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
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Somehow people think scaring people into voting for someone, being condescending to them, or resorting to name-calling is a good tactic for winning voters. I assume that most Democrats are progressives (or at least the ones around here), so maybe it's a good idea to reach out to the Sanders camp and listen to their concerns, instead of continuing the 'head in the sands' attitude?
Note: I am the first to admit that the opposite is also the case with the Sanders camp. And I think it's sad that American politics have become so polarized that even within the same party the two opposite sides refuse to listen to each other.
You try talking down a child giving a tantrum and that starts screaming and kicking everyone and everything that gets close to it and see how well it goes.
Inter arma enim silent legesIt is disgusting. It's fucking child abuse. Who to hell takes their child out and forces them to choose what sorta instrument you use to beat them with?
That you think that's even remotely acceptable pretty much proves that you didn't come out "a better person for it".
edited 16th Jun '16 10:34:37 AM by LeGarcon
Oh really when?@Angelus Nox
Besides I am not American, I live in a shithole where guns are practically banned but still roam around in the hand of criminals and I've been in situations where I've had to resort to self defense.
I know you're not American anymore than I am. I'm also aware of how terrible the place you live is, because I've seen you talk about it in quite a few threads. Problem is the USA isn't your home. It's not that terrible. And the kinds of guns we're talking about do a lot more harm than good in the US.
You can post all the stats you want about the number of Americans who defend themselves with guns every day. It's irrelevant to the conversation because we're not talking about banning all guns. My comments, which are the ones you are responding to, had to do with banning thirty-round mags on semi-automatic rifles. Unless you live in fear of hordes of zombies descending upon you, you don't need one of those to defend your home.
You can defend your home with a handgun. You can defend your home with a shotgun. You can defend your home with a rifle. Nobody is trying to take those rights away from anybody. Indeed, the only right I'm currently looking to take away from Americans is their "right" to walk into a club, shoot fifty people, and only have to reload a couple of times. How oppressive of me.
There's a strawman if I ever heard one. Particularly given that I spent the better part of the last two years living in a building that could charitably be described as one step removed from a crack house. We had the police over several times a week. We had mentally ill people and drug addicts roaming the halls. We had people try to break in while I stood behind the door with a meat cleaver waiting to see if they'd succeed in breaking it down. We had to Febreeze the hall every day to try and lower the reek of marijuana. And yet I've never felt the need to buy the kind of rifle that was used in Orlando—good thing too since I'd wind up in jail.
How amazing. I too like guns. My whole family, barring my mother, like guns. Did you miss the post wherein I described the arsenal my father used to keep in our basement? 150 guns. We could have armed the neighbourhood.
I'm also glad we have the option to defend ourselves. This might come as a surprise to you, but strict gun control laws in no way, shape or form impact our ability to do so. Since, once again, being limited to a five round mag and having get a license and register the gun don't stop us from defending ourselves. Imagine that.
Just want people to know we have a Parenting thread
, where I think the discussion about physically punishing children better belongs
Edited due to mods requesting parenting stuff go to that thread.
@Angelus Nox
Yes, one of the deadliest spree killings was done with a handgun. He still killed fewer people than the guy in Oregon. Nobody thinks banning those weapons will stop spree killers from existing. We think it will lower the bodycount, and you've got no real way to prove it wouldn't. Every second you spend reloading is a second in which you aren't shooting people. If even one person makes it out of there while you reload, than the law has done its job.
Where I live rifles are limited to five round mags, handguns to ten. We still have our crazy spree shooters. They tend to ratchet up a much lower bodycount.
Finally, no, gun control doesn't make me less safe on the street because while I won't have a gun, I can be fairly certain that nobody else does either. Not to mention, of course, that if the guy trying to mug me is armed, my gun isn't going to do me a lot of good.
edited 16th Jun '16 10:55:48 AM by AmbarSonofDeshar
By the same logic not voting for Trump is the same thing as voting for Clinton.
I've never understood the logic behind "Not voting for X is the same as voting for Y". Especially if you're not voting for Y either, since then your vote equates to exactly 0 either way. The only way that logic works at all to my mind is of your were formerly committed to voting X and then change your mind (such as a poster (I thought it was CaptainCapsase but have since been corrected) being perviously committed to voting conservative then deciding they couldn't support Trump).
I won't fault anyone for voting as their conscience dictates. Even if it's a dumb way to vote. In the end, if they had no intention of voting for Clinton whatever happened then their vote changes nothing that wasn't going to happen anyway.
Perhaps an odd place to draw a quote from, but I remember Jesse Ventura once said "the only wasted vote is the one that's never cast".
edited 16th Jun '16 1:06:42 PM by sgamer82
