Republican Presidential Debate

[Guard Dog]

Gun buyback programs aren't quite the same as gun confiscation.  Per the usual, NRA freaks out.  

 

edit: there are 2 guns for every 3 people in this country.  A gun ban isn't just a legislative non-starter, it is completely unfeasible.  

When she slips the word "mandatory" in front of gun buyback, which she did, then it IS the same thing.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

How much more unfeasible than tackling the underlying issues that actually cause gun violence? I'd wager probably not that much more. Not that that prevents people from ignoring the latter while continuing to harp on in regards to the former.

More unfeasible I'd argue, but I have the crazy idea most gun violence can be tied to criminal activity and that can be tied to poverty.

[ShadySands]

 

Petition to Bar Donald Trump From U.K. Garners Close to 200,000 Signatures.

 

Rofl. Someone better call a Waaaambulance.

Yes this is all over the international media....Gfted1 when Trump makes comments like he did how do you feel? I'm battling to understand why you guys aren't more annoyed and or concerned ?

 

I know I tend to perhaps overact to these types of comments but surly someone on this forum from the USA must be a little ......exasperated ?

 

 

To be honest I doubt anyone over here really cares, either about Trump (non supporters) or what the UK thinks of him (supporters)

 

As far as banning or even severely restricting guns in other countries I'd be curious to see what ownership levels and such were like before the bans. I could see banning them here eventually succeeding but it would probably take a few generations of moves in that direction, essentially changing the culture.

[Hurlshort]

 

Gun buyback programs aren't quite the same as gun confiscation.  Per the usual, NRA freaks out.  

 

edit: there are 2 guns for every 3 people in this country.  A gun ban isn't just a legislative non-starter, it is completely unfeasible.  

When she slips the word "mandatory" in front of gun buyback, which she did, then it IS the same thing.

 

 

This the the quote I am seeing:

 

Clinton replied, "I do not know enough details to tell you how we would do it or how it would work, but certainly the Australian example is worth looking at." The reason, she said, is that "by offering to buy back those guns, they were able to curtail the supply and to set a different standard for gun purchases in the future."

 

 

Her spokeswoman also clarified that she was absolutely not talking about mass confiscation.  But people are going to hear what they want to hear, really.  People still act like Obama is taking away guns, despite 7 years of zero legislation or changes in Federal gun laws. (other than the assault weapons ban actually expiring.)

 

I question why Clinton would bother with the statement, as it just gives the NRA ammunition against her, but this seems more like a red herring than an actual issue.  We have plenty of real stuff to criticize her over.

 

edit: tl;dr

 

She isn't coming for your guns.  She does want to spy on you and doesn't care about the middle class.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Hurlshot

[Guard Dog]

 

With regard to Hillary, she is the only one who is actually talking about confiscating firearms. I wonder if she truly believes we'll just meekly hand them over when the time comes? Does she truly comprehend what the outcome of that would be?

GD.....I have never understood why you think there will come a day when the Federal government will resort to killing Americans to enforce this type of law, which I doubt will ever be implemented due all the resistance from influential groups like NRA

 

I know you have explained this to me before but do you really think this is something possible .....and I wonder what other US members on these forums think about a possible future where the Feds resort to arresting and or killing American citizens for not complying with a law that wanted to confiscate firearms ?

 

Also I can understand now why you probably dislike Hillary so much...when she makes these types of comments...she must be the antithesis of your acceptable politician   

 

Ok, I do like to engage in hyperbole on forums such as this one. Sometimes I'm posting honestly and sometimes I inject a little drama into it because it does make for good forum chatter. But my honest $.02 on Hillary would be that she would be a far less objectionable president that Barack Obama has been.

 

Hillary Clinton is a sour, arrogant, dishonest and altogether unlikable human being. I do not think I'd want to spend even one second in her presence. Barack Obama is brittle and unfriendly but for that he is also thoughtful, moral, honest (in his own way and to his own ideals at least), and I think someone who is good to his friends and family. If you asked me which I'd rather have a beer with there is no question.

 

However, Obama is a political ideologue. I think he genuinely believes most Americans are too stupid or incompetent to manage their own lives or make important decisions for themselves. He truly believes the proper role of the government is to be manager, guardian, and provider to it's citizens. The power of the State over the people is absolute in his view. He believes in honest government, benevolent government, and total government. He is exactly the kind of leader Hayek wrote about in his book "The Fatal Conceit" when describing the notion held by the educated elite that "they are as entitled to rule and those who claimed the divine right of kings". Of course the US system of government will not permit that so the best he could do is chip away at those annoying concepts like "individual liberty", and "limitations of powers". The truth is he has a done a considerable amount of damage to the freedom of this country.

 

Hillary on the other hand is a machine politician. At heart she is as idealistically leftist as Obama and as arrogant in her view of the unwashed plebeians as he is. But she is less driven by that ideology and more concerned with outcomes. She will not start a fight she can't win with Congress or "die on an ideological hill" the way Obama would. She would be more open to deal making with the opposition to get something she wants. That pragmatism might make her a better President. I seriously doubt she would ever try something as radical as firearm confiscation.

 

But her pragmatism aside she is still an opponent of everything Americans like me hold dear. I will not cast a vote for her that is for certain. I'd take any of the Republicans over her, even Trump. That does not make me a Republican. I despise almost every one of them but as I have posted before voting in the US has become and exercise of choosing the lesser of two evils.

[Bartimaeus]

More unfeasible I'd argue, but I have the crazy idea most gun violence can be tied to criminal activity and that can be tied to poverty.

 

Yes, those were some of the underlying issues that I was referencing.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

More unfeasible I'd argue, but I have the crazy idea most gun violence can be tied to criminal activity and that can be tied to poverty.

 

 

Yes, those were some of the underlying issues that I was referencing.

We should avoid talking about them because they aren't as sexy as gun control.

[Darkpriest]

 

 

Petition to Bar Donald Trump From U.K. Garners Close to 200,000 Signatures.

 

Rofl. Someone better call a Waaaambulance.

Yes this is all over the international media....Gfted1 when Trump makes comments like he did how do you feel? I'm battling to understand why you guys aren't more annoyed and or concerned ?

 

I know I tend to perhaps overact to these types of comments but surly someone on this forum from the USA must be a little ......exasperated ?

 

 

To be honest I doubt anyone over here really cares, either about Trump (non supporters) or what the UK thinks of him (supporters)

 

As far as banning or even severely restricting guns in other countries I'd be curious to see what ownership levels and such were like before the bans. I could see banning them here eventually succeeding but it would probably take a few generations of moves in that direction, essentially changing the culture.

 

 

after WW2? it depends, there was a lot of firearms easily available and that is the period of time when EU societies decided to remove the weapon from their sight. I mean, you also have to understand that people did not really want to even look at weapons after the WW2. If the same level of fighting and destruction reached US, i believe you would have the same notion. as for times pre-WW2 it is hard to tell, not sure if there are any reliable statistics for that period of time, but certainly pre-WW1 personal weapon was easily available (pistols, spades, rapiers, knives, etc.)

[HoonDing]

The future is: personal body shields.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkQFhPJuxgk

[Enoch]

Hillary is talking about guns now because the issue helps her in the Democratic primary.  Bernie Sanders is trying to attack her from the left, but he's spent his political career representing a pretty rural state, and thus has a voting record on the issue that is a little out-of-tune with the core audience that shows up for Democratic primaries. 

 

I suspect that the rhetoric will soften when it comes time for the general election, and that, even if a D wins the White House with long coattails, only the most marginal gun-control initiatives would have a prayer of getting through Congress.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Enoch

[Elerond]

 

 

Petition to Bar Donald Trump From U.K. Garners Close to 200,000 Signatures.

 

Rofl. Someone better call a Waaaambulance.

Yes this is all over the international media....Gfted1 when Trump makes comments like he did how do you feel? I'm battling to understand why you guys aren't more annoyed and or concerned ?

 

I know I tend to perhaps overact to these types of comments but surly someone on this forum from the USA must be a little ......exasperated ?

 

 

To be honest I doubt anyone over here really cares, either about Trump (non supporters) or what the UK thinks of him (supporters)

 

As far as banning or even severely restricting guns in other countries I'd be curious to see what ownership levels and such were like before the bans. I could see banning them here eventually succeeding but it would probably take a few generations of moves in that direction, essentially changing the culture.

 

 

Severe restriction to gun ownership (like need to prove that you have practiced shooting for at least year before you can get permit to buy a light caliber gun and even longer if you want higher caliber gun) and return guns without licence without questions asked policy have dropped amount of guns owned by private citizens in Finland from estimated several millions to estimated bit over 1.5 million (which is about 1 private owned weapon per 4 citizens).

 

This estimated change has happened in my life time. Although lots of the returned weapons without license were from time of second world war and years after it, so they have returned when their owners have died and their beneficiaries didn't know what to do with the weapons they inherited.

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

Petition to Bar Donald Trump From U.K. Garners Close to 200,000 Signatures.

 

Rofl. Someone better call a Waaaambulance.

Yes this is all over the international media....Gfted1 when Trump makes comments like he did how do you feel? I'm battling to understand why you guys aren't more annoyed and or concerned ?

 

I know I tend to perhaps overact to these types of comments but surly someone on this forum from the USA must be a little ......exasperated ?

 

 

To be honest I doubt anyone over here really cares, either about Trump (non supporters) or what the UK thinks of him (supporters)

 

As far as banning or even severely restricting guns in other countries I'd be curious to see what ownership levels and such were like before the bans. I could see banning them here eventually succeeding but it would probably take a few generations of moves in that direction, essentially changing the culture.

 

 

Severe restriction to gun ownership (like need to prove that you have practiced shooting for at least year before you can get permit to buy a light caliber gun and even longer if you want higher caliber gun) and return guns without licence without questions asked policy have dropped amount of guns owned by private citizens in Finland from estimated several millions to estimated bit over 1.5 million (which is about 1 private owned weapon per 4 citizens).

 

This estimated change has happened in my life time. Although lots of the returned weapons without license were from time of second world war and years after it, so they have returned when their owners have died and their beneficiaries didn't know what to do with the weapons they inherited.

 

 

It always makes me a bit sad when the populance of country opts out or severly restricts gun ownership, it simply brings a false sense of security since humans will never stop killing each other. I rather have a nation of strongly armed citizens than one where the ownership of guns is dependent on people secretly thinking that they are the masters of all.

 

For example, the school shootings in Finland happened because of socially awkward and highly depressed boys didn't get the counsling when needed, not because of the availability of guns.

 

As for Trump: the left better take notes. He's brash, shows strength, is unapologetic and taps into the issues that the establishment refuse to acknowledge; he simply has the leadership calibre that people are subconsiously attracted to. Find someone with those qualities and they will flock to you as well.  

[Gfted1]

The UK boner rages on. Now they have stripped him of an honorary degree and rescinded a golf club membership. That will teach him.

[Bartimaeus]

I would certainly hope so: wasn't he the one whining about his golf course in the U.K. some time ago, and about how wind turbines in the distance were "ruining" the golf course? Hit him where it hurts.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Zoraptor]

Going by his current approach hitting him where it hurts would be stripping him of his WWE Hall of Famer status- if that meant he could no longer deliver policy speeches like he's doing a wrestling promo.

[Elerond]

Brits seem to have something against Trump today. Like for example this article from The Guardian that implies that Trump is terrorist supporter

Donald Trump attended a Sinn Féin fundraising dinner in New York just months before the party’s allies in the Provisional IRA ended its ceasefire with a massive terror attack in London’s Canary Wharf district.

 

As controversy rages over the Republican presidential candidate’s demand that Muslims be barred from the United States to prevent Islamist terror attacks, footage has emerged of the tycoon shaking hands with Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2ZPcPHJAno

 

For decades, Sinn Féin and the IRA were the political and military wings of the Irish republican movement, and the party was frequently accused of being an apologist for terror.

Trump and Adams met in the Essex Hotel in Manhattan in November 1995 at an event organised by the US-based Friends of Sinn Fein.

 

Guests, including Trump – currently the frontrunner in the race to become Republican presidential nominee – were charged a $200 entry fee to hear Adams speak about the Irish peace process.

But less than four months later the PIRA ended its ceasefire with a huge bomb in London’s Docklands on 9 February 1996. Two men working in a nearby newsagents were killed in the massive explosion, which caused £100m in damage to the Canary Wharf/South Quay district.

 

On his way to the New York fundraiser a few months earlier, Trump would have seen a group of demonstrators protesting ongoing IRA violence, including victims of the 1993 Shankill bomb massacre in which 10 people died.

 

There were also protests from the relatives of Catholics who had been shot, beaten and exiled by the IRA even after the organisation declared its first ceasefire on 31 August 1994.

 

On the steps of the hotel, Alan McBride, whose wife was killed in the Shankill Road bombing, said: “He justifies the existence of the Provos, of Sinn Féin, of the IRA, claiming that they were fighting for a just and lasting peace. Well, I’m sorry, but I don’t see how my wife’s murder helped IRA/Sinn Féin achieve peace. It’s hypocrisy. Gerry Adams is a hypocrite.”

 

As well as paying the $200 entry fee, business leaders and other donors, including a number of US celebrities, were asked to give donations to Friends of Sinn Féin.

During his speech, Gerry Adams even joked about Sinn Féin playing the “Trump card” from a podium close to where the businessman sat.

 

A spokesman for Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/09/donald-trump-ireland-sinn-fein-terrorism

 

[Barothmuk]

As for Trump: the left better take notes. He's brash, shows strength, is unapologetic and taps into the issues that the establishment refuse to acknowledge; he simply has the leadership calibre that people are subconsiously attracted to. Find someone with those qualities and they will flock to you as well.

I'd rather move away from personality cults tbh.

[Wrath of Dagon]

"On Tuesday’s Hardball, MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Donald Trump is resonating with “the little guy” who thinks the bipartisan permanent political establishment that Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush personify has sold him out on issues like immigration, trade, and terrorism and is completely out of touch with their hopes, fears, and concerns."

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/09/chris-matthews-trump-resonating-with-little-guy-permanent-political-class-has-sold-out-on-immigration-trade-nat-security/

 

And this is a liberal saying it.

[Barothmuk]

A billionaire tycoon is what I imagine when I think of someone "in touch with the people".

[BruceVC]

A billionaire tycoon is what I imagine when I think of someone "in touch with the people".

 

 

Oh Baro your anti-Capitalism sentiment makes me chuckle ....you have a way of saying something cynical but its funny

[BruceVC]

Nah Bruce. The world is changing. A lot and i mean A LOT of people see the more and more rigid PC and SJ rules, forced tolerance but only one way etc. as an ugly abomination that rose from fairly nice ideology. But then again even communism and national socialism were fairly decent ideologies which mutated into something horrible.

 

You need to draw a line between acquiringnequal right and opportunities vs. Fighting for more privilages because "reasons".

 

This is why ultra right wing parties win in CEE. This is why EU sees a rise in the same vein of politics, with France almost becoming another state under suuch influence. I see no reason why USA should walk a vastly different path.

So what would be your ideal political structure for something like the EU....lets say you could implement  any political system you wanted?

[Meshugger]

 

As for Trump: the left better take notes. He's brash, shows strength, is unapologetic and taps into the issues that the establishment refuse to acknowledge; he simply has the leadership calibre that people are subconsiously attracted to. Find someone with those qualities and they will flock to you as well.

I'd rather move away from personality cults tbh.

 

 

The point is what is and not what should be.

[BruceVC]

 

 

As for Trump: the left better take notes. He's brash, shows strength, is unapologetic and taps into the issues that the establishment refuse to acknowledge; he simply has the leadership calibre that people are subconsiously attracted to. Find someone with those qualities and they will flock to you as well.

I'd rather move away from personality cults tbh.

 

 

The point is what is and not what should be.

 

Meshugger it sounds like you  admire Trumps bravado and comments? 

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

As for Trump: the left better take notes. He's brash, shows strength, is unapologetic and taps into the issues that the establishment refuse to acknowledge; he simply has the leadership calibre that people are subconsiously attracted to. Find someone with those qualities and they will flock to you as well.

I'd rather move away from personality cults tbh.

 

 

The point is what is and not what should be.

 

Meshugger it sounds like you  admire Trumps bravado and comments? 

 

 

Dilbert explains it better than everyone: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/134791529391/risk-management-trump-persuasion-series

 

To put into context: People vote for Bernie Sanders because of the ideas that he represents, not for him personally. People vote for Trump personally and not for the ideas that he represents.

[Darkpriest]

 

Nah Bruce. The world is changing. A lot and i mean A LOT of people see the more and more rigid PC and SJ rules, forced tolerance but only one way etc. as an ugly abomination that rose from fairly nice ideology. But then again even communism and national socialism were fairly decent ideologies which mutated into something horrible.

 

You need to draw a line between acquiringnequal right and opportunities vs. Fighting for more privilages because "reasons".

 

This is why ultra right wing parties win in CEE. This is why EU sees a rise in the same vein of politics, with France almost becoming another state under suuch influence. I see no reason why USA should walk a vastly different path.

So what would be your ideal political structure for something like the EU....lets say you could implement  any political system you wanted?

 

 

This is fairly difficult to present briefly, and i certainly do not have time to write an essay here.