Political Point and Counterpoint

[Guard Dog]

 

No matter who is running the winner of California is pre-ordained.

 

And on that note... Guard Dog, how do you feel about (the mostly Democrat-led) effort to eliminate the electoral college in favor of using the popular vote to elect the president instead?

 

Depends on how they do it. If the try to amend the Constitution it will never happen. You have to get 2/3 of the states who will by utterly marginalized to agree to become backwater provinces of the great empire of Californianewyorkistan. 

 

Now if they want to do what Colorado, Oregon and a few other states are doing an award the states electors to the winner of the popular vote that is their prerogative. How each state determines it's electors is up to each state. 

 

But I can pretty much tell you the moment that (popular vote) benefits a Republican over a Democrat there will be great wailing and gnashing of teeth and probably put an end to it. But thankfully that can be reversed if the citizens of that state feel it should be 

[Bartimaeus]

It's theoretically supposed to benefit Democrats, but I am curious to see how that actually works in practice. There's a lot of disenfranchised people on both sides that are either taken for granted or simply ignored in the presidential race because of the electoral college. It makes me wonder how a popular vote election will affect the margins in places like California when people - on both sides - realize that their vote will actually affect the vote totals, which then have an effect on who's elected.

 

Interesting thing about this National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is that it's not *that* easy to overturn once enacted, so when - if - it ever comes to be, it could seriously change the reality of our elections for a time to come. To overturn in any given state effectively requires a state trifecta, so if the Democrats find that it actually ends up harming them instead of helping, they could find it very difficult to overturn it in all but the bluest of states, and then a few red trifecta states could jump in and reinforce it, effectively taking their place and reinstating it. It's hard to see us going back to the electoral college once it passes that threshold. Will be very interesting to see how that affects national politics if it comes to be.

 

I'm more interested in ranked choice voting to actually introduce the possibility of third parties, but that's almost certainly even farther off than this compact (and I assume it all has to be state-enacted - think states are guaranteed the right to hold their own elections how they want, right?).

Edited March 22, 2019 by Bartimaeus

[ShadySands]

Have any red or even purple states signed on? If not then I don't see the point really as those blue state votes are going Dem anyways

[Zoraptor]

 

again, we got loads o' personal experience shooting rodents, including rabbits and jackrabbits.  pest density has Zero impact on what firearm is necessary for downing a varmint.  'course given zor's blatant perversions o' the english language, perhaps you refer to actual molecular density o' new zealand rabbits. is new zealand rabbits sooperfied and repel ordinary weapons ammo?

 

zor believes 'cause somebody claims an assailant coulda' been tackled in the heat o' a gun fight 'cause o' the minimal time it takes to reload. naive. the video you cannot see shows a man firing 16 shots from a smith and wesson revolver. 4 seconds, which is including a reload.  you don't need reload individual bullets into a revolver. a lever action rifle is gonna hold ~15+ rounds, if you really want a rifle.  and finding the hero who is gonna rush the assailant while reloading is fantastic, but only works if the assailant don't simple pick up the loaded revolver on the table or ledge in front o' him to shoot the would-be hero as he rushes... then go back to his casual and ghoulish reload. but again, 16 shots in 4 seconds with reload. so again, a couple pump action shotguns or lever action rifles and a couple revolvers is gonna be no less lethal than a guy with an ar-15 and clips.  the shotgun and revolvers is also less likely to jam, though if an ar-15 is proper maintained, jam rate should be low. 

 

this law is nothing more than a security blanket for desperate folks.  give the masses something to feel better 'bout. now the people o' new zealand may tell themselves they did something 'bout a real problem and they can go back to their lives feeling safe and full o' justice. shady is correct, goal should be to keep the weapons outta loon hands.  these kinda bans don't bother us.  am personal in favor o' gun control measures even if 2nd amendment nullifies most such attempts here in the US.  nevertheless, the focus o' gun control measures 'pon particular weapons and accessories is asinine. is bass ackwards.  politicians appeal to the evocative nature o' military weapons to pass measures which complete miss the target.

 

You really are totally ignorant, aren't you? You literally don't have a clue what you're talking about.

 

Most important first: I don't claim the gunman could have been tackled, he literally was- twice. Second time finished the spree as he lost his gun and drove off. The first one can be seen- allegedly- on the video the gunman filmed himself on his GoPro and- allegedly since I cannot legally view it and wouldn't anyway- involved him being charged while reloading and him getting the mag in quickly enough to stop the guy. Fewer bullets in the mag or a slower reload and he would have been stopped there and then. Note again: that video, the one shot by the actual Christchurch gunman as he was shooting, is the one I cannot legally watch. I can watch irrelevant videos about revolvers as much as I want to.

 

Your experience shooting rodents and rabbits 6500 miles away in the Dakotas is irrelevant, they aren't New Zealand and the situation is different; experts here disagree with you, even people who would really rather like to ban s/a guns if it were practical- like our PM and our police- disagree with you and they disagree with you because you're wrong. The great irony is that you've been complaining about others being narcissists and pontificating about the situation in the US while you're trying to tell us how things really stand here, from 5000 miles away because of... your personal experience and weapons that haven't been legal here since before most of the population was born. Can't really get much more ignorant and narcissist than that if you were trying to be ironic.

 

Your revolver example is irrelevant. They're illegal here, the gunman didn't use one, might as well show artillery reloading it would be as relevant. Now, if you could prove that an AR15 with detachable mags has a similar reload speed and overall rof to something which isn't banned then you might have a point. Please, feel free to provide that evidence, but I won't be holding my breath waiting. Lever action rifles with 15+ rounds are also illegal here, so irrelevant.

 

Amazingly, they managed to largely avoid the pointless platitudes and actions for action's sake, except for constantly referring to 'assault rifles' which were already banned anyway; and I'm not a fan of the process used or shortening public feedback

 

am gonna again disagree stop swap out o' clips hardly does anything for safety

 

 

heh, 'clips'. Thanks, self proclaimed gun expert.

[Gromnir]

the amusing part being, the popular vote should benefit republicans in close elections and the real reason should be something for trump to tweet non-stop 'bout, but he doesn't know 'bout it... so please don't tell him.

 

the sooper tiny states which get functional free votes is actual tending to balance out 'tween republican and democrat close. slight advantage for democrats traditional, but close. nope, is a quirk of the Constitution that the electoral college is based Congressional representatives of each state.  two senators and at least 1 rep per state, but do folks know what that actual means?

 

"The Constitution provides that each state will have a minimum of one member in the U.S. House of Representatives, and then the apportionment calculation divides the remaining 385 seats among the 50 states. Congress decides the method used to calculate the apportionment.

 

"The method for calculating the apportionment has changed over time. The methods used through most of the 20th century have been based upon the use of a mathematically determined priority listing of states. Adopted by Congress in 1941 and used each census thereafter, the method of equal proportions also results in a listing of the states according to a priority value--calculated by dividing the population of each state by the geometric mean of its current and next seats--that assigns seats 51 through 435. The method of equal proportions is calculated according to provisions of Title 2, U.S. Code."

 

is Not number o' citizens who determine number of reps.  honest.  reps is based on census numbers regardless o' citizenship and is balanced according.  so ca, ny, wa, tx, and fl is skewing the electoral college based on a high amount of non-citizen residents, and a few states must necessarily lose to balance out the aforementioned gains.  pa, oh, mi, nc, and in is the states current losing.

 

in a popular vote, only citizens would vote, yes?  

 

if trump knew what were actual happening, he would be screaming 'bout undocumented immigrants even more than he is.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

you are right 'bout the clip... have been doing that for years.  picked it up from our grandfather.  dad, who were military, would pick up a paper clip and howl at us, "this is a clip!"  *chuckle* good times.

 

again, you seem to have have no idea how fast a revolver can be reloaded. insert a new magazine is no faster than the ammo reload from the revolver.  4 seconds. 16 shots. you see video which you say we can't see showing somebody getting shot while trying to tackle the shooter. pick up the loaded revolver and shoot the charging assailant is gonna be as quick as adding more ammo to an ar-15. and reload the revolver is comic fast with only small practice.

 

and 5 or 5000 miles/km don't change how bullet resistant is bunnies.  and our experience with killing bunnies were almost total with a winchester model 69 bolt action rifle.  has such been illegal in nz... evar?

 

https://www.guncity.com/357-mag-smith-wesson-686-6-stainless-steel-6-7-shot-316580

 

also looks to be available to "hunters" in nz, which is weird.  thought were a range weapon only? is a bit o' overkill, but is a nice .357.  not 8 rounds as were the revolver in our video, but seven.  no doubt prohibited for self defense, but appears ok for range shooting and other sporting activities as long as is licensed. close enough.  

 

the fact the shooter didn't use a handgun is precise the point.  nz has nice restrictions on handguns, but they ain't illegal in spite o' their lethality.  the ar-15 was targeted by politicians only because it were used in the shooting, and not 'cause o' inherent lethality.  you are kinda missing the point.

 

keep going though.  tell us 'bout nz's iron bunnies.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Gromnir

[Bartimaeus]

Have any red or even purple states signed on? If not then I don't see the point really as those blue state votes are going Dem anyways

 

They need 270 electoral votes for it to go into force, they're at 181 now (89 to go) with 158 others in various stages of pending (some of them with a realistic path, some of them not...for the time being). That's the thing about once it goes through for a state - they only need one election that gives a state trifecta at worst (i.e. with zero Republican support) for it to go through, and once it's through, the Republicans will need a state trifecta to overturn it (well, once again, assuming zero Democratic support).

 

Right now, Delaware (3) and New Mexico (5) are awaiting governor's signature and likely to be approved soon. After that...a few other states seem likely to jump on board sooner or later (like Oregon and Michigan), but yeah, it'll still be a while before it happens, if ever.

 

[Gromnir]

am admitted personal in favor o' a more reactionary approach to the popular vote for Presidency debates.

 

our suggestion is to return the Presidency to original 1787 roots... well, maybe 1804... or 1787 with a dash o' 1804?

 

have President be a relative apolitical office selected by wise men (and women) from across the nation who would be entrusted with the duty o' choosing a wise man (or woman) to lead a small executive branch tasked mainly with foreign policy negotiations and day-to-day mundanities o' government.

 

jefferson is the President who got things off-track.  rather than further embracing the mistakes o' jefferson, lincoln, wilson and fdr, perhaps we should instead try a fresh start.

 

is not a genuine suggestion, but much o' the federal govt. problems today is 'cause while the Court and Congress function, for the most part, as the founding fathers intended, the chief executive is a far different entity than were envisioned when the Constitution were original penned.  the scheme o' checks and balances only made sense when branches were coequal with different areas o' influence.  the executive now has its own judges and magistrates handling executive rule interpretations.  the executive may also functional legislate through department rules creation and executive orders.  the President is even grabbing for Congressional purse strings and may succeed 'cause Congress abdicated authority to the executive in times o' crisis, and the President can pretty much decide what is and ain't a crisis.

 

solution, from our pov, is to increase the distance o' the President from popular influence and to limit his powers to pre jeffersonian levels.  that ain't gonna happen though.  

 

but as to the electoral college specific, ignoring big picture concerns stated 'bove… meh.  is a handful o' elections which were determined by quirks o' the electoral college, and at least in the most recent case, weren't the electoral college as much as willful obtuseness by one candidate which determined the election.  were four key battleground states in 2016 and the democrat candidate largely ignored those states. change the system 'cause one candidate were epic stoopid? am having a hard time embracing our righteous indignation on this issue.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Zoraptor]

https://www.guncity.com/357-mag-smith-wesson-686-6-stainless-steel-6-7-shot-316580

 

That's Endorsed License Required. Specifically it requires B (or C) cat. That's can only be legally fired at pistol clubs by members of said clubs (B class) and can be owned but may not be fired (C class; ie registered collectors). Both license endorsement and buying the gun is allowed on a case by case basis. They 100% aren't available to the general public and aren't available to hunters. The vast majority of pistols owned are in Olympic classes as that is just about the only reason accepted for owning them.

 

There are other exceptions too, Bill Clinton's Secret Service detachment was given B and E cat exemptions when they were here for APEC, for example.

 

The bunny thing is a volume issue, as it is with goats/ pigs/ deer etc. In some places the rabbit cull is 200/day per farm as they have very limited natural predators (and no myxomatosis either), deer, pigs, goats etc have no natural or introduced predators at all. While I'm not familiar much with the Dakotas I'd be confident the situation isn't even slightly similar.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Zoraptor

[Guard Dog]

It's theoretically supposed to benefit Democrats, but I am curious to see how that actually works in practice. There's a lot of disenfranchised people on both sides that are either taken for granted or simply ignored in the presidential race because of the electoral college. It makes me wonder how a popular vote election will affect the margins in places like California when people - on both sides - realize that their vote will actually affect the vote totals, which then have an effect on who's elected.

 

Interesting thing about this National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is that it's not *that* easy to overturn once enacted, so when - if - it ever comes to be, it could seriously change the reality of our elections for a time to come. To overturn in any given state effectively requires a state trifecta, so if the Democrats find that it actually ends up harming them instead of helping, they could find it very difficult to overturn it in all but the bluest of states, and then a few red trifecta states could jump in and reinforce it, effectively taking their place and reinstating it. It's hard to see us going back to the electoral college once it passes that threshold. Will be very interesting to see how that affects national politics if it comes to be.

 

I'm more interested in ranked choice voting to actually introduce the possibility of third parties, but that's almost certainly even farther off than this compact (and I assume it all has to be state-enacted - think states are guaranteed the right to hold their own elections how they want, right?).

I am very much a fan of ranked choice voting. But it will never happen so long as the D & R have an absolute monopoly on the political process. If we are ever going to see 3rd & 4th parties in this country we are going to have to force them down their throats by actually VOTING for them and getting over this stupid notion that by refusing two terrible choices we are somehow "wasting" our vote.

 

Setting aside the Democrat dream of popular vote elections the thing they are talking about that concerns me the most as adding six more Supreme Court Justices. That is much ore do-able and is nothing less than a naked grab for power. 

[Malcador]

Always found the flash suppressor an odd item on these assault weapon bans. Not sure that adds all that much to the threat of a weapon.

[Guard Dog]

It makes the weapon "scary". Like Gromnir said there really isn't more to it than that. It's a bunch of idiots who find themselves in elected office because they are too stupid or incompetent  to earn a honest living. They don't know s--t about s--t but feel that can still make policy about the s--t they know nothing about. They thin that  because they think are better an more enlightened human beings than the "little people" simply because they happened to be the least despicable choice in the previous election. 

[Malcador]

True, but had wondered at the thinking.  Bit off topic, but I found everything about this video too funny to not share

 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

It's theoretically supposed to benefit Democrats, but I am curious to see how that actually works in practice. There's a lot of disenfranchised people on both sides that are either taken for granted or simply ignored in the presidential race because of the electoral college. It makes me wonder how a popular vote election will affect the margins in places like California when people - on both sides - realize that their vote will actually affect the vote totals, which then have an effect on who's elected.

In practice the big losers would be the population of "swing states", which have dominated focus by virtue of being the only place in contest according to conventional wisdom. Big winner would be population dense urban areas, which would gain power regardless of state. The bigger states would get more attention, but you'd see stuff like Republicans going to California and New York or Democrats going to Texas that doesn't really happen at present. The small states with less than 5 votes in the EC would take a hit, but at present nobody gives a **** about them unless it's campaign season and they're an early primary or swing state anyways. Overall there probably would be less of an impact on the results of presidential elections and just a change of how candidates go about campaigning, if anything we might see an increase in outside parties because a shift in perception of how votes matter but I doubt it would be anything like the Green Party or Libertarian Party grabbing more than 10% of the popular vote.

[smjjames]

 

It's theoretically supposed to benefit Democrats, but I am curious to see how that actually works in practice. There's a lot of disenfranchised people on both sides that are either taken for granted or simply ignored in the presidential race because of the electoral college. It makes me wonder how a popular vote election will affect the margins in places like California when people - on both sides - realize that their vote will actually affect the vote totals, which then have an effect on who's elected.

 

Interesting thing about this National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is that it's not *that* easy to overturn once enacted, so when - if - it ever comes to be, it could seriously change the reality of our elections for a time to come. To overturn in any given state effectively requires a state trifecta, so if the Democrats find that it actually ends up harming them instead of helping, they could find it very difficult to overturn it in all but the bluest of states, and then a few red trifecta states could jump in and reinforce it, effectively taking their place and reinstating it. It's hard to see us going back to the electoral college once it passes that threshold. Will be very interesting to see how that affects national politics if it comes to be.

 

I'm more interested in ranked choice voting to actually introduce the possibility of third parties, but that's almost certainly even farther off than this compact (and I assume it all has to be state-enacted - think states are guaranteed the right to hold their own elections how they want, right?).

I am very much a fan of ranked choice voting. But it will never happen so long as the D & R have an absolute monopoly on the political process. If we are ever going to see 3rd & 4th parties in this country we are going to have to force them down their throats by actually VOTING for them and getting over this stupid notion that by refusing two terrible choices we are somehow "wasting" our vote.

 

Setting aside the Democrat dream of popular vote elections the thing they are talking about that concerns me the most as adding six more Supreme Court Justices. That is much ore do-able and is nothing less than a naked grab for power. 

 

 

I have concerns myself on adding more SCOTUS justices since court stuffing is something you usually see in dictatorships/illiberal-democracies, but other than that, it's also ripe for tit-for-tat since what's going to stop the Republicans from doing the same thing? Or un-stuffing it even.

Edited March 22, 2019 by smjjames

[Zoraptor]

It makes the weapon "scary".

 

It's an 'assault rifle' feature like, uh, semi automatic fire.

 

If there's one thing I thought was really stupid about our PM's presentation on the law changes it was her constantly referring to assault rifles, because if she really wanted people to hand them in voluntarily the worse thing she could do is look like a clueless townie trying to appeal to the fears of people who don't own the weapons in question instead of addressing those who do. I'd also have to say that having read the local paper yesterday I have a fair bit more sympathy for Gromnir getting things wrong, they managed to say that all s/a weapons apart from .22 had been banned in 3 separate articles. It takes 30 seconds to read the police release on the matter, and they get them emailed to them automatically but getting it right is far too much work it seems.

 

OTOH, 'silencers' look scary but aren't banned here. Guess, technically, they make a gun safer since they reduce muzzle velocity but I'm not entirely sure that's the reasoning used.

[ShadySands]

You can get silencers and actual assault rifles and even machine guns here in the US but you have to go through the gov't and they are pretty pricey increasing from left to right as I listed them.

 

Not sure if you guys have a different definition of assault rifles but ours is based on firing function and caliber not cosmetic or ease of use features. Now our assault weapons definitions vary by locality and always include cosmetic and ease of use features

 

I'm generally for expanding the SCOTUS though I think it should be in a phased approached so one person/party can't stack the deck. I also think they need to adopt a code of ethics and having more members will allow them to recuse themselves more easily as I've seen that excuse used before as to why they haven't when they probably should have. But that's just like my opinion, man.

[smjjames]

Mueller has now finished the Russia probe and delivered his report to the AG.

Needs to be leaked already....

[Bartimaeus]

Mueller's report has been filed.

 

(e): and smjjames beat me by seconds. Brutal, .

Edited March 22, 2019 by Bartimaeus

[Zoraptor]

Not sure if you guys have a different definition of assault rifles..

 

The term they should have used was 'Military Style Semi Automatics' as that's the correct* term under our legislation. So far as I'm aware we use the standard definition of Assault Rifle ('centrefire mid calibre rifle length gun capable of select fire').

 

*As of 3pm Thursday at least, before that they were standard A cat weapons and not specifically categorised except when paired with high capacity magazines.

[Gromnir]

actual footage o' the nz bunnie problem.

 

 

if only the poor dumb fool had a semi-auto... or if those +90 pistol shooting clubs in new zealand 'could get their act together.

 

*shrug*

 

regardless, amentep likely recognizes the movie as night of the lepus, which starred marion crane and dr. mccoy, or rather, janet leigh and deforest kelly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited March 23, 2019 by Gromnir

[Amentep]

Plus one of the other Enterprise doctors, Paul Fix. But no Hoyt Axton for the STTOS hat-trick...

[Gromnir]

for simpson's fans, the movie also answers the question asked by at least a few, "who the hell is rory calhoun?"

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Zoraptor]

actual footage o' the nz bunnie problem.

 

 

Well, if you insist...

 

 

There you go. Historic report, but the only thing which has changed is Calicivirus being released (illegally) and rabbits are immune to the strain here now. And of course all the footage is daytime, with rabbits mostly being nocturnal.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

actual footage o' the nz bunnie problem.

 

 

Well, if you insist...

 

 

There you go. Historic report, but the only thing which has changed is Calicivirus being released (illegally) and rabbits are immune to the strain here now. And of course all the footage is daytime, with rabbits mostly being nocturnal.

 

so, 30 year old footage?  *snort*  and again you miss the point.  is not numbers which is a concern.  can fire pretty darn fast with lever or bolt... or is this another case o' zor being concerned 'bout tackling during a reload?   angry lepus tackling farmers during a reload? farmers need semi-auto to protect themselves?  

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11944891

 

so folks facing a limited area plague, worthy o' special media coverage in 2017, is culling unconfirmed 200 rabbits a week as 'posed to 200 a night zor mentioned earlier in the thread, and again, they aren't gigantic bunnies which is gonna shrug off a bullet wound. 

 

being ridiculous 'bout the semi-auto for bunnies, but am doubting am arguing with any save zor at this point.  not gonna need convince anybody else and cannot convince zor, so...

 

now for bear...

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited March 23, 2019 by Gromnir

[Zoraptor]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11944891

 

so folks facing a limited area plague, worthy o' special media coverage in 2017, is culling unconfirmed 200 rabbits a week as 'posed to 200 a night zor mentioned earlier in the thread, and again, they aren't gigantic bunnies which is gonna shrug off a bullet wound.

This is New Zealand, our usual news cycle is 'cat rescued from tree' level. But in any case, from the article you're citing:

 

In the middle of one day, he stood in the same spot on a Moeraki farm for two and a-half hours and shot 46 rabbits, he said.

"There's more rabbits in town than on the outskirts. The last thing I want to do is lose my firearms licence, but I reckon I could take out 1000 around town in a couple of weeks."

 

Why do you even bother posting articles when you never bother to read them.

 

FYI, Moeraki is miniscule- population of, 60.

Edited March 23, 2019 by Zoraptor