Sir you seem to be smart,and you hit many good points.
I absolutely agree that trying to gain votes or favor through painting your opponent as a bad person is ultimately a morally bankrupt idea.
We should be careful how we exercise our rights. The fact of how everyone regards how important they are but never how we should use them wisely is a problem that is likely going to cost us in the long run.
But I'd like to remind you that most crimes involving firearms are done with illegal firearms.
"Get on Target for Victory in November Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly" is NOT inches away. It can be interpreted in no other way. Palin has introduced linguistic salad with a side of cute in such a way that this imagery can be spewed at will while everyone pretends it's funny or a clever way of "just sayin'". It is provocation, it's what cheer leaders do, it's getting an audience worked up into a frenzy for the kill.
as someone who has been "diagnosed" and re-diagnosed with one mental disorder or another, I can vouch that anyone can pass as sane for at least long enough to undergo psych screening. the crazy talk has to be called out for what it is. I include the lunatic conspiracy theorists, the right wing militants, every bat shit fundamentalist cult, and for crap sake, get these kids who think they're on some spiritual dream transcendence some help. more people are on the edge than anyone wants to admit.
Once you start demonizing your opponent, making them appear as less human, then there will be trouble ahead, regardless of whether this is legal or not. Speech has consequences + underhanded symbolism towards violence, while sometimes justified, should be looked at very carefully, especially by those who initially agree with the sentiment. The feeling of resentment in the face of injustice + corruption, oftentimes backfires upon itself, as long as underlying cause is not addressed.
Your take on the 'distance' between the political class vs. their constituents is, in my opinion, accurate + this incident will only serve to further this distance.
As a kid I vaugely remember the hate filled attacks on Carter,then Reagan, Bush etc....and of course this current adminstration is not the first to feel the full rath of the internets. The last admin took an incredible barrage of the (hate side) dialectic, from bloggers and pundits.Not everyone has the ability to debate & calmly sooth people, like a Noam Chomsky. As for this Jared guy ,he had no issues to kill for, no issues ....let alone to even debate.
A psych evaulation while novel will not stop a crazed man or women from obtaining a gun if they want it that bad. It will add government jobs though. Awesome.
As far as gun rights, the person who restrained Loughner until law enforcement arrived was also armed and has stated he was prepared to shoot the shooter as he ran toward the commotion. It's a matter of a reasonable logical thinking person and an insane individual, which Loughner was according to past reports. I think people need to know that as much as they need to know about the incident.
@700eyesonly007 Also it was Palin awhile back I think who said just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Is Palin guilty of poor judgement with the target map? Absolutely.
I think that's why during Ron Pauls run for President, he always called for PEACEFUL revolution so as not to send the wrong message to people who might see it as something it wasn't, but then he's an educated man and seasoned politician.
i've gotten tired of fighting the gun control fight. let the right have their guns. what i read FFTA as saying is that we're just going to have to accept that this sort of thing is going to happen as a result. this incident disproves the argument that we're safer with guns. there WAS a guy there with a gun, he couldn't get there till it was too late. takes less than five seconds to kill or maim 20 people with a gun of this kind. by the time you pull out YOUR gun, it's over.
@LiberaLib I did a vid a while back which has gotten a lot of hate called How fast is your morality. Once again, I wasn't really saying anything about gun control, more explaining why I personally will not use a gun because of the relationship between the split second time frame and the necessary certainty, in my mind, involved in pulling the trigger. Apparently, a lot of people feel very certain that they would be right - I can only wonder if I'd agree.
@FeelFreeToArgue I have been in that situation. Adrenalin kicks in and you can make the decision. Someone was trying to run me down with a truck and I pointed my gun at the driver and began pulling the trigger when I realized shattering the windshield would be just as effective.
Why are debates always portrayed as black/white? Many (I suspect most) people are for gun rights AND for gun regulation. Just because I don't want crazy people with criminal records to be able to legally buy guns doesn't mean I'm against the second amendment.
You cant blame the right wing folks, If they wanted to pump lead into leftwingers it would be done hard and fast into thier punk wimpy anti gun ass. Hell its not even an issue. We know who runs the guns. And it is sure as hell is not the left wing girly men thats for danm sure.
@mejt223 I think it is interesting that I say personal responsibility but you hear gun control. Do you think people should be free to use a gun irresponsibly. Do you agree with the shooter in this case?
All I say is that if you do not do psych screenings on people before you sell them a gun then crazy people will get guns. I think this is a reasonable consequence, borne out by this exact instance.
Your reaction to this vid does not help your case.
@FeelFreeToArgue Even if the person fails a psych exam they will get a gun if they want it enough. The government does not deserve a monopoly on guns. I could be argued if more people were carring this guy would not have gotten so many shots off. It is a shame this is the world we live in.
Do they need it? Sure, they are pandering to a very specific constituency. The language and themes being used are not accidental. While censorship is obviously not an option, poor taste is unfortunately continually reaching all time lows.
Arizona and Nevada are just in alignment with the constitution. The right to bear arms was intended to make sure the state did not have a monopoly on violence .
Once politicians are completely disconnected from consequences of their actions
then you will live in exactly the kind of country that was rejected in 1776.
Maybe you better read Mao again or stop calling yourself a Progressive.
How evil do they have to be, how much will you take before you have to act?
@tyrbolo I have to admit that I'm mystified by your response. Do you think I'm advocating taking people's gun rights away? Because I thought I was careful not to criticize the lax gun laws of Arizona/Nevada.
The state's weaponry is so far beyond that of the average citizen as to constitute an effective monopoly on force.
I think this incident will cause greater disconnect between politicians & constituents. I'm not sure how that serves democracy.
"The state's weaponry is so far beyond that of the average citizen as to constitute an effective monopoly on force."
From my point of view, guns even give a false sense of security vs the state thats almost worst, like Willie Coyote in Road Runner staying under 60 tons of falling rocks because hes under an umbrella. Guns have not prevented military grade anthrax from being sent to media and politicians, nor the patriot act, torture, rendition, secret prisons, wire tap, etc,
@FeelFreeToArgue LOL The Laws are not "lax" in Nevada and Arizona, they are quite rigourously enforced.
California on the other hand is notoriously slack about enforcement because they have way to many bad laws on the books which are selectively enforced. It is also a State where a mimeoed bill of rights presented as
a petition couldn't get signatures because it was "too controversial".
BTW pricks who shoot women and children usually get hung in the states of the west even if they are insane.
Funny it's easier to buy a 9mm Glock and your ammo at Walmat, the 1st Walmart turned him down for Ammo because of his beheavior, Funny again how a Walmart Clerk is all that stands between deciding to sell ammo to a nutjob, though he was able to pass the normal test at the next Walmart.
Also notable easier to buy the gun then to get Psychiatric help, for that you would God forbid "Health Insurance" Which again the Right wants to cut for Austerity.
Making guns MORE illegal won't stop people from getting guns. My stance, if more people had guns this guy wouldn't have been able to shoot as many as he did before someone NOT crazy would have taken him out.
@tecnoblix Arizona's laws are about as lax as they come. Most people will not carry a gun even if nothing stops them. They're not interested in defending themselves that way. None of the people at this inciedent were - certainly nothing stopping them from packing in Arizona.
@FeelFreeToArgue That was actually my point. Making them more illegal wont stop crazy people from doing crazy things. The only thing harsher laws will do is stop law abiding citizens from getting guns. Legal guns. Laws don't stop criminals from doing crimes.
I'm not for the wild west, but I also don't want good people to be afraid and not be able to defend themselves from molestation.
Maybe not but it would makes it much less likely that a crazy person will be shooting a half dozen people. Shootings are a dime a dozen in the US, but in Japan they are relatively rare.
If more people had guns, unless everyone's wearing a poncho and walking to Sergeo Leone background music, odds are someone shooting a gun in a crowd can kill several people before a good guy can draw and shoot (and hit the shooter as oppose to the other person beside him), but there would be more shootings(math)
Sir you seem to be smart,and you hit many good points.
I absolutely agree that trying to gain votes or favor through painting your opponent as a bad person is ultimately a morally bankrupt idea.
We should be careful how we exercise our rights. The fact of how everyone regards how important they are but never how we should use them wisely is a problem that is likely going to cost us in the long run.
But I'd like to remind you that most crimes involving firearms are done with illegal firearms.
Inderrix 1 year ago
"Get on Target for Victory in November Help remove Gabrielle Giffords from office Shoot a fully automatic M16 with Jesse Kelly" is NOT inches away. It can be interpreted in no other way. Palin has introduced linguistic salad with a side of cute in such a way that this imagery can be spewed at will while everyone pretends it's funny or a clever way of "just sayin'". It is provocation, it's what cheer leaders do, it's getting an audience worked up into a frenzy for the kill.
paddedshell 1 year ago
as someone who has been "diagnosed" and re-diagnosed with one mental disorder or another, I can vouch that anyone can pass as sane for at least long enough to undergo psych screening. the crazy talk has to be called out for what it is. I include the lunatic conspiracy theorists, the right wing militants, every bat shit fundamentalist cult, and for crap sake, get these kids who think they're on some spiritual dream transcendence some help. more people are on the edge than anyone wants to admit.
paddedshell 1 year ago
Once you start demonizing your opponent, making them appear as less human, then there will be trouble ahead, regardless of whether this is legal or not. Speech has consequences + underhanded symbolism towards violence, while sometimes justified, should be looked at very carefully, especially by those who initially agree with the sentiment. The feeling of resentment in the face of injustice + corruption, oftentimes backfires upon itself, as long as underlying cause is not addressed.
55ella2007k 1 year ago
Your take on the 'distance' between the political class vs. their constituents is, in my opinion, accurate + this incident will only serve to further this distance.
55ella2007k 1 year ago
Spot on my friend, spot on! =D
Peace.
KazukiSeirei 1 year ago
As a kid I vaugely remember the hate filled attacks on Carter,then Reagan, Bush etc....and of course this current adminstration is not the first to feel the full rath of the internets. The last admin took an incredible barrage of the (hate side) dialectic, from bloggers and pundits.Not everyone has the ability to debate & calmly sooth people, like a Noam Chomsky. As for this Jared guy ,he had no issues to kill for, no issues ....let alone to even debate.
Heartbreakin 1 year ago
A psych evaulation while novel will not stop a crazed man or women from obtaining a gun if they want it that bad. It will add government jobs though. Awesome.
Connect2Homes 1 year ago
As far as gun rights, the person who restrained Loughner until law enforcement arrived was also armed and has stated he was prepared to shoot the shooter as he ran toward the commotion. It's a matter of a reasonable logical thinking person and an insane individual, which Loughner was according to past reports. I think people need to know that as much as they need to know about the incident.
700eyesonly007 1 year ago
@700eyesonly007 Also it was Palin awhile back I think who said just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Is Palin guilty of poor judgement with the target map? Absolutely.
I think that's why during Ron Pauls run for President, he always called for PEACEFUL revolution so as not to send the wrong message to people who might see it as something it wasn't, but then he's an educated man and seasoned politician.
700eyesonly007 1 year ago
i've gotten tired of fighting the gun control fight. let the right have their guns. what i read FFTA as saying is that we're just going to have to accept that this sort of thing is going to happen as a result. this incident disproves the argument that we're safer with guns. there WAS a guy there with a gun, he couldn't get there till it was too late. takes less than five seconds to kill or maim 20 people with a gun of this kind. by the time you pull out YOUR gun, it's over.
LiberaLib 1 year ago
@LiberaLib I did a vid a while back which has gotten a lot of hate called How fast is your morality. Once again, I wasn't really saying anything about gun control, more explaining why I personally will not use a gun because of the relationship between the split second time frame and the necessary certainty, in my mind, involved in pulling the trigger. Apparently, a lot of people feel very certain that they would be right - I can only wonder if I'd agree.
FeelFreeToArgue 1 year ago
@FeelFreeToArgue I have been in that situation. Adrenalin kicks in and you can make the decision. Someone was trying to run me down with a truck and I pointed my gun at the driver and began pulling the trigger when I realized shattering the windshield would be just as effective.
Smarterthanyouarable 1 year ago
Why are debates always portrayed as black/white? Many (I suspect most) people are for gun rights AND for gun regulation. Just because I don't want crazy people with criminal records to be able to legally buy guns doesn't mean I'm against the second amendment.
MarmaladeINFP 1 year ago
@MarmaladeINFP How dare you be reasonable about this issue. Find a pole to defend, like a decent person.
FeelFreeToArgue 1 year ago
You cant blame the right wing folks, If they wanted to pump lead into leftwingers it would be done hard and fast into thier punk wimpy anti gun ass. Hell its not even an issue. We know who runs the guns. And it is sure as hell is not the left wing girly men thats for danm sure.
snoopdog68 1 year ago
Im sad to see you Zach argue to the lowest common denominatoor (stricter gun laws) of this event.
Im not a gun owner and no one aroiund me is, but I can see that more gun control will not solve or stop more of this from happening.
You say youre not judging, but you are.
Where I would like to see ANY discussion on this situation would be:
Was he on medication? What type? Anti depressants? Ritilan? This is a far bigger issue to me when 1/4 kids are on one of the two.
mejt223 1 year ago
@mejt223 I think it is interesting that I say personal responsibility but you hear gun control. Do you think people should be free to use a gun irresponsibly. Do you agree with the shooter in this case?
All I say is that if you do not do psych screenings on people before you sell them a gun then crazy people will get guns. I think this is a reasonable consequence, borne out by this exact instance.
Your reaction to this vid does not help your case.
FeelFreeToArgue 1 year ago
@FeelFreeToArgue Even if the person fails a psych exam they will get a gun if they want it enough. The government does not deserve a monopoly on guns. I could be argued if more people were carring this guy would not have gotten so many shots off. It is a shame this is the world we live in.
Connect2Homes 1 year ago
Do they need it? Sure, they are pandering to a very specific constituency. The language and themes being used are not accidental. While censorship is obviously not an option, poor taste is unfortunately continually reaching all time lows.
BTeamHooligan 1 year ago
Arizona and Nevada are just in alignment with the constitution. The right to bear arms was intended to make sure the state did not have a monopoly on violence .
Once politicians are completely disconnected from consequences of their actions
then you will live in exactly the kind of country that was rejected in 1776.
Maybe you better read Mao again or stop calling yourself a Progressive.
How evil do they have to be, how much will you take before you have to act?
tyrbolo 1 year ago
@tyrbolo I have to admit that I'm mystified by your response. Do you think I'm advocating taking people's gun rights away? Because I thought I was careful not to criticize the lax gun laws of Arizona/Nevada.
The state's weaponry is so far beyond that of the average citizen as to constitute an effective monopoly on force.
I think this incident will cause greater disconnect between politicians & constituents. I'm not sure how that serves democracy.
FeelFreeToArgue 1 year ago
@FeelFreeToArgue
"The state's weaponry is so far beyond that of the average citizen as to constitute an effective monopoly on force."
From my point of view, guns even give a false sense of security vs the state thats almost worst, like Willie Coyote in Road Runner staying under 60 tons of falling rocks because hes under an umbrella. Guns have not prevented military grade anthrax from being sent to media and politicians, nor the patriot act, torture, rendition, secret prisons, wire tap, etc,
Rickdeckard2020 1 year ago
@FeelFreeToArgue LOL The Laws are not "lax" in Nevada and Arizona, they are quite rigourously enforced.
California on the other hand is notoriously slack about enforcement because they have way to many bad laws on the books which are selectively enforced. It is also a State where a mimeoed bill of rights presented as
a petition couldn't get signatures because it was "too controversial".
BTW pricks who shoot women and children usually get hung in the states of the west even if they are insane.
tyrbolo 1 year ago
Funny it's easier to buy a 9mm Glock and your ammo at Walmat, the 1st Walmart turned him down for Ammo because of his beheavior, Funny again how a Walmart Clerk is all that stands between deciding to sell ammo to a nutjob, though he was able to pass the normal test at the next Walmart.
Also notable easier to buy the gun then to get Psychiatric help, for that you would God forbid "Health Insurance" Which again the Right wants to cut for Austerity.
valhala56 1 year ago
Making guns MORE illegal won't stop people from getting guns. My stance, if more people had guns this guy wouldn't have been able to shoot as many as he did before someone NOT crazy would have taken him out.
tecnoblix 1 year ago
@tecnoblix Arizona's laws are about as lax as they come. Most people will not carry a gun even if nothing stops them. They're not interested in defending themselves that way. None of the people at this inciedent were - certainly nothing stopping them from packing in Arizona.
FeelFreeToArgue 1 year ago
@FeelFreeToArgue That was actually my point. Making them more illegal wont stop crazy people from doing crazy things. The only thing harsher laws will do is stop law abiding citizens from getting guns. Legal guns. Laws don't stop criminals from doing crimes.
I'm not for the wild west, but I also don't want good people to be afraid and not be able to defend themselves from molestation.
tecnoblix 1 year ago
Maybe not but it would makes it much less likely that a crazy person will be shooting a half dozen people. Shootings are a dime a dozen in the US, but in Japan they are relatively rare.
If more people had guns, unless everyone's wearing a poncho and walking to Sergeo Leone background music, odds are someone shooting a gun in a crowd can kill several people before a good guy can draw and shoot (and hit the shooter as oppose to the other person beside him), but there would be more shootings(math)
Rickdeckard2020 1 year ago
I meant Ennio Morricone music ;)
Rickdeckard2020 1 year ago