• Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.

San Francisco creates PC terms to protect criminals from "hate speech".

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,405
Trophies
2
XP
5,353
Country
United Kingdom
you also dont need to colour your examples so much,

I was just following your terrorist/pilot extreme example.

Maybe if Londoners were allowed to have guns, it is possible that less of them would be killed by knives and be able to defend themselves.

While there is gun crime in the UK, because all hand guns are illegal and the criminals know that the chances are low that they will come across someone else with a gun then they are only used in a limited number of circumstances as there is no point in taking the risk.

If the US has anything to show then all that would happen is there would be ten times the number of gun deaths. I know which I'd rather take my chances against.

I worry more about the "good guy with a gun", under the apparent "good" exterior is someone who every day leaves the house with the thought that today might be the day they get to kill someone.

I agree that cannabis, LSD, GHB, and mushrooms should be legal. Everything else I don't think should be legal.

I'm not sure I'd agree that they should be legal, but I also don't think that harsher criminal sentencing is working. Addiction should be treated as a mental health problem rather than a criminal problem. If someone has gone beyond the point where they can function for themselves then there should be some way the state can step in and help.

Would you agree that all legal immigrant applicants should be allowed in regardless if they can or will assimilate into the US society and eventually learn to take care of themselves? Should we offer free welfare services for life to all immigrants who refuse to work? What about immigrants with criminal backgrounds such as MS-13 members? We shouldn't cut them out of the immigration process?

We were all immigrants who refused to assimilate once. I don't know if you should give free welfare services to anyone for life if they refuse to work. Mostly immigrants are harder working than natives.
 
Last edited by smf,

morvoran

President-Elect
OP
Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
1,032
Trophies
0
Location
MAGA Country
XP
2,358
Country
United States
If the US has anything to show then all that would happen is there would be ten times the number of gun deaths. I know which I'd rather take my chances against.
I might agree with you here since the US has over 5 times the population with some cities having a much denser population than the entire UK.

While there is gun crime in the UK, because all hand guns are illegal and the criminals know that the chances are low that they will come across someone else with a gun then they are only used in a limited number of circumstances as there is no point in taking the risk.
I heard that UK residents are nice chaps, but this is pushing it. A criminal looking at a potential victim in Longon, "Oy, that bugger looks like he might not 'ave a gun, it wouldn't be proper of me to use mine to steal from 'im, guvna." Is this how things work over there?

I worry more about the "good guy with a gun", under the apparent "good" exterior is someone who every day leaves the house with the thought that today might be the day they get to kill someone.
I would worry more about the "bad guy with a gun" who leaves their home knowing that they are going to kill someone.

I'm not sure I'd agree that they should be legal, but I also don't think that harsher criminal sentencing is working. Addiction should be treated as a mental health problem rather than a criminal problem.
Oh, so they shouldn't be legal, but at the same time, shouldn't be a "criminal" problem? That's not how the law works.

We were all immigrants who refused to assimilate once. Mostly immigrants are harder working than natives.
First, I was never an immigrant. I was born in the USA and have always been a resident here. I speak English, love this country, and I do not fly a foreign flag in my front yard.
Second, I would like to see these statistics where you pulled the immigrants are harder working than natives. "Please don't say from your head, please don't say from your head....Damn!"
While I can agree some immigrants may work harder then natural born citizens, you can't say most if you don't know their backgrounds.
A lot of immigrants that come here are richer and have better education than most of our poor, so of course, they won't need to work harder to buy a home, find a job, and/or start a business to make it here. A lot of countries teach english in their schools (with some countries making it mandatory) on top of it being one of the easiest languages to learn, so they don't need to work harder to learn our language.
Also, with our welfare programs, non-white immigrants are highly likely to be approved for welfare assistance thanks to affirmative action laws. I didn't and don't recieve any of these benefits which means I have to work harder to have as much as them on top of my taxes going to them to help get those benefits.

Speaking of drugs, are you a "person with a history of substance abuse"? You said most drugs come into the US by postal service, so would you please post some of whatever you're on to me, so I can see the world through your frame of mind? I would love to walk around and see dancing unicorns, rainbows, and clowns everywhere without having to go to a pride parade.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,405
Trophies
2
XP
5,353
Country
United Kingdom
I heard that UK residents are nice chaps, but this is pushing it. A criminal looking at a potential victim in Longon, "Oy, that bugger looks like he might not 'ave a gun, it wouldn't be proper of me to use mine to steal from 'im, guvna." Is this how things work over there?

More like

"If I get caught with a gun then I go to prison even if I don't use it, if I go with a knife then I will just get community service and a tag."

It really does work. The way the US does it is so dumb.

Most thefts in London are committed by unarmed pick pockets. Violence tends to come from gang wars.

That doesn't make it right, but it's better.
 
Last edited by smf,

morvoran

President-Elect
OP
Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
1,032
Trophies
0
Location
MAGA Country
XP
2,358
Country
United States
It really does work. The way the US does it is so dumb.
. Yeah things like "freedoms" and "rights" are such idiotic things. Why have any of them? Maybe we can take away the right to leave your house, that will stop even more crimes.

That doesn't make it right, but it's better.
A matter of opinion. I don't think it's better.

"If I get caught with a gun then I go to prison even if I don't use it, if I go with a knife then I will just get community service and a tag."
We have gun laws and our felons are not allowed to have guns, but guess what. They still obtain them somehow even with the stigma of going back to prison. Maybe they're not aware they're breaking the law? Just FYI, the cities/states with the strictest gun laws also have the most gun violence here. Why is this? Because persons with involvement in the legal system have other people holding them down? (You can't blame Trump for this.) Try to remember that it's much easier to deal with 60 million people than 300 million.
 

smf

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
6,405
Trophies
2
XP
5,353
Country
United Kingdom
. Yeah things like "freedoms" and "rights" are such idiotic things. Why have any of them? Maybe we can take away the right to leave your house, that will stop even more crimes.

You can keep your freedom to shoot or be shot at. It's absurd to suggest that the opposite to playing at cowboys is to lock everyone up.

We have gun laws and our felons are not allowed to have guns, but guess what. They still obtain them somehow even with the stigma of going back to prison. Maybe they're not aware they're breaking the law?

Felons need to be able to defend themselves too, because everyone else has guns. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise. In the UK that doesn't come into play.

Get rid of all your guns and the death penalty and killings would go down.

The US has 26 times the gun deaths per capita than the UK, there is no way that is just caused because there are more people.
 
Last edited by smf,
D

Deleted User

Guest
. Yeah things like "freedoms" and "rights" are such idiotic things. Why have any of them? Maybe we can take away the right to leave your house, that will stop even more crimes.

A matter of opinion. I don't think it's better.

We have gun laws and our felons are not allowed to have guns, but guess what. They still obtain them somehow even with the stigma of going back to prison. Maybe they're not aware they're breaking the law? Just FYI, the cities/states with the strictest gun laws also have the most gun violence here. Why is this? Because persons with involvement in the legal system have other people holding them down? (You can't blame Trump for this.) Try to remember that it's much easier to deal with 60 million people than 300 million.
Hmm let's see. How can I make argument for the thing in bold.
oh right.
Trump bashed video games and pretend that it caused violence, meanwhile doing and advocating nothing to actually improve gun laws or anything to prevent mass shootings (Just like the rest of the politicians. And if your one of the idiots that believe it. Go look at the countless many studies and also check who is doing them. Many studies have found no evidence and video games reduces violence, or inconclusive results)
Oh and who does that help creating a false argument so they don't have to fix actual issues
NRA (and lazy politicians)
You know what it doesn't help solve?
People dying.
 
Last edited by ,

morvoran

President-Elect
OP
Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
1,032
Trophies
0
Location
MAGA Country
XP
2,358
Country
United States
And if your one of the idiots
I'm sure you should have used, "you're" here. Your = possessive; you're = "you are". And you accuse me of being an idiot... sheesh

Trump bashed video games and pretend that it caused violence, meanwhile doing and advocating nothing to actually improve gun laws or anything to prevent mass shootings
He said this one time while reading off a prompter which makes me think it a writer added this nonsense. I don't believe for one second that he believes (or pretends) this to be true either as he has never brought this up before or since.
What have the democrats ever done to stop these things? They've been complaining for years about something needs to be done. All they have done is take guns from honest people and put them into the hands of criminals while protecting those same criminals such as trying to change how we refer to them.

Oh and who does that help creating a false argument so they don't have to fix actual issues
NRA Democrats (and lazy politicians) (and crazy leftists)
There, fixed this for you. This is so true. Thanks for bringing it to everybody's attention.


Felons need to be able to defend themselves too, because everyone else has guns. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise. In the UK that doesn't come into play.
Oh, like that mass shooter in Philadelphia who was protecting himself from those dangerous cops with guns where he shot 6 of them? All he did was sell drugs to his community, why was he being harassed? Good thing he was able to escape with his life.

Get rid of all your guns and the death penalty and killings would go down.
Wrong! Completely speculation on your part.

The US has 26 times the gun deaths per capita than the UK, there is no way that is just caused because there are more people.
A lot of our cities have denser populations than in the UK. Denser population means more crime, more poverty, more deaths. I've already told you this.
 
Last edited by morvoran,
D

Deleted User

Guest
I'm sure you should have used, "you're" here. Your = possessive; you're = "you are". And you accuse me of being an idiot... sheesh
You know I have a life right? I don't really have the time to go thoroughly every single thing to make sure I don't make any tiny mistakes while typing. But moving on you missed a big pretty keyword.
IF you're one of those idiots, didn't say you're one of those idiots.
Then again, you write your entire profile based on being a trump supporter so you would of seen that as insult anyways.
He said this one time while reading off a prompter which makes me think it a writer added this nonsense. I don't believe for one second that he believes (or pretends) this to be true either as he has never brought this up before or since.
let me go ahead and refute your nice try to say "trump doesn't believe video games cause violence"


Yeah... just once. Right...
You know, just once is doing it twice, once a year ago and then the other three weeks ago roughly.
What have the democrats ever done to stop these things? They've been complaining for years about something needs to be done. All they have done is take guns from honest people and put them into the hands of criminals while protecting those same criminals such as trying to change how we refer to them.
I need to ask a question. In what way are Democrats trying to remove guns from honest people? Second off, how would they go about taking it from honest people to criminals? Please inform me, because until I get proof, I smell shit a mile away.
Second off let me ask this. Do you know how laws are passed?
Third let me ask this, have you even considered who wants what in this shitshow?
Let me explain. So if it is truth that democrats want to remove all guns, why would they target violent video games instead of going for the throat? Hint, they don't (all though some do and that's mostly because the "left" is mostly a centered right.)
Let's ask another question. If the president has executive order for threats to the country (which I would consider mass shootings as so) why hasn't he? Here's another question that follows up on that one why rile up people about the borders. Do you realize how often borders are brought up? And the illegals are coming in?
I have to ask a question, do you think every single illegal is some horrible shit robbed individual who wishes to cause harm to others or that the vast majority? do you even consider them as human, I don't want you to answer that question now, but I want you to answer it when you use the word "illegal"?
Now that I asked those questions. Why is it that walmart decided to hide violent games? even going as far as to remove demoing consoles. But keep the guns in. Violent games don't cause violence, people do. Guns don't cause violence, guns are merely a tool of intent. If the education system is left leaning as everyone states. Then the left would equally know that yes? So, let's now look to other side. Republicans want to keep guns (and they have a right to) but you also have to understand that the NRA can lobby for those that they like. A left wing person is less likely to tell the stories the NRA want's to hear, as they want regulations on guns, which means overall less profit. Republicans however, don't want companies to be regulated and let the free market do it's thing, which is fair, after all if a government was in everything problems would arise. However if companies are left unchecked, then the government has to step in to solve it as no one else can. Or else people suffer. In both situations, people suffer. So when calling out a "invasion" of our country, when it isn't true isn't or making people afraid or believe that they are going to be invaded and "illegals" are going to come in and rob them. What is people's response to that?
Self preservation. People buy guns, people buy weapons, people buy and prepare, and then become emotionally entwined with what they were told, as they now have made a investment.
I'm not saying every single illegal person is a white knight. That's impossible. However there is likely more people with good intent that simply can't
Do you understand what I'm trying to get here. There's a side that benefits from it.
On that let's discuss jobs. People claim illegals are out to grab our jobs. Do you have any idea how much out sourcing happens in companies? If people retaliate their below miniumwage or in work conditions that are absolute ass, that company will just find the next desperate person, and other countries that have no government or a corrupt and or broken government. It's much more likely to find willing workers, who will gladly accept the horrible pay and conditions.
 

morvoran

President-Elect
OP
Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
1,032
Trophies
0
Location
MAGA Country
XP
2,358
Country
United States
You know I have a life right?
No, I don't know you at all. I can tell proper grammar is not a priority in it, though.

In what way are Democrats trying to remove guns from honest people?
Other than background checks, what else could they do for more gun control???

how would they go about taking it from honest people to criminals?
Have you heard of "Operation fast and furious"?

Do you know how laws are passed?
Yes, I do.

For the rest, tl:dr. Have you read the title of this thread? You are going way off this subject.
It's bad enough I, along with others, went off on another tangent, but you just jumped in midstream with one line that barely relates to this topic with other nonsense included. I'm not blaming you for this train wreck, but I just realized that we are no longer discussing the topic.
I am more than willing to discuss these other matters further, but create a new thread if you feel like it. We need to get this one back on track.
 

billapong

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2019
Messages
265
Trophies
0
XP
290
Country
United States
Renaming things is a commonly known tactic, especially in the mental health field as it is somewhat effective on the weak minded. If per say, you want to rename "apple" to "pear", because you suddenly find that the word apple is offensive, the smart people will know that the "pear" was originally an apple and was simply renamed because some people were intolerant. So now a "pear" to the people who are smart is simply an apple that was renamed, so the meaning and stigma is passed along.

On the same side, some people stopped using the common term "n****" and now use "African American", but both words define the same thing. It's sort of a nice gesture, because if a word has become stigmatized the less educated will think differently of the same person, place or thing when simply calling it by another name, but actually nothing has changed. I don't think it's a very effective long term solution to any problem. Should we be focusing on what caused the word to become stigmatized in the first place, because the new word will likely suffer the same fate?
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
    K3N1 @ K3N1: https://youtube.com/shorts/PArWUK0WyDQ?feature=share