Reply With QuoteNo, the best way to combat it is to vote people out.
I don't even know why this even needs to be said. It's not like Jesse Helms or Joe Lieberman appointed themselves Senators for life.
i drink it up!
This is accurate, but term limits are just the best (and how shitty is that?) way people try to combat it. At least if you get another kick at the can every 4 years there's a chance to wipe the slate.Originally Posted by Diff-chan
can't wake up
No, the best way to combat it is to vote people out.
I don't even know why this even needs to be said. It's not like Jesse Helms or Joe Lieberman appointed themselves Senators for life.
So how long do we have until Obama starts looking for ways to skirt the balance of power and issues some knife control executive orders?
I love how gun nuts are using a knife attack in which nobody died and comparing it to gun rampages that leave a dozen (or more) people dead.
Isn't that hilarious though? I mean, isn't that the argument for certain parts of the gun control proposal? Even when you use a gun, that it's more ineffective?
can't wake up
I don't get this either. The end results of this knife rampage proves the gun nuts wrong. Nobody is saying you can't go on some crazy spree with other weapons, everybody is saying that guns make those sprees way more deadly.
instead of chuckling too yourself over your supposed superior outlook on the issue, take time to really think about what those kinds of comments mean.
IMO, to people who make those kinds of statements, it is the same. Because to them, the deaths of gun violence or so distant it is as if no one died. The displays of violence are interchangeable because no one they knew died. Not a single person in their area was impacted.
The mindset isn't elaborately different than people who brag about how much they don't care about international problems. Or those who don't even know enough about international problems to even be smug they don't care. They don't know enough about them to even make the statement.
'that' is a major problem with the issue of guns. Neither side of the debate cares about the people far away. The gun hobbyist in Ohio doesn't give a shit about people 15 hours away. The mother in the city with two kids dead from gun violence in turn doesn't give a shit about gun hobbyist 15 hours away from her.
The world is still very big on some issues.
No, no it isn't. Yeah, try telling person X who lost the only person that died in a one death event that 'at least this wasn't as bad as <insert storm that killed 100 people here>', but ultimately, there is a difference if you're on the outside of both.
I don't give one damn about gun hobbyists. If the world can be safer taking some fringe bullshit gun or magazine away, I am all for it. Get a different hobby if that subset affects you so deeply and don't feign concern over the Constitution.
You know why it's comparable? Because anything Obama or anyone else has proposed would not do a single solitary thing to stop either of them.
can't wake up
Who cares about this selfish crap POV in a policy discussion?
There was also that knife rampage in China where 23 kids were stabbed the same day as Newtown. Nobody died there either.
If we are going to have lone crazed men going on these rampages - if it is an inevitability that these people will commit these rampages... I would much, much, MUCH rather they have a knife than a high powered rifle.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks