Yeah, but 'ethnic' is just trying to steer things back towards race. It's not about that. It's about people that think they are Americans not wanting non-Americans here. Focus on that.
Serious question for every non-conservative here: If forced you to watch nothing but Trump speeches and Fox News and hang out on white supremacist chatboards for a year...would you be more likely to become a mass shooter?
It's kind of an interesting point alluding to the Know Nothings. They were certainly bigoted towards Catholics, but there wasn't really a racial component. To the contrary, they were very much opposed to the pro-slavery Democrats. But they were true nativists.
The old line, again, is that 'America beckons, Americans repel'. When i was younger I found that some of the worst bullies were the kids one rung up the social ladder from the bottom because it was important to them that they keep someone below them. Same with immigrants. Some of the most xenophobic are the last generation that arrived. That's how you know they have begun assimilating.
So I think rather than talk about white supremacy, it would make more sense to talk about xenophobia or nativism, because that is the actual driving force. When Liberians and Bosnians tell you they voted for Trump because he promised to 'keep out illegal immigrants' then you know this isn't about race, it's about immigration.
As previously discussed, we're going to see a huge increase in refugees/asylum seekers/illegal immigrants in the coming decades. If we're going to figure out a national policy, we need to understand the dynamics that make people resistant to this. Calling them all white supremacists or white nationalists seems really intellectually lazy, even for an SJ Left that is obsessed with race.
Tulsi was the first Democratic candidate I liked for fairly obvious reasons. I'm a non-interventionist with regards to foreign policy and can think of about 1,000 better things to do with all of that money. I also think, y'know, talking to world leaders (even the mean ones) is a smart foreign policy. Her and Williamson should be supporting each other on that front.
I had two history teachers in high school who prided themselves on never tipping their hand as to their political leanings. They liked the mystery and felt it could only bias the way their students interpreted their lessons. I guess I feel the same way about sports commentators. Just call the game.
When was the last time you saw the captain of the football team. the president of the student counsel or the popular guy at the office engaging in a mass shooting? They are nearly all lonely in some way, angry and unable to find a healthy outlet to express that.
I get Sam's poaition, that this feels like a network giving in the the big bully in the Whitehouse...but goddamn, it would be nice if there were a few parts of American life left that weren't subject to political partisanship.
When I bought my current deer rifle I had planned on bringing home a .270 but they had a .243 that i liked and the price was right. I just thought it was a better deal. Little did I know it would cause my hunting buddies such anguish. Had I known I would have done it much sooner.
Now i'm in the market for something with more distance. I've already settled on a .300 win mag but I keep hemming and hawing with my coworkers, just to hear their arguments for their caliber of choice. So entertaining...
This. The (correct) position from the Right is typically that mental health problems are the root cause of mass shootings. Even people that adhere to some type of troubling ideology (Chip would call them 'Republicans') probably have some issues that set them on that path. And you're right, often that happens in high school and other kids knew about it. How does the government accept, consider and archive that information for the future? Figure that out and we might be able to start shifting our focus to the other 99% of gun crime.
The shooting case i was on earlier this year was over someone stepping on someone else's shoes. 7 people were shot as a result. That wasn't caused by the easy availability of guns. That's cultural.
Gun owners are not a monolithic group. It's a very fractured community with people that own guns for very different reasons.
As for enforcement, I was on the jury for a shooting case earlier this year. Two guys shot up a bar and even though both were felons, neither was charged with the possession of a firearm. They got one on an Alfred plea to the shootings, but they didn't tack on the gun charge. His partner has never been in jail. Prosecutors are letting far too many of these cases go.
What I'm suggesting is that Dems build a coalition among non-politicians that maybe lean a bit to the right. Start with the hunting groups. Most of us don't have a boner for guns. They are a tool. We also voluntarily regulate the hell out of our sport. Hunting licenses, hunter education requirements, mentorship programs, bag limits...it's all designed around creating a robust system of personal responsibility. I also don't know any hunter worth his salt that buys a weapon 5 days before the season. I'm hunting with a crossbow for the first time this fall and I bought it in February so I could practice all spring and summer. The last time I bought a deer rifle it was about the same time frame. I honestly wouldn't even want to be in the woods with a hunter and a recently purchased gun.
So the idea that we couldn't be persuaded to extend the waiting period on guns to 30 days or that we wouldn't agree to a federal gun permit...or whatever...would be a real misunderstanding of our community and millions of potential allies. Get us on board and we'll drag the politicians kicking and screaming. Most of us don't donate to the NRA. We give our money to conservation groups, so Wayne LaPierre can kiss our camo-covered asses.
I'm going to say this as politely as I can...i don't think you would know a moderate if one of them invited you to the symphony. Seriously man, if you have demonstrated anything over the years of your posting and commenting here it's that you are so far out of touch with normal America that I'm sure I do see like some kind of mainline conservative to you. Meanwhile my Team Red friends tease me about being a closet liberal. I mean, really dude, you are clueless.
As for how we view mass murders, they are a very unfortunate byproduct of a culture where more and more men are lonely and filled with an impotent rage. What separates me from you is that I see the root cause while you only see the symptom.
Moderate conservatives in the hunting community have been rallying not just their own members but also fellow public land users to push back against a lot of bad land-grab legislation from the Right. They are oftentimes leveraging support from moderate Democrats to make that happen. So I guess I am a bit more optimistic on that front.
P.S. If we could maybe not call it a 'memorial' bill I would appreciate it.
"Have they no solutions? No urge to pass legislation? No desire to do anything about mass shootings but offer thoughts and prayers?"
Gun owners usually talk about enforcing existing laws for possession by felons. They also talk about mental health, but that gets shouted down. But honestly, I don't focus a whole lot on mass shootings because they are such unpredictable outliers and so much a symptom of the psychological health of our country, not of a gun problem.
I think the problem is that the moderate conservatives are scared to speak up because they will get eaten alive by the party. That's why I think moderate Dems need to lead on this and the moderate conservatives can support knowing there is safety in numbers. Amy Klobuchar says she understands it because her uncles hunted...great. Time to lead. I would start with the hunting groups. Ducks Unlimited, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, etc. They need to speak up.
When I got married I was told that the best thing to do was 'choose your battles'. The problem as I see it is that liberals keep choosing the wrong battle i.e. assault weapons and background checks. Gun folks know these are dumb issues, so we just laugh them off. If they stopped wasting so much political capital on those things, got themselves educated on guns and then built some support with gun owners (they would find it among hunters for one) then they might be surprised what they could do.
Or they could just keep grandstanding about assault weapons and universal background checks every time there is a mass shooting and things will go nowhere.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “The Answer, My Friend, is Blowin’ in the Wind? Perhaps.”
Yeah, but 'ethnic' is just trying to steer things back towards race. It's not about that. It's about people that think they are Americans not wanting non-Americans here. Focus on that.
"
"Pro-gun people think easy access to handguns, assault rifles, and the like are worth thousands of needless deaths..."
Oh good, are we finally going to talk about handguns and urban crime?
"
Serious question for every non-conservative here: If forced you to watch nothing but Trump speeches and Fox News and hang out on white supremacist chatboards for a year...would you be more likely to become a mass shooter?
"
'If it bothers you, we could drop the right/left language and just note how many mass shootings are motivated by misogyny or racism."
Please do. I'd like to see those numbers.
"
It's kind of an interesting point alluding to the Know Nothings. They were certainly bigoted towards Catholics, but there wasn't really a racial component. To the contrary, they were very much opposed to the pro-slavery Democrats. But they were true nativists.
The old line, again, is that 'America beckons, Americans repel'. When i was younger I found that some of the worst bullies were the kids one rung up the social ladder from the bottom because it was important to them that they keep someone below them. Same with immigrants. Some of the most xenophobic are the last generation that arrived. That's how you know they have begun assimilating.
So I think rather than talk about white supremacy, it would make more sense to talk about xenophobia or nativism, because that is the actual driving force. When Liberians and Bosnians tell you they voted for Trump because he promised to 'keep out illegal immigrants' then you know this isn't about race, it's about immigration.
As previously discussed, we're going to see a huge increase in refugees/asylum seekers/illegal immigrants in the coming decades. If we're going to figure out a national policy, we need to understand the dynamics that make people resistant to this. Calling them all white supremacists or white nationalists seems really intellectually lazy, even for an SJ Left that is obsessed with race.
On “Tulsi Gabbard is What Donald Trump Could Have Been”
Tulsi was the first Democratic candidate I liked for fairly obvious reasons. I'm a non-interventionist with regards to foreign policy and can think of about 1,000 better things to do with all of that money. I also think, y'know, talking to world leaders (even the mean ones) is a smart foreign policy. Her and Williamson should be supporting each other on that front.
On “On Changing The Subject”
I had two history teachers in high school who prided themselves on never tipping their hand as to their political leanings. They liked the mystery and felt it could only bias the way their students interpreted their lessons. I guess I feel the same way about sports commentators. Just call the game.
On “The Answer, My Friend, is Blowin’ in the Wind? Perhaps.”
When was the last time you saw the captain of the football team. the president of the student counsel or the popular guy at the office engaging in a mass shooting? They are nearly all lonely in some way, angry and unable to find a healthy outlet to express that.
On “On Changing The Subject”
I get Sam's poaition, that this feels like a network giving in the the big bully in the Whitehouse...but goddamn, it would be nice if there were a few parts of American life left that weren't subject to political partisanship.
On “The Answer, My Friend, is Blowin’ in the Wind? Perhaps.”
When I bought my current deer rifle I had planned on bringing home a .270 but they had a .243 that i liked and the price was right. I just thought it was a better deal. Little did I know it would cause my hunting buddies such anguish. Had I known I would have done it much sooner.
Now i'm in the market for something with more distance. I've already settled on a .300 win mag but I keep hemming and hawing with my coworkers, just to hear their arguments for their caliber of choice. So entertaining...
"
This. The (correct) position from the Right is typically that mental health problems are the root cause of mass shootings. Even people that adhere to some type of troubling ideology (Chip would call them 'Republicans') probably have some issues that set them on that path. And you're right, often that happens in high school and other kids knew about it. How does the government accept, consider and archive that information for the future? Figure that out and we might be able to start shifting our focus to the other 99% of gun crime.
"
"I would say that your definition of “white nationalism” is “not a democrat”.
This seems to be accurate.
"
The shooting case i was on earlier this year was over someone stepping on someone else's shoes. 7 people were shot as a result. That wasn't caused by the easy availability of guns. That's cultural.
"
If we want to talk about gun deaths, again, it comes back to handguns.
"
Gun owners are not a monolithic group. It's a very fractured community with people that own guns for very different reasons.
As for enforcement, I was on the jury for a shooting case earlier this year. Two guys shot up a bar and even though both were felons, neither was charged with the possession of a firearm. They got one on an Alfred plea to the shootings, but they didn't tack on the gun charge. His partner has never been in jail. Prosecutors are letting far too many of these cases go.
"
What I'm suggesting is that Dems build a coalition among non-politicians that maybe lean a bit to the right. Start with the hunting groups. Most of us don't have a boner for guns. They are a tool. We also voluntarily regulate the hell out of our sport. Hunting licenses, hunter education requirements, mentorship programs, bag limits...it's all designed around creating a robust system of personal responsibility. I also don't know any hunter worth his salt that buys a weapon 5 days before the season. I'm hunting with a crossbow for the first time this fall and I bought it in February so I could practice all spring and summer. The last time I bought a deer rifle it was about the same time frame. I honestly wouldn't even want to be in the woods with a hunter and a recently purchased gun.
So the idea that we couldn't be persuaded to extend the waiting period on guns to 30 days or that we wouldn't agree to a federal gun permit...or whatever...would be a real misunderstanding of our community and millions of potential allies. Get us on board and we'll drag the politicians kicking and screaming. Most of us don't donate to the NRA. We give our money to conservation groups, so Wayne LaPierre can kiss our camo-covered asses.
"
Isn't most legislation the imposition of political will?
"
I agree with not understanding the crime statistics. It's a real shame when there is SO MUCH data out there.
"
Saul,
I'm going to say this as politely as I can...i don't think you would know a moderate if one of them invited you to the symphony. Seriously man, if you have demonstrated anything over the years of your posting and commenting here it's that you are so far out of touch with normal America that I'm sure I do see like some kind of mainline conservative to you. Meanwhile my Team Red friends tease me about being a closet liberal. I mean, really dude, you are clueless.
As for how we view mass murders, they are a very unfortunate byproduct of a culture where more and more men are lonely and filled with an impotent rage. What separates me from you is that I see the root cause while you only see the symptom.
"
You're assuming 'gun owners' is analogous to 'Republicans'. It isn't.
"
Moderate conservatives in the hunting community have been rallying not just their own members but also fellow public land users to push back against a lot of bad land-grab legislation from the Right. They are oftentimes leveraging support from moderate Democrats to make that happen. So I guess I am a bit more optimistic on that front.
P.S. If we could maybe not call it a 'memorial' bill I would appreciate it.
"
There's also this to consider:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-ramming_attack#List_of_non-terrorist_incidents
"
"Have they no solutions? No urge to pass legislation? No desire to do anything about mass shootings but offer thoughts and prayers?"
Gun owners usually talk about enforcing existing laws for possession by felons. They also talk about mental health, but that gets shouted down. But honestly, I don't focus a whole lot on mass shootings because they are such unpredictable outliers and so much a symptom of the psychological health of our country, not of a gun problem.
"
I think the problem is that the moderate conservatives are scared to speak up because they will get eaten alive by the party. That's why I think moderate Dems need to lead on this and the moderate conservatives can support knowing there is safety in numbers. Amy Klobuchar says she understands it because her uncles hunted...great. Time to lead. I would start with the hunting groups. Ducks Unlimited, Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, etc. They need to speak up.
"
When I got married I was told that the best thing to do was 'choose your battles'. The problem as I see it is that liberals keep choosing the wrong battle i.e. assault weapons and background checks. Gun folks know these are dumb issues, so we just laugh them off. If they stopped wasting so much political capital on those things, got themselves educated on guns and then built some support with gun owners (they would find it among hunters for one) then they might be surprised what they could do.
Or they could just keep grandstanding about assault weapons and universal background checks every time there is a mass shooting and things will go nowhere.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.