U.S. Politics - Page 578 - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Cafe > General

General Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5771  
Old 12-20-12, 12:27
aphronesis aphronesis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,699
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhubroma View Post
A similar discussion happened to me in Havana with this Canadian guy, who argued the same "defense from the government" BS as did BroDeal. Apart from the error in his reading of this historical phenomenon, which is much more connected to a "revolutionary" cause and pioneer expedient (as if a political class would wantonly encourage a means toward its own extinction), the notion that "the people" can take comfort in the possibility of armed resistance today is ridiculous.

I said to that Canadian guy that in light of the perverse kultur a "right to bear arms" has progressively generated in America and the potency of national defense, any empowering effects of the former have been drastically mitigated. Therefore, why is it really necessary to have this "right" any more, at least under its current administration? How is it even possible for citizens to defend themselves from the government with arms today, I asked, of course in light of all the Cuban affairs? Was he thinking of Marius and the popolares within the context of modernity, I insisted? He didn't seem to grasp the import of my inquiries, however. It was all just Greek to him. Naturally this was debated over a Cohiba and rum.
Yeah, I'd say the fact that the Christmas shoppers are running out to pick up extra bags of ammo rather than actually protesting any potential cut-off gives a pretty clear idea as to the extent to which the frontier radicals could be counted on to actually muster for more significant and "intolerable" conditions.

@Scott: a grace period and then either submit to a psych screening or an accounting for and relinquishment of any previously registered guns. Shouldn't be that labor intensive; didn't Obama just up the numbers for Homeland Security? Several schools offering degrees as well.
Reply With Quote
  #5772  
Old 12-20-12, 12:45
mikeNphilly mikeNphilly is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 243
Default

Seems in 1921 people with guns decided enough was enough and changed the history of the US, as it was less then a 100 years ago I find it quite relative. Plus it deals with a major issue in the US still today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
Reply With Quote
  #5773  
Old 12-20-12, 12:55
aphronesis aphronesis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,699
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeNphilly View Post
Seems in 1921 people with guns decided enough was enough and changed the history of the US, as it was less then a 100 years ago I find it quite relative. Plus it deals with a major issue in the US still today.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
Two or three quick things worth noting about that: it was during a period of international labor struggles (right after the Russian revolution for example) and the civil war was still within living memory for many--for whom there were aspects of the country worth fighting over in terms of their definitions.

The international models of solidarity for popular uprising are mostly dwindling now or already being reformed. (Outside of Greece and a few other places). Within our lives the era of Viet Nam would be the most relevant example and most of the radicals from that moment have either capitulated or been fully disenfranchised. And Viet Nam was a very different sort of national trauma than the civil war. The latter was the last gasp--for a time--of an old style imperial model.

I posed this question yesterday: how many people do you honestly know who would stake some of their livelihoods and civil liberties in order to argue for radical and long-term economic reform that would pit them as an oppositional political class to the current status quo?

(And saying that, I'm relatively aware of Philly's overall history in the twentieth century, especially during the last several decades, but I wonder how much of the one-time resentment and oppositionality could still be organized into something constructive.? It's definitely out of the question in places like Brooklyn and the East Village/LES.)

Last edited by aphronesis; 12-20-12 at 13:10.
Reply With Quote
  #5774  
Old 12-20-12, 14:57
aphronesis aphronesis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,699
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blutto View Post
...here is someone talking about the defense against the government...do note that this someone is with the second largest gun lobby group in the US ( after the NRA )....is this, as the article asks, an example of potential domestic terrorism?....or is this someone prepared to stand up for freedom and stuff from The Most Holy Moranistical Gospels?....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/1...cted-Officials

Cheers

blutto
Be afraid. Better than the Watts uprising.

"Does this mean that the Gun Owners of America’s 300,000 members are preparing to revolt?"
Reply With Quote
  #5775  
Old 12-20-12, 15:28
aphronesis aphronesis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,699
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blutto View Post
...so does this mean that Merika is soon going to enjoy the wonders of Drone Warfare up close personal-like?....and you just know "the people" will just eat this up...because its exactly like that ultimate video game that those lucky Mooslim peoples overseas have been participating in all these years...

Cheers

blutto
Like this? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...tan-bug-splats
Reply With Quote
  #5776  
Old 12-20-12, 15:28
Scott SoCal's Avatar
Scott SoCal Scott SoCal is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southern California
Posts: 4,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blutto View Post
....usually that is a very difficult thing to answer because your posts rarely have an argument and are for the most part just clever word-play but in this particular case you seem to show a surprising amount of relative clarity....so after consulting several experts in the fields, the answer is....

Banning guns looks like it will make the average person less safe, banning concealed carry looks certain to make the average person less safe.

...so do I get a prize?....

Cheers

blutto
The idea was put out there by MI to eliminate all civilian firearms from the public place. Outlaw CCP's.

How does that position square with data suggesting incarcerated criminals, in surprisingly large numbers, have had their criminal operation altered by a would be victim carrying a gun?

How does that position square with data suggesting murder rates fall (depending on data looked at, something like 60% of murders committed are gun related) or continue to fall when CCP's are more broadly legal?

The argument is: is it the gun that's the problem and will we overreact in such a way that makes more people less safe?

Edit: in other words, do we just ignore the million or so times per year where guns were used in a defensive posture?
__________________
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009

Last edited by Scott SoCal; 12-20-12 at 15:34.
Reply With Quote
  #5777  
Old 12-20-12, 15:52
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
The argument is: is it the gun that's the problem and will we overreact in such a way that makes more people less safe?
Almost everything the NRA and the gunfreaks tell you is complete nonsense.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...n-control.html

Flip through Harvard's Firearms Research pages (the links in that article). It's enlightening, and simple: more guns = more homicides, everywhere, even outside of the US.

Self-defense? Fiction. Almost never happens.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research...use/index.html

btw one of the links in that NYorker article leads to an interesting article on how the NRA revolutionized the legal interpretation of the Second Amendment.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...amendment.html
Reply With Quote
  #5778  
Old 12-20-12, 16:16
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott SoCal View Post
Ok, fine. What would your gun laws look like and how would they have stopped Lanza or any other mentally ill mass murderer?

That is the point, right?

Lay out something that you think would effectively reduce or eliminate Columbine, Aurora and Newtown. Be specific.
Oh there's a thousand and one things that can be done that aren't being done, but that's not really the problem. The Second Amendment itself is the problem. It's anachronistic, a throwback to a bygone time. Repeal it.

Quote:
Looking at the Bill of Rights with more than two centuries’ hindsight, it is simply irrational that firearms have a protected position on par with freedom of speech and religion. Were Americans — liberal or conservative — writing a Constitution completely from scratch today, they probably would agree that something akin to “freedom to drive” was more far important than the “right to bear arms.” The rights of state militias (which many liberal legal theorists argue is the essence of the Second Amendment) are as much a throwback to an 18th century mind-set as restrictions on quartering soldiers in private homes during peacetime (the little-remembered Third Amendment).
http://www.salon.com/2007/04/18/second_amendment/
Reply With Quote
  #5779  
Old 12-20-12, 16:30
rhubroma's Avatar
rhubroma rhubroma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 5,422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frenchfry View Post
There is a proverb that says:



(The freedoms of some stop where the freedoms of the others begin)

I think you could interpret this as saying that the right to carry war weapons is superceded by the right to live in a society where you don't risk getting assinated while at school or in a movie theater.
La mia liberta' finisce, dove quella di un altro comincia...
Reply With Quote
  #5780  
Old 12-20-12, 16:32
VeloCity's Avatar
VeloCity VeloCity is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 3,096
Default

Damn low-information voters.

Quote:
Just over half the public says that the GOP should give up more than the Democrats in any bipartisan solution to the country's problems, according to a new national survey.

And a CNN/ORC International poll also indicates that a slight majority of Americans sees the Republican party's policies and views as too extreme, a first for the GOP, and fewer than a third say they trust congressional Republicans more than President Barack Obama to deal with the major issues facing the nation.

Fifty-three percent of those surveyed say they view the policies of the GOP as too extreme, up 17 points from two years ago. Only 37% say they view the polices of the Democratic Party as too extreme.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...cid=sf_twitter
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:25.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.