Politics ( ͡° ͜ ʖ ͡°)


#182

I would beg to differ. at least in my opinion, people have been very respectful in this thread (which is surprising tbh) and the conversations have been quite productive. And even though I do disagree with a few of the opinions stated in this thread, I don’t see them as enemies or evil because of it. Everyone has their opinions, and as long as you’re civil about it, I don’t mind much really.

As for my STRONG LANGUAGE in this thread, I simply do it to make it seem like my point actually has some merit, plus I’m edgy boi and I liek usig slur to ffend peepl hi hi hi. But yeah, when I’m using fuck in my sentences, most of the time i’m not actually angry so yeah.

So @moderators please don’t close :frowning:


#183

But definitely keep your fire extinguishers on hand.
We’re about to delve into…

G U N S
Stance on guns, control, personal experiences, etc?


#184

I think guns are alright, we do need a little bit more strict licensing though (IN THE U.S), but that’s about it. No banning guns in general and attempting to remove the 2nd amendment :confused:


#185

See: here’s the thing.

the 2nd amendment was supposed to allow us match the government’s power, to rebel if the government became “tyrannical”, i.e. another American Revolution.

It’s completely outdated at this point, you’d have to be giving everyone suitcase nukes and tanks to be able to match the US military at this point.

The 2nd amendment is about as outdated as slavery is, times change.

I’m definitely biased on this one, as I’m a high school kid that lives close to a town that got shot up, evacuated because of a fire, and had asshats go back to that town to say “God sent the shooter and the fire”.

(Speaking of which, I don’t like the concept of religion, espcially when people use it to justify everything).

slight bias on my part, and I recognize that, but I think my arguments are sound.


#186

eh, I guess I can see your point, but then again…

That must mean the 1st amendment is outdated as well

also this
Capture4

I would say that it’s still important even if it’s very outdated now. It still protects the right to have your weapon for defense (either against the government or assailant).


#187

image
:thinking:
quick google search, may be wrong/biased as well.


#188

oh I actually found it (the original source my bad xd), and one similar to it.

Injuries and deaths due to fire arms in the home

Accidental shootings

The information in the first source is questionable, as the math doesn’t add up, that and it was taken over 2 decades ago in three cities (that of which being seattle, Memphis, and Galveston), all of which have some of the most highest crime rates in the U.S

heres the crime rates if you don’t believe me

Seattle Crime demographic
Memphis Crime Demographic
Galveston Crime Demographic


#189

The first one is from the US institute of medicine, run by the government. Probably a credible source.


#190

In Australia since the 1996 gun law reforms, homicides using firearms have more than halved.

“The number of homicide incidents involving a firearm decreased by 57 percent between 1989-90 and 2013-14. Firearms were used in 13 percent of homicide incidents (n=32) in 2013-14. In 1989-90 it was 24 percent (n=75) of incidents.” - http://crimestats.aic.gov.au/NHMP/1_trends/

As far as the US goes it’s worrying how many firearms are used in crimes that are obtained legally.


#191

My mistake >>>>>>>>>>>.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

(still doesn’t take away from the fact that knife crimes are still up a bit)

The U.S does have a problem with guns, but I would like to see a source for how many crimes are done with legal fire arms

the only related one I found was from the Washington post (which I find a little hard to trust now).
Washington post article


#192

Look at the first graph, the homicide rate has been declining.


There doesn’t seem to be a trend of increasing knife crime.


#193

My internal monologue

(FUCKING SHIT IM LOSING THE ARGUMENT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE MCFLURRY PIECE OF SHIT I HATEEEEEEEEEE U)

alright, I was being a dumi when it came to the knife crimes, but they do show occasional spike age while gun incidents have steadily decreased. but that’s about all I have for that really (without backing myself more into a corner :frowning: ).

now if you’ll excuse me, Ima go phone my nibba shen bapiro so he can PWN YOU WITH FACTS AND LOGIC.


#194

I misworded this “As far as the US goes it’s worrying how many firearms are used in crimes that are obtained legally.”

What would be more accurate is that are large amount of guns used in crime are originally obtained legally, which means that gun control measures would have an effect.

http://www.socialmedicine.info/index.php/socialmedicine/article/view/852/1649
This is the source they use for their info on that Washington post article.


#195

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Thanks for the clarification :smiley:


#196

Political correctness is when you’re being told not to say certain things because it would be “improper”, or something to that effect. It’s not the same as direct censorship.

Could be dangerous if it’s done improperly. Using copyright as an excuse to censor people who criticize their products is already something some companies do, for example.

Making websites liable for what their users do will also lead to massive censorship as the website owners will preventively get rid of anything that could get them in the smallest bit of trouble. If you can get sued just because one of the users of your forum posted some edgy meme, that’s not going to encourage you to have freedom of speech on said forum.

See that’s the part I don’t really get. How are your weapons defending you against the government if, regardless of how many weapons you have, they can still get away with practically anything, including stuff like making up fake WMDs to justify the invasion of a foreign country or taking away your healthcare plan?

Even if a civil war did break out, what makes you think the government would play fair and only send ground troops against you, instead of just carpet-bombing your ass from the stratosphere?


#197

It can go uphill in #whine-cellar

I have yet to see something good arise of this post :confused:
Other than the popcorn


#198

I don’t find “could be” arguments to have much substance to them

Every single law on earth could be done improperly

Also the EU can’t sue you. It can not sue an individual and certainly will not sue a company

Bringing a massive company to court could take many years and they simply do not have the time or desire

What they will do is take their European domain and try to block their site in the Euro zone

That is if they wanted

It kills me inside when I see memes and article 13 on the same discussion

It’s a such irrational jump in reason and logic

The EU has never tried to “censor memes”

Or for that matter someone’s freedom of speech

Saying they will use this to

As many articles say

“DESTROY THE INTERNET AND FREE SPEECH”

“REE DONT TAKE MY MEMES”

is unfounded and just fake news

You cant make sensational and radical claims with no reason to think that way

That’s like trying to get every country to revoke all their draft laws

Because you think they are going to draft the entire country into a huge war

When they have never done that before

Maybe if the EU had ever made made a massive attempt at censoring free speech

This fear mongering might make sense

But seeing as they have not, this seems like another classic example of “red scare”

Expect its about the EU instead of communism

And everyone’s taking the bait

Really it’s funny everyone freaks out over this but China who pays people to make thousands of fake articles about the EU and commits waves of atrocities in the way of free speech and basic humans rights just flys under the radar

Seems like all this recent negativity about the EU really plays right into their pocket


#199

That copyright law proposal introduces the idea that site owners are liable for the content their users post. This creates a dangerous precedent as it makes it very easy to pressure site owners into censuring their own users.

I never said the EU itself would sue anybody.

“You can’t criticize the EU or else the bad guys win!”

If I’m not going to be allowed to criticize the EU then what’s the difference between the EU and China?

Or how about I flip the script on you and tell you that you can’t criticize Putin or else you play right into the US’ pocket?

That’s just not a good argument to make. If the EU and China are both doing shitty things then they should both be criticized, instead of being allowed to get away with this whataboutism deflecting nonsense.


#200

Yeah I think a site should hold some responsibility in stopping child pornography on their website but maybe that’s just me

What is this dangerous precedent? Sites already censor there users? Example tumblrs massive ban on NSFW content.

I really do not see the danger here besides fear mongering about the EU

The real danger and what is actually is scary is how easy people believe what they read and use it make wild accusations and claims

The dangerous precedent is the fear mongering media outlets and likewise clueless youtubers spouting nonsense and people actually listening to it as if it were fact

This kind of sensationalist reporting is what is used in countries like Russia to oppress and generate fear and hate

To sway popular opinion with “what could happen”

Then this is what is really used to oppress people not some EU law that could possibly cause harm in a worst cause scenario

Just as saying “if we elected this person this will happen”

There may be no proof to back up these claims but people will believe it and grow fearful and hateful of that person

This can be extended to groups of people and I think that is definitely the case here

An article

The EU is a European community that wants to create economic and overall peace in Europe

China is a brutal dictatorship that massacres it’s people and commits a mass of human rights violations

That’s the difference

Also I’m not saying to not criticize it

Just realize who has the most the to gain from this circle jerk about the EU

sounds just like the Russia media to me

Talk about America all you like

But the difference again comes to one to being a democratic state and the other being a brutal oppressive regime

You have to understand one deserves FAR more criticism

Yet it does not receive it

Russia invades and annexes crime from Ukraine

no international reaction

America breaths

“IMPERIALIST”

Can you imagine what would happen if America invaded and annexed part of a country?

The backlash that would happen ?

The large difference here is everyone is always riding the “I hate the EU” bandwagon

Where as no one is saying anything about China

EU proposes copyright law

“NAZIS”

China brings African countries into huge debt then takes their oil fields and natural resources, kidnaps falun gong members and harvest their organs, lies and says tinannamen square among other massacres never happened

“I love trading with China”

If you want to read about it

So yes the EU does deserve criticism

But sometimes we need to stop and think why is this suddenly being spread and pushed by thousands of news agencies (many with Chinese connections)?

Could it be China plan of trying to discredit and break apart the EU to further their global trade dominance

Or to keep the mainstream light of their brutal disgusting humans rights violations

Both is the answer

Sometimes you need to look behind just what the massive headline says and think why is this all of a sudden being made into a overwhelming ordeal

This is done all around the world all the time

Sensationalist stories flood the news with fear and hate to hide from the public the real danger they should be worrying about

I would have to say China dominating global trade and harvesting peoples organs (neo colonialism amongst many other things)is a bigger issue then the EU possible censoreship of peoples memes


#201

honestly in my opinion we could do more to make guns harder to obtain, but i’d disagree with banning them.
also on a similar note, i’m pretty sure a lot of school shooters were bullied before they did their thing. pretty sure being bullied influenced their decision, so if we wanted to keep school shootings to a minimum, then stopping bullying would be a step in the right direction