« First « Previous Comments 4 - 43 of 71 Next » Last » Search these comments
Keeping guns in the home when a household member is mentally ill, to me is no different than DUI.
Just out of curiosity do you own a gun?
Just out of curiosity do you own a gun?
I did own a 9mm Pistol, Ruger 10-22 Rifle and a pump action shotgun, I sold them before I moved overseas.
You do know the statistics for mentally ill people with firearms in the house, right?
I like what Dodgerfanjohn said, political agenda is a huge source of propaganda. E.G. "the bees are disappearing from colony collapse disorder, household income has been dropping since the 70s, women are underpaid.
All of these do not stand up to statistical scrutiny or are false statistics.
All of these do not stand up to statistical scrutiny or are false statistics.
According to a bunch of wing nut welfare morons who eschew empirical knowledge, think the Civil War was about Tariffs and that Thomas "Rape is better than masturbation" Aquinas is the shining star of western Civilization.
According to a bunch of wing nut welfare morons who eschew empirical knowledge
According to a bunch of Libby nut welfare morons who worship empirical knowledge over common sense.
Fixed it for you
And you believe that the civil war was about freeing the slaves...
I prefer facts
Keeping guns in the home when a household member is mentally ill, to me is no different than DUI.
I have zero problem with background checks every five years or so to maintain gun ownership. Of course, you see the problem with registering firearms and govt funded shrinks deciding who is sane and who isn't....
I have zero problem with background checks every five years or so to maintain gun ownership. Of course, you see the problem with registering firearms and govt funded shrinks deciding who is sane and who isn't....
The government shrinks aren't doing the deciding, the doctors/hospital are.
A background check doesn't work here, because the Mother buying the firearms isn't a nut but lives with her nutty kid, just like several of the Aspie Mass Murderers in recent history. Like any mother "She can't imagine" her Socially Handicapped kid going on a unfulfilled sex/my Online Game Character got deleted or killed type rage rampage.
Also, guns need to be restricted to age 30 and above - proven adults.
The law should be that you have 60 days to sell or store your firearm outside the home once you have a child, dependent, or fellow household resident diagnosed with mental illness.
According to a bunch of Libby nut welfare morons who worship empirical knowledge over common sense.
Common Sense is the first refuge of the moron. "It's Common Sense the Moon Landing never happened!"
And you believe that the civil war was about freeing the slaves...
Yeah, bleeding Kansas was all about violence between Tariff Supporters and Detractors.
Common Sense is the first refuge of the moron. "It's Common Sense the Moon Landing never happened!"
Except I am not a moron...
Yeah, bleeding Kansas was all about violence between Tariff Supporters and Detractors.
There is far more nuance to this subject to characterize it as a single issue indicates your ignorance.
There is far more nuance to this subject to characterize it as a single issue indicates your ignorance.
We've been over this time and time again. All your assertions have been annihilated, like your claim slavery was on the wane before the Civil War when in reality slavery was growing right up until the Civil War by both numbers of slaves and geographic range of slavery
Equally annihilated has been your assertion that it was about slavery. If nothing else the Emancipation Proclamation or the pure evil of Lincoln etc etc. Technology would have replaced slavery in short order.
If nothing else the Emancipation Proclamation or the pure evil of Lincoln etc etc. Technology would have replaced slavery in short order.
Huh??
Oh and on the Obozo speech, how did he manage to cry on cue-did he get acting lessons from Hollywood? Or perhaps this was a killing two birds with one stone deal? pretend to do something for gun control and drive the sales of firearms through the roof-hence assured of 300k an hr speaking fees from the gun lobby as their best salesman-and also get 300k an hr speaking fees from the dems side-who will give him money no matter what. perhaps doubling his after term tally??
Equally annihilated has been your assertion that it was about slavery. If nothing else the Emancipation Proclamation or the pure evil of Lincoln etc etc. Technology would have replaced slavery in short order.
Right, because there weren't sharecroppers in 1870, 1880, 1890, 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, or even 1960 and 1970, then replaced by guest workers and illegals.
Why today, tomato farms in Florida and lettuce plantations in California run on robot labor, right?
Wow, amazing how those Japanese make those robots look like Mexicanos, eh? Look at the range of motion in their limbs!
Restricting guns to those over 30 is silly. At least from a rural perspective. I know 10 year olds more capable of handling guns than adults.
Right, because there weren't sharecroppers in 1870, 1880, 1890, 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950, or even 1960 and 1970, then replaced by guest workers and illegals.
Why today, tomato farms in Florida and lettuce plantations in California run on robot labor, right?
Wow, amazing how those Japanese make those robots look like Mexicanos, eh? Look at the range of motion in their limbs!
Your usual lack of insight...
These graphs show hot much productivity has gone up and farm labor has gone down.
I've been using guns unsupervised since I was 10 and I still haven't shot anyone. Then again, my parents taught me gun safety first, not hood politics.
That said, I don't see me doing that with my own kids. We live in vastly different environments.
Also, our soldiers get guns at 18. Will you suggest they aren't ready and should fight with sticks until age 30?
I've been using guns unsupervised since I was 10 and I still haven't shot anyone.
So you never actually needed one?
All those proposals would ASSUME that the goal was to better protect the American people from gun violence. This is clearly not the goal.
The coming economic disaster will severely tax the government's resources when it comes to keeping an increasingly irate population under control. If they have guns when this happens, the wealthy elite will lose.
This is why we have seen Obama (who is just a puppet for the wealthy elite) pushing hard on gun control for most of his time in office.
And the people see it coming. Gun sales have never been more brisk. Obama is gun salesman of the decade!
I see it the same way. Guns kind of make it hard for government to be bad, it's too expensive to oppress population that is armed.
These graphs show hot much productivity has gone up and farm labor has gone down.
Because of robots picking the lettuce and the cucumbers?
I've been using guns unsupervised since I was 10 and I still haven't shot anyone. Then again, my parents taught me gun safety first, not hood politics.
That said, I don't see me doing that with my own kids. We live in vastly different environments.
Also, our soldiers get guns at 18. Will you suggest they aren't ready and should fight with sticks until age 30?
There are plenty of 18 year olds who could rent a sports car and not be tempted to totally wreck it. Thing is, no rental car agency will do so because there are plenty who can't resist the temptation.
You look at most of the "gun" crime, it's largely under 30s.
Don't be a tard
You know damn well farming vegetables requires large numbers of (poorly paid) people to pick the peppers in the present.
You know damn well farming vegetables requires large numbers of (poorly paid) people to pick the peppers in the present.
So are presuming that this has not changed since the 1800s?
You look at most of the "gun" crime, it's largely under 30s.
It is worth mentioning that much of the gun violence is because of demographics. Hold onto your bullet proof vest as the demographics are going to start changing big time.
So are presuming that this has not changed since the 1800s?
Dude, What are we debating? Show me the tomato picking robots in 1880 or your "Slaves would have been replaced by technology soon enough" argument fails.
It is worth mentioning that much of the gun violence is because of demographics. Hold onto your bullet proof vest as the demographics are going to start changing big time.
Yep.
So you never actually needed one?
Not for a person. Thing is, not living in the hood pretty much takes care of that possibility. Most of the gun crime occurs there, and the violent crime rate elsewhere is very low. It's when people insist on averaging out violent crime statistics over the entire population/state/nation that shit starts to look scary.
That said, I have used guns to defend against wild animals more than a couple times. Of course, my experience is more than a few standard deviations outside the norm.
Dude, What are we debating? Show me the tomato picking robots in 1880 or your "Slaves would have been replaced by technology soon enough" argument fails.
You are implying that slavery was not replaced because of a picture of pickers still picking. IOW you are saying there are only absolutes. I'am saying that slavery or cheap labor has largely and continually being replaced by technology as in the two charts.
You are implying that slavery was not replaced because of a picture of pickers still picking. IOW you are saying there are only absolutes. I'am saying that slavery or cheap labor has largely and continually being replaced by technology as in the two charts.
Yeah, there are absolutes. You absolutely need people to pick peppers for pickling. Just like you still need people to flip burgers and get more buns from the back freezer and take the trash out to the dumpster.
Your argument that something besides human labor was used for cotton picking needs some evidence for it.
Here's Texas Cotton Picking, 1920 - that's more than a half century after the Civil War and the "Slavery was on the way out from technology".
Technology would have replaced slavery in short order.
So a half century isn't short order?
I don't care about your charts. Cereal growing wasn't what the South was built on, but King Cotton. Show me machines picking the cotton within a few decades of the Civil War, or there isn't any "Short Order".
So a half century isn't short order?
In the scheme of thing it is a short period of time and has got progressively better the tractor for instance:
In 1892 in the tiny village in Northeast Iowa, John Froelich (1849 -1933) invented the first successful gasoline-powered engine that could be driven backwards and forwards. The word “tractor†wasn't used in those days, but that's what it was. At that time, steam-powered engines were used to thresh wheat.
I'am saying that slavery or cheap labor has largely and continually being replaced by technology as in the two charts.
Chart 1 is about crop genetics and fertilizer. It has nothing to do with cheap labor or slavery. BTW how much slavery was in the US in 1940 when the chart starts?
Chart 2 is just plain old wrong. Where did it come from? Somebody just made up the numbers. Where did they get the 1840/1850 numbers from anyway? The 1840/1850 census didn't record occupation. As per the census of 1860 there were 433,895 farmers and 735,679 farm workers out of a workforce of 8,173,731 for a total of 14% of the workforce. Go ahead look it up. The document you are looking for is 1860a-15.pdf. https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
The libertarian mantra: It's true because I believe it should be true.
In 1892 in the tiny village in Northeast Iowa, John Froelich (1849 -1933) invented the first successful gasoline-powered engine that could be driven backwards and forwards. The word “tractor†wasn't used in those days, but that's what it was. At that time, steam-powered engines were used to thresh wheat.
Is cotton a cereal? What the South was built on King Cotton, not King Barley.
The libertarian mantra: It's true because I believe it should be true.
Yep. Apparently people picking cotton by hand everywhere in the South 60 years after the Civil War meant that slavery would have replaced by Technology in "Short Order".
The Glibertarian version of history includes Bleeding Kansas where people killed each other over the Tariff Rate, or those famous books "Tariffs are a Positive Good." and "Uncle Tom's Tariff."
Southerners screamed about extending Anti-Tariff states and defending their "peculiar institution" of widespread Anti-Tariff sentiment. They even passed the Fugitive Tariff Act that required Escaped Black Tariff Supporters to be sent back to the Anti-Tariff South .
Chart 1 is about crop genetics and fertilizer. It has nothing to do with cheap labor or slavery. BTW how much slavery was in the US in 1940 when the chart starts?
A key metric about this subject is the value of the products produced which even you can see has gone up. It is about value!
Chart 2 is just plain old wrong. Where did it come from? Somebody just made up the numbers. Where did they get the 1840/1850 numbers from anyway? The 1840/1850 census didn't record occupation. As per the census of 1860 there were 433,895 farmers and 735,679 farm workers out of a workforce of 8,173,731 for a total of 14% of the workforce. Go ahead look it up. The document you are looking for is 1860a-15.pdf. https://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
The main point is that the amount of labor required to produce farm goods has gone down a lot. A 100 years ago 60% of the population were farmers today it is what 2%?
So you can so your usual lets wallow in the minutia, but the point is that the amount of labor has gone down while the amount of farm products produced has gone way up. Therefore far less dependent on labor or slave labor and has been that way since technology started influencing farming.
The main point is that the amount of labor required to produce farm goods has gone down a lot. A 100 years ago 60% of the population were farmers today it is what 2%?
So you can so your usual lets wallow in the minutia, but the point is that the amount of labor has gone down while the amount of farm products produced has gone way up. Therefore far less dependent on labor or slave labor and has been that way since technology started influencing farming.
Farmers were 15% of the workforce (not population) in the 1910 census with farm labor another 15% for a total of 30%. That would be just about the same as 1860 except 15% of the farm workforce were slaves and didn't get counted. The number is about 4% of workforce today. Errors in the 100-200% range being minutia must be a libertarian thing.
When in your odd world did technology start influencing farming. Hint, tractor sales started getting substantial about 1920 with the 1917 introduction of the fordson tractor starting at $395. Tractor sales were reasonably good at 100-200k a year through 1929 but fell to almost nothing during the depression. Then they exploded in WWII through the 1950's at 400-500k a year. The question still stands for the king of dodgem, how many slaves were there in the US in 1920 when tractor sales started in earnest?
1860
Total population: 31,443,321; farm population: 15,141,000 (est.); farmers 58% of labor force; Number of farms: 2,044,000; average acres: 199
1900
Total population: 75,994,266; farm population: 29,414,000 (est.); farmers 38% of labor force; Number of farms: 5,740,000; average acres: 147
So it went down 20% in 40 years
not including the slaves.
Errors in the 100-200% range being minutia must be a libertarian thing.
and apparently your libby thing as well
There were numerous advancements in farming technology, that continued to reduce the labor necessary for farming from the 1800s on
I cant believe you guys engage this idiot, its obvious he doesnt even know what hes talking about
« First « Previous Comments 4 - 43 of 71 Next » Last » Search these comments
Eeesh, listening to this guy is giving me a headache.
Look moron,
1.) IF you want me to accept your proposals, first explain where and how each of the individuals obtained their guns and how your proposals would have prevented that.
2.) Make mental illness treatment and awareness a key platform of you administration and a focus of Obamacare. Without this factor, anything you do is utterly meaningless. A huge number of people do not seek treatment for their own mental illness or think it's some make beleive condition. I'd be willing to wager that over 95% of those who commit mass shootings suffer from mental illness. I realize you addressed this(scarcely) but I don't think you are serious. I think if you had your way you'd completely ban guns.
3.) Either you are an idiot or you think the American people are. Stop using the 30,000 gun deaths per year number. It's utter bullshit. 19,000 of those deaths are suicide. 18,999 of those would occur regardless of access to firearms. ~8000 of the deaths are gang related. Not a one of those is a legally possed gun. Not a single one. To deal with this, require a minimim 15 year sentence for felons in possession of guns. That's already the federal law. Prosecute EVERY arrest of felon with firearm at the Federal level. Do this and I GUARANTEE that the number of gun inflicted gang deaths drops to fewer than 500 a year. That's leaves very few deaths remaining...accidental...which I'm totally ok with as a Darwinian measure...and then the handful of mass shootings and other criminal deaths.
Honestly the whole thing is just one massive liberal panic attack. But if you want to address the real dangers...well I've outlined it. My proposals along with sealing the border would reduce non suicide gun deaths by about 80%. Obamas measures will do literally nothing to reduce gun deaths.