[Nevyn]

worry, on 21 February 2018 - 09:39 PM, said:

Killing guns isn't the point. Not sure where that came from. Changing our gun culture is the point, and that's already happening.

I've posted this before, where it related to partisanship, but what it shows more generally is that it really does depend on how you present "gun control" when polling:


I don't discount the CNN article, but it does include adults of all parties under 35, which gets into the older millennial cohort too (and doesn't include Gen Z). Which is fine because I'm talking generally about a generation (or 1.5 generations I guess), but I think you'll find when you get to the nuances things are more interesting even w/ millennials. For instance, this article doesn't disagree with those findings, but delves a little further into distinctions: https://www.politico...-on-guns-215703

And in terms of the 'moderates' you're talking about, as far as I'm concerned they're already there. 50% of people across the board support generic "gun control" -- way more, when you break it down to individual proposals (and as you know, that doesn't mean 50% vs. 50%, it's 50% vs. like something in the 30s, and then a know-nothing chunk that hovers around 10%). And that's everyone, with a multi-million dollar disinformation campaign and literally no fact-based information campaign to counter it. Imagine how things would be different if a gun control campaign arose w/ even a quarter of the ubiquity of the anti-smoking movement. The moderates exist, it's the organizing and leadership that's been absent.

I don't see a big danger in people getting excited about nascent movements. I'd argue there's much more danger in listening to so-called 'voices of moderation' who roll their eyes at nascent movements that don't produce immediate results, not because they care about the advancement of the issue but because they profit from the status quo and/or trolling. Kowtowing to dissent for its own sake, even from liars and morons, is how you end up with a slate of the world's foremost dumbasses like David Brooks talking gun control, Bret Stephens talking climate science, Bari Weiss talking #MeToo, and countless "let's hear them out" gentle profiles of neo-Nazis and Trump voters at the "paper of record".

Again, I see no evidence of a change in gun culture.

Most of the polling you are citing has not really changed over time. The problem with the polls listed is they don't ask people how much they care.


The people who love guns and are paranoid about a slippery slope, and will blanket oppose any attempt at regulation care about it passionately. They go to rallies, they call their congressmen, they vote, and they will absolutely decide their vote based on that issue alone. That means any Republican, house or senate, knows that if they help at all on gun control, those people are all going to back a gun toting primary challenger (who will also get a big fat NRA cheque).

In the meantime, there are many republicans you could talk into more background checks, or wait periods, or regulating trade shows and private sales. But while they are happy to say they support it, it doesn't change their vote. They won't go democrat because the republican didn't back a gun control measure, because they still prefer the republican position on taxes, or abortion, or gay marriage, or health care. And they won't back an anti-gun primary challenge, because there won't be one, and again, they care about other issues more.

In the meantime, safe "blue" districts run up the score on being in favour of gun control, but don't bring enough votes in congress to get anything done. And a few swing state democrats actually risk their seats if they back this too much, because again, they can only lose voters. There are not many on the fence moderate voters who'll back Joe Manchin if he backs gun control, but with otherwise vote republican (or primary him).

Further, as I said earlier, the democratic tactics are half assed. Can you tell me specifically which republicans killed background checks or private sales regulation after Sandy Hook? It never comes to a vote. It dies in committee or never gets scheduled, because all the uproar is only while the shooting is in the news cycle. Democrats don't need voters mad now. They need to try to do something, get the republicans to kill it, and then sign a giant spotlight on the specific people who blocked it.

As for "killing guns", that is part of the problem with the debates when there is a mass shooting. The rhetoric calls out people taking NRA money. You get arguments about how stupid the 2nd amendment is. You get a lot of talk about the evils of guns in general. And all of that feeds into an "all or nothing" mentality. It lets right wing media treat the debate as if the other side wants to take away all guns. It gets caught in side arguments over the amendment, or over whether a specific thing complained about could have prevented that particular shooting.


To get any progress on this, you need to first organize people, then propose a specific measure relating to the incident, with a specific narrative of how it could have prevented the tragedy, and then you need to highlight the popular support for that specific measure, and again, you then need to tell everyone who to blame if a committee chairman won't let it out, or if Ryan/McConnell won't allow a vote on it (or the nay votes if you ever get a vote).

And if you really really are determined to get something done, you need anti-gun people in gerrymandered districts registering republican for the specific purpose of backing a primary challenge to anyone that stood in the way.



As for "nascent movements", there is nothing wrong with getting excited. You just have to be clear eyed about what they mean. Loud != unanimous. I am not even saying any of the movements are wrong. I am saying that making bold pronouncements about how everything is changed from this day forward just leads to disappointment when the change doesn't happen simply. For a movement to work, it needs a realistic view of its level of support, and of what it will take to get things done.

[Nevyn]

This dynamic works for many things by the way.

Progress on legalizing marijuana is so agonizingly slow because no one is changing their vote to back the pro weed guy .... but others will vote against it.

Popular opinion is not enough unless you live in a direct democracy. You need to mobilize that opinion into active and ongoing support.

[QuickTidal]

White boy Dylan Roof shooting up a church full of POC in the south, cascaded into the eventual dismantling of Confederate monuments, and flags.

Protests like the current #NeverAgain movement led to the 26th Amendment.

stats say that 4 Million of these teens surviving school shootings and protesting will be voting age before the midterms. FOUR MILLION.

The fact that the GOP and NRA can't scent the change on the wind is astonishingly short-sighted. They are literally flat out refusing to help the very people who can swing the votes when the generation that is currently keeping them in power (Boomers) are dying out of old age. By 2020 entire student bodies across the country will be voting age and replacing the old guard...It's crazy that these future voters are being SO ignored.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 22 February 2018 - 07:34 PM

[Nevyn]

QuickTidal, on 22 February 2018 - 07:31 PM, said:

stats say that 4 Million of these teens surviving school shootings and protesting will be voting age before the midterms. FOUR MILLION.

Id really love a link so I can tell what the heck you are talking about because that is a weird sentence

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 22 February 2018 - 07:36 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 22 February 2018 - 07:31 PM, said:

stats say that 4 Million of these teens surviving school shootings and protesting will be voting age before the midterms. FOUR MILLION.

Id really love a link so I can tell what the heck you are talking about because that is a weird sentence

Here it is. Holly gleaned it from public Census information.

I just meant teens to be clear...but the school shooting survivors are driving the conversation and protest right now, so I mentioned them....and across the country too. But yes, weird sentence, apologies.

And between 2018 and 2020 it's closer to 8 million.

[Nevyn]

Ok, that makes more sense.

So 4 million new potential voters, but not all of them victims, not all of them protesting, many of them won't vote at all, others won't change vote based on this issue along, and even for the remainder you have to demographically split them into the districts and senate races they can affect.

Mentioning the votes or the protests is not a predictor of change. At best, it is a reminder and plea for change. It is an attempt to engage those 4 million to actually vote and to vote on this issue.

And I won't even get into how the same voter suppression ID laws that disenfranchise minorities could impact a generation who are generally less likely to pursue a driver's license.

[QuickTidal]

Nevyn, on 22 February 2018 - 08:04 PM, said:

Ok, that makes more sense.

So 4 million new potential voters, but not all of them victims, not all of them protesting, many of them won't vote at all, others won't change vote based on this issue along, and even for the remainder you have to demographically split them into the districts and senate races they can affect.

Mentioning the votes or the protests is not a predictor of change. At best, it is a reminder and plea for change. It is an attempt to engage those 4 million to actually vote and to vote on this issue.

And I won't even get into how the same voter suppression ID laws that disenfranchise minorities could impact a generation who are generally less likely to pursue a driver's license.

I think you're being overly nihilistic.

You're basically saying "Nothing will change. Everyone is screwed."

Which is....not great.

[Nicodimas]

worry, on 22 February 2018 - 04:04 AM, said:

I may have an idea that doesn't involve forcing neglected, unemployed veterans to become human meat shields to protect our kids from mass slaughter, but it would mean a minuscule portion of the American populace would have to endure a few minor limits on one of their hobbies, so it's like...hmmmm, what to do, what to do.

@ worry:This is not a “hobby”. Please refrain from that logic.

This is part of the reason you remain free. It’s fine you might not get that.

Let’s be honest the 2nd Amendment was always about putting weapons of war in peoples hands to give the people a certain leverage over the core government. Another part is giving people the right to defend themselves.

(Another part would be to maintain militias, but this has been largely destroyed due the power of the core central goverment)

I just don’t think we are their yet.. Someday..I have always said when we are ready as a society I could see the 2nd being modified. That’s like step 10, we as collective society have work to do before then

I generally don’t think we are ready for this until we don’t see a black market pop up afterwards.

@ Cause: Gun Free zones account for **90%+** of where all mass shootings occur. Of course they are magnet.. this is called a soft target where you encounter little to no resistance. You know nobody can challenge you when they pick this target. The idea has always been the idea, the thought someone may be carrying.. you don’t know.

I don’t see how it would be tough to geographical locate schools nearer to police stations. Indiana has done this with one that has camera feeds/panic buttons/smoke systems.

@ All: A lil bit more education and rational guns laws would probably occur actually. There’s tons of ways to make that occur! The problem is you have to know guns inside and out to get the debate fully.. and most fail in that regard.
I am totally in a few in a favor of ones that have mentioned here, just broached poorly in presentation.

I also fail too see the relation of this generation being “anti-gun”. Plenty of people will feel safer defending themselves, versus making people shelter-in.

Shelter~in is madness unless your throwing money behind it.
https://www.louderwi...cealed-schools/

Ultimately since this thread is about exploring gun culture and the way Americans view it. I would read this as many gun-nuts view this as cannon:

https://www.amazon.c...gn+and+demostic

This post has been edited by Nicodimas: 22 February 2018 - 08:38 PM

[worry]

Nevyn, I think you aren't arguing with me, but with a hypothetical opponent who said something like "the 2018 midterms will change all gun policy for the better." I don't disagree with you that our representatives are going to lag way behind, or that immediate changes -- if we get any -- will be small and incremental.

What I'm saying is that Gen Z, by and large, are an exponential leap ahead of everyone else on a whole host of issues, because they've grown up without the baggage. They're still part of society, everyone else still exists and votes and all that, but I mean if you know that without me having to say it, I'm sure everyone else does too. But do you think they care at all, even sentimentally, if the NRA goes on existing?

Quote

As for "killing guns", that is part of the problem with the debates when there is a mass shooting. The rhetoric calls out people taking NRA money. You get arguments about how stupid the 2nd amendment is. You get a lot of talk about the evils of guns in general. And all of that feeds into an "all or nothing" mentality. It lets right wing media treat the debate as if the other side wants to take away all guns. It gets caught in side arguments over the amendment, or over whether a specific thing complained about could have prevented that particular shooting.

This "killing guns" thing doesn't exist in the U.S. It's made up. If you're seeing it, it's cuz you're listening to gun-nut propaganda or "present both extremes" style cable news. And I'm not criticizing you, we all hear it, we're awash in the propaganda of a gun industry trying to convince us that is the battle. But it literally doesn't exist as a movement.

Now that's different than saying the NRA is evil, blood-drenched quasi-terrorist organization with an unholy grip on Republicans and some Dems: that's a fact, and it's refreshing to see people not pretending otherwise (it would be nice to see journalists with half the spine the kids showed at that CNN forum last night). And it's different from saying the 2nd Amendment sucks: it does, stylistically and linguistically, which I've explained in previous posts. But Gen Z, even the survivors of the Parkland massacre, aren't calling for an extinction of all private gun ownership, or the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, nothing even close to that.

Maybe we're both talking about two senses of the word "moderate". There's political moderates, like among politicians, who maybe can be convinced to vote for some incremental changes. But when you're talking about a "voice of moderation" between two extremes, you have to understand that one of the extremes in that scenario is wholly invented by the other extreme. The two actual extremes here are die-hard gun advocates who want to hold everyone hostage over any change at all and everyone else. Finding the halfway point between that shifts the Overton window even further towards stupid. The Parkland kids are doing their damndest to push the Overton window back somewhere sensible. That's where I see Gen Z headed on a lot of issues. Not by 2018, but by like 2030? 2040? Big time.

[Obdigore]

Nicodimas, on 22 February 2018 - 08:38 PM, said:

worry, on 22 February 2018 - 04:04 AM, said:

I may have an idea that doesn't involve forcing neglected, unemployed veterans to become human meat shields to protect our kids from mass slaughter, but it would mean a minuscule portion of the American populace would have to endure a few minor limits on one of their hobbies, so it's like...hmmmm, what to do, what to do.

@ worry:This is not a “hobby”. Please refrain from that logic.

This is part of the reason you remain free. It’s fine you might not get that.

Let’s be honest the 2nd Amendment was always about putting weapons of war in peoples hands to give the people a certain leverage over the core government. Another part is giving people the right to defend themselves.

(Another part would be to maintain militias, but this has been largely destroyed due the power of the core central goverment)

I just don’t think we are their yet.. Someday..I have always said when we are ready as a society I could see the 2nd being modified. That’s like step 10, we as collective society have work to do before then

I generally don’t think we are ready for this until we don’t see a black market pop up afterwards.

@ Cause: Gun Free zones account for **90%+** of where all mass shootings occur. Of course they are magnet.. this is called a soft target where you encounter little to no resistance. You know nobody can challenge you when they pick this target. The idea has always been the idea, the thought someone may be carrying.. you don’t know.

I don’t see how it would be tough to geographical locate schools nearer to police stations. Indiana has done this with one that has camera feeds/panic buttons/smoke systems.

@ All: A lil bit more education and rational guns laws would probably occur actually. There’s tons of ways to make that occur! The problem is you have to know guns inside and out to get the debate fully.. and most fail in that regard.
I am totally in a few in a favor of ones that have mentioned here, just broached poorly in presentation.

I also fail too see the relation of this generation being “anti-gun”. Plenty of people will feel safer defending themselves, versus making people shelter-in.

Shelter~in is madness unless your throwing money behind it.
https://www.louderwi...cealed-schools/

Ultimately since this thread is about exploring gun culture and the way Americans view it. I would read this as many gun-nuts view this as cannon:

https://www.amazon.c...gn+and+demostic

Good news, everything you posted is incorrect. Stop lying.

The 2nd amendment was originally included for 2 reasons. The first, was to put down slave revolts, and the second is to defend against other nations, as the founding fathers didn't make any provision for, in fact many were against, a standing military.

There was absolutely nothing included in any writings about keeping the United States government in line with armed force.

Let's be brutally honest here Nico, it is, in fact, a hobby. One you like. One that you justify, that actually leads to the deaths of thousands of U.S. Citizens each year. One that also leads to a group of very motivated people to vote as single issue voters, against their own interest in nearly every other policy for the person they are voted for, because of the Delusion you are peddling that somehow, your bunker full of small arms could possibly prevent the US military from destroying you, and every single person like you, inside the borders of the US, if they so chose. You literally do not matter enough for them to do so, nor will you ever. That isn't a slight, none of us do. The world does not revolve around you, despite what you might WANT to believe.

The simple facts are that you put your delusion, your need to feel safe, above the lives of 30,000 American Citizens each year. That 'need' to feel safe, that you aren't safe if you don't have a weapon, is also instilled in you by the very same people manufacturing and selling you those weapons, the NRA. You think GUNS = FREEDOMZ, when in reality, it is just another chain upon your psyche, your reliance upon firearms, and the 'knowledge' that you aren't safe if you don't have access to them.

You are the cause of, and you could be the solution to, the massive american gun violence. Why are you so afraid of admitting that? I honestly think you need to see a psychiatrist, and maybe they can help you learn how to distinguish between things you WANT to be true, and things that are true.

This post has been edited by Obdigore: 22 February 2018 - 08:58 PM

[Vengeance]

I think that like cars people who buy guns should be forced to get liability insurance. The insurance would increase the deadler a gun is considered. A 22 long rifle would have a mounthly fee of 5 - 10. A hunting rifle about the same. A hand gun is used to kill people more so it should have a much higher fee. Any semi-automatic weapon should have monthly fees in the hundreds of dollars. It is the law that if you drive a car you have to have insurance. A car can be considered a deadly weapon. You have to take a multiple tests in order to be able to drive a car. In order to own a car you have to have insurance. Owning a gun should be no different. You should have to take test. Written and shooting before purchasing a gun. Then you should have to get insurance. There would be no more infringement then people having to show multiple forms of ID in order to vote. Voting is a right just like the second amendment.

Of course if you can't afford the insurance premium of a semi-automatic weapon then we are going to fine you. Just like if you don't have car insurance. The rest of society shouldn't have to pay for handfuls of people to be able to have access to semi-automatic weapons. Just like a car or home insurance you have to pay at least 6 months in advance. When you purchase a weapon.

[Nicodimas]

@ Worry: That’s the way to view it for Gen Z! I totally agree with you.

Now do you worry(lol) that they haven’t been given their war yet? This week it went to a 10 about the future war with China and how we must be prepared. It’s kind of shocking, but I wouldn’t be surprised to hear this continue over the next couple of years and it to start popping up in the Media.

That’s what worries me the next conflict that this next gen gets tossed at by the goverment and elite.

Watch this closely:
https://www.google.c...-war-with-china


About Trump: I see the l left wholeheartedly cringe as a unit with his double-downing of teachers having guns. He offered them bonuses!

Like theirs ways to approach an idea and not. Damn if he has the worst approaches..bribery was probably not the best idea.

[amphibian]

The problem with putting vets into schools to be disciplinarians or to mold the kids into soldiers is that school is not the military. That's the way it is for good reasons.

It is bizarre to expect vets to automatically and adequately handle children in schools just like it is bizarre to expect teachers to automatically and adequately be soldiers.

[Macros]

You can go out and buy an AR15.
But you aren't old enough to drink because it's bad for teenagers.

You don't see a problem with this Nico?

More Americans have been killed by Americans since... Probably Korea, than by any other nationality. The enemy isn't at the gates, the enemy is inside, making fucking coffee. You owning guns doesn't keep your government in line. I think the senate has demonstrated enough times how it gives zero fucks for what the voters want as they shit all over average Americans and pander to the rich lobbiests, like the NRA.


The enemy is the NRA and people who resist gun regulation.

[Nevyn]

worry, on 22 February 2018 - 08:43 PM, said:

What I'm saying is that Gen Z, by and large, are an exponential leap ahead of everyone else on a whole host of issues, because they've grown up without the baggage. They're still part of society, everyone else still exists and votes and all that, but I mean if you know that without me having to say it, I'm sure everyone else does too. But do you think they care at all, even sentimentally, if the NRA goes on existing?

I got that you said that earlier.

And on some issues, you are right.

But I have yet to see evidence guns are one of those issues.

With each generation, american kids grow up with more diverse friends and classmates. That does wonders over time for fighting racism, and sexism, helps with gay and transgender rights and other issues. But the gun culture starts in the home.

And also, this particular generation are growing up with far more polarized news. 30+% of them are growing up in 'fox news' households, which means they are also growing up with a build in distrust of both science, and "mainstream media".

And I worry that when people talk about how the next generation will change so much, part of why they think that is what has changed is they are no longer even talking to those who disagree.

[Nicodimas]

@ Obigore: I actually don’t currently own any guns, bit of a social experiment this last year. I still have means to buy one tomorrow.. they aren’t going anywhere. At this point there are so many it wouldn’t be too tough to find one really if it did go to shit. The hardest thing is I can see my shooting skills go down, but have been using a buddies at the range. This last year I stopped carrying outright. I did this kind of at this forums behest kinda..

I really don’t buy what your selling though. Wish I could properly explain it to you, but probably not going to change your mind.

American gun violence has been failing for thirty years. We are a safer society.

Please don’t OMG your approach as your constructiveposts you have armed me with tons of facts that I have listened too. There is however the freedom aspect you should ponder .. why this is so important?? I firmly believe that.

[Macros]

Cross posting.

War with China? Not likely.

Arming teachers?

Given that two of our teachers had to take 6 months sabatical after having break downs in class, I'll say no. Children are little shits, some are just little wankers that want to rub teachers the wrong way. And you want to arm the teachers?? Fuck that.

[Nicodimas]

@ Macros:

Trump stated raising it to be 21. I’m for that as I am for raising the age of military enlistment too. 18 is clearly a child.

@ Vengy: I like that idea for reasons and not. How would the poor get by? My buddies and his wife barely scrape by in the current system. The rich having more access to something so personal as self-defence would bother a crowd.

I don’t think their would be money in it for insurance companies and that’s why they haven’t tried this. A publicly traded company wouldn’t go near it...

Would the NRA offer this? Probably. How comfortable do you feel making them richer ?

[Obdigore]

Nicodimas, on 22 February 2018 - 09:13 PM, said:

@ Obigore: I actually don’t currently own any guns, bit of a social experiment this last year. I still have means to buy one tomorrow.. they aren’t going anywhere. At this point there are so many it wouldn’t be too tough to find one really if it did go to shit. The hardest thing is I can see my shooting skills go down, but have been using a buddies at the range. This last year I stopped carrying outright. I did this kind of at this forums behest kinda..

I really don’t buy what your selling though. Wish I could properly explain it to you, but probably not going to change your mind.

American gun violence has been failing for thirty years. We are a safer society.

Please don’t OMG your approach as your constructiveposts you have armed me with tons of facts that I have listened too. There is however the freedom aspect you should ponder .. why this is so important?? I firmly believe that.

I really don't care that you personally don't own any guns, unless you have also changed your stance on them, and support taking them away from the populace at large.

I'm not selling anything, that's the thing. I'm not Alex Jones, trying to sell you Super Omega Bone Broth, not GMO but totally GMO.

I'm trying to give you facts. I'm trying to help you understand what reality is, as opposed to what you want it to me. 'The Freedom Aspect' sounds like a ride at some NASCAR track where you fuck a bald eagle then drive a stock car into a giant tub of milk.

Guns bring American Citizens literally no freedom. Guns do not provide freedom to the poor, the disheartened, the huddled masses. Guns do not provide freedom to 330 million american citizens. Guns are not 'freedom sticks', or some sort of financial security generators, or even some sort of back-up plan in case the US Military decides to kill us all. Guns literally do one thing, they kill living creatures. That is their purpose.

There are times and places for guns. Being in the hands of citizens for no reason other than the founding fathers viewpoints were tainted from their struggle against Britain is idiocy to the level of the movie of the same name. GUNS, THE LIFE MUTILATOR.

Fuck off with your 'oh im one of the good pro-gun people.' I notice you backed right off your 'George Washington Loved Remingtons!' spiel from your earlier post. Do you only post lies until people call you out on them, or do you still believe that, because it's easier than accepting that you have been essentially programmed by the NRA?

[Macros]

I have a simple idea.

Raise the purchase age to 21.

In 2021
Raise the age to 25