Some of them do have serious problems, including mental illness, and all have grievances or resentments. Some of them have stated loud and clear what their motives were.
Certainly not all are mentally ill.
Again, in many cases they were clear about why they did it, including written and filmed content on why.
We’re not allowed to discuss why online.
The US is shot, finished. It’s a sick country.
Yes, I found out the reasons. I said that in my previous opinion.
But I think the United States will one day overcome that problem. They have always faced the challenges. There may be a period of suffering, more difficult life and dissatisfaction, but in the end the problems are solved or at least mastered to a degree that is bearable for society.
It is a bit subjective to be honest. IF the world worked perfectly and no one broke any laws, then yes - reducing the number of firearms obviously reduces the number of people who can use them. IF governments could ever be trusted with that much power over their people, we could reasonably disarm the populace. However, criminals will be criminals and then the only people who have access to firearms are those who you DONT want to have access to them, and now a disarmed populace of innocents.
The US and EU are not comparable in many ways, so it’s hard to use this as a model for what the US should do. This being said, disarming the populace will result in immediate civil war here - so the best course of action is to enforce the rules that already exist and to stop attempting to reduce the number of good guys with guns.
Um, very strong arguments. With so many brutal criminals, the question is how to protect the ordinary working man who pays taxes and is at the heart of the state if you deprive him of the opportunity to defend himself.
I am glad that I am not an American politician on whom the solution to this issue depends. Where is the balance, what to do … what if we make a mistake in our decision?
[quote="Andrewgen_Receptors, post:124 to stop attempting to reduce the number of good guys with guns.
/quote]
I don’t mind the good guys having guns. But we also might disagree on what constitutes a “good guy”.
This is quite possible, but I’d hope in the land of “innocent until proven guilty” we can find a fair bit of common ground.
Life has taught me it should be “idiot until proven otherwise”.
I won’t disagree, but I would hardly use that as a monikker for legislating anything - much less guns. There sure are a large number of idiots around though.
I’d sure like to limit the amount of idiots with guns. Wouldn’t you?
I think “idiot” is a very subjective term that varies in definition based on the person using the term. Like i think liberals are idiots who are ruining this country, but i wouldn’t suggest to disarm them. I don’t think that sentiment goes both ways though.
So yes I’d like less armed idiots, but would never suggest to use a vague term like that in legislation. I think the wording of 2A is as good as it could ever get tbh.
Weird. I don’t want an idiot with a gun anywhere near me or the people I care about. YMMV.
Most Democrats and liberals agree. Every woke progressive does. Most left-wing policy disasters throughout the last century began with the premise that most people are stupid and should have limited control over their own affairs.
@twojarslave I am convinced that one of the strongest elements of leftism is control freakery, which is why leftists are so opposed to people going their own ways and doing their own things or even questioning their policies.
Yes! I can’t think of a leftist without this feminine quality.
They’re also high in affect intensity. Some have also said they’re higher in self-hate, though I certainly don’t think that’s true for all of them.
What I’ve noticed amongst nearly all is a romanticization of actually or supposedly oppressed people, underdogs, pathological people, and in some cases, criminals.
No one should even question what leftists want or ask them to provide any evidence of why we should accept what they propose. You simply have to trust lines like, “We can’t do that because it’s wrong” and “This the right thing to do.”
Ask the leftist, “why is this wrong?” and he’ll reply, “it just is.”
Provide evidence that flies in the face of what a leftist proposes, and you’ll get no response. Or he’ll reply with something like, “That’s outdated.”
Leftists also oppose societal norms that have been shown to keep things in check for hundreds, maybe even thousands of years. Nothing can be considered normal or abnormal. There’s no frame of reference… until you do or think or say something they don’t like. Then all of the sudden that moral relativism goes out the window and you’re clearly defined as a bad person.
That’s my take.
To be fair: I can’t think of any masculine qualities they have.
Which societal norms and how far back do you want to go?
The “leftist” handle probably only applies to 20% of Dems. On everything from crime to gun laws to abortion to spending to lgbt whackery, your average Dem isn’t that far from your average Repub. The starkest difference I’ve noticed is how people on different parts of the spectrum weigh the importance of a given issue.
Also, this. It’s (not-at-all-actually, of course) amazing, given their hatred of God. If anyone believes they reject religion due to atrocities committed in the name of religion, that person has been fooled. They love religion and require religious devotion to their “morals.”
Edit to avoid creating multiple posts in response:
This is likely true. However, that doesn’t mean
“Leftist” doesn’t apply; it may just apply to many Republicans as well.
I won’t list all here. When I repeatedly say I will not discuss something online, it’s because I am living under leftist rule. I believe many leftists seek the ruin of others, even those who simply verbalize opposition or question their policies or agendas.
I will say they sure went to work on the nuclear family in several ways.
I’ll also say they ruined sexual propriety, which is one of the ways they went to work on the family unit. You can notice there is a heavy emphasis on sex amongst them, and they have managed to weaponize and politicize sex. Hedonism, getting one’s rocks off, and sterile sex—all which makes an environment in which anyone can screw anyone for fun, with no accountability or stipulations—are very important. That’s why the pill and abortion are so important.
They coddle and sympathize with criminals, even violent ones, letting them out of jail or prison repeatedly. They are against the death penalty.
They got rid of vagrancy laws.
Of course I’ve delved into more than just norms.
I can go on and on. Maybe I’ll continue further later.