The Joe Biden 2020 tracker thread (1 Viewer)

[Intensesaint]

A place for all the gaffs, slip-ups and overall outlandish things Democratic candidates will say or do in lead up to the 2020 Election.

 

[brandon]

Educate us. What should they do? Just shrug and enjoy their bullet-ridden schools?

I just did educate you. The gun control measures being proposed by the Democratic candidates will not go over well in the 2020 election.

You offered exactly nothing for what could be done to prevent school shootings.

Correct. I was discussing some of the flaws in the Democratic position that I believe will hurt them this election cycle because this is a thread about Democratic candidates.

That’s fine, but you don’t get to say “I just did educate you” about a question I wasn’t asking.

 

[Joe Okc]

I never even mentioned an AR-15.

Sounds like you’re the one hung up on the AR-15. I’m definitely down for better regulation of handguns too if it fixes the problem.

Give me a second to put on my raincoat before your head explodes.

Nope, you never did mention ar15s. But you are stuck on school shootings like those are the only ones happening. The majority of mass shootings are 4 or 5 teens and it happens about once or twice a week...

But that doesn't take the spotlight does it?

Right now a felon tried assassinating some NYC cops? How'd he get a gun,

What do you think of my National gun license.? Instead of restricting the gun itself?

 

[wardorican]

Nope, you never did mention ar15s. But you are stuck on school shootings like those are the only ones happening. The majority of mass shootings are 4 or 5 teens and it happens about once or twice a week...

But that doesn't take the spotlight does it?

Right now a felon tried assassinating some NYC cops? How'd he get a gun,

What do you think of my National gun license.? Instead of restricting the gun itself?

I may be a bit young, but wasn't the original "assault weapon ban" pointed at reducing drive bys? Which is the type of crime you're discussing.

and it seemed like the murder rated dropped a lot.

 

[brandon]

Nope, you never did mention ar15s. But you are stuck on school shootings like those are the only ones happening. The majority of mass shootings are 4 or 5 teens and it happens about once or twice a week...

I don’t think you want to go down this road with me. I’m glad to do whatever it takes to reduce ALL gun deaths. I’ve been a proponent of gun buybacks for a long time, for instance.

Right now a felon tried assassinating some NYC cops? How'd he get a gun,

I assume he got it from someone who legally purchased it, or from someone who stole it from someone who legally purchased it, or he purchased it legally himself before he was a felon. No matter where he got it, the initial sale of the gun was legal.

What do you think of my National gun license.? Instead of restricting the gun itself?

If that will reduce gun deaths, let’s do it. If it won’t, let’s do some research and find out what will actually reduce gun deaths, and let’s do that.

 

[Joe Okc]

I may be a bit young, but wasn't the original "assault weapon ban" pointed at reducing drive bys? Which is the type of crime you're discussing.

and it seemed like the murder rated dropped a lot.

Ward. No offensel but again why is this limited to one 1 type of crime, the majority of mass shootings is a simple handgun. 4 shot or more.

I can't search here until I get home...

@brandon ... I wonder.. I feel the problem is with man.

 

[Archies Ghost]

Prohibition absolutely would fail my test.

On the other hand, yours is a strong argument for the removal of speed limits, so I guess that’s something.

You have discovered for yourself the core issue with your “common good” test, its extreme subjectivity.

 

[V Chip]

Ward. No offensel but again why is this limited to one 1 type of crime, the majority of mass shootings is a simple handgun. 4 shot or more.

Interestingly, the NRA helped draft the first federal gun restrictions in 1938 which heavily regulated guns that were typically used in crimes, as well as requiring sellers to have a license and maintain records on their customers. They also supported California's Mulford Act (1967) which banned carrying loaded guns in public, and the 1968 Gun Control Act which was aimed at the curbing the importation of cheap handguns (Saturday Night Specials) frequently found in urban areas.

 

[Beach Friends]

Anybody here thinking about voting for the DNC's favored candidate?

 

[wardorican]

Anybody here thinking about voting for the DNC's favored candidate?

He's not correct about the 95%.. more like 50-65% at best..., but in "spirit" he's not exactly wrong, about who ends up being arrested.

You have more police in areas of high crime and violence, you'll also end up with more arrests for petty stuff, because they're there to see it.

This is from 5 years ago, the whole thing, and it's audio too.

Bloomberg’s false racist claims about who commits crime

At 41:10 into this Q&A session in Aspen, Colorado last week, Michael Bloomberg made this claim about who the criminals are First thing is . . . 95% of your murderers and murder victims fit one …

crimeresearch.org

They also make allegations that he pushed the Aspen Institute and Grassroots TV to not show the broadcast, which Aspen said wasn't that uncommon,but Grassroots TV was upset about... according to the Daily Caller.


but man, you really follow some weird stuff. That's not even a real news twitter account. They don't have a website that works. Lots of just bad tweets and junk outrage.

Oh, and No, He's not my preferred candidate, nor do I think he's the DNC's.. he just has money to burn.

 

[wardorican]

Ward. No offensel but again why is this limited to one 1 type of crime, the majority of mass shootings is a simple handgun. 4 shot or more.

I can't search here until I get home...

@brandon ... I wonder.. I feel the problem is with man.

Oh, I'm not limiting it to one thing. But this one thing tackles a couple specific problems.. not all of them.

Also, mass shooting statistics are terrible. 4 or more doesn't really capture the differences between 4-5 people being shot down town vs 20 in a school or hundreds at a concert.

Also, I'm not saying I'm for this. i'm just saying, it's not crazy.

 

[wardorican]

This started when I proposed gun legislation that I would support. Counter to what Democratic candidates are proposing.

I am curious why every time we talk gun control its always about mass shootings and ar15s, while plain old regular gun violence just gets brushed under the table like it doesnt exist.

According to CBS news and the FBI... Louisiana has three cities in the top ten for murder. Yet none of those stats are from mass shootings, and for some reason that just doesn't seem to be a concern.

Chicago is used because the have stricter gun laws than most of the country. My concealed permit is not honored there, but yet they average about 8 people shot a day. All youth with handguns.
But that gets swept under the carpet.

Last year The State of Oklahoma went to "constitutional carry".. You can now walk around with a six gun strapped to your hip without needing a license anymore.. but yet our gun violence crime rate is at or below the national average.. But yet other cities continie to have more gun violence even with more gun laws.

But every talking Democratic politician or internet liberal warrior either wants to either take my guns, make me go through more background checks or propose I register them and get insurance, when I have a safe full of guns, a clean record and not the problem. And I just wonder why that is.

I'm good with your idea for a national license. I'm ok with that. Depends on what type. I think concealed carry is a bit over done.

and again, I'm all for multiple solutions and discussions. It's not a this or that discussion. it's an all of the above discussion to me, like most things.

Also, the entire state of Oklahoma has around 3.9 Million people. Metro Chicago (i.e. Chicago and the burbs) is approximately 9.5Million people.

Crime tends to follow population density.

 

[Beach Friends]

Back to the question of whether Mayor Pete has problems connecting with AA voters:



(Truthfully, it was probably an accidentally good moment)

 

[JimEverett]

Example: if one argues against a speed limit law (either a new one, or the existing one) by saying "people are going to speed anyway no matter what laws we make" that's logically the same as stating speeding laws are useless (it's important that the person is arguing AGAINST the law/regulation, and not just a philosophical "criminals break laws" take). If one argues against gun regulations (new or existing) by stating "bad guys are gonna get guns no matter what laws we make" its the same logically as stating gun regulations are useless. If something is useless, what is the point of it -- i.e., the law is useless, thus it isn't needed and we shouldn't have it (because you argued against the law with that argument)./QUOTE]



If one just stated a more nuanced position like "murder laws don't affect murderers" but still was in favor of the law (as a punishment, for instance), that's different. But if you argue against murder laws (whether new or existing) by stating that, it's basically the same as arguing they are useless thus not needed.

The statement "criminals are going to get guns no matter what, therefore we do not need [new] regulations restricting people's right to own or possess guns" does not, in any way shape or form, entail or is the same as: "There should be no laws about murder, stealing, etc. because people are going to murder, steal, etc."

Perhaps there is a hidden assumption I am making - that gun possession/ownership is not the problem trying to be cured. It seems clear that the problem is what certain people do with the guns: mass shooting, murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, armed robbery, etc.
If the idea is that possession/ownership itself is problematic then someone stating that "laws won't stop bad people from getting guns" then that, perhaps, becomes similar or the same as "we should not have murder laws because they won't stop people from murdering."

 

[JimEverett]

Can you rephrase this.. too many negatives there, so I"m not following your point. Sorry.

It sounds like laws are fine, even if people will break them, but adjustments aren't worth it, because people will break them.

So, don't ever update laws or regulations?

My point was that some make more sense than others. There are better ways to get weapons out of the hands of dangerous or unstable people.

I think you get it. I am just not trying to make the point about regulations.
I am only trying to point out that the following:
We should not have any more regulations about consuming alcoholic beverages because no matter what we do people are still going to drink and drive

Does not entail

We should get rid of DUI laws because no matter what we do people are still going to drink and drive

The first point concerns what is an otherwise innocuous activity, drinking alcoholic beverages - no one is harmed or potentially directly harmed.
The second concerns the activity that we wish to stop - driving while drunk

 

[superchuck500]

WTH?

 

[samiam5211]

Sanders - 28
Pete - 25
Klob - 15
Warren - 11
Biden - 8
Yang -8

That’s my guess for tonight.


Joe will drop out Friday.

 

[BobE]

Sanders - 28
Pete - 25
Klob - 15
Warren - 11
Biden - 8
Yang -8

That’s my guess for tonight.


Joe will drop out Friday.

Still early but pretty spot on so far

 

[BobE]

Yang Gang preparing to suspend campaign