• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Islamic Dilemma

Deacs89 said:
although I believe there definitely should be a better vetting process as it relates to gun ownership I do laugh at the left crying that the death penalty doesn't deter crime but harsher gun laws will prevent criminals from getting guns.
Click to expand...

I don't know the exact number, but there are so few people landing on death row these days that I seriously doubt it's much of a crime deterrent. If you commit a crime serious enough to be sentenced to death, you probably didn't give a shit about your own life in the first place.

Strict gun control laws will reduce the number of guns in circulation and make it harder for potential criminals to have access to them. Harsher gun laws will never stop all violent crime, but that doesn't mean it's not worth a look. These gun control measures are more for the everyday criminal, not the maniacs that commit mass murder (although limiting access to guns probably wouldn't hurt here, either).
 
Deacs89 said:
although I believe there definitely should be a better vetting process as it relates to gun ownership I do laugh at the left crying that the death penalty doesn't deter crime but harsher gun laws will prevent criminals from getting guns.
Click to expand...

Did you just pick random things out of the air? They have nothing in common.

Gun control makes it more difficult for criminals to get guns, which are an important instrument in many, if not most, violent crimes. Lack of access to guns can prevent crime ex ante. It's not just about inflicting harsher punishments for gun possession, it's about actually decreasing the number of guns available.

The death penalty doesn't take effect until afterwards. And it's ridiculous to suggest that would-be murderers are deterred up front by the death penalty when the alternative is life without parole. You really think that that difference keeps people from committing murders?
 
While we're making comparisons I do think it's kinda funny how people will say the drug war failed because we've spent a lot of money on it and there are still a lot of drugs but then think "banning" guns is a good solution. Just trading one hopeless war on _____ for another there.
 
tintinisahottie said:
While we're making comparisons I do think it's kinda funny how people will say the drug war failed because we've spent a lot of money on it and there are still a lot of drugs but then think the welfare state is a good solution. Just trading one hopeless war on _____ for another there.
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
tintinisahottie said:
While we're making comparisons I do think it's kinda funny how people will say the drug war failed because we've spent a lot of money on it and there are still a lot of drugs but then think "banning" guns is a good solution. Just trading one hopeless war on _____ for another there.
Click to expand...

The war on drugs isn't a failure because there are still drugs getting into the country. It's a failure because we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the free world, and millions of Americans are imprisoned for non-violent drug crime (with minorities being imprisoned at a disproportionate rate). Legalizing marijuana and taxing it like alcohol would create billions in tax revenue, and take out a large chunk of the black market demand. The war on drugs is a failure because it makes no god damn sense.

I'm not sure that any reasonable person is arguing to "ban all guns". If they were to ban them all, however, there is no doubt that gun crime would drop significantly. There would still be gun related crime and deaths, but there's no way it wouldn't drop. Any meaningful gun control measure will limit the supply, drive up the price of illegal weapons, and keep them out of the hands of the common criminal. That being said, I wouldn't vote to ban all guns, and there's no way anything like that would ever pass in the current climate.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
Just curious, how many people/families do you personally know who receive welfare?
Click to expand...

#anecdotes are fun, but you didn't have to be a mariner to realize the Titanic was sinking. It is time for the poop deck band on the S.S. Welfare State to close their set, Juice.
 
Unpredeactable said:
The war on drugs isn't a failure because there are still drugs getting into the country. It's a failure because we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the free world, and millions of Americans are imprisoned for non-violent drug crime (with minorities being imprisoned at a disproportionate rate). Legalizing marijuana and taxing it like alcohol would create billions in tax revenue, and take out a large chunk of the black market demand. The war on drugs is a failure because it makes no god damn sense.

I'm not sure that any reasonable person is arguing to "ban all guns". If they were to ban them all, however, there is no doubt that gun crime would drop significantly. There would still be gun related crime and deaths, but there's no way it wouldn't drop. Any meaningful gun control measure will limit the supply, drive up the price of illegal weapons, and keep them out of the hands of the common criminal. That being said, I wouldn't vote to ban all guns, and there's no way anything like that would ever pass in the current climate.
Click to expand...

This is a very good post.
 
jhmd2000 said:
#anecdotes are fun, but you didn't have to be a mariner to realize the Titanic was sinking. It is time for the poop deck band on the S.S. Welfare State to close their set, Juice.
Click to expand...

#anecdotes are #anecdotes, but your lack of personal connection to anyone receiving personal government assistance (you probably know lots of people who benefit from corporate welfare) may explain your inability/refusal to empathize.
 
JuiceCrewAllStar said:
#anecdotes are #anecdotes, but your lack of personal connection to anyone receiving personal government assistance (you probably know lots of people who benefit from corporate welfare) may explain your inability/refusal to empathize.
Click to expand...

What you characterize as "inability/refusal to emphathize" might also be characterized as a failure to accept unacceptable failure.
 
so, when you meet a struggling family or see a Toys For Tots bin, you're first feeling is "I'm sorry, but empathizing with you would only further your misery. good day to you, Mr. Cratchit"
 
ImTheCaptain said:
so, when you meet a struggling family or see a Toys For Tots bin, you're first feeling is "I'm sorry, but empathizing with you would only further your misery. good day to you, Mr. Cratchit"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I bet he hates all of this evidence of failure invading his upper middle class world this time of year.
 
WFFaithful said:
Yeah, I bet he hates all of this evidence of failure invading his upper middle class world this time of year.
Click to expand...

Why should other families---generations on end----have to settle for the same broken outcome that isn't good enough for your family? At what point does your compassion tolerate reform (and possibly admitting your past mistakes)?
 
jhmd2000 said:
Why should other families---generations on end----have to settle for the same broken outcome that isn't good enough for your family? At what point does your compassion tolerate reform (and possibly admitting your past mistakes)?
Click to expand...

My family was graced with a ton of #privilege. You don't get to choose in what family you are born. Plain old hard work is not enough to get ahead anymore.
 
WFFaithful said:
My family was graced with a ton of #privilege. You don't get to choose in what family you are born. Plain old hard work is not enough to get ahead anymore.
Click to expand...

Thank God for subsistence, multigenerational government dependency programs, right? What would we do without them?
 
jhmd, Im still waiting on those numbers you were going to provide regarding the folks who are gaming the entitlements system vs those who are truly in need.

I know you remember because you are a smart poster with an airtight memory and good attention to detail, so you can't pull a Wrangor and 'forget.'

It would be great if I could go ahead and get those soon so we can have something fun to discuss over the holidays.

Thanks.
 
WakeandBake said:
jhmd, Im still waiting on those numbers you were going to provide regarding the folks who are gaming the entitlements system vs those who are truly in need.

I know you remember because you are a smart poster with an airtight memory and good attention to detail, so you can't pull a Wrangor and 'forget.'

It would be great if I could go ahead and get those soon so we can have something fun to discuss over the holidays.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

You do a fine job of shifting the focus from the failures of your policies (egregious, manifest and inflicting ongoing and irreparable damage) to blaming people that the system exploits (something no one other than you is doing). Are there people gaming the system? Of course (we both know this) but far more damage is being done in reverse (something your enormous (and baseless) pride refuses to admit).

Dependency is not the answer, but it's the opiate your preferred system provides. That is a shame and we can do better. Can't we?
 
No see, we have gone down this road many times and established that entitlement services have a rightful place in our society for those in need, and that your beef and the harmful/damaging part was the gaming of the system. We both agreed on that point. We posted for pages about back-to-work programs and other thoughtful solutions. Then I asked you what percentage of entitlement recipients were, in fact, gaming the system.

This is essential to the whole solution, don't you think? If you agree that there are people in need who use the service properly, then its total elimination is not even on the table. It comes down to eliminating the gamers.

We need to know how many there are and we can begin to build a solution. I know you are an astute numbers man, and an all around well-read man. So I know you wouldn't form the cornerstone of your theory on the working/poor class without knowing these numbers backward and forward.

So lay them on me, man. Let's see them!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top