Why Was No One Armed & Shooting Back In El Paso WalMart ?

[Leo123]

This idiot Glasnost is obviously some imbecile on a mission.
He/she has shown nothing but combative nonsense in this thread. Not worth your time.
Continue to feed the troll at you own expense.

I've never put anyone on ignore.....but considering it in this case.

I don't like to put people on ignore as well but I'm tired of seeing the pet fly.

 

[WinterBorn]

YOu have said several times that we must "BAN GUNS". Does this mean you want to ban all civilian owned firearms? Or is it only the types more likely to be used in mass shootings?

All guns in the cities and all handguns everywhere.

I did not bring up Switzerland, because the culture in other countries is different than the cultures in the US.

Switzerland proves that Americans should not be allowed to have guns.

I disagree that all handguns should be banned. There are also more times that guns are used defensively than in crimes.
from: That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses
"In particular, a 2013 study ordered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and conducted by The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council reported that, “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence”:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008."

I am curious why you want to ban all guns in cities, but only handguns outside the cities. Is this because those outside the cities hunt?

 

[GLASNOST]

This idiot Glasnost ..... I've never put anyone on ignore.....but considering it in this case.

... and .....

I don't like to put people on ignore as well but I'm tired of seeing the pet fly.

DO IT.

 

[GLASNOST]

YOu have said several times that we must "BAN GUNS". Does this mean you want to ban all civilian owned firearms? Or is it only the types more likely to be used in mass shootings?

All guns in the cities and all handguns everywhere.

I did not bring up Switzerland, because the culture in other countries is different than the cultures in the US.

Switzerland proves that Americans should not be allowed to have guns.

I disagree that all handguns should be banned. There are also more times that guns are used defensively than in crimes.
from: That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses
"In particular, a 2013 study ordered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and conducted by The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council reported that, “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence”:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008."

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with only one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.

I am curious why you want to ban all guns in cities, but only handguns outside the cities. Is this because those outside the cities hunt?

Yes, that is what might be a fair idea.

 

[22lcidw]

The U.S. is destroying itself from within and it is all because of political corruption in conjunction with armament manufacturers and others. But rather than you getting your ass off the sofa and trying to help to save your country and your countrymen you instead contribute your spending and BS logic (found in the pages of the very sources that are strangling you) on defending them!

Saying you "care" is cheap lip service. If you do not give American politicians a good kick in the keester and an ultimatum then the country is going to explode into a full-blown civil war ... and then what will you say? The Military-Industrial Complex moguls will be kicking back with a Piña colada in Thaiti and watching you crying in front of some upstart CNN reporter with his microphone in your face.

And BTW, your statics (above) are all false and/or spun - but in the big picture, it doesn't matter because you are killing each other at an alarming rate. YOU MUST BAN GUNS!

Nothing lower than a Jackass with an Agenda ...yeah...I'M TALKING TO YOU
You plead to give up rights over a handful of tragedies, and gladly put millions in harms way.
Congrats. You earned The Imbecile of the Year Award.

Venezuelans Now Regret Giving Up Their Guns – This is What Happens to a Disarmed Populace
Venezuelans Now Regret Giving Up Their Guns - This is What Happens to a Disarmed Populace - The Truth About Guns

Oh my, you're just another sheeple in the flock. My Agenda is the concern for the well-being of American citizens .... your Agenda is guns, guns, guns. More guns. "Look at me! I have guns!"

View attachment 273376

That's a double Al Bundy! Peg did her job.

 

[WinterBorn]

YOu have said several times that we must "BAN GUNS". Does this mean you want to ban all civilian owned firearms? Or is it only the types more likely to be used in mass shootings?

All guns in the cities and all handguns everywhere.

I did not bring up Switzerland, because the culture in other countries is different than the cultures in the US.

Switzerland proves that Americans should not be allowed to have guns.

I disagree that all handguns should be banned. There are also more times that guns are used defensively than in crimes.
from: That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses
"In particular, a 2013 study ordered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and conducted by The National Academies’ Institute of Medicine and National Research Council reported that, “Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence”:

Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008."

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.

I am curious why you want to ban all guns in cities, but only handguns outside the cities. Is this because those outside the cities hunt?

Yes, that is what might be a fair idea.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes. I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.


As for banning firearms in the city, and not outside the city, many of us live in the city (I live inside I-285 in the Greater Atlanta area) and hunt regularly. I do not want to leave my long guns in the hands of people I do not know very well. I also know my long gun are secured at my home. This I disagree with.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Walmart said no guns.. I guess they thought criminals would obey the rules

And this filthy leftist creep, this Beto O'Rourke type scumbag, said he picked Walmart because it's a gun free zone.

It's was t a gun free zone darlin, quit watching knees news
Nice foul trump u mouth.
I thought he chose it because it had a lot of military shoppers.
Plus our usual pantywaist armed old white farts

Ah, you must be a Stalinist democrat - since you're just making shit up with zero regard for facts. The Walmart in El Paso is indeed a gun free zone. The vast majority of shoppers at it are hispanic, not the whites you so bitterly hate.

Honestly stupid, if the victims were white, do you really think CNN or MSNBC would be upset about it? Come on.

 

[RealDave]

So you insist to continue with the stupid argument.

We had a law called Assault Rifle Ban What was in it????. There were definitions.

I clearly said assault type weapons just to shit you assfucks up about " OMG OMG OMG the definition OMG OMG OMG"

I want to ban semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

There ya go. Is that good enough? Or will you show me another picture of the Mini?

How about you stfu about your silly definition & address the problem that is killing innocent people, women children?

How about that.

Oh, detachable magazines. That's nice. So THAT is your definition of an assault type weapon, huh ? LOL. Well here we are hours later, after I first asked you for a definition, and the best you could come up with is "detachable magazines" and "Assault Rifle Ban What was in it????"

Well, since you are asking the question (complete with 4 question marks) it's obvious you have no clue what was in that ban, if it would even matter now, 25 years later.

What this all comes down to, is you (same as many other gun-clueless liberals) are calling for a ban on "assault type weapons", and you don't have the foggiest idea what those words mean.

I said semi-automatic dumbass.

If you bothered to read the 1994 assault weapon ban, you would find their definition. Did you do it? Oh wait, you're the fucklng expert.

I know what is meant by assault type weapon as to most intelligent people. When you assfucks want an honest discussion instead of hiding behind your bullshit, let me know.

 

[protectionist]

I said semi-automatic dumbass.

If you bothered to read the 1994 assault weapon ban, you would find their definition. Did you do it? Oh wait, you're the fucklng expert.

I know what is meant by assault type weapon as to most intelligent people. When you assfucks want an honest discussion instead of hiding behind your bullshit, let me know.

So now you claim a "semi-automatic" is an assault weapon ? For your edification, a semi-automatic is a gun that fires a single round with each pull of the trigger. SAME AS A HANDGUN.

A mass shooter using a semi-automatic rifle would have no advantage over a CCW carrier with a handgun, in terms of the number of shots firing per unit time.

A military assault weapon might be properly defined as one that has "select fire".. whereby you can choose between semi-automatic, burst (3-5 instantaneous shots), or fully automatic (many shots with each pull of the trigger - aka "machine gun"). No charge for the tutoring.

 

[WinterBorn]

I said semi-automatic dumbass.

If you bothered to read the 1994 assault weapon ban, you would find their definition. Did you do it? Oh wait, you're the fucklng expert.

I know what is meant by assault type weapon as to most intelligent people. When you assfucks want an honest discussion instead of hiding behind your bullshit, let me know.

So now you claim a "semi-automatic" is an assault weapon ? For your edification, a semi-automatic is a gun that fires a single round with each pull of the trigger. SAME AS A HANDGUN.

A mass shooter using a semi-automatic rifle would have no advantage over a CCW carrier with a handgun, in terms of the number of shots firing per unit time.

A military assault weapon might be properly defined as one that has "select fire".. whereby you can choose between semi-automatic, burst (3-5 instantaneous shots), or fully automatic (many shots with each pull of the trigger - aka "machine gun"). No charge for the tutoring.

The shooter with the rifle would have no advantage in rate of fire. But rate of fire is but one factor, and probably not the most important. Most rifles offer huge advantages in accuracy, power, and bullet speed (which aids in both accuracy and power at impact).

 

[protectionist]

The shooter with the rifle would have no advantage in rate of fire. But rate of fire is but one factor, and probably not the most important. Most rifles offer huge advantages in accuracy, power, and bullet speed (which aids in both accuracy and power at impact).

We all know that already. Ho hum. Of course the mass shooter wont have any advantage when he's DEAD,

My point wasn't so much with the advantages of the contenders, but primarily with realdave's lack of knowledge.

 

[WinterBorn]

The shooter with the rifle would have no advantage in rate of fire. But rate of fire is but one factor, and probably not the most important. Most rifles offer huge advantages in accuracy, power, and bullet speed (which aids in both accuracy and power at impact).

We all know that already. Ho hum. Of course the mass shooter wont have any advantage when he's DEAD,

My point wasn't so much with the advantages of the contenders, but primarily with realdave's lack of knowledge.

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

 

[protectionist]

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

I suggested it.

 

[WinterBorn]

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

I suggested it.

Shot by someone with a 9mm pocket pistol after sneaking up behind the shooter. Yeah, I remember.

 

[GLASNOST]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

 

[22lcidw]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

 

[GLASNOST]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

Yes, "A lot of people do not trust the political class". I would say the vast majority do not trust them. But the paradox is that because the population are not taught political philosophy in school they, as a consequence, think the subject is too difficult to understand so they continue voting for the lesser of the two evils ....... generation after generation. So, with only two viable choices to make, nothing ever changes for the better. I mean Jesus(!) just look at the choice America had this last time: Trump or Hilary Clinton! Personally, I think America did chose the lesser of the two evils but even tossing a coin wouldn't have been very much worse of a method. Political philosophy MUST be taught to the population so they can bring the nation up a few notches and Democracy can be brought on board to its fullest advantage.

 

[WinterBorn]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

My apologies for mistaking it as a switch. You are, of course, correct, in that the oligarchy is the root cause of some of the issues people have.

I agree. Rolling up our sleeves and working to root out the leaches will help.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

 

[GLASNOST]

My apologies for mistaking it as a switch.

No problem. What's a discussion without disagreements and misunderstandings? Just go easy on me the next time I do it.

... the oligarchy is the root cause of some of the issues people have.

I guess it's always been that way.

I agree. Rolling up our sleeves and working to root out the leaches will help.

It ain't a-gonna' be easy, that's for sure, but I'm with you 100%.