Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
Honest question: If a near future republican president has the same makeup of the house/senate as Biden does just flipped R/D then wouldn't they just kill the filibuster without any hesitation?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:

they already did, it's why the Supreme Court looks like it does today

That was a filibuster for judicial appointments. I'm talking about a filibuster for legislation which is what some Dems (but not enough) have wanted to get rid of so they can pass literally anything. What I'm wondering is if a slim republican majority would abolish it without hesitation. Because if that's the case then I don't know why any Dems are currently afraid of getting rid of it since their main point of contention seems to be "Well imagine what would happen if the Republicans have the majority again someday without a filibuster!" But it's like, who cares they will probably get rid of it anyway if they are in the same situation? Might as well get rid of it now while you can actually do some good?

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
A vasectomy sure is looking good right about now

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Who was the dem no vote? Manchin?

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

-Blackadder- posted:

‘He’s Not OK’: The Entirely Predictable Unraveling of Madison Cawthorn

Sounds like his loss was the best for everyone, including himself. Hopefully he gets the help he needs.

Counterpoint: gently caress that Nazi

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

cat botherer posted:

I really don't understand this conservative hard-on for executing/imprisoning the wrongfully accused. Just one of those situations where I can't put myself in their place well enough to understand their motivations. Is it really just to avoid making the justice system look weak?

It's an inherently violent ideology. That's it.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
Has anyone blamed the video games yet

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Jaxyon posted:

Fascists and white supremacists are absolutely are not pulling punches talking to their kids. It behooves us to do the same.

Not that it makes it any easier. :smith:

I'm curious how fascists talk to their kids about school shootings. Especially when it happens in a school their kids attend.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
I wonder if the US is just going to start seeing a massive population decrease in the coming decades. I can't think of a (western) country that has made it more hostile to have kids than the US. I wake up every day thankful that I never wanted any, and never had any because I see what parents go through here and I don't know how they maintain their sanity. I look at the cost of having a baby, the cost of daycare (because you know both parents have to work) the added costs to already astronomical insurance rates for people with kids, food costs are through the roof which is really painful when you have a family to feed, and of course housing and gas costs are more when you have a family.

And to top it off, you can't even be sure your kids will be safe when their in class. While you're working your rear end off to provide for them some psycho could walk into their school and start shooting up the place. Im sure plenty of people that actually want to have kids are having second thoughts about it these days.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
I remember during the early years of Obama's administration his commentary on the school shootings was always really sad but by the later years of his admin he was still sad but just resigned to it after multiple failed attempts to get any gun control legislation passed through Congress. This will no doubt happen to Biden too.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

SpaceCadetBob posted:

Im drunk as poo poo due to the news, but i hold this minute candle of hope that this time just might be different since this happened in texas. Locality matters, and there are a lot of suburban texas moms having to stare straight at real consequences for their political opinions tonight.

Not saying anything will change, buts its minutely more likely in this case as opposed to the shooting occurring in NY of CA.

Do you know how many of these same people have lost family members to covid and still believe it's either a hoax or a "plandemic" and even after losing loved ones refuse to get them and their families vaccinated or even wear a mask? Trust me when I say these people will not be swayed by school shootings even if it happens at a school their own kids attend. The average American Republican is so beyond a lost cause there isn't even a word to describe it.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Killer robot posted:

Notably, New York was one of several states that passed a sweeping new assault weapon ban in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting. It was pitched explicitly to prevent things like this, but actually was targeted at ways that guns remind remind people of scary action movie villains over anything that makes them particularly more valuable for murdering people. While very little applied to handguns, due to a whoopsie in its late night drafting and passage they accidentally banned police from carrying their duty pistols (which might have actually saved some lives) and had to go back and revise it.

In the end, it was a reactionary, knee-jerk law that did nothing to reduce gun crime; not because of gun industry capture or NRA opposition, but because of what its initial proponents wanted. Because in this country even most gun control activists, by preference, clamor for things to sooth their action movie fears more loudly than they do for anything connected to real-world crime. It's really a hosed situation no matter what your views on gun ownership.

While the gun that was used in the Buffalo shooting was obtained legally, the magazine for it certainly was not. NY has had a 10 round limit on magazines I thinl for decades now but the shooter was using a 30 rounder. Would the time that the shooter would have spent changing out 10 round mags potentially saved some lives? Maybe, maybe not. But I think that's the whole idea of 10 round mag limits.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
Gov Abbott press conference is getting heated as hell. I'm only listening to the audio but apparently someone is shouting at the governor and of course he's like "The victims families are here how dare you" Lol he has no defense at all the piece of poo poo

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
The Texas lt governor is on the mic in the press conference. His solution to this: more God.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Dick Trauma posted:

I cannot imagine as a private, unarmed citizen standing outside that school listening to gunfire that means the murder of children and not going in. Even if it meant certain death. If all I had was a rock I would pick it up and go in. I would not be able to live with myself if I did nothing.

For trained, armed and armored cops... I cannot understand how they could resist the impulse to stop what they knew was a slaughter of innocents.

Your heart is in the right place here but it's really easy to say something like that until it happens. Most of us never deal with a life and death situation so you really don't know how you'd react in that situation regardless of how you think you'd act.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

nine-gear crow posted:

Arizona elected a vacuous remedial child trapped in an adult's body to be one of their United States Senators. A woman who is literally distracted by cookies and juice boxes and shiny objects.

Someone tell Chuck Schumer to jingle some keys in front of her face and see if that can trick her into voting to abolish the filibuster.

Hi Arizonan here and multiple Sinema voter through her Congress and Senate runs. All I can say is right up until she was elected to the Senate she seemed like a Republicans worst nightmare. She would call herself a "Prada Socialist" a decade ago and the Republicans would run the most hilarious attack ads about it which to my mind just made her a more attractive candidate.

Then she got elected to the Senate and I don't know what the gently caress happened but she hoodwinked the hell out of us. I don't know if she's getting bankrolled by the Republicans now but it sure seems like it.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

DeeplyConcerned posted:

you're right it's not a mental illness. not as we currently understand it. there is no diagnosable mental illness associated with this kind of behavior. if you walk into a psychiatrist's office and ask for help because you want to mow down a classroom full of 20 kids and have no other symptoms they will tell you to hit the bricks. in fact a lot of the personality traits that are associated with antisocial behavior are actually protective against other forms of mental illness like depression and anxiety. so not only is this violence NOT associated with what we commonly understand as mental illness but shifting the conversation towards people with mental illness is totally ludicrous in this context.

mental illness is defined by a form of suffering causing distress and discomfort and interfering with the life of the person suffering. wanting to cause suffering to someone else falls into a category of thought/behavior that doesn't formally exist.

I happen to disagree with psychologists on this perspective. I think antisocial behavior should be treated as
a form of mental illness. ALL human behavior is subject to change, and that we ought to figure out what causes people to cause suffering to others, so we can develop treatments. if we want to continue living in a society and don't just want to normalize barbarism.

that doesn't mean giving potential mass shooters a hug or patting them on the head. It means figuring out why they make the choices they make and stopping them before they are able to take action. but I'm in the vast minority.

I think another part of the problem is that the mental illness that apparently so many teens have that causes them to shoot up schools doesn't look all that different from typical teenage edgelordism. Even on the extreme end. There's lot of teens that dress all in black, listen to sad music, get bullied in school, cut themselves, etc. Most of those teens grow out of it. A small percentage go off the deep end and shoot up a school. How can parents tell the difference between the teens that will end the former or the latter?

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Flying-PCP posted:

It looks like in a number of cases the right is going down a path of legally empowering fascist vigilantes to hurt people in ways they haven't managed to do yet through direct legislation, so, yknow, that might be worth factoring into the conversation.

This. Obviously being armed isn't going to do anything against a government with tanks and drones. But against marauding bands of Proud Boys out looking to kill Democrats, Gays, and Brown people I don't think its crazy that to want to be armed against that. Will it do any good? Probably not in the end but not everyone wants to go down without at least taking a fascist with them. And if you think the scenario of militia running around going after those they consider undesirable is crazy then you don't know history. The Proud Boys, 3 percenters, Oath Keepers etc are all modern day brownshirts.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
I'm no forensic expert so I might totally wrong about this but isn't it a bit early to say so matter of factly that no policemen's bullets hit these kids? Like I don't know how fast autopsies can be done but it's barely been 48 hours since the shooting so I would think that with the amount of victims that autopsies would still be taking place.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
Wasn't the whole point of outfitting cops with AR15s and MRAPS because criminals are so well armed these days? I mean I know that's not the real reason, but I'm sure it was the "official" reason.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

BiggerBoat posted:

Wouldn't the autopsy reveal if the fatal shots came from a different gun?

I think so. Especially if the cops were using handguns firing something like 9mm rounds I'm sure expert analysis can determine the difference in wounds between them and the 5.56 rounds the assailant was firing.

It wouldnt surprise me at all if the cops accidently shot some of those kids. It was probably a really chaotic situation and I'm sure both sides were probably firing wildly.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

papa horny michael posted:

Edit: ^Bingo.

In Uvalde, the Coroner is also the Justice of the Peace, and works directly with the Sheriffs department. These are positions that are elected by a commission, typically without medical training. So it will be up to him to determine causes of deaths, and do the paperwork certifying who died and in what matter.

Here is an article from NPR talking with him.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/31/1102097583/a-uvalde-coroner-is-haunted-by-identifying-the-bodies-of-children-and-an-old-fri

That sounds like a massive conflict of interest...

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Lemming posted:

Nobody was accusing them of anything until during a press conference they were like "we are absolutely certain we did not kill ANY children. If any kids have cop bullets in them, they were definitely already dead. We know nobody asked, we just wanted to make sure everyone knew."

My "I did not accidentally shoot any kids" shirt has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my shirt.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Mayday Cat posted:

Why would you not give them the benefit of the doubt? Isnt America founded on the idea of innocent until proven guilty?

Lol

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

The article says the police are treating the shooting as a "catastrophic situation". So yeah here we freaking go again.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009
I noticed one of the ways a lot of chuds handwave away Jan 6 was that "They weren't armed". Well I mean didn't most of the rioters come from out of state? And most of them flew to DC? It's not exactly easy to fly with a gun. Im not even sure you can legitimately fly with a handgun. There are ways to do it (I think hunters can fly with a gun) but it's extremely difficult from what I understand.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Kalit posted:

Can we please have the rule against posting/linking rando twitter accounts reinstated? This is absolute garbage.....

I'm not really buying this story about Boebert but for what it's worth the same people that buried Madison Cawthorne are the ones that dug up this story. I believe they are called the "Muckraker PAC".

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Sodomy Hussein posted:

Nobody buried Madison Cawthorn except the GOP when he went into business for himself. If he hadn't gone out of his way to make an enemy of Thom Tillis he'd probably still be around.

Well yeah, the PAC that buried Cawthorne is run by the GOP obviously. And they went after him after his "Coke and orgies" statement on that radio show.

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Main Paineframe posted:

https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1537136174266974208

DeSantis, classy as always.

Between this and some of the open transphobia MTG's been dropping lately (such as claiming that tampon shortages are caused by letting trans people use their preferred bathrooms, or making wiener-chopping jokes with Milo), I kind of feel like they've been ramping up the open offensiveness lately for the election cycle.

Playing to their base is all they got. Can you blame them?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Fritz the Horse posted:

It was mentioned earlier that the Garland DOJ is especially cautious about bringing cases, they don't prosecute unless they have a 100% slamdunk case. I suspect they're worried about political blowback from failed prosecutions of Jan 6th rioters and especially of Trump himself. If they bring cases against the rioters or Trump and lose (or even just if those cases drag on for a long time), right-wingers get to triumphantly proclaim they were the victims of a totally phone made-up witch hunt and their innocence has been vindicated in court etc.

They're going to say this anyway no matter what happens. The DOJ can have sworn videotaped testimony from Trump himself that he wanted to steal the election and his followers will STILL say it was all a Democrat witch hunt.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

Dick Trauma posted:

Is there a risk to the Murdochs and Kochs of the world that they might exhaust the GOP reservoir of hatred and ignorance with this flood of dramatic and provocative garbage?

You can't exhaust a violent, hateful, fascist culture of new ways and new groups to hate.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply