Willbacker
Ravens Ring of Honor
Always forgive. Plus yes we all Ravens fans and that's one thing all of us can 100% agree on.
-
Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.
The Well-Mannered Politics Thread
- Thread starter usmccharles
- Start date
- Status
Always forgive. Plus yes we all Ravens fans and that's one thing all of us can 100% agree on.
52520Andrew
Pro Bowler
They didn't go in because they were scared, I think we can all agree on that. And I am no police officer but I am sure they aren't all running around with AR-15s. Would arming them AR-15s themselves have caused the officers to go in? Not sure but I strongly suspect it would have been better than what we got.
Whose playbook do you think they got that stuff from? And make no mistake, I am no democrat, I voted 3rd party in 2016 because I couldn't stomach voting for either side and went Romney in 2012. Both of these parties stink and care more for their own agenda than they do helping people. You don't need to convince me the Dems aren't perfect, I already know that. Look at the gerrymandering going on in Maryland as another example. Doesn't change my opinion that we need to do SOMETHING about all these mass shootings or they will continue to get worse.
It looks like Trump is nearing completion on an order to ban them. At least it is something. Shouldn't have taken more than a week after Vegas though and the only reason it is happening is the uptick in people wanting gun control after the latest shooting.
Last edited:
K-Dog
MVP
I can't see that ever happening on anything remotely close to a unanimous scale.
This guy is SO hated.
K-Dog
MVP
No, no we can't.
EDIT:
Where did the rest of my post go?
I read something somewhere that a "stand down" was ordered.
K-Dog
MVP
There is nothing to forgive.Always forgive. Plus yes we all Ravens fans and that's one thing all of us can 100% agree on.
I have a few here on "hide" I suspect one of them recently insulted me, but I have no clue who or what was said, so no worries whatsoever.
There is nothing to forgive, there is just people on here I have no desire to interact with.
Last edited:
52520Andrew
Pro Bowler
Then why didn't they go in if they weren't scared? Legitimately curious on this one
K-Dog
MVP
Check my edit.
Inqui
Pro Bowler
Like I say I'm happy to give him a huge amount of credit for what I regard as his role in getting NK to talk (so I'm feeling a little ignored here when everyone says no-one gives him credit for anything
). Even if it's just Kim stalling for time and trying to buy a few months with a pointless meeting that he knows will go nowhere, dialogue is always better than threats and other forms of escalation. And that's a legitimate achievement in the most important role in office that no-one else has managed as far as I can recall.With that said, any attempts to strike a deal won't be helped by the fact that this is probably the most gutted and understaffed State Department in modern history (there are legitimate downsides to a dogmatic "smaller government" approach). I'm also a little sceptical about how much he does is for show being the brilliant TV guy that he is (bombing that Syrian base after his "many many red lines" speech is an easy example to cite, especially given it was functioning again within a few hours iirc) and I'm also aware that ramping up talk of nuclear armageddon carries a lot of risk if something goes wrong - say a NK missile test goes awry and hits a Japanese base or someone panics during a training drill and shoots down someone else's plane - and that has to be factored into any grand strategy, so I have yet to be won over in terms of this grand strategy for the peninsula. Especially considering his first strategy of asking China to put pressure on them didn't work. But like I say a win's a win, and having that meeting is a win as far as I'm concerned. And we'll see what comes of it.
52520Andrew
Pro Bowler
Ah gotcha, I don't know about that. I mean the school security guard definitely should have gone in regardless. Also it sounds like almost all of the police officers went in so I don't see it. You have to wonder how effective a stand down order would have been with a potential active shooter in the school. We know how effective stand down orders are in Baltimore after the riots right?
52520Andrew
Pro Bowler
This study goes over quite a bit of stuff but all I could really find for defensive use was more into defensive use vs crimes committed with guns. Nothing in here comparing how many lives are saved to how many people die from guns. In fact the word "lives" appears twice in the entire study and "saved" doesn't appear once.
"Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use."
"Estimates of gun use for self-defense vary widely, in part due to definitional differences for self-defensive gun use; different data sources; and questions about accuracy of data, particularly when self-reported. The NCVS has estimated 60,000 to 120,000 defensive uses of guns per year. On the basis of data from 1992 and 1994, the NCVS found 116,000 incidents (McDowall et al., 1998). Another body of research estimated annual gun use for self-defense to be much higher, up to 2.5 million incidents, suggesting that self-defense can be an important crime deterrent (Kleck and Gertz, 1995). Some studies on the association between self-defensive gun use and injury or loss to the victim have found less loss and injury when a firearm is used (Kleck, 2001b)."
The first quoted part compares the defensive use of guns to crimes used by them. Looks like there are indeed more defensive uses than crimes committed although the number of defensive uses is definitely uncertain. From here(https://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/) around 17,250 people were murdered in the U.S. in 2016. The fact that there were about 300,000 uses of guns in crimes but 17,250 total murders(and this includes manslaughter) suggests that even if guns are being used in self defense only during use of violent crimes using firearms, the number of lives saved is probably much less than that. Of course you could argue that this is all because the good guy with a gun for the reason only 17,250 died out of 300,000 violent gun crimes but since less than half of Americans own guns and half the guns in the country are owned by 3% of the people, I'm gonna call that unlikely.
Second part really echos my main concerns stated with self defense related to guns, completely subjective and tough to have an unbiased number either way.
Furthermore most gun deaths are from suicides, I think over 20,000 which is more than the total number of homicides so factoring that in, it is tough to really say the number of lives saved vs the number of people killed by guns. Also this next part reflects my opinion on suicides with guns.
"Most firearm-related deaths are suicides. Fifty percent of suicides are by firearm and 60 percent of firearm deaths are suicides (Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2013). Research demonstrates that the proportion of suicide by firearm is greater in areas with higher household gun ownership (NRC, 2005). Further, two studies found “a small but significant fraction of gun suicides are committed within days to weeks after the purchase of a handgun, and both [studies] also indicate that gun purchasers have an elevated risk of suicide for many years after the purchase of the gun” (NRC, 2005, p. 181)."
TLDR: Overall this study doesn't really go into your argument that "the number of lives saved by guns is significantly higher than those killed by guns" so I think we can dismiss this argument. But given the high degree of uncertainty as to what defensive uses with guns are, it is tough to really say anything about it. Also people underestimate the number of suicide deaths from guns, doesn't come up much in gun control debates.
EDIT: Formatting
Last edited:
Dom McRaven
Hall of Famer
I don't even think Trump cares if CNN finally gives him credit for this. Wouldn't take long until they go back to "normal."
No kidding. And with how divided country, there'll never be a "unanimous scale" when it comes to Trump.
Sledge Hammer
Pro Bowler
Couple questions. How is it these shootings happen more often whenever gun control is already a hot topic?? Then what are school mates doing on the news a day or 2 later?? with speeches that were clearly written by people with years of experience in gun ban activism??
Sledge Hammer
Pro Bowler
I would beg to differ with Raven with the his sexual assault allegations against Trump. HE is misinformed!!
The Raven
Veteran
You're right. We were better off with the millionaire, slave owning, aristocratic class running the country.
You know what, I'll apologize for the name calling. That's out of line, and I'm sorry.
Also, Freedom of Assembly can be applied in this case. The freedom protects the right of people to assemble publicly or privately. K-Dog's assertion that going to a public place is an earned privilege and not a right is downright laughable. Segregation -- under which people could have white only private businesses -- was struck down on the basis of Freedom of Assembly. In other words, the court decided that the right to assemble did extend to private property.
According to Lincoln University, "While the right to peaceful assembly is primarily intended to protect freedom of people to express themselves in public places, the courts have interpreted that, in some instances, this constitutional protection may be extended to private property as well. The first attempt to provide a constitutional basis for the protection of free expression on private property occurred in the mid-1940s."
If the courts say privately owned businesses can't discriminate, then surely it stands to reason that there's some inherent right to go to private places, contrary to K-Dog's statement.
And okay, so the company, of which Trump was the head, filed for bankruptcy. Trump still signed the paperwork, no?
Last edited:
The Raven
Veteran
Because shootings happen pretty fucking frequently
that is the most shallow, reductive, classless and stupid letter I've ever read
EDIT: i was so dumbfounded by the letter ive had to go and look up the teacher who wrote it - he since seems to have changed his stance a bit- the letter is from february 19th here are his comments since:
Blair said his attitude about the student protest has changed since he wrote the post in late February. “I thought the walkout was going to be a novelty, but I see the sincerity and I support the students,” he said, adding that he hopes they have a peaceful and civil protest.
“The real issue is that the horse is out of the barn,” Blair said. “The guns are out there and the real key is to keep them locked away and in a safe,” he added. “If you prevent someone from buying a semiautomatic, that’s great,” he added, but not that effective if “he can go out and get one anyway” from a private owner.
either way the letter was probably an emotional reaction by the teacher to hearing something but its still immensely reductive
Willbacker
Ravens Ring of Honor
Trust me the media will not put forth students that strongly believe in the 2nd amendment. They found the 2 they need.
K-Dog
MVP
you kidding me?
he's essentially blaming kids for their own murders...
he's completely disregarding that every child is different in terms of their desire to be social (or not)...
he's completely disparaging an entire generation as stereotypically self-involved, lacking sensitivity, lacking empathy and obsessed with status
he's blaming school shootings on kids with behavioural problems...
he's suggesting also that kids are responsible for the burden of dealing with issues of people they dont even know - that’s an inappropriate load for him to expect children to carry...
he constantly says “He could likely be our next shooter."
-No. It’s not likely. It’s actually entirely unlikely. Basic common awareness of statistics says that the vast majority of lonely kids never become school shooters.
the author of that open letter is doing a huge disservice to children who struggle enough as it is by portraying antisocial or emotionally impaired student as “likely” mass murderers
there's a fallacy inherent to his argument anyway - it’s incredibly presumptuous of that former teacher to assume that every child sitting alone wants to be included in social activities
im not saying that kids shouldnt be nicer to each other - but its not like they should be forced to interact with people outside of their comfort zone necessarily... why is that their duty?
and since when do adults tell kids to be friends with someone, just so that they don’t get shot up?
Plus, he deflects responsibility from where it ought to rest. They are children. It should be the job of adults to keep them safe. Every single one of them... Including the child sitting in the corner of the lunch room alone.
i also dont really get the point of the argument either in the first place: even if this was a legitimate fix why does the students marching on 1 day together preclude them from walking up to these "lonely" kids every or any other day of the year?
how low has it got that kids are being blamed pre-emptively for their own future murders?
- Status