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

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56126: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:20:56 PM

Aye, gun crime is just a symptom, the actual disease that causes it is poverty and mental illness. That's what we need to be focusing on.

And I swear to god I will find a way to reach through the internet and bitch slap anyone who essentially says that there are no metropolitan cities besides LA, San Fran, NYC, and Chicago. There are large metropolitan areas that have less gun crime which are comparable, and have relaxed gun laws. It isn't retarded for someone to see a bit of a correlation there.

Big cities breed poverty, and poverty breeds crime, and firearms are one of many tools criminals use. Mental illness that goes untreated leads to spree shootings, not to mention media sensationalizing events like that in the news the way they do spurring others on to do the same.

And you can't accuse left-wingers of not banging the "schools and SNAP, not private prisons" drum hard enough.

Aye, I'm on the same side as you on that issue. More cash for education and an overhaul of our justice/correctional systems is sorely needed. One of the issues I'm a liberal on for the most part.

edited 8th Jun '13 7:22:02 PM by Barkey

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56127: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:21:28 PM

[up][up]No, but I can accuse them of being a lot of talk, and little action. Ala, Mayor Bloomberg cares so much about obesity, he institutes a tax on sodas that'll net the city money, but conveniently cuts after school and extra-curricular activities.

As I've said, the Democrats sell their bullshit better than Republicans do. That's the main difference I see. NOTE: Bloomberg is an Independent, but you take my point.

[up] There are no cities besides New York. All others are just knock-offs. tongue

edited 8th Jun '13 7:22:44 PM by TheStarshipMaxima

It was an honor
RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#56128: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:25:39 PM

Oh, and racial profiling too, that shit has to stop.

Like I said before: the odds of the Democratic Party actually achieving decent stuff correspond directly with the degree to which the progressive wing of their base has the Party frightened.

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56129: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:30:48 PM

Lets put it this way Taoist, for me, I want most Democratic initiatives to succeed, but I'm afraid of gun rights being a casualty of that, I really don't want that to happen. If I felt confident that they wouldn't be, I'd be a diehard Dem supporter when it comes to most of their candidates.

But as it is, it's not an acceptable trade to me. I'm not willing to contribute to any group that will lead to me losing those.

edited 8th Jun '13 7:31:17 PM by Barkey

RadicalTaoist scratching at .8, just hopin' from the #GUniverse Since: Jan, 2001
scratching at .8, just hopin'
#56130: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:34:04 PM

It strikes me as a strange set of priorities in that you'd rather have your gun in a failing society than laws on where you can take your gun in one that is functioning, but people are allowed to disagree with my political priorities too, so hey.

What do we do about kids shooting themselves accidentally though? Charge adults for murder by negligence?

edited 8th Jun '13 7:34:19 PM by RadicalTaoist

Share it so that people can get into this conversation, 'cause we're not the only ones who think like this.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#56131: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:40:15 PM

I never said that they needed to be silenced, I said that the Republican party needs to silence the fuckwits who say things like "the possible loss of my gun rights is a greater loss than the very real loss of your now dead child". And yes, a guy said that. And Barkey and Max seem happy to ignore that sort of bullshit.

The nutjobs are the ones in control of the issue right now, and they're preventing any sort of conversation repeatedly. I'm not pulling this out of thin air.

[up]Good question, given the rash of children shooting themselves and each other that seems to be going around.

edited 8th Jun '13 7:41:00 PM by AceofSpades

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56132: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:44:33 PM

Okay, okay, okay. Yes, that was some extremely crazy shit to say. But then, the Tea Party was never a bastion of sanity and reason anyhow.

It was an honor
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#56133: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:49:53 PM

And yet they still have quite a bit of control over the Republican party. And they allow people like that to speak for them. Exactly how the fuck am I supposed to respect or trust a party that lets people like that represent them?

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56134: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:50:47 PM

Damn. True.

It was an honor
Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56135: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:50:48 PM

What do we do about kids shooting themselves accidentally though? Charge adults for murder by negligence?

What can we force parents to do? I mean shit, I keep all my stuff in a locked safe, even though I don't necessarily need to since I don't have kids that can get a hold of them.

Cable-locks, gunsafes, all those things are available and there are groups out there which talk about how you should use them. A lot of guns come with them. When I bought my XD, it came with a cable lock to properly secure it with. You can't really force parents to be responsible. Though if it were my kids, I'd teach them to properly respect firearms and how to use them safely, but I also wouldn't give them free access to them, they would be locked up. It helps that I keep my gunsafe key on my dog tag chain, so if I did have kids, they wouldn't be able to get my key, because it's always on my person and my handgun safe by my bed is biometric, so only my thumbprint can unlock it.

^^

Don't look at me, I went out on a limb and trusted Obama with my vote both times despite my better judgement.

edited 8th Jun '13 7:53:11 PM by Barkey

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56136: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:51:45 PM

Crazy-Prepared, eh, Bark?

It was an honor
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#56137: Jun 8th 2013 at 7:56:40 PM

He is a military man.

[up][up]Obama, by and large, is saner than most of the Republicans speaking on TV today. You can't really say he's crazy about locking up the guns either, because he didn't even really address the issue until the Sandy Hook shootings despite that a lot of people wanted him to. I can't recall it being a huge part of his platform ever.(Education being my thing that's why I voted for him, as well as others.)

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#56138: Jun 8th 2013 at 8:14:53 PM

^

Agreed. Until Sandy Hook sort of forced his hand for some sort of a response, Obama had been pretty much silent on guns, which is why I was ok with voting for him. I don't really have any anger with Obama over gun control. He's done the best he can to leave the issue alone. However, other Democrats I can't say the same about that on. Hillary is an extremely vocal anti-gun politician, which is why I will never support or vote for her. My own state senators, Feinstein and Boxer, have pretty much lynched gun rights in my home state. It's why I'm so bitter about this topic compared to people who live elsewhere, most of this comes from the fact that I'm a Californian, and face much tougher restrictions than the rest of the United States. That's why I'm so pissed off about this topic all the time.

Now I'm really pissed off because I just carefully typed out several paragraphs that I was quite happy with, and this stupid government computer balleeted my post by accident, because the filter is never quite certain on if it likes TV Tropes or hates it.

edited 8th Jun '13 8:15:46 PM by Barkey

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#56139: Jun 8th 2013 at 8:24:49 PM

Send Feinstein and Boxer over to Texas then, see if they can do some good here. I think the Republican party in Texas is drinking some funky ass water. We don't even have zoning laws in much of the state, for fuck's sake.

Also boo on government computers. which is weird considering that article I read about some military group basically jacking up a bunch of playstations or something together to make one awesome supercomputer.

Edit: Republicans in my state piss me off more than Republicans in general. We seem to get the worst ones here. And the fucking Libertarians.

edited 8th Jun '13 8:31:28 PM by AceofSpades

Morgikit Mikon :3 from War Drobe, Spare Oom Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Mikon :3
#56140: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:15:54 PM

"Gun rights"...anybody else feel like we're getting to the point where guns have more rights than people?

DeviantBraeburn Wandering Jew from Dysfunctional California Since: Aug, 2012
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#56142: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:20:00 PM

At least the Houston free gun initiative comes with training.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
midgetsnowman Since: Jan, 2010
#56143: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:33:38 PM

@Maxima: to be fair. australia banned guns altogether and their gun crime rates dropped like a stone. so Its not 100% a given that moar legal guns = less gun crimes

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#56144: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:43:34 PM

"Gun rights"...anybody else feel like we're getting to the point where guns have more rights than people?
Let it never be said that I thought the obnoxious hyperbole was restricted to one side.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Morgikit Mikon :3 from War Drobe, Spare Oom Since: Jul, 2012 Relationship Status: What's love got to do with it?
Mikon :3
#56145: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:44:36 PM

Yeah, that was about the response I was expecting. >_>

TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56146: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:45:35 PM

Yeah Midget, and if we banned cars and made people rely on bikes, public transportation, or their own feet, we'd likewise have zero vehicle accidents.

Or....maybe....I don't think that's a good trade off.

It was an honor
Irene (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#56147: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:53:43 PM

Cars are transportation vehicles and meant for getting around.(this can include getting Items and living beings around, like a pet or a crate full of papers)

Guns are weapons that are meant to kill or heavily injure things.

Guns are comparable to Tanks, or Jet Fighters with guns, or various planes with Guns... etc.

The analogy you made is completely off and misunderstands what the purpose of a Car and a Gun is. Please stop making it.

edited 8th Jun '13 9:55:32 PM by Irene

Shadow?
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56148: Jun 8th 2013 at 9:58:11 PM

Guns are also recreational tools used for hunting and sport. The analogy stands.

It was an honor
Irene (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Crazy Cat Lady
#56149: Jun 8th 2013 at 10:01:54 PM

No, it doesn't.

The analogy fully fails because of the full purpose of their existence.

Cars(which you specified, fyi) are only used to get things and people around.

Shooting wooden targets? Training for being better to use it to injure and kill things. That's why Guns exist, you know. To hurt things. It's their purpose.

They're given to authority just in case... they have to be forced to injure or kill things.

Cars are given to authority to... get to people faster to save them, sometimes to chase down criminals.(note, these are still regular cars)

Really, again, the only type of ground vehicle Guns were ever similar to were Battle Vehicles like Tanks. You know, with the purpose to hurt things.

"Hunting and Sport". What do you think you're hunting, non-living things? No, you're hunting living beings and hurting them. Sport? I'm not sure exactly how you're defining that. If you mean a shooting range, that's... pretty much the only point you got. Except that again, that's the only non-violent use of a gun in general. Cars are hardly made for violent use, so there's a huge difference between the two. And we mean regular cars. Unless you're using some really odd definition of a "car".

edited 8th Jun '13 10:06:29 PM by Irene

Shadow?
TheStarshipMaxima NCC - 1701 Since: Jun, 2009
NCC - 1701
#56150: Jun 8th 2013 at 10:07:03 PM

Okay, I follow. Guns are weapons with no non-lethal, non-martial use. Cars have many uses and aren't designed as weapons as any sort. All good points.

I fail to see how this relates to overall point that, yes, we can achieve 100% safety with the wholesale banning of things that can potentially be used to harm others. I could ban sex and preempt any instance of STDs. I can get rid of air travel, and prevent any other plane crash. I can ban alcohol and whittle down the instances of drunk drivers, alcohol poisoning, and many instances of date rape down to near zero.

The point I'm making is that some of us don't like the idea of excessive knee-jerk bans just to achieve a few more percentage points of safety.

It was an honor

Total posts: 417,856
Top