Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gun Control 1: Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    The Hill has always leaned conservative. At least a few years ago the writing was solid now it is trash.
    It's not exactly "conservative," it's utterly in the tank of access journalism, so it reports anything anyone on the hill says with a straight, inside beltway face. The irony is nobody in real life maps to the Hill's slant, because partisans are committed to a position, while Members are narcissistic sociopaths, and staffers are cynics with no beliefs or derpy Mormons on a mission from god.

    They used to do headcounts that were as accurate as Whip counts, but if they still do I can't find them. The best I can say is they're light years better than Politico, and they take breathless, uncritical dictation of the lies that will be mocked in history books.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Originally posted by Handyman View Post

    The Hill has always leaned conservative. At least a few years ago the writing was solid now it is trash.
    Yeah, I thought The Hill was basically just a very slightly right wing aggregator. They didn't do much for original journalism, just fed country club republicans the headlines and a paragraph or two of content.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Originally posted by FadeToBlack&Gold View Post

    IMO, The Hill and The Atlantic have gotten very 'bothsidesy' since Biden took office. And we already know about CNN's rightward drift in the past year under their new management.
    The Hill has always leaned conservative. At least a few years ago the writing was solid now it is trash.

    Leave a comment:


  • dxmnkd316
    replied
    Originally posted by psych View Post

    Has The Atlantic went downhill recently?
    Yes, not recently, but violently. Ten years ago they were one of the (if not the) top shops in the industry. Thought-provoking and relatively balanced. Now it just feels like they're a bunch of semi-reformed neocons, trollnalists, and general morons.

    Leave a comment:


  • FadeToBlack&Gold
    replied
    Originally posted by psych View Post

    And I thought the lines before “…as guns become more ubiquitous, the motiveless and impulsive spree killers will be more likely to have one nearby when the impulse strikes” were more contrary to anything Drew has ever posted about guns than your part, but what do I know? The rest of that article is trash. Has The Atlantic went downhill recently?
    IMO, The Hill and The Atlantic have gotten very 'bothsidesy' since Biden took office. And we already know about CNN's rightward drift in the past year under their new management.

    Leave a comment:


  • St. Clown
    replied
    Originally posted by psych View Post

    And I thought the lines before “…as guns become more ubiquitous, the motiveless and impulsive spree killers will be more likely to have one nearby when the impulse strikes” were more contrary to anything Drew has ever posted about guns than your part, but what do I know? The rest of that article is trash. Has The Atlantic went downhill recently?
    Has it started going Diet Satire? Just one satire, not satirical enough?

    Leave a comment:


  • psych
    replied
    Originally posted by Kepler View Post

    Note:
    And I thought the lines before “…as guns become more ubiquitous, the motiveless and impulsive spree killers will be more likely to have one nearby when the impulse strikes” were more contrary to anything Drew has ever posted about guns than your part, but what do I know? The rest of that article is trash. Has The Atlantic went downhill recently?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
    Note:

    And as a matter of policy, the government should try to ensure that the embittered psychos who live among us are armed with nothing more dangerous than a pillow.

    Leave a comment:


  • Drew S.
    replied
    Right on the money https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...erican/672847/

    Leave a comment:


  • ticapnews
    replied
    California governor Gavin Newsome was visiting victims of the latest (or has there been another?) mass shooting and one told him he wanted to leave the hospital ASAP because he couldn't afford the medical bill.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by psych View Post

    Absolutely. I’m on board with banning 95% of privately owned weapons*, so any legislation that heads in that direction has my approval.

    *Disclaimer that I obviously know this is currently, and may always be, politically impossible to accomplish.
    I think only 6 shooters made before 1890 should be legal.

    If we are going to have shooters, at least have them be cool.

    As to the impossibility, someday the dam will burst. The laws in this country are about one hundred years behind the majority now, due to the poisoning of our politics by the marriage of Plute greed and Reactionary cowardice. Someday, the entire structure is going to give way from the sheer weight it is impeding, and modernity will pour through the legislative process like a summer rain relieving a parched desert. The US will jump from 1920 to 2040 in a few years and a flurry of Amendments, just like the catch up waves of progress before (Bill of Rights, Reconstruction, Progressive Era, New Deal, Civil Rights Era).

    A New Bill of Rights to bring America into the present:
    • ERA
    • Fix or repeal 2A
    • Abolish the EC
    • End the prison exemption of 13A
    • Modify the Senate to control inequality of representation
    • End gerrymandering
    • End the speech rights of fictive persons
    • Extend 1A protections to privacy
    • Health care and housing as rights of basic human dignity
    • Broad limits on personal wealth to protect democracy

    The Plutes know this. That is why they are erasing democracy before it drowns their serf fiefs.

    Humanity will survive conservatives and continue to slowly draw itself out of the sewer of tradition.


    Last edited by Kepler; 01-24-2023, 12:16 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • psych
    replied
    Originally posted by Kepler View Post

    It is possible to have opinions on multiple events simultaneously. If x responds to y's prior post rather than z's, z should not feel neglected.

    I am absolutely on board with a national ban on all military-style semiautomatic weapons, all high-capacity ammunition magazines and all parts that allow weapons to be so modified, within 5 days of this event. Who's with me?
    Absolutely. I’m on board with banning 95% of privately owned weapons*, so any legislation that heads in that direction has my approval.

    *Disclaimer that I obviously know this is currently, and may always be, politically impossible to accomplish.

    Leave a comment:


  • psych
    replied
    Originally posted by MichVandal View Post

    No, I don't. But it is bad to point out that debating whether a celebrity is guilty about an accidental death in the movie they are related with because of a gun is pretty darned irrelevant compared to multiple shootings of people? One accidental shooting death a while ago vs. 9 intentional ones in a day? Yea, one where a gun is allowed and used- but massive mistakes happened is interesting, but to have it dominate news vs. a shooting at a school and 7 in CA just seem off.

    Man, some of you get so triggered.

    And, yes, it REALLY bugs me that the 4 dead in Moscow get so very much national news over the continuous shooting all over the country. Just like that kid in Colorado 30 years ago got so very much news- one white kid over every other killing in cities. I can't even remember that kids name, but I never understood why THAT was so important compared to all the other kids dying in shootings.
    Me triggered? I’m not the one calling people out for not apparently being sufficiently angered by more mass shootings, as evidenced by the lack of comments on that particular mass shooting and commenting on something else that, sure, isn’t necessarily as tragic or important.
    But, it’s a message board. Since when is commenting on every single post about a mast shooting a requirement to be considered angry about the situation? My post about suicides and the dearth of comments/posts on here doesn’t mean we all care less about those deaths. You can point out we’re commenting about something other than mass shootings, but again, you’re acting like by us posting about something else, we don’t truly care about mass shootings, which by extension are far less important when it comes to deaths than suicides, which makes either all of us hypocritical, or just that it’s a message board.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by MichVandal View Post
    As I read the AP article, I see why it is being so downplayed. Which is very disappointing.
    I don't even know what this is code for, but I'm guessing it is because the shooter is non-white and whites are snowflakes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kepler
    replied
    Originally posted by MichVandal View Post

    DGF- that was to Kep and others who seemed to brush over that event. The shooting at the movie set was more an accident than anything else, whereas the 9 dead yesterday were very intentional.
    It is possible to have opinions on multiple events simultaneously. If x responds to y's prior post rather than z's, z should not feel neglected.

    I am absolutely on board with a national ban on all military-style semiautomatic weapons, all high-capacity ammunition magazines and all parts that allow weapons to be so modified, within 5 days of this event. Who's with me?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X