• Multiple marines, police officers wounded and killed in attack in Chattanooga, TN
    219 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;48227210]For the most part, we're looking at Law Enforcement taking on the role of forcefully disarming the population. The President isn't allowed to deploy the Military to act as Law Enforcement, Congress must Authorize it first. The only way the Military can be deployed without Congressional Authorization is if Law Enforcement completely fail to maintain order. Governors can deploy the National Guard if they declare a State of Emergency.[/QUOTE] american law enforcement officers would never disarm the population neither would the military [editline]17th July 2015[/editline] most people wouldnt follow an order like that
[QUOTE=Leon;48227322]american law enforcement officers would never disarm the population neither would the military [editline]17th July 2015[/editline] most people wouldnt follow an order like that[/QUOTE] I misunderstood your post to mean "The police and military will be armed against the citizens" rather than "against the government.", my bad.
[QUOTE=KnightSolaire;48223854]I have no idea how americans defend their gun culture and laws when it obviously doesn't work. Seriously. Ps. I'm the owner of a shotgun in the UK. Inb4uknownothingbritbong[/QUOTE] Our gun laws work really good considering that way less than 1% of Americans get shot per year in the United States.
[QUOTE=cqbcat;48227416]Our gun laws work really good considering that way less than 1% of Americans get shot per year in the United States.[/QUOTE] That's kind of a retarded argument considering the fact that America is filled with over 300 million people.
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;48227523]That's kind of a retarded argument considering the fact that America is filled with over 300 million people.[/QUOTE] And we have anywhere from 300-310 million firearms in private hands
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;48227523]That's kind of a retarded argument considering the fact that America is filled with over 300 million people.[/QUOTE] So ratios don't matter?
[QUOTE=TornadoAP;48227523]That's kind of a retarded argument considering the fact that America is filled with over 300 million people.[/QUOTE] No it's not. Even if you had a country with only ten thousand people, less than one hundred people would be gun shot victims and even fewer would be fatal. If you only had pne hundred people in America, no one would ever die cause the gun crime isn't even high enough to kill 1 out of 100. Anyone getting murdered is tragic, but the problem is so small, it's trivial. If someone is going around killing people, let law enforcement take of the asshole and then lock him up forever. No need to bother millions and millions of American's gun rights.
The problem with gun control that I have is that almost all gun control will have disproportionate effect on lower income groups, and with the current legislation on the books, it'll inevitably make it so if you don't make more then $40,000 to $50,000 a year, you'll be unable to ever realistically keep a firearm up and running. Needing to purchase a safe, needing to have several files with local departments, having to report firearm loss even if you are unaware of it(California = 5 years in prison if you don't), and with how some people expect regulations to work... If some current politicians had their way, any soldiers returning from combat zones that show signs of PTSD would be disallowed from ever owning a firearm again because they might snap. The greatest issues relating to murder and suicide are things which can only be tackled by dealing with the socioeconomic issues and restructuring the healthcare system in it's entirety. Dealing with socioeconomic problems is going to be a damn nightmare because it'd require us to deal with things such as why people reoffend after committing crimes, dealing with jobs not hiring someone with a small infraction on their criminal record, and rebuilding the education system so that poorer neighborhoods are not a dead end that leads into gangs. As for the current healthcare system, one of the massive problems with people getting help for their problems is the massive stigma that can be felt by actually looking for help(not even to mention the cost! :eng101s:), and the fact that with how most meds for depression and the like take time to set in, and sometimes can take months of flip-flopping, it's really just a slow and very painful sluggish pace. I feel another issue when approaching mental healthcare is that you can be punished for finding something out that you were unaware of up till that point. You could have a completely clean criminal record, been a good citizen, done civi duties, babysit at an animal center, but because you get one infraction on your record from mental healthcare, you can be disallowed from holding certain career options, restrained or disallowed from certain rights, and you could be shuffled in and out of certain meds for months at a time which can cause you to enter a slump. Naturally speaking, we need to find a way to deal with all of these issues because if we don't, people will not stop entering crime gangs, those with mental problems will not look for help, and with further restrictions we'll only continue to remove the rights of those who earn less then you and I. I'm not sure if I hold this idea alone, but I believe the people who most likely need firarms are the ones in crime areas as they are more susceptible to violence and break-ins. Why punish them if only a certain number of the people in their areas are committing those crimes? It just doesn't make sense to me in the long run. I apologize for switching in and out of a few topics, I just feel that the current issue cannot be fixed with only some gun regulations. It's a far larger beast that needs to be dealt with.
Is there any new information on the attack, such as the motive behind it?
[QUOTE=redonkulous;48225066]That's not really comparable. Hunting rifles designed around the mouser action are still designed for hunting rifles. You don't put a sports car transmission in a Ford Focus and call it a sports car. The AR-15 is an M-16 without the automatic fire option. A sports car that has been limited to 80 mph is still a sports car, just a less fun sports car.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=redonkulous;48225212]You're back to arguing semantics rather than trying to come up with facts that disprove the points people try and make. [/QUOTE] ??? You're literally arguing semantics. A Mauser-derived hunting rifle is a hunting rifle designed around a military rifle's action. An AR-15-derived hunting or target rifle is a hunting or target rifle designed around a military rifle's action. The practice of designing civilian weapons after the actions of military ones goes back well over a hundred years, and the practice of straight-up selling the same weapon to both military and civilian customers goes back all the way to the founding of our country. An AR-15 is an M-16 without the automatic fire option. A Remington 700 is a Mauser without a bayonet mount. A Safari BAR is a purely civilian weapon never meant for military use, but it's a semi-automatic firing the same round as the bolt-action Remington. Whether a gun is designed for military or civilian use is essentially worthless semantics, because both are designed to the same purpose of propelling bits of metal at high speed. It's inherently a semantic argument meant to play off emotions, not a meaningful categorization.
Anyone who wears a military uniform should be given a side arm because walking around in those things is like walking around dressed as a target for people like this. As for gun laws, had there not been any guns in this country for him to get a hold of, he'd just do it with a knife (Like in the UK) or with a home made bomb The US has 42% of the world's arms, 9 out of 10 homes have a weapon, yet we're no where close to the most gun related homicides per 100,000 people as a lot of countries, some who have dick all for weapons in its citizen's hands
[QUOTE=redonkulous;48225066]That's not really comparable. Hunting rifles designed around the mouser action are still designed for hunting rifles. You don't put a sports car transmission in a Ford Focus and call it a sports car. The AR-15 is an M-16 without the automatic fire option. A sports car that has been limited to 80 mph is still a sports car, just a less fun sports car.[/QUOTE] The Mauser action was designed for hunting doughboys.
[QUOTE=TheTalon;48230036]Anyone who wears a military uniform should be given a side arm because walking around in those things is like walking around dressed as a target for people like this. As for gun laws, had there not been any guns in this country for him to get a hold of, he'd just do it with a knife (Like in the UK) or with a home made bomb [/QUOTE] That is a stupid idea. These assaults on military men are no where near widespread or common enough to warrant arming every single soldier in uniform, especially on home soil.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;48229849]Is there any new information on the attack, such as the motive behind it?[/QUOTE] I think they mentioned he was inspired by ISIS but wasn't actually connected.
[QUOTE=Grimhound;48224158]The more we marginalize people the more this shit is going to happen. We need a push for unity as a nation. A renewed sense of togetherness. Something to bring everyone together despite their differences. To break down the barriers of hatred and cultural opposition. A sense of duty and purpose as a nation. We need to dissolve the enclaves and get everyone interacting. We need to get people, especially young people, involved in something that promotes and strengthens the bonds of society. We need to overcome the gangs and cults and extremists that prey on youth by using their own methods against them to involve people in making for a better future. Not just for out nation, but for our world. Fancy words aside, I'm not sure how exactly we can do that. My thoughts on the matter have been to fund more community centers and get people involved in team-building exercises. Whether that involves building and cultivating community gardens or running pen & paper RPGs and card game tournaments. It gives people something to do and encourages cooperation. Builds relationships. Takes in people that might otherwise be taken in by others and radicalized and gives them a feeling of brotherhood.[/QUOTE] I appreciate what you have to say on the subject, and think it was very well stated. I don't do nearly as good a job of it as I would like, but this is exactly what I have been trying to advocate since the Charlie Hebdo shootings refreshed the tensions with Muslims, and why I felt the reflexive backlash of things like "draw Mohammed" parties to be such a toxic display. Extremism and ethnic tensions bloom proportionally. One feeds the other. Fighting the growth of groups like ISIS, and reducing the amount of individual crusaders, starts with disproving the argument that the world is at war with their culture. Ignorance and hatred go both ways; a fear, distrust, or hatred of Muslims provokes similar feelings right back, which feeds into the propaganda networks of extremist organizations. The military plays a crucial role in directly fighting the physical force of these groups and their supporters, but if the emotional and societal aspects remain unaddressed, new hostilities will take root. We could do serious long-term damage to the growth and sustainability of religious and cultural extremism by coming together as a society and finding new ways for differing cultures to integrate and benefit from one another.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48230178]We could do serious long-term damage to the growth and sustainability of religious and cultural extremism by coming together as a society and finding new ways for our differing cultures to integrate and benefit from one another.[/QUOTE] What benefits do Islamic culture bring to the table for America?
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;48230216]What benefits do Islamic culture bring to the table for America?[/QUOTE] The same as every other culture. Art, music, history, tradition, food, architecture, faith and spirituality, style, ideas, etc, etc. It's one of the world's oldest and most complex cultural and ethnic groups, and despite its troubled history it has a lot of beauty. You might as well argue that nobody has any cultural worth at all if you think that Islamic culture has nothing to offer the world.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48230226]The same as every other culture. Art, music, history, tradition, food, style, [b]ideas[/b], etc, etc. It's one of the world's earliest cultures, and despite its troubled history it has a lot of beauty. You might as well ask what point there is to culture at all.[/QUOTE] Who is opposing these things? America already appreciates and welcomes these sorts of things from the Islamic world (Coincidentally, I just ate at a Persian restaurant yesterday). I'm concerned about what specific ideas you're talking about though.
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;48230262]Who is opposing these things? America already appreciates and welcomes these sorts of things from the Islamic world (Coincidentally, I just ate at a Persian restaurant yesterday). I'm concerned about what specific ideas you're talking about though.[/QUOTE] What are you goading him toward? I feel like you're beating around the bush waiting for him to say something particular for you to come out against. We all know you're anti-Islam.
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;48230262]Who is opposing these things? America already appreciates and welcomes these sorts of things from the Islamic world (Coincidentally, I just ate at a Persian restaurant yesterday). I'm concerned about what specific ideas you're talking about though.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure I understand what you mean? I'll try to respond, but some clarification of your point would help. I don't mean to imply that there is a zero tolerance policy of the Islamic culture and faith outside of the Middle East, if that's what you're trying to argue. Certainly, a level of integration and exchange has occurred and is impossible to avoid. However, it seems impossible to deny that the rift between Western and Middle Eastern cultures has grown significantly in the last decade or so, most notably in Europe, which has a much higher concentration of immigrants and refugees. I also don't mean to imply that religious extremism can be completely eradicated with social policy, if that is what you're hinting towards. So long as different belief systems exist, a small percentage of loons will go to extreme measures in the name of those beliefs. This is true of every cultural group, and is in no way unique to the Islamic faith or general ethnic demographic. What I am simply trying to argue is that greater exchange and integration of cultural assets and values between groups is necessary to creating a greater sense of unity, and thus reducing the tensions that extremist organizations exploit in their recruiting efforts. By extension, I am also arguing that hostile reactions to belief systems as a whole based on the actions of a radicalized minority feeds the rifts that allows radicalism to thrive and expand by giving fuel to propaganda and exploitative leaders.
Chatty is just 50 minutes West of me here in Old Fort. It's a shitty thing, but it bugs me even more having it happen somewhat close to home.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48230341]I'm not sure I understand what you mean? I'll try to respond, but some clarification of your point would help. I don't mean to imply that there is a zero tolerance policy of the Islamic culture and faith outside of the Middle East, if that's what you're trying to argue. Certainly, a level of integration and exchange has occurred and is impossible to avoid. However, it seems impossible to deny that the rift between Western and Middle Eastern cultures has grown significantly in the last decade or so, most notably in Europe, which has a much higher concentration of immigrants and refugees. I also don't mean to imply that religious extremism can be completely eradicated with social policy, if that is what you're hinting towards. So long as different belief systems exist, a small percentage of loons will go to extreme measures in the name of those beliefs. This is true of every cultural group, and is in no way unique to the Islamic faith or general ethnic demographic. What I am simply trying to argue is that greater exchange and integration of cultural assets and values between groups is necessary to creating a greater sense of unity, and thus reducing the tensions that extremist organizations exploit in their recruiting efforts. By extension, I am also arguing that hostile reactions to belief systems as a whole based on the actions of a radicalized minority feeds the rifts that allows radicalism to thrive and expand by giving fuel to propaganda and exploitative leaders.[/QUOTE] He is trying to get out of you the basic philosphical differences between a a free-choice secular society culture, and an authoritarian conservative religious culture. And that perhaps the biggest problem comes from a very Political setting then it is a social setting. And that perhaps those differences in Politics are so strong that there is little hope for social dynamics.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48230341]I'm not sure I understand what you mean? I'll try to respond, but some clarification of your point would help. I don't mean to imply that there is a zero tolerance policy of the Islamic culture and faith outside of the Middle East, if that's what you're trying to argue. Certainly, a level of integration and exchange has occurred and is impossible to avoid. However, it seems impossible to deny that the rift between Western and Middle Eastern cultures has grown significantly in the last decade or so, most notably in Europe, which has a much higher concentration of immigrants and refugees. I also don't mean to imply that religious extremism can be completely eradicated with social policy, if that is what you're hinting towards. So long as different belief systems exist, a small percentage of loons will go to extreme measures in the name of those beliefs. This is true of every cultural group, and is in no way unique to the Islamic faith or general ethnic demographic. What I am simply trying to argue is that greater exchange and integration of cultural assets and values between groups is necessary to creating a greater sense of unity, and thus reducing the tensions that extremist organizations exploit in their recruiting efforts. By extension, I am also arguing that hostile reactions to belief systems as a whole based on the actions of a radicalized minority feeds the rifts that allows radicalism to thrive and expand by giving fuel to propaganda and exploitative leaders.[/QUOTE] I asked what parts of Islamic culture you thought we needed to integrate and you responded with art, food, architecture, etc. I simply fail to see where these things haven't already been integrated into our culture in some way. I also fail to see how these particular parts of Islamic culture being integrated into Western culture will influence extremists in any way. I have much greater disagreements with your views on Islam, but I'm not even talking about that right now. I'm just disagreeing with Grimhound's current argument.
I knew one of the marines killed. Skip Wells. He was a sophmore at my high school when I was about to graduate... he was such a good kid. He LOVED ROTC so damn much, he was such a military guy. I do believe he served a term in the Middle East, but I don't know why he ended up at a recruitment center. Hard to believe he's gone now...
[QUOTE=Pantz Master;48230479]I asked what parts of Islamic culture you thought we needed to integrate and you responded with art, food, architecture, etc. I simply fail to see where these things haven't already been integrated into our culture in some way. I also fail to see how these particular parts of Islamic culture being integrated into Western culture will influence extremists in any way. I have much greater disagreements with your views on Islam, but I'm not even talking about that right now. I'm just disagreeing with Grimhound's current argument.[/QUOTE] We may eat kebabs, but much of the Western world still damns the refugees, immigrants, faith, and cultural identity of Muslims as a generalized entity. There is still a huge rift between our cultures based largely on fear and distrust. I am not opining that selling Nasheeds in record stores and having a Halal section in our grociers is the end-all of cultural acceptance and the final word on integration-- you just asked me for a few examples of what Muslim culture had to offer and I gave them. Your current argument is dramatically simplifying the position by focusing only on the materialistic aspects, and dismissing the core concept of what it is we're talking about here: an integration of our cultures and values such that the alternative is just as familiar as your own while both still retain their most defining aspects. It works to the benefit of both cultures.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;48230226]The same as every other culture. Art, music, history, tradition, food, architecture, faith and spirituality, style, ideas, etc, etc. It's one of the world's oldest and most complex cultural and ethnic groups, and despite its troubled history it has a lot of beauty. You might as well argue that nobody has any cultural worth at all if you think that Islamic culture has nothing to offer the world.[/QUOTE] Ever since I moved to a region with a stronger native american population, I realized that cultural preservation is terrible. You have a group of people here who so desperately hold on to their cultural heritage that they let it drag them down into crushing poverty. They live in reservations that basically amount to slums and don't even have constitutional protections while living there. Many reservations ban free speech for tribal members. This desire to preserve it is passed on to their children. The children ultimately don't interact with the population at large enough to develop the necessary social skills to ever succeed. It is sad. I watch it breed hate. Both sides harbor a strong resentment for the other for absolutely no reason that couldn't be easily fixed. All for what? I understand keeping traditions for yourself, but children? They won't miss them. Culture has no inherent value. It almost exclusively serves to continue to promote our differences. We can't move towards being a global society without first abandoning the lines that separate us.
[QUOTE=GunFox;48231174]Ever since I moved to a region with a stronger native american population, I realized that cultural preservation is terrible. You have a group of people here who so desperately hold on to their cultural heritage that they let it drag them down into crushing poverty. They live in reservations that basically amount to slums and don't even have constitutional protections while living there. Many reservations ban free speech for tribal members. This desire to preserve it is passed on to their children. The children ultimately don't interact with the population at large enough to develop the necessary social skills to ever succeed. It is sad. I watch it breed hate. Both sides harbor a strong resentment for the other for absolutely no reason that couldn't be easily fixed. All for what? I understand keeping traditions for yourself, but children? They won't miss them. Culture has no inherent value. It almost exclusively serves to continue to promote our differences. We can't move towards being a global society without first abandoning the lines that separate us.[/QUOTE] Meanwhile I'd rather we celebrate our differences.
[QUOTE=Swilly;48231219]Meanwhile I'd rather we celebrate our differences.[/QUOTE] Which is what ultimately causes the problem. We can't, as a culture, do that. We try and fail repeatedly because nobody really understands what that means. We don't recognize that "differences" extends deeper than we believe. As an example: We have trouble dealing with arabic countries because the concept of "face" fucks us up. In western culture we value personal integrity, but acknowledge that you can make mistakes. You can fuck up, recognize it, and walk away with someone holding a higher opinion of you than when you started. This works differently for many Arabic cultures. Admitting fault is NEVER acceptable. Showing guilt or hesitating is a massive sign of weakness. Apologizing for mistakes or shortcomings and working to improve them are signs of weakness. This is a well understood concept. It isn't some Arabic hating bullshit, the CIA recognized it as a problem long ago because their case officers couldn't cooperate with assets. [url]https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/kent-csi/vol8no3/html/v08i3a05p_0001.htm[/url] We think of differences like foods, languages, dress, and all the things we can see, but other cultures view the world in fundamentally different ways. They can be doing the "right" thing and we can be doing the "right" thing and they are complete opposites. Cooperation is incredibly difficult in such cases.
[QUOTE=GunFox;48231174] All for what? I understand keeping traditions for yourself, but children? They won't miss them. Culture has no inherent value. It almost exclusively serves to continue to promote our differences. We can't move towards being a global society without first abandoning the lines that separate us.[/QUOTE] Dunno if that is the average American view on culture, but European countries generally value their traditions and cultures. I can't see most European countries ditching their ancestry and culture in lieu for one single global culture.
[QUOTE=Jordax;48231621]Dunno if that is the average American view on culture, but European countries generally value their traditions and cultures. I can't see most European countries ditching their ancestry and culture in lieu for one single global culture.[/QUOTE] Most western European countries are sufficiently similar that it doesn't matter. The underlying principles are close enough tha t cooperation is possible. It is why they get along reasonably well. Cooperation doesn't require being identical, just close enough. You'll still have minor issues, like everyone making fun of the French for no valid reason, but negotiations have a solid basis of common ground upon which to build.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.