Gun Violence Makes Us Feel Powerless, But We're Not - General

[video=youtube;iDXlWTRyxgE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDXlWTRyxgE[/video] I don't watch The Late Show but this appeared in my recommended and thought it was nice.

I think I would legitimately vote for Stephen Colbert an all likelihood

[QUOTE=BlackWolf97;52864818]I think I would legitimately vote for Stephen Colbert an all likelihood[/QUOTE] But why? He's just an actor. If anything, the current president is a living example of why someone with absolutely zero political background should not be elected to the highest public office in the United States.

as nice as these impassioned speeches are, I'm really not impressed by repeated calls for someone to "do something" if after decades of gun violence, the only suggestion you have, the absolute [I]best[/I] you can do, is "do something", then maybe there really isn't anything we can do or at the very least, maybe you aren't the person people should be looking to for opinions on policy

[QUOTE=Hinterlight;52864844]But why? He's just an actor. If anything, the current president is a living example of why someone with absolutely zero political background should not be elected to the highest public office in the United States.[/QUOTE] Most of anyone is better at this point

iv'e heard this thousands of times. Why not come up with that "something" then talk to us.

[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;52864867]iv'e heard this thousands of times. Why not come up with that "something" then talk to us.[/QUOTE] Significantly increased gun control lol

[QUOTE=Hinterlight;52864844]But why? He's just an actor. If anything, the current president is a living example of why someone with absolutely zero political background should not be elected to the highest public office in the United States.[/QUOTE] Wasn't Reagan an actor before his presidency? Or did he hold office at some point as well? Not saying that I'd vote for Colbert as I personally feel someone should have held some sort of office at some point before being inaugurated. However that mindset allows these career politicians to continuously be elected, but I just feel the office of the presidency should require at least [I]some[/I] experience. I'd prefer to not have a president we have to potty train the first couple years before they start getting things done.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52864936]Significantly increased gun control lol[/QUOTE] LOL! Which would include what new laws?

[QUOTE=Jeezy;52864942]Wasn't Reagan an actor before his presidency? Or did he hold office at some point as well? Not saying that I'd vote for Colbert as I personally feel someone should have held some sort of office at some point before being inaugurated. However that mindset allows these career politicians to continuously be elected, but I just feel the office of the presidency should require at least [I]some[/I] experience. I'd prefer to not have a president we have to potty train the first couple years before they start getting things done.[/QUOTE] Ronald Reagan was the Governor of California before becoming President.

[QUOTE=Jeezy;52864942]Wasn't Reagan an actor before his presidency? [/QUOTE] [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan_filmography"]Yes he was[/URL].

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52864936]Significantly increased gun control lol[/QUOTE] Based on what i've read in the other thread, this guy legally shouldnt have been able to obtain a firearm, but the laws in place werent acted on to prevent him from doing so. The laws already in place should have prevented this, but the people in charge were incompetent.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52864936]Significantly increased gun control lol[/QUOTE] lmao how would that have helped? he was already not legally able to purchase a firearm, and the ATF background checks fucked it up and didn't catch the fact that he was dishonorably discharged how is implementing new laws going to fix the problem when the existing laws and backgrounds checks cant even fucking work right?

[QUOTE=Hinterlight;52864844]But why? He's just an actor. If anything, the current president is a living example of why someone with absolutely zero political background should not be elected to the highest public office in the United States.[/QUOTE] Mostly because I've been hearing him speak on the topic of politics (obviously scripted and obviously not all written by him) since 2005 and that's lead me to believe he's competent and capable of rational discussion, critical thinking, changing his mind, and considering all perspectives. Late 00's Colbert Report interviews, the 'Better Know a District' segment, or things like this are examples of why I consider him to be a politically competent man. [video=youtube;lFswnse0yGM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFswnse0yGM[/video] I think it's naive to assume that all celebrities are inherently incompetent at politics, or would be as corrupt as the current administration. I think some celebrities are capable of using their star power to speak to large portion of the population and either educate or persuade them on hot topics. So many people lately are amassing colossal followings akin to the TV show hosts of yesteryear and I think there's been far too much telling people what to think and far too less education and skepticism. If anything I think Trump is an example of why I [I]would[/I] vote for an actor, not the other way around. We already have a corrupt cult of personality twitter celeb as our nations leader, is a talk show host much worse than that? I can't imagine Stephen tweeting half of the horrible things our president has, for example. I think there would be a lot less division in our country and a lot more sentiments like the one the OP. I'm not saying I literally want Stephen Colbert to be the potus, I'm saying whoever it would be should in some ways model his behavior as it appears his heart is in the right place. Which is more than I can say for some US presidents...

[QUOTE]Move your village, build a fence or kill the tiger[/QUOTE] This sentence I really liked. It conveys your choices in the face of terror attacks. To be honest unless you're a ninja, there's no way of taking down a active shooter without your own gun. You can't hide until the cops show because the shooter has probably taken the inspiration from action movies and moving fast to kill as many people as he can. Unless you have the opportunity to fight back, your only hopes to survive are to get hit somewhere non-lethal and play dead until the cops come. I understand you're a pacifist, but in a country like the US where you got the mentally insane, street gangs, drug cartels, etc. It's already so far gone that there is no other option but to own even just a .38 revolver. No matter what gun control laws are passed, there will still be illegal firearms in the hands of cruel people. And those illegal firearms are military grade, which outmatch the guns you legally buy from a gun store.

[quote] in a country like the US where you got the mentally insane, street gangs, drug cartels, etc [/quote] Um, those types of people live all over the world, even in other first world countries? Not arguing for gun control but I feel your argument against it is pretty weak.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52864936]Significantly increased gun control lol[/QUOTE] That's great, but what is 'gun control' in your eyes? Just saying that alone doesn't mean anything. Are we going to implement laws that could make it harder for gun owners? Or laws that are actually going to be enforced unlike the one that would have stopped or slowed the Texas church shooter? Because that didn't help Whats your big plan on gun control? I'm sure you have tons of ideas that could work, but what are they?

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52864936]Significantly increased gun control lol[/QUOTE] Your incisive wit, cunning and intellect has solved the Gun Control Question. Tomorrow the United States Government will deploy specialized commando units to seize every civilian-owned firearm in the territorial United States, then relocate them to a smelting plant at an ad-hoc CIA black site in order to melt them down. Simultaneously, Congress shall create and pass a revised version of the current U.S. constitution with the controversial Second Amendment struck from it. This will be fast-tracked through House and Senate with a unanimous vote, then be signed in to law within the hour of it's inception by President Donald J. Trump, before it will be immediately ratified by every state in the union. Meanwhile, the USAF Cyberwarfare division will begin DDOSing and removing all firearm blueprints from the internet, both professional grade and zipgun tier. Special care will be given to pinpoint and drone-strike anyone who tries to coordinate a weapon's exchange using any digital media, no matter the cost or collateral. The U.S. Navy will act in coordination with the NSA, and TSA to ensure that no weapons from Mexico, Canada, the Post-Soviet states or any other part of the known world will enter American borders during the firearms purge. Finally, in the following weeks, every Sunday, all law abiding U.S. citizens will report to a local depot for gunpowder residue testing. Those found to have an unacceptable level of the substance about their person will be detained, and the location of their illegal murder-tubes will be dragged out of them in the most expeditious way possible. Those found in violation of the new [B]Increased Gun Control Act[/B] will be subject to the highest possible punishment available in the known world: Death by Shooting.

[QUOTE=Jeezy;52864942]Wasn't Reagan an actor before his presidency? Or did he hold office at some point as well? Not saying that I'd vote for Colbert as I personally feel someone should have held some sort of office at some point before being inaugurated. However that mindset allows these career politicians to continuously be elected, but I just feel the office of the presidency should require at least [I]some[/I] experience. I'd prefer to not have a president we have to potty train the first couple years before they start getting things done.[/QUOTE] He was also the President of SAG for sometime. While not completely political, it was definitely a good stepping stone.

good gun control scheme for the better tomorrow: Hand over all the guns to me. I have good intentions, you can trust me. Make me world leader. I just want everyone to have a good life. Hand over all first-born daughters to my harem. Just let me handle it all. You can trust me. don't argue!

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;52865587]Your incisive wit, cunning and intellect has solved the Gun Control Question. Tomorrow the United States Government will deploy specialized commando units to seize every civilian-owned firearm in the territorial United States, then relocate them to a smelting plant at an ad-hoc CIA black site in order to melt them down. Simultaneously, Congress shall create and pass a revised version of the current U.S. constitution with the controversial Second Amendment struck from it. This will be fast-tracked through House and Senate with a unanimous vote, then be signed in to law within the hour of it's inception by President Donald J. Trump, before it will be immediately ratified by every state in the union. Meanwhile, the USAF Cyberwarfare division will begin DDOSing and removing all firearm blueprints from the internet, both professional grade and zipgun tier. Special care will be given to pinpoint and drone-strike anyone who tries to coordinate a weapon's exchange using any digital media, no matter the cost or collateral. The U.S. Navy will act in coordination with the NSA, and TSA to ensure that no weapons from Mexico, Canada, the Post-Soviet states or any other part of the known world will enter American borders during the firearms purge. Finally, in the following weeks, every Sunday, all law abiding U.S. citizens will report to a local depot for gunpowder residue testing. Those found to have an unacceptable level of the substance about their person will be detained, and the location of their illegal murder-tubes will be dragged out of them in the most expeditious way possible. Those found in violation of the new [B]Increased Gun Control Act[/B] will be subject to the highest possible punishment available in the known world: Death by Shooting.[/QUOTE] You forgot just one thing. Millions will lose there jobs.

[QUOTE=Crazy Ivan;52865587]Your incisive wit, cunning and intellect has solved the Gun Control Question.[/QUOTE] Yeah but where do the FEMA camps come in?

I love how they talk about "gun violence" being such a problem, and it potentially is. Yet they're so damn shallow about what they want to do to fix it. It's always about "if only guns were banned or extremely limited, this wouldn't have happened" A massive amount of "gun deaths" in the United States are either suicides, which "gun control" would not help (unless you plan on an outright ban on every firearm imaginable, even if you got your Fully Automatic High Capacity Magazine Clip Assault Rifles™ banned, there is a hunting rifle and shotgun in every nook and cranny of this country), and gang/cartel related violence in the deepest, poorest areas of our country. Instead of looking at WHY 80% of gun related deaths happen in this country, we look at how, what gun was used, and then lump it into a big convenient number ("TENS OF THOUSANDS DIE EACH YEAR TO GUNS") without actually trying to help anyone. Suicide prevention and mental health relief for those who are going through depression is an issue largely ignored, and that results in a fair bit of "gun violence". But they'd rather go after the guns??? Gang violence is perpetuated by indoctrinated children who grow up in terrible, poor conditions in Detroit and Chicago, and have no other way out, no way of getting an education, and know nothing else other than gang affiliations and brotherhoods. But nobody ever tries to do anything. If Mom's Demand Action or whoever put even half of their donation income into helping out and pulling people out of poverty in Chicago, they'd actually be helping. But they don't. They lobby for the banning of the guns themselves for some reason, because that's easier. It's a scapegoat. [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/hwNi85B.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/uTG0cAK.png[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/OwrHz05.png[/img_thumb] Sources are at the bottom of all of them.

One thing I hate is the whole argument "Less guns means less gun violence/gun suicides", which is stupid because no shit less guns means less gun violence. That's like saying having less cars statistically is proven to have less car accidents. It doesn't mean anything. [editline]7th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Bomimo;52865686]good gun control scheme for the better tomorrow: Hand over all the guns to me. I have good intentions, you can trust me. Make me world leader. I just want everyone to have a good life. Hand over all first-born daughters to my harem. Just let me handle it all. You can trust me. don't argue![/QUOTE] I completely trust this man and will devote my life to his empire

[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;52864867]iv'e heard this thousands of times. Why not come up with that "something" then talk to us.[/QUOTE] We should take all the guns in America and push them somewhere else.

Let's not forget that the people who write our laws do not understand firearms at all: [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ospNRk2uM3U[/media] She doesn't know what a barrel shroud is (a safety feature preventing you from burning yourself on a hot gun barrel), and yet writes legislation to ban it. And these are the people writing our laws.

America didn't act like nothing could be done after 9/11, not sure why guns are radically different.

[QUOTE=Sharkcheater;52864947]LOL! Which would include what new laws?[/QUOTE] Limit access and recall Assault/Fully Automatic rifles, leave Bolt Action/Hunting/Shotguns in place, works for Hunters, Range Users and Safety. Problem is the US is so fucked with it's Gun Worship that this will never happen.

[QUOTE=Whibble;52865906]I love how they talk about "gun violence" being such a problem, and it potentially is. Yet they're so damn shallow about what they want to do to fix it. It's always about "if only guns were banned or extremely limited, this wouldn't have happened" A massive amount of "gun deaths" in the United States are either suicides, which "gun control" would not help (unless you plan on an outright ban on every firearm imaginable, even if you got your Fully Automatic High Capacity Magazine Clip Assault Rifles™ banned, there is a hunting rifle and shotgun in every nook and cranny of this country), and gang/cartel related violence in the deepest, poorest areas of our country. Instead of looking at WHY 80% of gun related deaths happen in this country, we look at how, what gun was used, and then lump it into a big convenient number ("TENS OF THOUSANDS DIE EACH YEAR TO GUNS") without actually trying to help anyone. Suicide prevention and mental health relief for those who are going through depression is an issue largely ignored, and that results in a fair bit of "gun violence". But they'd rather go after the guns??? Gang violence is perpetuated by indoctrinated children who grow up in terrible, poor conditions in Detroit and Chicago, and have no other way out, no way of getting an education, and know nothing else other than gang affiliations and brotherhoods. But nobody ever tries to do anything. If Mom's Demand Action or whoever put even half of their donation income into helping out and pulling people out of poverty in Chicago, they'd actually be helping. But they don't. They lobby for the banning of the guns themselves for some reason, because that's easier. It's a scapegoat. [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/hwNi85B.jpg[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/uTG0cAK.png[/img_thumb] [img_thumb]https://i.imgur.com/OwrHz05.png[/img_thumb] Sources are at the bottom of all of them.[/QUOTE] If only the CDC could research gun violence... oh wait they cant because of the gun lobby

[QUOTE=Redcoat893;52866183]Limit access and recall Assault/Fully Automatic rifles, leave Bolt Action/Hunting/Shotguns in place, works for Hunters, Range Users and Safety. Problem is the US is so fucked with it's Gun Worship that this will never happen.[/QUOTE] IIRC 90% of gun crime is committed with handguns. [QUOTE=Lambeth;52866166]America didn't act like nothing could be done after 9/11, not sure why guns are radically different.[/QUOTE] You know, i could've sworn i saw you in the SH thread where people were actually discussing what solutions could be had. Interesting that you say that.