TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#284376: Jul 4th 2019 at 7:56:03 AM

So what does that say about the people who want to disarm us?

That we don't want to get shot by some jackass in the street.

The idea that the citizenry needs to be armed in order to protect itself from the government is patently ridiculous. When civilians and the army were both using muskets, sure, but the power gap between a modern civilian and the modern military is so immense that any fantasy of holding off the government if they actually decided to come at you at gunpoint is utterly puerile. Armed revolution is not something that can possibly work in a country with as powerful a military as the US; not without the military itself turning on the government, at which point whether civilians are armed or not is irrelevant.

Soban Since: Aug, 2009 Relationship Status: 700 wives and 300 concubines
#284377: Jul 4th 2019 at 7:56:20 AM

Stamina, M84, that seems like a bit of a strawman to me. I don't think I mentioned anything about Mad Max or a similar situation. (Unless perhaps if you count post war Germany? but that seems a stretch). The government in Germany never fell apart, it evolved in rather horrifying ways.

I don't think it has to reach Mad Max levels for it to be worth it. Consider for a moment the 1868 elections, some southern blacks had begun to arm themselves. In one incident in Tennessee, by brandishing his gun a black man fought off a mob of terrorizing Klansmen who dragged him from his house. “I prevented [one of them] by my pistol, which I cocked, and he jumped back,” the man explained. “I told them I would hurt them if they got away. They did not burn nor steal anything, nor hurt me.”

Another more recent incident is also instructive, the Black Panthers as mentioned I think earlier. They armed themselves because being armed helped prevent the cops from coming after them (for both good and bad, the Black Panthers were not angels). The same can be said for other civil rights activists who armed them selves. And even if the gun was never even fired or even pointed at anyone, helped stop them from getting harassed and worse.

Today, I'm a supporter of the pink pistols. Why? Because jumping, beating, and killing someone because their LGBT is a lot harder and risky if they are armed and trained. Even if they never have to shoot someone, it comes into the calculation. (and if they do, good riddance).

Consider for a moment activists in 2230 who is fighting against a new rising tide of anti-immigration. Because they are armed, the police back off of harassing them so they can do their work and make a difference that stops a genocidal state from occurring. That's significantly more then hypothetical, given the examples above.

I don't disagree that those on the right have most of the guns right now. But what I don't see is why the same rights can't also protect others as well. Gun Rights don't just protect the people who might commit atrocities. They also protect the people who those atrocities might be committed against.

I'm not against reasonable legislation, most gun owners aren't. They are pushed to the extreme because those are the options that are put before us not because those are the options they really believe in.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On a different note, Justin Amash 2020?

Justin Amash: Our politics is in a partisan death spiral. That’s why I’m leaving the GOP.

My parents, both immigrants, were Republicans. I supported Republican candidates throughout my early adult life and then successfully ran for office as a Republican. The Republican Party, I believed, stood for limited government, economic freedom and individual liberty — principles that had made the American Dream possible for my family.

In recent years, though, I’ve become disenchanted with party politics and frightened by what I see from it. The two-party system has evolved into an existential threat to American principles and institutions.

...

True to Washington’s fears, Americans have allowed government officials, under assertions of expediency and party unity, to ignore the most basic tenets of our constitutional order: separation of powers, federalism and the rule of law. The result has been the consolidation of political power and the near disintegration of representative democracy.

These are consequences of a mind-set among the political class that loyalty to party is more important than serving the American people or protecting our governing institutions. The parties value winning for its own sake, and at whatever cost. Instead of acting as an independent branch of government and serving as a check on the executive branch, congressional leaders of both parties expect the House and Senate to act in obedience or opposition to the president and their colleagues on a partisan basis.

In this hyperpartisan environment, congressional leaders use every tool to compel party members to stick with the team, dangling chairmanships, committee assignments, bill sponsorships, endorsements and campaign resources. As donors recognize the growing power of party leaders, they supply these officials with ever-increasing funds, which, in turn, further tightens their grip on power.

The founders envisioned Congress as a deliberative body in which outcomes are discovered. We are fast approaching the point, however, where Congress exists as little more than a formality to legitimize outcomes dictated by the president, the speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader.

With little genuine debate on policy happening in Congress, party leaders distract and divide the public by exploiting wedge issues and waging pointless messaging wars. These strategies fuel mistrust and anger, leading millions of people to take to social media to express contempt for their political opponents, with the media magnifying the most extreme voices. This all combines to reinforce the us-vs.-them, party-first mind-set of government officials.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#284378: Jul 4th 2019 at 7:58:03 AM

[up]For crying out loud, one op-ed shouldn't be nearly enough to convince people that a Rep should become the 2020 candidate.

Especially one who is bothsiding the issue.

He's not all that different from the likes of Biden anyway, considering Biden's all about trying to end the partisanship too.

And it's hardly a Strawman. Your entire argument boiled down to the USA falling apart making guns "necessary". And that's not really a good argument.

Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 10:59:52 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
tclittle Professional Forum Ninja from Somewhere Down in Texas Since: Apr, 2010
Professional Forum Ninja
#284379: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:00:05 AM

[up][up]I actually posted that a page or two ago, but now that I'm fully awake and had a good read on it, it doesn't seem like he's gearing himself up for a 2020 run.

Good on him if he does, but I highly doubt it.

"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#284380: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:00:52 AM

I don't think we need another third party candidate running.

I doubt he'd be able to bleed too many GOP voters anyway.

Edited by M84 on Jul 4th 2019 at 11:03:20 PM

Disgusted, but not surprised
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
#284381: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:05:07 AM

Some would be better than none, though.

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#284382: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:10:05 AM

He'd need a more defined platform than "partisanship is bad" anyway.

So it's a good thing he's not planning a 2020 run.

Disgusted, but not surprised
Wryte Since: Jul, 2010
#284383: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:11:31 AM

Another more recent incident is also instructive, the Black Panthers as mentioned I think earlier. They armed themselves because being armed helped prevent the cops from coming after them (for both good and bad, the Black Panthers were not angels). The same can be said for other civil rights activists who armed them selves. And even if the gun was never even fired or even pointed at anyone, helped stop them from getting harassed and worse.

So your argument is that gun ownership must be protected by law so that minorities can protect themselves... from the people who are responsible for upholding the law. The answer here is not to armed civilians, it's to fix the police, which is something that desperately needs to be done anyway.

I don't disagree that those on the right have most of the guns right now. But what I don't see is why the same rights can't also protect others as well. Gun Rights don't just protect the people who might commit atrocities. They also protect the people who those atrocities might be committed against.

We've already been shown plenty of times that the Good Guy With a Gun narrative doesn't really work. Remember the Las Vegas mass shooting, when there were plenty of armed individuals around, none of whom could draw their weapons because they were afraid of being confused for the shooter.

I'm not against reasonable legislation, most gun owners aren't. They are pushed to the extreme because those are the options that are put before us not because those are the options they really believe in.

Bullshit. There have been plenty of moderate gun control options brought to the legislative table, and even if there hadn't been, those people are still putting their ability to own something shiny over the safety of actual human lives. I have no sympathy.

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284384: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:21:24 AM

[up] Most gun owners (something like 80-90% for UBC and testing requirements) support stricter gun control. [1] The NRA and extremist republican legislators are the issue here. The only real gap between gun owners and non-gun owners is on capacity limits and assault weapons bans.

It’s also worth considering that Democrats don’t really do anything to reach out to those gun owners. You often see all gun owners painted as mass murdering Nazis waiting to happen, or you see Democratic politicians displaying little to no knowledge about the topics, such as the infamous De Leon quote.

Edited by archonspeaks on Jul 4th 2019 at 8:28:01 AM

They should have sent a poet.
akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#284385: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:30:34 AM

[up] Why would anyone who has a gun support gun control, risking the gun is taken away?

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284386: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:31:39 AM

[up] Increased gun control doesn’t automatically mean confiscation of all guns.

They should have sent a poet.
akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#284387: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:35:33 AM

[up] Maybe, but for it to work, any kind of stricter gun control would start with reviewing existing gun permits, and not only apply to people who apply for guns after the control is made stricter right?

Edited by akanesarumara on Jul 4th 2019 at 5:36:20 PM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284388: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:39:31 AM

Are you disputing the data in those polls?

I’d say that knowing first-hand how dangerous guns can be and seeing all the unsafe handling that happens at ranges is a good reason to support strict gun control. Nobody wants to get shot because the idiot in the lane next to him doesn’t understand basic gun safety.

Edited by archonspeaks on Jul 4th 2019 at 8:41:08 AM

They should have sent a poet.
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#284389: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:42:52 AM

Everyone wants a gun. Nobody wants the guy next to them to have a gun. This should illustrate something about human psychology: we all think that we are better and/or more competent than the people around us.

Humans, in aggregate, are just not psychologically capable of going through day to day life with deadly weapons at our immediate disposal.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#284390: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:43:56 AM

[up][up]I'm not doubting they answered they would like stricter gun control. I just didn't understand the reason why. Though this might come from being in a country where guns are pretty strictly regulated and where owning and carrying a gun is not written in the constitution. (Mostly even shooting ranges have the guns there at the range, you only bring the ammo as far as I know. Hunting is a huge exception, and most gun related accidents are due to hunting mishaps.)

[up] Yes which is why I wouldn't trust myself with a gun. When All You Have Is a Hammer…...

Edited by akanesarumara on Jul 4th 2019 at 5:51:10 PM

archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284391: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:46:12 AM

[up] That’s kind of nonsensical. People who like cars support the existence of traffic laws. You can own something and also want that thing regulated, not everyone is solely motivated by pure selfishness.

Like I said, if you know what guns can do you should want them regulated.

[up][up] In my experience it’s not a matter of not wanting other people to have guns, it’s a matter of not wanting to get shot. That’s why things like universal background checks and mandatory testing see such popularity across the board, even while gun owners advocate for said ownership to be more widespread.

I don’t care if the guy next to me has a gun, I just want him to be safe with it.

Edited by archonspeaks on Jul 4th 2019 at 8:50:55 AM

They should have sent a poet.
GoldenKaos Captain of the Dead City from Cirith Ungol Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
Captain of the Dead City
#284392: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:55:38 AM

In 1920, I don't think anyone saw the horrors of the holocaust coming.

This feels dangerously close to the "the Holocaust wouldn't have happened if the populace was armed" narrative that people like Ben Carson and Ben Shapiro were espousing not too long ago.

"...in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach."
akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#284393: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:57:55 AM

[up][up] Point taken. I apologize if I came off as combative or similar.

As for the background checks and mandatory testing, those can unfortunately be outwitted but that is true in any field, not just guns, so that doesn't count I think.note 

Edited by akanesarumara on Jul 4th 2019 at 5:58:07 PM

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#284394: Jul 4th 2019 at 8:59:28 AM

[up][up]I was wondering whether I should bring up how utterly wrong the "If only the Jewish people had guns" argument is.

Disgusted, but not surprised
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284395: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:00:35 AM

[up][up] As was mentioned in the article, stricter gun control, specifically background checks, testing, and safe storage requirements are proven to reduce firearm deaths by a significant amount.

There’s no such thing as 100% for any law, but there doesn’t need to be.

Edited by archonspeaks on Jul 4th 2019 at 9:13:21 AM

They should have sent a poet.
akanesarumara Since: Mar, 2012 Relationship Status: Abstaining
#284396: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:03:20 AM

[up] Yes, they do, assuming the people who answer the questions are honest. But as I said, that is something we need to take into account not only for guns, but also for things like occupational medicine checkups, driving licence renewal and so on and so forth so the point is not against guns.

PhysicalStamina i'm tired, my friend (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
i'm tired, my friend
#284397: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:04:48 AM

I don't disagree that those on the right have most of the guns right now. But what I don't see is why the same rights can't also protect others as well.

The same reason a bicycle can't pull a passenger train: that's not what they were made to do.

i'm tired, my friend
Fighteer Lost in Space from The Time Vortex (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: TV Tropes ruined my love life
Lost in Space
#284398: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:08:36 AM

[up][up]Well, sure. If we want a safer society, we have to be more aggressive about enforcing licensing requirements. In most states, renewing (or even obtaining) a driver's license is basically a formality. You don't have to have new vision checks or skill checks; you just fill out some paperwork and you're done. In a sense, we wait for bad things to happen before we take away someone's privileges.

With both cars and guns, this is a recipe for disaster, which is borne out in the statistics. This site gives the number of deaths in road crashes globally as 1.25 million (3,287 deaths per day), with 20-50 million injured or disabled.

If three thousand people were dying per day to terrorist attacks, we'd be up in arms, literally. We'd drop everything to solve the problem. It demonstrates something fundamentally flawed with the way human beings evaluate threats.

Edited by Fighteer on Jul 4th 2019 at 12:08:51 PM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
archonspeaks Since: Jun, 2013
#284399: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:14:28 AM

[up][up] Groups like the Pink Pistols have found some success adapting the message traditionally held by the right when it comes to guns to the left.

They should have sent a poet.
PhysicalStamina i'm tired, my friend (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Coming soon to theaters
i'm tired, my friend
#284400: Jul 4th 2019 at 9:18:09 AM

[up]And you think the current administration won't leap over chairs and desks to suppress them should they get really active?

Edited by PhysicalStamina on Jul 4th 2019 at 12:18:23 PM

i'm tired, my friend

Total posts: 417,856
Top