« First « Previous Comments 93 - 132 of 1,397 Next » Last » Search these comments
Nope - not just an armed mere merchant ship. I am talking about the entire class of people who wanted a ship armed to the teeth - and had to become a sanctioned privateer to withstand a frigate attempting to "cross the T" and blow them out of the water.
Hey, you guys keep claiming there is no such thing as an assault rifle, but want to use assault rifles in statistics. Sorry you can't have it both ways.
let's move on to discussing actual relevant issues and solutions.
The interesting thing about that list is that it shows society has a much higher tolarence for bad shit that happens where the relationship between cause and effect is well understood
Not so with things like a school shooting or other so called RANDOM acts of violence. Society has a much lower tolerance for these.
In fairness the distinction between banning guns and "banning heart disease" or any such absurdity- gun deaths are unique in that many of them are intentional
Except for maybe abortion - notice how every other class of things on that list that kill people are not intentional
They're actually using this tragedy to convince people that we need MORE guns in schools by arming teachers or adding God knows how many security guards.
The NRA obviously knows how to appeal to a certain type of person--I'll give them that. They're actually using this tragedy to convince people that we need MORE guns in schools by arming teachers or adding God knows how many security guards.
I think these threads on pat.net are a really good indication of how well propaganda works in the United States.
The interesting thing about that list is that it shows society has a much higher tolarence for bad shit that happens where the relationship between cause and effect is well understood
Wrong.
Society has gotten use to many hundreds of thousands of deaths in that list because they happen so frequently. They've become desensitized. Does it make those deaths less important?
So society has a lower tolerance for something that happens rarely, and tolerates things that happen on a regular basis?
What's that truly say about society?
anon_0e666 saysIn fairness the distinction between banning guns and "banning heart disease" or any such absurdity- gun deaths are unique in that many of them are intentional
anon_0e666 saysExcept for maybe abortion - notice how every other class of things on that list that kill people are not intentional
Really??
Obesity isn't intentional?
Stuffing your face with triple cheese burgers isn't intentional?
Smoking isn't intentional?
Alcoholism isn't intentional?
Drunk driving isn't intentional?
Drug overdose isn't intentional?
Many of the others on that list are from the intentional items I just listed.
Not intentional? Really??
There are no words....
There are like 4 - 5 million NRA members in the country but there are over 100 million gun owners in the country. Does that sound like the NRA has any type of leverage?
Of course some people claim money doesn't affect elections or politicians votes. Even some right here on patnet.
Yes - like the case of old age, in many ways those deaths ARE less important.
Like terrorism, gun violence is random, it is senseless, and often the victims are innocent.
We value predictability, and we abhor unpredictability. No more no less.
anon_d06f9 saysYes - like the case of old age, in many ways those deaths ARE less important.
Well, isn't that nice.
anon_d06f9 saysLike terrorism, gun violence is random, it is senseless, and often the victims are innocent.
anon_d06f9 saysWe value predictability, and we abhor unpredictability. No more no less.
OK, how about this unpredictability concerning children?
When are you going to start protesting Flu deaths of innocent children? When do the protest marches start trying to ban the flu?<...
When are you going to start protesting Flu deaths of innocent children? When do the protest marches start trying to ban the flu?
May Democracy prevail against Elite preference.
Amen. If only Democracy could overcome the $50MM+ in campaign donations from the NRA.
There are even some here that claim gun ownership in homes is down the last few decades.
Which organization represents a mass movement, and a democratic membership, and which one represents a steering committee financed from wealthy foundations ?
Which is more representative of democratic impulses? If there is such a mass movement for Gun Control, where are their million member single issue organizations?
Tell me.
The NRA is a private advocacy group of over 5 million citizens that gets $0 in Federal or State funding.
Seems like it's Democracy in action, not being overcome.
anon_cf6c6 says
There are even some here that claim gun ownership in homes is down the last few decades.
No there aren't. The percentage of households with guns is down 40%.
Not these percentages again, some just haven't learned math.
In 1978 there were 73 million households, so 51% of 73 = 37 million were gun owners.
In 2016 there were 126 million households, so 36% of 126 = 45 million were gun owners.
Quick math question, which is larger, 37 million or 45 million?
No there aren't. The percentage of households with guns is down 40%. The guns per household has doubled. Less of the population owns guns but the ones that do own a lot more of them. Numbers matter.
Not these percentages again, some just haven't learned math.
In 1978 there were 73 million households, so 51% of 73 = 37 million were gun owners.
In 2016 there were 126 million households, so 36% of 126 = 45 million were gun owners.
Quick math question, which is larger, 37 million or 45 million?
What was that again about "right wing math"?
More households own guns NOW.
Numbers matter.
No there aren't. The percentage of households with guns is down 40%. The guns per household has doubled. Less of the population owns guns but the ones that do own a lot more of them. Numbers matter.
Not these percentages again, some just haven't learned math.
In 1978 there were 73 million households, so 51% of 73 = 37 million were gun owners.
In 2016 there were 126 million households, so 36% of 126 = 45 million were gun owners.
Quick math question, which is larger, 37 million or 45 million?
What was that again about "right wing math"?
More households own guns NOW.
Numbers matter.
No there aren't. The percentage of households with guns is down 40%. The guns per household has doubled. Less of the population owns guns but the ones that do own a lot more of them. Numbers matter.
Nice try sniper.
Criminals do not follow laws.
Newly created and potential future laws will be ignored by criminals.
People who are not criminals do follow laws.
By this logic, we should get rid of all laws. Criminals don't follow them, after all.
« First « Previous Comments 93 - 132 of 1,397 Next » Last » Search these comments
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Couple things to note in there:
1. The specific mention of a militia being the reason for the need to bear arms.
2. The 2nd Amendment never mentions the word gun at all.
So, what exactly is the definition of "arms"?
In 1755 Dr. Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language was first published. It defined “arms” as “weapons of offence, or armour of defence.”
Weapons of offence would seem to include pretty much anything and everything, from knives to nuclear weapons. The US has already seen fit to ban some weapons of offence so the 2nd Amendment clearly has not been interpreted strictly as meaning that the US cannot ban all "arms". Therefore, the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee citizens the right to own whatever weapons they choose.
So it then becomes a question of which weapons should be banned, which should be strictly regulated, and which should be lightly regulated or not at all. Like anything else, we should weigh an individual's right with society's right. When looked at in that manner, it becomes very difficult to justify why fully automatic or semi automatic rifles should be allowed. What purpose do they serve an individual? And why would that purpose outweigh the extreme damage those weapons have cased society??
Patrick thinks the Chamber of Commerce is the worst organization, and he may be correct, but the NRA is not far behind.