The Political Thread - Hobbes Edition

[Guard Dog]

It would be interesting to see a credible challenge to Trump from within the GOP. I couldn't vote in their primaries (I am not a Republican) but it would be interesting to see. 

[Raithe]

Well this is likely to add to a few tensions  Black security guard caught a shooting suspect, the police arrive, and shoot the security guard.

Edited November 13, 2018 by Raithe

[Guard Dog]

Well this is likely to add to a few tensions  Black security guard caught a shooting suspect, the police arrive, and shoot the security guard.

I have only two things to say to those cops: You have the right to remain silent. You have the right to an attorney. 

[Pidesco]

Well this is likely to add to a few tensions  Black security guard caught a shooting suspect, the police arrive, and shoot the security guard.

 

I'm waiting for NRA's white hot outrage.

[Volourn]

Cops are douchebags. It is that simple.  I'm not enccessarily for stricter gun control but I say if the pro gun control peeps agree to banning all cops from having guns, I will agree to stricter gun control. DEAL?

[Malcador]

Security guard was in uniform apparently - https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/11/13/npr-police-fatally-shoot-black-security-guard-who-detained-suspected-shooter

 

The cops will use some 'fog of war' type defense, will walk away easily.

[Gfted1]

CNN sues President Trump and top White House aides for barring Jim Acosta.

 

I cant stands how "the press" regards itself as some sacred cow so its feels good, man, to watch them soil themselves every time Trump smacks one of them down.

[Raithe]

And Trump is tweeting he wants to take funding away from California due to "mismanagement" of the wildfires...

 

ABC News - Trump threatens to pull federal funding for California wildfires due to 'gross mismanagement'

[smjjames]

Cops are douchebags. It is that simple.  I'm not enccessarily for stricter gun control but I say if the pro gun control peeps agree to banning all cops from having guns, I will agree to stricter gun control. DEAL?

 

You do realize that would mean a near total ban on guns, right? Not neccesarily near total though, just strict laws like the UK has for example and possibly some gun confiscation. The reason why UK police mostly don't carry guns is because they don't need to use them because there aren't all that many guns in the UK.

 

You can't have the police have no guns while regular people have guns, it's a chicken and egg problem.

[Malcador]

More funny than political - https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/trump-tweets-bizarre-warning-against-a-european-army-1.6652471

[Gfted1]

It is kinda weird that CA has been on fire for like a decade. I cant recall the same happening in any other state?

[Volourn]

"You do realize that would mean a near total ban on guns, right? Not neccesarily near total though, just strict laws like the UK has for example and possibly some gun confiscation. The reason why UK police mostly don't carry guns is because they don't need to use them because there aren't all that many guns in the UK.

 

You can't have the police have no guns while regular people have guns, it's a chicken and egg problem."

 

Nope.  Cops get no guns.  Citizens will have to pass a psyche evaluation every x years, lack of violent criminal record, machine guns or anything that can fire a billion bullets in 1 second are out, no guns allowed in gov't buildings including public schools (private schools can deal with it as they wish), and maybe few other restrictive laws that I'll let the pro gun banning lobby get.

 

In exchange, no guns for cops. PERIOD.

 

 

p.s. It is funny too since the people who are pro gun banning are usually anti cop yet when you tell them that cops should be banned from having guns they somehow then defend the cops' 'right' to have guns as seen here.

 

MAKES NO LOGICAL SENSE.

Edited November 13, 2018 by Volourn

[Guard Dog]

"You do realize that would mean a near total ban on guns, right? Not neccesarily near total though, just strict laws like the UK has for example and possibly some gun confiscation. The reason why UK police mostly don't carry guns is because they don't need to use them because there aren't all that many guns in the UK.

 

You can't have the police have no guns while regular people have guns, it's a chicken and egg problem."

 

Nope.  Cops get no guns.  Citizens will have to pass a psyche evaluation every x years, lack of violent criminal record, machine guns or anything that can fire a billion bullets in 1 second are out, no guns allowed in gov't buildings including public schools (private schools can deal with it as they wish), and maybe few other restrictive laws that I'll let the pro gun banning lobby get.

 

In exchange, no guns for cops. PERIOD.

 

 

p.s. It is funny too since the people who are pro gun banning are usually anti cop yet when you tell them that cops should be banned from having guns they somehow then defend the cops' 'right' to have guns as seen here.

 

MAKES NO LOGICAL SENSE.

I would not disarm police. But I absolutely would strip their qualified immunity. That would make them think twice before pulling a trigger I'd imagine. 

 

As far as gun control, there will be some intrusions at some point. It's likely unavoidable. But confiscation = civil war. Not joking. 

[Malcador]

Bullet control is the solution.  Or does that breach the 2nd amendment ?

[Raithe]

It's really funny in America

"hey, lets think about some form of gun control due to mass shootings and such"

"NO! That's a slippery slope that leads to tyranny and stripping us of our rights!"

vs.

"hey, let's make it so some people can't vote"  or "hey, let's ignore the rules and strip press of white house credentials if they offend the President"

"Eh, it's no biggie. We're America, nothing can go wrong with this. Just Fake News."

[Gfted1]

Good riddance. "The press" isnt beholden to be truthful or even factually accurate. Its no different than a glorified internet message board. Im not sure why people think "the press" is there for "the people".

[Raithe]

Good riddance. "The press" isnt beholden to be truthful or even factually accurate. Its no different than a glorified internet message board. Im not sure why people think "the press" is there for "the people".

 

It can depend on the press.

But that just means you clean up the press - setting a precedent to deny access on the grounds used is a dangerous step.

[Volourn]

Consideirng much of the media - and this includes  right wing ones like Fox - spend a lot of their time mocking and belittling people including their own viewers that makes it even more laughable. The media hasn't been beholden to the people or the truth for a very long time.

 

It used to be  reporter would sniff a story and investgate to find facts and report said facts.

 

Now, they create a story  and only report things that backs up their opinion while eschewing or ignoring facts that don't back them up.

 

 

Notice how nobody outside of Fox (TO MY KNOWLEDGE) has talked about Carlson Tucker's family and house being targeted and threatened by never do wells and the ones who do tend to claim he deserved it. And, the one well known 'lefty' who slammed the miscreants was quickly labeled racist, Nazi, and evil. LOLZ

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I've never ignored anyone. But in all this time there has been only one poster I genuinely disliked. I didn't just dislike that SOB, I hated him. That guy had a real attitude problem.

Monty wasn't that bad.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Well this is likely to add to a few tensions  Black security guard caught a shooting suspect, the police arrive, and shoot the security guard.

It's a sad that a rent-a-cop is not only more effective at apprehending shooters than real cops but gets shot after stopping a shooting. So much for being a good guy with a gun.

[Gfted1]

It can depend on the press.

But that just means you clean up the press - setting a precedent to deny access on the grounds used is a dangerous step.

Iyo, how would you go about cleaning up a racket that is accountable to nobody and constitutionally protected to say anything they want? Call them out on it? Get them to print a retraction, weeks later, on the back page, in small font?

[HoonDing]

cut off their limbs and boil them in acid

[Gfted1]

I was just reading the wiki for freedom of the press and I cant understand how the press scammed their way into the constitution. England had "free press" going back to 1695 so why did the writers of the constitution feel that they had to include it?

[ShadySands]

I'll hazard a guess they included it so it couldn't easily be revoked or suppressed depending on who is in charge and which way the wind was currently blowing

[Zoraptor]

It is kinda weird that CA has been on fire for like a decade. I cant recall the same happening in any other state?

 

Happens all the time in Australia, which has a similar climate to Ca. Personally I'd stake money that it happens elsewhere in the US as well, and probably about as frequently on a like to like basis, but there are a lot less people living in those places.

 

Trump may have a bit of a point about fire management- fires in Australia and California are 100% natural and 100% inevitable even if some are started deliberately; the problem is people having houses in the fire prone areas and, historically at least, governments trying to stop all fires. The biggest fire preventer in a an  area is to have had a recent fire as that clears underbrush and the like, but controlled burns tend to be unpopular due to smoke and you get in trouble if the wind changes direction and strength and the fire jumps a break.