The Political Quinceañera Thread

[Malcador]

Ah, the real culprit

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/02/16/florida-school-shooting-kentucky-governor-blames-violent-video-games-movies/344336002/

[Guard Dog]

 

It was a hell of a deterrent to the Japanese in WW2...

Id be interested to read about this if you have any links.

 

I'm sure there is plenty of info to had on the web. But the details I know of come from three books I've read, two of which are on the shelf right behind me.

 

The first is The Thousand Mile War by Brian Garfield. It covers the Japanese invasion of Alaska in great detail. Most interestingly the commanders and the strategies used.

 

 

The other is The Rising Sun: The Decline and Fall of the Japanese Empire. Anyone who has a serious interest in the War in the Pacific should give this a look. It goes into great detail about the politics and thinking of the Japanese high command, especially Hideki Tojo:

 

 

The third was about the battle of Midway. I don't remember the exact name but it was from the '90's. The plan depended heavily on victories in the Aleutians (which they had, briefly) and at Midway (which is where they lost the war ultimately). The idea was to invade Midway and destroy one or both of the US Carrier groups from Hawaii there, then redeploy to block off the US naval forces in Tongo (prepping for the invasion of the Solomons, what we now call the battle of Guadalcanal) then invade Hawaii. With Midway and Hawaii as air bases they could pin assets and stir up havoc on the US West Cost while the 32nd Army (later deployed to Okinawa) landed in Alaska and invaded through Canada.

 

The plan was later rejected by Tojo because of the logistics of supporting a land invasion and the difficulty of invading a country where nearly everyone had the means to fight back, The invasion in Alaska went on as planned but was only half the original strength, and was intended to be a diversion to pull forces away from Midway which was crucial to both sides for control over the North Pacific.

[smjjames]

I think getting caught up in the specs of these weapons is simply a red herring. While I'm sure the firing rate and everything is a factor in the choice of these mass shooters, I'd say a big reason they are choosing this:

 

 

Over some hunting rifle is because it looks like something you would go shoot people with.

 

How would you legislate against 'this weapon looks like it's something you would go shoot people with' though? As mentioned, the AR platform is so common and in the public domain that it's difficult to deal with.

 

As polarized as the discussion in the US is, there probably isn't any perfect solution that everybody would agree on or that would work best. The thing is that the proven solution in the rest of the world has been to reduce the accessability of firearms in one way or another. Not outright confiscation mind you, that wouldn't go over well, theres methods that don't involve that.

Edited February 16, 2018 by smjjames

[Hurlshort]

 

I think getting caught up in the specs of these weapons is simply a red herring. While I'm sure the firing rate and everything is a factor in the choice of these mass shooters, I'd say a big reason they are choosing this:

 

 

Over some hunting rifle is because it looks like something you would go shoot people with.

 

How would you legislate against 'this weapon looks like it's something you would go shoot people with' though?

 

I wouldn't. I'd deal with the mental health issues that are at the root of this.

[Guard Dog]

Agreed. That is the root cause. Still not easy though. You can only help the willing even when there is help.

[smjjames]

The thing is with going after mental illness is that the Republicans and Trump want to decrease funding for the very things that would help treat what they're blaming, which seems counterintuitive if they really thought mental illness was to blame.

 

I agree that helping treat mental illness would go a ways towards helping, but what the Republicans have been doing is in the opposite direction.

Edited February 16, 2018 by smjjames

[Guard Dog]

That is really something the State governments should be doing if you ask me. The federal government will f--k that up six ways from Sunday. And to tell the truth not one of it's enumerated powers has anything to do with medical care, mental or otherwise. It would be fair to ask them for money for the State governments to use but you do NOT want them running it.

[smjjames]

They still have to budget for it though, and whether or not you agree that the federal government should be involved, it's still pretty telling that they're defunding for the very thing that they're blaming.

[Ben No.3]

How I am understanding it, guns are a problem, but taking them away an even bigger one and anything else useless?

[smjjames]

Some would argue guns aren't the problem and outright confiscation of legally owned firearms would be a bad idea, yes. The 'anything else is useless' is actually 'politicians can't agree and compromise on a damn thing'.

 

Voluntary buybacks are definetly a thing though.

 

Don't know the specifics of how Australia did it though, whether through voluntary buybacks or outright confiscation.

Edited February 16, 2018 by smjjames

[Gfted1]

Good ole' "mental health issues". Well duh. But the bigger issue is how to ferret out these "mental health issues". What makes a mass murderer? I dunno. Maybe we can take a more proactive stance wrt predicting "mental health issues"? We know that genetics plays a part in this so, again, collecting every single persons DNA at birth would be a good start at building a database. Perhaps an "are you cray cray" test could be administered with approximately the same frequency as drivers license renewals? We cant just wait around for someone to raise their hand and tell us they are utterly unhinged.

[Guard Dog]

That's where the conversation gets scary. A subjective standard on what constitutes mental illness standards applied by police scooping people up and locking them up for "evaluation". Some psychiatrists and media figures are on record saying belief in God is a sign on mental illness. There have been countries in the world where "incorrect thought" will get you institutionalized.

Edited February 16, 2018 by Guard Dog

[ShadySands]

That's where the conversation gets scary. A subjective standard on what constitutes mental illness standards applied by police scooping people up and locking them up for "evaluation". Some psychiatrists and media figures are on record saying belief in God is a sign on mental illness. There have been countries in the world where "incorrect thought" will get you institutionalized.

What's the quote? "If you talk to God, you are praying; If God talks to you, you have schizophrenia"

Edited February 16, 2018 by ShadySands

[Gfted1]

Ug, don't even get me started on religion. If I told you I absolutely believed in the Flying Spaghetti Monster you would look at me like I'm crazy. But you (not you) say you learned about an omnipotent being from a book that's been; mistranslated, misinterpreted and edited over thousands of years to suit the narrative of those in power and people go all *nodnod*.

 

Regardless, I don't think people need to be scooped up, just some standardized testing administered on a semi-regular basis?

[injurai]

I don't think dealing with mental health will ever mitigate school shootings. Tagging weapons to know when they've left a safe or house might be better.

[Raithe]

The News and Observer : No, there haven’t been 18 school shootings so far in 2018. That number is flat wrong.

 

An interesting point about how both sides of the argument skew the data.

Read more here

Edited February 16, 2018 by Raithe

[Ben No.3]

How is the story with gun deaths rather than suicides. More specifically, (how) does gun ownership correlate with suicide? Cause there seems to be a correlation...

 

Here’s gun ownership

 

 

Here’s suicide

 

 

Afterthoughts: If there is such a stark correlation between the two (which seems intuitive, since guns male suicide easy), and if preventing people from owning guns proves too difficult, we have to wonder how to lower suicide rates. Which I genuinely don’t know how to do, but free for all, easy access psychological and psychiatrical help seems like a logical first step

Edited February 16, 2018 by Ben No.3

[Blarghagh]

Hm, I'm a bit salty reading this and other debates. I'mma use your posts as a springboard Guard Dog, but I'd like to preface that by saying I'm not pissed at you or anything, I'm mostly just ranting. More I'm pissed at what happened, the culture, this damn repeat debate and Trump, most of all Trump.

 

Also I typed this on my phone and probably missed half a page since I started.

 

Blaming the hardware is not going to fix the root cause.

Obligatory: No Way To Prevent This Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens

 

Don't worry, only the names and dates have changed from last time so if you read it then you know the gist.

 

The both fire the exact same ammunition at the exact same rate. The former is an "assault weapon" the latter isn't. The distinguishing factors are purely cosmetic. They have nothing to do with the operation.

That sounds like a better argument in FAVOR of regulation than any school shooting, though? You say this like its a lack of knowledge on their part, but to me this just looks like a lack of clarity, categorization and regulation from the gun industry. And like I said when people threw a hissy fit about loot boxes - any industry has to self-regulate or someone will step in and do it for them. This discussion will happen again and again as long as gun-pushers remain negligent.

 

But you're right, actually. The culture surrounding guns is the problem, not their existence. This discussion would not be happening if the US had a healthy relationship with guns I think. But instead of looking at that relationship the people in charge are busy exploiting mental illness as a boogeyman as much as the opposition does to guns while simultaneously promoting the sale of weapons into the hands of said mentally ill. What's that about? And the mentally ill in the US will buy 'em too, because despite what people claim guns aren't for defense in the US at all - they're model train kits. They're fancy toys to brag about, to spitshine and show off. If you don't have one, you're not a man at all.

 

This more than anything is why a lot of people in the States want gun control now - farmer Jack's fancy arsenal poses a more immediate and visceral danger than anything because he keeps showing off his killing power. You don't even trust Uncle Jack with it, does the local riffraff have access to the same stuff? They know HE has it, so they'd need more to compete. Thankfully, Walmart's stocking up on just the thing you need to feel safe in your own home from your own community. Any time something like this happens, those fears will flare up first.

 

If it was just pistols or something, that'd be different. Have at it, home defense style shoot that burglar in his stupid criminal face at your leisure. But it's not, is it? It's not just

had he rammed a car into 17 kids at a bus stop

now is it? A pistol would have been a car. Those 'shoot the same ammo at the same rate with cosmetic differences' things that most people can't even tell apart? That is more like a truck with special serrated blades on arms. And even though those are 'just for cutting down trees' in the same way those rifles are 'just for defense' I'm pretty sure they'd be talking about regulating those too if some random schmuck had easy access to one and cut up a busstop of people, right?

 

Hell, maybe have them give everyone age 21 and up a pistol for defense. Make it mandatory and add mandatory safety education or something. But they have to do something, and it needs to be done consistently and clearly. Because any country that goes 'we'll give our teachers guns before we'll give 'em pencils' needs a more stern looking at than this nonsense 'regulation is a slippery slope' fallacy people keep spouting allows whenever this subject threatens to rear its ugly head.

 

Personally I think the right to bear arms as an argument against better regulation is a crock anyway. Give everyone a pistol and that right is fulfilled to the letter, right? But the way it's worked in the US so far is a recipe for inevitable escalation, and I think that's probably the thing that went wrong you're looking for.

 

Anyway, completely unaimed at anyone specific and least of all you GD since I know you didn't vote for him: Trump overturned mental health checks and he himself blames mental illness, once again I'd count at least some of this blood as being on his tiny hands, and those of his voters. So... go team Trump?

 

Rant over. Grumpy man hangry now. Grmbl grmbl.

[Guard Dog]

 

In all seriousness my #1 objection to regulation is and has always been that it is only proposed as a step in the ultimate goal of total disarmament. When I hear the other side acknowledge the right is absolute and individual THEN we'll talk about regulation. Not holding be breath. I can (and have) link a hundred or more quotes and news articles over these past forty years of debate the indicate the goal is not "reasonable restriction". That is only the first step.

[Guard Dog]

How about we amend the 2nd Amendment to read as follows:

 

The right of the people to keep and bear arms not more than .50 cal smokeless, 40 RPM, or drum fed or utilizing magazines greater than 16 rounds shall not be infringed.

 

I'd get behind that.

[injurai]

About the suicide correlation.

 

People in rural areas are more isolated with fewer opportunities. Rural living is associated with decreased law enforcement presence and an increased need to self-secure.

 

I think it just so happens that these correlate, and you'll find high suicide rates in other rural regions of the world which don't particularly have many guns.

[smjjames]

How is the story with gun deaths rather than suicides. More specifically, (how) does gun ownership correlate with suicide? Cause there seems to be a correlation...

 

Here’s gun ownership

 

 

Here’s suicide

 

 

Afterthoughts: If there is such a stark correlation between the two (which seems intuitive, since guns male suicide easy), and if preventing people from owning guns proves too difficult, we have to wonder how to lower suicide rates. Which I genuinely don’t know how to do, but free for all, easy access psychological and psychiatrical help seems like a logical first step

 

I'd question the structuring of that second map a bit because it makes a huge jump in category for number of suicides, rather than incrementing, it jumps right to 122 from 17.

[Ben No.3]

 

How is the story with gun deaths rather than suicides. More specifically, (how) does gun ownership correlate with suicide? Cause there seems to be a correlation...

 

Here’s gun ownership

 

 

Here’s suicide

 

 

Afterthoughts: If there is such a stark correlation between the two (which seems intuitive, since guns male suicide easy), and if preventing people from owning guns proves too difficult, we have to wonder how to lower suicide rates. Which I genuinely don’t know how to do, but free for all, easy access psychological and psychiatrical help seems like a logical first step

I'd question the structuring of that second map a bit because it makes a huge jump in category for number of suicides, rather than incrementing, it jumps right to 122 from 17.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide.shtml

 

They have a more sensible map in that sense (last category is up to 20), averaged by state rather than location, though it end up looking similar. I’d assume the 17-122 is used because there are a few single places with disproportionately high numbers

[Ben No.3]

About the suicide correlation.

 

People in rural areas are more isolated with fewer opportunities. Rural living is associated with decreased law enforcement presence and an increased need to self-secure.

 

I think it just so happens that these correlate, and you'll find high suicide rates in other rural regions of the world which don't particularly have many guns.

Suicide

 

 

Guns

 

 

Degree of technological development in the economy, lets say

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Ben No.3

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

How about we amend the 2nd Amendment to read as follows:

 

The right of the people to keep and bear arms not more than .50 cal smokeless, 40 RPM, or drum fed or utilizing magazines greater than 16 rounds shall not be infringed.

 

I'd get behind that.

You're not touching my recreational nukes statist.