Gun control
- Thread starter Saladus
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
At this point I'd say Mikhail, at least Fanaskin disappears for a while to his secret underground lair.
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,739
- 52,292
Let's try a simple logic explanation out, and if you think what I'm saying is racist, then you're just a retard.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C
In America, minorities are more likely to be poor and poor people are more likely to be criminals, therefore minorities are more likely to be criminals.
'Minorities are more likely to be criminals' is not a necessarily racist statement, it's just a simple expression of fact. If you choose to hear 'Minorities are more likely to be criminalsbecause they are minorities', then the problem is in your brain, not in what we are saying.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C
In America, minorities are more likely to be poor and poor people are more likely to be criminals, therefore minorities are more likely to be criminals.
'Minorities are more likely to be criminals' is not a necessarily racist statement, it's just a simple expression of fact. If you choose to hear 'Minorities are more likely to be criminalsbecause they are minorities', then the problem is in your brain, not in what we are saying.
Yeah but that's not what he said. He said the problem is diversity (not poverty and not racism). In fact, he directly attributed the cause of racism to diversity (and not...you know...ignorance or whatever).
- 6,338
- 7,144
The only thing I would add to this is to keep in mind that white people make up the vast majority of the population. So considering the relative population make up of blacks and hispanics, their murder rate is vastly out of proportion to white peoples.
Here's a question: is anyone operating with a definition of "diversity" that doesn't mean "the presence of a large proportion of people who are not members of the majority (in this instance, whites)"? Because when I hear "the problem is the presence of a large proportion of people who are not members of the majority (in this instance, whites)" that sounds pretty fucking obviously racist to me.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
Goddamn you are dense. OBVIOUSLY racism and ignorance is the problem, which I stated MULTIPLE TIMES, even in sentences you quoted. However, in a population that isn't diverse, it doesn't matter if there is racism (at least in relation to crime).
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,739
- 52,292
Americans 308,745,538 100.0 %
White or European American 223,553,265 72.4 %
Black or African American 38,929,319 12.6 %
Asian 14,674,252 4.8 %
American Indian or Alaska Native 2,932,248 0.9 %
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 540,013 0.2 %
Some other race 19,107,368 6.2 %
Two or more races 9,009,073 2.9 %
Rest your case on what, that objective facts are racist?
If you don't want to sound racist, you should leave out that "however" part because it insinuates that, in some way, the presence of minorities is at all to be blamed.
What do you think his implication is when he says "So considering the relative population make up of blacks and hispanics, their murder rate is vastly out of proportion to white peoples."?
What do you think he means for us to draw from that? That it's actually poverty (or the desperation associated with poverty) that's the issue?
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,739
- 52,292
Factual statements don't necessarily have an implication, especially when the person who makes the statement doesn't expound on it in any way.
Gavinmad
Mr. Poopybutthole
- 43,739
- 52,292
Let's try the other direction then. There are several potential implications of his factual statement, and you are choosing the one that best fits your position.
I'm choosing the one that's obviously true, given that he makes no mention whatsoever of any confounding factors besides race.
Except now you strip the average citizen of their freedom, one that's backed by our constitution, and remove the citizens most effective and quickest form of defending themselves from the murderer. It's so easy for others to be convinced by our government to strip our freedom based on reactionary fear. And how easy do you think it would be to ban all guns as opposed to securing these gun free zones, created by our government, that are the targets for the mass murderers? Banning guns isn't an option. Many would view this action as tyranny, because it is. Which creates a much larger problem than the current one we have now. You'll have to find another way.
khalid
Unelected Mod
- 14,071
- 6,775
Anyway, off the racism and canada derail.
If I had to come up with a list of things to implement to try and respond to Sandy Hook:
1) Add to the NICS background check some sort of mental health database, so those that are deemed mentally unfit could be excluded. I am worried that it might be far too easy for people to get put on this list though, so would have to be some way to get off said list.
2) Allow private citizens to call in a NICS check before doing private sales if they choose to. I very much wish I had the ability to do this now.
3) Increase punishment of those lying on the 4473 form. It seems obvious to make sure we are currently enforcing our gun laws before trying to pass more.
4) Stop all enforcement of marijuana laws. The stringent enforcement of the almost harmless marijuana is just silly. I don't smoke pot and have no intention of doing so. However, those that want to, shouldn't have an issue. We need to do something to stop the drug war, and enforcement sure hasn't done anything but make it more violent.
5) Make it a "right-to-carry" for teachers to concealed carry if they have attended a class and proved some level of competence. Gun-free school zones only make it easier for shooters. As long as the teachers are carrying concealed and know that brandishing it will involve them losing their jobs, I don't see pretty much any downside to this.
If I had to come up with a list of things to implement to try and respond to Sandy Hook:
1) Add to the NICS background check some sort of mental health database, so those that are deemed mentally unfit could be excluded. I am worried that it might be far too easy for people to get put on this list though, so would have to be some way to get off said list.
2) Allow private citizens to call in a NICS check before doing private sales if they choose to. I very much wish I had the ability to do this now.
3) Increase punishment of those lying on the 4473 form. It seems obvious to make sure we are currently enforcing our gun laws before trying to pass more.
4) Stop all enforcement of marijuana laws. The stringent enforcement of the almost harmless marijuana is just silly. I don't smoke pot and have no intention of doing so. However, those that want to, shouldn't have an issue. We need to do something to stop the drug war, and enforcement sure hasn't done anything but make it more violent.
5) Make it a "right-to-carry" for teachers to concealed carry if they have attended a class and proved some level of competence. Gun-free school zones only make it easier for shooters. As long as the teachers are carrying concealed and know that brandishing it will involve them losing their jobs, I don't see pretty much any downside to this.
I agree with everything except 5. Teachers do not need to be carrying guns.
Statistically speaking number 5 is just fucking stupid. Do you honestly think that bringing guns into a school is a good idea? Giving guns to teachers is a good idea? Understanding that shootings are ANOMALIES- It's not like combating the flu which we know will happen ever year.
Your suggestion is simply we flood all schools with guns which will CREATE problems, not SOLVE problems.
God damn- you people talk about knee-jerk reactions. Flooding schools with guns to protect against anomalies is not the answer.
