms. But when the response is always "we must ban these weapons of war, bring back the assault weapon ban, etc etc" the response from gun owners is always going to be "what does a ban on pistol grips on rifles do to help prevent people from shooting elementary schoolers?" If you're couching your ideas in the aestetics rather than what the actual, practical effect of the law then your position is going to sound entirely symbolic. Or in other words, a politician could say "we are going to limit magazine sizes to ten rounds and make it so that you can only use bolt action rifles and you can only buy twenty rounds a year" and to a lot of voters that will sound like "oh good, so they can only shoot twenty kids" even though that would be an incredible reduction in actual deaths. CuddleCryptid fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Mar 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 14:52
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:These poll results aren't really new and are kind of infamous, but the trend of the last 30 years or so where large majorities of Americans desperately want completely contradictory things is still holding strong. This is a lot less contradictory when you recognize that the fully expanded statement is "Cut taxes for me". I don't know why the Dems haven't bothered offering a plan that involves tax cuts for the majority of the population coupled with increased taxes on the wealthy so they could sell the whole thing as an important comprehensive tax reform under the label "Biden/Democrat Tax Cut", considering that seems to be a popular combination.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:These poll results aren't really new and are kind of infamous, but the trend of the last 30 years or so where large majorities of Americans desperately want completely contradictory things is still holding strong. Can't help but notice that it looks like this poll didn't ask people how they felt about military spending. You could cut military spending in half and easily make all the rest of those points presented as contradictory happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:06
|
|
|
The point of the "arm teachers/more cops in schools" messaging is it forces a reframing of the subject where gun control advocates have to argue against the pro-gun framing, shifting discussion away from gun control.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:These poll results aren't really new and are kind of infamous, but the trend of the last 30 years or so where large majorities of Americans desperately want completely contradictory things is still holding strong. I think this is pretty easily explained by the absurdly glaring omission of military spending (and to a lesser extent, police budgets). I don't think it's strange to think the government spends way too much in general and way too little on specific things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:07
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:This is a lot less contradictory when you recognize that the fully expanded statement is "Cut taxes for me". You know why: capitalism + money in politics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
Forum accident posted:Can't help but notice that it looks like this poll didn't ask people how they felt about military spending. You could cut military spending in half and easily make all the rest of those points presented as contradictory happen. Ershalim posted:I think this is pretty easily explained by the absurdly glaring omission of military spending (and to a lesser extent, police budgets). I don't think it's strange to think the government spends way too much in general and way too little on specific things. Unfortunately, no. Military spending is also very popular. Gallup's most recent poll from last month shows ~63% of Americans think current military spending is either too low or about right. Only 35% think it is too high. Only 11% think our current national defense is "stronger than it needs to be," 44% say "not strong enough," and 44% say "about right." https://news.gallup.com/poll/1666/military-national-defense.aspx The only category of spending where a majority of Americans support cuts is "Foreign Aid."
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:14
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Unfortunately, no. I see. Well, I retract my previous statement and instead would offer  . It's something of a derail, but I honestly believe that democracy is incapable of addressing systemic issues in part because living in a system apparently prevents the vast majority of people from being able to see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
This is a different poll though, isn't it? I just mean that military spending being left off of the original poll can explain the way it's being presented as contradictory.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
Forum accident posted:This is a different poll though, isn't it? I just mean that military spending being left off of the original poll can explain the way it's being presented as contradictory. Yes, but the original poll did ask about a lot more categories. They just didn't include them all in the tweet graphic. They are described and listed in the article underneath that was copy and pasted. Here's the crosstabs: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yes, but the original poll did ask about a lot more categories. They just didn't include them all in the tweet graphic. They are described and listed in the article underneath that was copy and pasted. Ah, thanks, I didn't see that in the AP article.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:48
|
|
|
 In graph form.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
I do wonder what the breakdown looks like - is it that most people want a few things cut, but the things they want cut all differ wildly? Like if you're funding A, B, C and D, and have 4 people, and each of them thinks one of those needs to be cut completely and half its moneys moved to the thing of their choice, you'd have 75% thinking "good enough or more" for each item but 100% agreement that "the government spends too much" Of course there's probably also just a lot of "I want stuff without having to pay for it" as well
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 16:00
|
|
|
Probably going to regret asking this, but what exactly are the people saying we spend too little on border security complaining about? Do they want more camps, or more murders at the border, or some other thing that isn't occurring to me? I assume the question reads as border security [from Mexico], but is there another angle to it? Like, are people buying into copaganda that fentanyl from China is giving them Super Havana Syndrome or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 16:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I do wonder what the breakdown looks like - is it that most people want a few things cut, but the things they want cut all differ wildly? Pretty much. The only universal belief is that the government spends way too much money on things that aren't that important. Everyone differs on what the things are
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 16:03
|
|
