Swordfish Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Not if you're Smith & Wesson or other firearm companies that see your profits tripled after a few months of tragedies and the president saying, "hey, we should maybe do something about this." Then you have a very serious incentive to make sure no one can produce a concrete study to show how harmful this county's obsession with fetishizing guns has become. You inadvertantly demonstrate the concern.Legitimate studies do not set out to justify a political conclusion like 'to show how harmful this county's obsession with fetishizing guns has become. ' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wise Fool Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Well, I guess we'll never know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Time Magazine did an interview with Trump. It's interesting how he likes to repeat sentences (I guess for emphasis?) and sometimes speaks in almost a stream-of-consciousness way.It amazes me that people think he's a fiery orator, or an engaging speaker. He reminds me a lot of Dubya when it comes to verbal communication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elarte Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 You inadvertantly demonstrate the concern.Legitimate studies do not set out to justify a political conclusion like 'to show how harmful this county's obsession with fetishizing guns has become. 'Last time I checked I was neither a scientist at the CDC or a politician pushing for this to be a thing so my "political conclusion" is just that: mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Time Magazine did an interview with Trump. It's interesting how he likes to repeat sentences (I guess for emphasis?) and sometimes speaks in almost a stream-of-consciousness way.Sometimes? I'd say almost entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Last time I checked I was neither a scientist at the CDC or a politician pushing for this to be a thing so my "political conclusion" is just that: mine. And? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Preventing the study of firearms impact on public health is pretty silly.Scott, to me, it's perhaps one of the most outrageous elements of the whole issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Not if you're Smith & Wesson or other firearm companies that see your profits tripled after a few months of tragedies and the president saying, "hey, we should maybe do something about this." Then you have a very serious incentive to make sure no one can produce a concrete study to show how harmful this county's obsession with fetishizing guns has become. Quite the opposite, actually. The gun manufacturers love it when people in government make noises about gun control because when that happens, a substantial fraction of the people worried about upcoming restrictions goes shopping. A study supporting gun restrictions would have exactly the same effect. Of course, if the government actually banned the sale of guns, the manufacturers would be in trouble... but there is currently no chance of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 I'm starting to think I'm wrong about Trump. I believe my analysis up until a month or two ago was correct (that he was just a bored rich guy doing this because he could, and that once he saw how popular he was he tried to self-destruct), but he is definitely in it for the long haul now, unless his numbers crater. The way his followers worship him has to stroke is ego in a way he's never felt before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Trumpin': the perpetual state of being owed an apology by the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 I would pay 199 bucks to watch trump and clinton debate on PPV.That moment when Hillary looks at the The Donald and says: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodRider Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 I don't. Movement Conservatism created this monster - let them deal with the horrors of their creation.I would agree with you if it were not for the fact that everyone has to deal with the horrors of Trump. Especially minorities who are getting shit from those who are emboldened by Trumps overt racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrackerNeil Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 That is something worth remembering. I'm usually glad that the democrats do not obsessively primary one another, but perhaps I was mistaken to be. I surely don't want this fellow as a representative of my party in any fashion. Democrats don't have to demonstrate that they are crazier than the next guy/gal, because in general leftist extremists have little influence over the party. We call GOP extremists "presidential candidates." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli Fury Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 That and even the fringiest crazies of the left aren't regularly terrorizing clinics and vandalizing mosques and killing people over it. The mainstream of the GOP has a rhetoric that is intolerant and promotes a certain gun toting vigilanteism and then we are all supposed to be shocked when somebody puts intolerance and guns together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Preventing the study of firearms impact on public health is pretty silly.Silly doesn't quite cover it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywin et al. Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Democrats don't have to demonstrate that they are crazier than the next guy/gal, because in general leftist extremists have little influence over the party. We call GOP extremists "presidential candidates."The "far left" basically just debate how much they want to expand the "welfare state." There is no way to compare the far right and the far left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 That and even the fringiest crazies of the left aren't regularly terrorizing clinics and vandalizing mosques and killing people over it. The mainstream of the GOP has a rhetoric that is intolerant and promotes a certain gun toting vigilanteism and then we are all supposed to be shocked when somebody puts intolerance and guns together.The politics of the left also inspire madmen to commit murder. The targets are different (e.g. police rather than mosques), but the dynamics of the situation are identical: agitators get the faithful riled up against a target group and thereby drive an unstable individual over the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 The politics of the left also inspire madmen to commit murder. The targets are different (e.g. police rather than mosques), but the dynamics of the situation are identical: agitators get the faithful riled up against a target group and thereby drive an unstable individual over the edge.How is he representative of the politics of the left? Hostile towards authority, arrested 19 times (!), and specified as not participating in any political protests or rallies of any kind. How did leftist politics inspire him, exactly? He seems to have been inspired by personal experience, and therein identifying with victims of police prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Radical left and right movements both exist, both cause violence, both suck. That said, the radical right certainly appears to have more mainstream political appeal right now in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted December 9, 2015 Share Posted December 9, 2015 Radical left and right movements both exist, both cause violence, both suck. That said, the radical right certainly appears to have more mainstream political appeal right now in the US. Sure, I was just arguing with the example given. Radicalism of anything, including the 'middle' is often identifiable by violence. Invading Iraq can be viewed as a radicalized majority opinion, for example. edit: USA majority opinion, I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.