Now is not the time to talk about gun control (3 Viewers)

[brandon]

T&P

Redirect Notice

 

[Texan1211]

The problem is that Republicans in Congress see any gun control measures as non-starters.

Seems like voters are okay with it. Who knows? Didn't really hear much from either campaign on it.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

To an extent.
I see.

Yes, to an extent. I outright reject nonsensical or outdated/disproven theories, like geocentrism.

I feel like we have different concepts of what it means to be open-minded. I am getting the impression that your idea of being open-minded means accepting the possibility of a wide range of theories regardless of evidence. My idea of being open-minded means understanding the proffered theory/opinion/belief, processing the data provided against what I know of the world, and making a personal judgment call. If no evidence is proffered, there is no judgment to be made. I reject it until the evidence is presented.

Essentially, it comes down to this. I am not saying your belief is complete trash. I am saying I refuse even to entertain it until you provide supporting evidence.

Edit: typing too fast, fixed a big mistake

 

[Dragon]

I really don't care what you reject or accept.
I wonder what would have happened if the doctor who figured out how to use pig valves in humans had simply said "There is no evidence that it is possible so it must not be possible". That is all you're doing. You are denying even the possibility because you see no evidence for it.

You clearly don’t understand how science works.

The doctor’s conclusion is based on scientific evidence and years of rigorous research. For example, pigs’ biology is remarkably similar to humans in many ways, which is why genetically modified pigs can produce human insulin. Achieving this milestone required years of meticulous scientific study, including examining the physiology and genetics of multiple species.

As others have pointed out, when you make a statement without supporting arguments, the burden of proof lies entirely on you. Otherwise, anyone could throw out baseless claims like "Trump is a Russian agent" and demand others disprove them. But we wouldn’t do that—at least not without presenting credible evidence.

 

[Texan1211]

You clearly don’t understand how science works.

The doctor’s conclusion is based on scientific evidence and years of rigorous research. For example, pigs’ biology is remarkably similar to humans in many ways, which is why genetically modified pigs can produce human insulin. Achieving this milestone required years of meticulous scientific study, including examining the physiology and genetics of multiple species.

As others have pointed out, when you make a statement without supporting arguments, the burden of proof lies entirely on you. Otherwise, anyone could throw out baseless claims like "Trump is a Russian agent" and demand others disprove them. But we wouldn’t do that—at least not without presenting credible evidence.

it is almost impossible to believe you aren't being obtuse.

 

[Texan1211]

Actually, I think this was a great way to start the topic. The subject line promotes conversation by taking away the conservative argument that "now is not the time," which really functions as a way to dismiss conversation entirely until it's too late to do anything about gun control.

T&P functions similarly by pointing out that "thoughts and prayers" is also a cynical attempt to give the least amount of effort possible in actually fixing the situation. Symbolically, offering "T&P" is probably the only thing conservatives could do that would require less effort than "thoughts and prayers," and both are equally effective.

Thus, the topic has been framed in such a way that either forces conservatives to actually engage in how to make our country safer, or it at least keeps out the useless platitudes while the rest of us can genuinely talk about the topic.

If the headline touched a nerve, then it did its job.

I am positive it is vastly different when a Democrat does it though, right?

 

[superchuck500]

I am positive it is vastly different when a Democrat does it though, right?

When a Democrat does what? This is certainly an area where Democrats and Republicans have a very different agenda and history - with measures aimed to restrict excessively dangerous weapons (AR's, high-capacity etc.), tighten up gun sales (and loopholes), reduce guns on the street, and restrict gun access to minors, domestic abusers, and other dangerous psychological profiles. Republicans have basically been the opposite: resisting measures to tighten gun sales, resisting restrictions on ARs, expand carry permits, and defeat gun-access measures.

Here are a couple of summaries of such legislative actions or attempts over the past 25 years or so. It's very obvious the Democrats are making attempts to address elements of the gun situation in the United States - and Republicans are opposing those efforts.

The gun legislation Congress has passed and rejected amid mass shootings: Timeline

From the assault weapons ban and Brady bill to a push to expand background checks, here is a look at how federal gun legislation has fared in Congress.

abcnews.go.com

The Long, Failed History of Gun Control Legislation

Terrorism, domestic violence, school shootings, 3D printed guns—none of them have been enough to win the support of Republicans resistant to gun control reforms

www.bu.edu

 

[Texan1211]

When a Democrat does what?

Offer up T &P like a Republican, of course.

 

[superchuck500]

Offer up T &P like a Republican, of course.

In the context of his point, yes, it's different. When you steadfastly resist to address the mechanism of harm, the reliable responses of 'thoughts and prayers' can be viewed cynically. Even if they are genuine in the thoughts and prayers, they are lawmakers and have authority to take action . . . but they refuse, which serves the same purpose as turning a blind eye. So yes, it's fair to view it as a hollow sentiment.

 

[Huntn]

The usual response from the republicans

Prayers are cheap…

 

[Texan1211]

In the context of his point, yes, it's different

Sure, it is always somehow different when a Democrat does what a Republican does.

 

[RobF]

Sure, it is always somehow different when a Democrat does what a Republican does.

Come on people, this level of dialogue is not worth engaging with.

He either doesn't understand the difference between offering thoughts & prayers and trying to take actions to improve a situation, and just offering thoughts & prayers while conspicuously not only not trying to take actions but also actively opposing actions, or he does understand the difference and is just trolling.

Neither one is worthy of your time.

 

[Texan1211]

Come on people, this level of dialogue is not worth engaging with.

He either doesn't understand the difference between offering thoughts & prayers and trying to take actions to improve a situation, and just offering thoughts & prayers while conspicuously not only not trying to take actions but also actively opposing actions, or he does understand the difference and is just trolling.

Neither one is worthy of your time.

You like to bandy that word trolling around.
I have listed what type of gun controls I would support.
Which, of course, has zero to do with someone expressing their sentiments with thoughts and prayers, no matter how some may find it so offensive. Almost all politicians do the same. Its just I won't try to pretend they are different.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

it is almost impossible to believe you aren't being obtuse.

Can you please explain how someone asking a person making a claim to provide evidence for said claim is being obtuse?

 

[Huntn]

Facts say the incidents of violence were lower. Are you arguing against fact now?

Two year does not make a solid trend when looking at 40 years, and it’s way to easy to kill people in this country.

2022: 48k dead. Currently trending lower..

Annual Gun Violence Data | Center for Gun Violence Solutions

publichealth.jhu.edu

Yet:
Shootings where 4 or more people shot: 3-5 mass shootings per month.

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2024-11-11/a-list-of-mass-killings-in-the-united-states-this-year

For the following chart I have no idea what criteria is being used, but it shows an up trend over 42 years.

Number of mass shootings in the U.S. 1982-2024 | Statista

As of September 4, there were two mass shootings in the United States in 2024.

www.statista.com

 

[Texan1211]

Two year does not make a solid trend when looking at 40 years, and it’s way to easy to kill people in this country.

2022: 48k dead. Currently trending lower..

Annual Gun Violence Data | Center for Gun Violence Solutions

publichealth.jhu.edu

Yet:
Shootings where 4 or more people shot: 3-5 mass shootings per month.

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2024-11-11/a-list-of-mass-killings-in-the-united-states-this-year

For the following chart I have no idea what criteria is being used, but it shows an up trend over 42 years.

's.

Number of mass shootings in the U.S. 1982-2024 | Statista

As of September 4, there were two mass shootings in the United States in 2024.

www.statista.com

Thanks for the graphs proving what I say is true--school violence has increased since the 50s and 60s, but some insisted I was wrong.

 

[Texan1211]

Can you please explain how someone asking a person making a claim to provide evidence for said claim is being obtuse?

Why are you working so hard to prove me right about your obtuseness?

 

[Huntn]

I am positive it is vastly different when a Democrat does it though, right?

There is zero equivalence between Dems and MAGAs, and it’s disingenuous to make this argument especially when looking at the Train Wreck the Cult bow downs to.

 

[Texan1211]

There is zero equivalence between Dems and MAGAs, and it’s disingenuous to make this argument especially when looking at the Train Wreck the Cult bow downs to.

Oh, I forget, all you want to do is yak on about MAGA, Trump, etc. Have fun with the other members of that little circle.