Properly funding our schools and not just rich white suburb schools.
Build more schools and hire more teachers for proper pay so the class room sizes aren't 30-40 kids for one teacher.
UBI (at least start talking about it) once AI takes over most of the blue collar jobs.
End for profit prisons
Enforce the laws already on the books
Make sure there are safety nets for poor families so the kids don't turn to violence/gangs to survive.
Increase the minimum wage
Recreate our mental healthcare so kids don't turn to the internet for support. And to help veterans not end up as a suicide number.
Actively make a law to solidify Pro-choice rights. More unwanted children do not help our situation.
Banning Insider Trading for Congress
Term limits
Ranked Choice Voting so we can move away from a 2 party system
So basically... Fix every other nearly impossible to fix problem first before even deciding to do anything about the actual guns, if anything at all?
And to be clear, by impossible to fix, I mean politically, not that these problems are actually unsolvable.
So you're plan is to try and tackle something that's written into the constitution.... that's your goal? Say it's nearly impossible to do everything else on that list which isn't written into our constitution...but guns... they're easier to fix...fucking hell you all are really naive.
So you’re plan is to try and tackle something that’s written into the constitution… that’s your goal?
You mean like slavery?
Are you equating slavery to owning firearms? You white privileged ivory tower types are hilarious.
Nope. I'm equating slavery to tackling something in the constitution and changing it. You know, the thing you just implied was not something that could be done. I'm sure you know that and are obfuscating.
Yea everyone basically agreed slavery was bad...we fought a fucking civil war over it...the majority of the USA is pro-gun. You will never radify the constitution to remove or nullify the 2nd. It's not going to ever happen.
If everyone agreed, why did we fight a civil war over it?
Are you suggesting we fight another civil war so you can repeal the 2nd amendment? You do realize who wins that one right?
You didn't answer my question. If everyone agreed, why was there a war over it?
I did answer it...you just didn't like the answer.
No you didn't. Either everyone agreed or a war was fought over it. It can't be both. You don't fight a war over something everyone agrees on.
So feel free to explain that contradiction. I doubt you will.
Because most of the ignorant south at the time didn't know shit about it being fought against slavery. Me and 100million + other firearm owners haven't killed anyone or used our firearms in anger..which harms 0 people... slavery harms a fuck load of people and you equating it to the 2nd is hilariously naive. Congress can't even get single payer healthcare past..yet you think we can ratify the constitution?
I didn't specify a plan one way or another. I just think it's crazy that the talking points you presented seem pretty clearly designed to just kick this issue down the road, cause at least that way you still get to have your guns.
And believe me, solving all those things you mentioned would be great. But why not also try and do something about the major gun issues at the same time too?
Those "talking points" would solve our firearm violence. We don't have a gun problem, we have a societal one. Random mass shootings are a new phenomenon...gang violence and drug violence are not. Solving these things with the list I posted, would curb our violence epidemic 100xs more than just another emotional gun law from people who don't understand guns.
We do have a societal problem. We also very much have a gun problem.
And proposing all these other things you know won't get accomplished is a way to shift all the responsibility away from the gun issue itself.
And you aren't being emotional about even the thought of some more gun control or anything to even tackle that issue head on? Come on.
It might be because I'm not delusional about why we have the violence in the first place. I'm proposing things that actually would make a difference, another AWB or mag cap/mag ban/etc is emotional policies that will not put a single dent in our gun violence... I'm not the one kicking the can down the road, you are.
I personally didn't propose any of those policies. I genuinely don't know what would work best. I just think you are being really transparent in treating the guns themselves as having nothing to do with the issue of gun violence.
I think everything you were saying would be great to accomplish. It's just really disingenuous to propose them knowing there is a slim chance any of them will happen while completely ignoring the actual guns, just because you want to keep your guns.
The statistics and other countries show that violence is mainly driven by poverty and ignorance. Work on those two main things, and you slow the violence.
And most other countries also have much stricter gun control laws too.
We could work on those things and the gun problem too.
So again, you are being very transparent by completely disregarding the guns as if they somehow aren't part of the gun violence problem.
Either way. I think this is where I drop out of this. We are going in circles and while I agree we should work on the things you mention, we clearly just disagree about the actual guns themselves. And of course neither of us are actually in a direct position to make changes to any of those things, I assume. So you have a good one.
Lol fantastic response. And its crickets from everyone else being critical
No, not crickets. Those things sound great, let's do them. We should do everything we can, and that also includes stricter gun laws.
Not term limits though. It may sound like a good idea, but I implore you to research issues with term limits.
Term limits need to happen, otherwise you end up being ruled by politicians who are in a perpetual cycle of trying to stay in office.
Term limits will seal the deal to the end of our Democracy.
Either you're arguing in bad faith, and know this, or you're refusing to inform yourself of the downsides.
So you're ok with SCOTUS and other judges being appointed and no term limits? What about the POTUS, are you saying it's ok if Trump won and kept being president as long as he continues to win?
Please tell me the good sides of having no term limits. Laws shouldn't be straped to a single person.
Buddy, I'm not going to do all the work for you. This is a well researched subject with a ton of information, it's not some brand new idea.
I was mainly referring to elected positions, I'm not necessarily against term limits for Supreme Court Justices.
Edit: See my reply to the knob below for a few sources.
Lol that's a cop out for, I don't have anything other than shit from life long politicians who say it's bad. You're the one making the claim not me.
Oh my fucking god, do like 3 seconds of googling before being so goddamn confident you're correct. Jesus Christ, I'm not your fucking nanny:
You might want to read your own articles...none of them strictly state how term limits are bad. The NPR article even calls out the bullshit. Most politicians shouldn't be politicians in the first place, because they're not there to do good, they're there to get reelected.
Want to know how I know you didn't even read all of the headlines of those links, let alone the content itself?
O I did, you just don't understand them. Almost everyone of them is there because they see that the odds of new people coming in means there is no one to train them... that's the entire reasoning...and that incumbents almost always keep their seats. It's party based power, and it's good for both sides, while being shit for the people.
Those are all fantastic suggestions. In my opinion we absolutely should be taking much more drastic measures to decrease school shootings in the meantime, as nearly everything you suggest would still take at least ~15-20 years to see results. Any dead kid is too many and there are way too many school shootings.
And you can end with bringing your gun regulations up to speed to every other developed nation.
Or not because it's not the guns... it's our society that needs fixing.
We can start with:
Single payer healthcare
Ending the War on Drugs
Ending Qualified immunity
Properly funding our schools and not just rich white suburb schools.
Build more schools and hire more teachers for proper pay so the class room sizes aren't 30-40 kids for one teacher.
UBI (at least start talking about it) once AI takes over most of the blue collar jobs.
End for profit prisons
Enforce the laws already on the books
Make sure there are safety nets for poor families so the kids don't turn to violence/gangs to survive.
Increase the minimum wage
Recreate our mental healthcare so kids don't turn to the internet for support. And to help veterans not end up as a suicide number.
Actively make a law to solidify Pro-choice rights. More unwanted children do not help our situation.
Banning Insider Trading for Congress
Term limits
Ranked Choice Voting so we can move away from a 2 party system
So basically... Fix every other nearly impossible to fix problem first before even deciding to do anything about the actual guns, if anything at all?
And to be clear, by impossible to fix, I mean politically, not that these problems are actually unsolvable.
So you're plan is to try and tackle something that's written into the constitution.... that's your goal? Say it's nearly impossible to do everything else on that list which isn't written into our constitution...but guns... they're easier to fix...fucking hell you all are really naive.
You mean like slavery?
Are you equating slavery to owning firearms? You white privileged ivory tower types are hilarious.
Nope. I'm equating slavery to tackling something in the constitution and changing it. You know, the thing you just implied was not something that could be done. I'm sure you know that and are obfuscating.
Yea everyone basically agreed slavery was bad...we fought a fucking civil war over it...the majority of the USA is pro-gun. You will never radify the constitution to remove or nullify the 2nd. It's not going to ever happen.
If everyone agreed, why did we fight a civil war over it?
Are you suggesting we fight another civil war so you can repeal the 2nd amendment? You do realize who wins that one right?
You didn't answer my question. If everyone agreed, why was there a war over it?
I did answer it...you just didn't like the answer.
No you didn't. Either everyone agreed or a war was fought over it. It can't be both. You don't fight a war over something everyone agrees on.
So feel free to explain that contradiction. I doubt you will.
Because most of the ignorant south at the time didn't know shit about it being fought against slavery. Me and 100million + other firearm owners haven't killed anyone or used our firearms in anger..which harms 0 people... slavery harms a fuck load of people and you equating it to the 2nd is hilariously naive. Congress can't even get single payer healthcare past..yet you think we can ratify the constitution?
I didn't specify a plan one way or another. I just think it's crazy that the talking points you presented seem pretty clearly designed to just kick this issue down the road, cause at least that way you still get to have your guns.
And believe me, solving all those things you mentioned would be great. But why not also try and do something about the major gun issues at the same time too?
Those "talking points" would solve our firearm violence. We don't have a gun problem, we have a societal one. Random mass shootings are a new phenomenon...gang violence and drug violence are not. Solving these things with the list I posted, would curb our violence epidemic 100xs more than just another emotional gun law from people who don't understand guns.
We do have a societal problem. We also very much have a gun problem.
And proposing all these other things you know won't get accomplished is a way to shift all the responsibility away from the gun issue itself.
And you aren't being emotional about even the thought of some more gun control or anything to even tackle that issue head on? Come on.
It might be because I'm not delusional about why we have the violence in the first place. I'm proposing things that actually would make a difference, another AWB or mag cap/mag ban/etc is emotional policies that will not put a single dent in our gun violence... I'm not the one kicking the can down the road, you are.
I personally didn't propose any of those policies. I genuinely don't know what would work best. I just think you are being really transparent in treating the guns themselves as having nothing to do with the issue of gun violence.
I think everything you were saying would be great to accomplish. It's just really disingenuous to propose them knowing there is a slim chance any of them will happen while completely ignoring the actual guns, just because you want to keep your guns.
The statistics and other countries show that violence is mainly driven by poverty and ignorance. Work on those two main things, and you slow the violence.
And most other countries also have much stricter gun control laws too.
We could work on those things and the gun problem too.
So again, you are being very transparent by completely disregarding the guns as if they somehow aren't part of the gun violence problem.
Either way. I think this is where I drop out of this. We are going in circles and while I agree we should work on the things you mention, we clearly just disagree about the actual guns themselves. And of course neither of us are actually in a direct position to make changes to any of those things, I assume. So you have a good one.
Lol fantastic response. And its crickets from everyone else being critical
No, not crickets. Those things sound great, let's do them. We should do everything we can, and that also includes stricter gun laws.
Not term limits though. It may sound like a good idea, but I implore you to research issues with term limits.
Term limits need to happen, otherwise you end up being ruled by politicians who are in a perpetual cycle of trying to stay in office.
Term limits will seal the deal to the end of our Democracy.
Either you're arguing in bad faith, and know this, or you're refusing to inform yourself of the downsides.
So you're ok with SCOTUS and other judges being appointed and no term limits? What about the POTUS, are you saying it's ok if Trump won and kept being president as long as he continues to win?
Please tell me the good sides of having no term limits. Laws shouldn't be straped to a single person.
Buddy, I'm not going to do all the work for you. This is a well researched subject with a ton of information, it's not some brand new idea.
I was mainly referring to elected positions, I'm not necessarily against term limits for Supreme Court Justices.
Edit: See my reply to the knob below for a few sources.
Lol that's a cop out for, I don't have anything other than shit from life long politicians who say it's bad. You're the one making the claim not me.
Oh my fucking god, do like 3 seconds of googling before being so goddamn confident you're correct. Jesus Christ, I'm not your fucking nanny:
look at that, pretty much the first result and it's NPR - https://www.npr.org/2023/10/29/1207593168/congressional-term-limits-explainer
More because apparently you can't do anything yourself. But don't expect me to pull out the relevant quotes or anything, you can do that:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/16/term-limits-congress-senate-house/
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/term-limits-exacerbate-all-the-problems-with-our-government.html
https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/3979677-term-limits-wouldnt-clean-up-congress-they-could-make-things-worse/
https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2016/10/18/13323842/trump-term-limits
Good enough, or...?
You might want to read your own articles...none of them strictly state how term limits are bad. The NPR article even calls out the bullshit. Most politicians shouldn't be politicians in the first place, because they're not there to do good, they're there to get reelected.
Want to know how I know you didn't even read all of the headlines of those links, let alone the content itself?
O I did, you just don't understand them. Almost everyone of them is there because they see that the odds of new people coming in means there is no one to train them... that's the entire reasoning...and that incumbents almost always keep their seats. It's party based power, and it's good for both sides, while being shit for the people.
Those are all fantastic suggestions. In my opinion we absolutely should be taking much more drastic measures to decrease school shootings in the meantime, as nearly everything you suggest would still take at least ~15-20 years to see results. Any dead kid is too many and there are way too many school shootings.
And you can end with bringing your gun regulations up to speed to every other developed nation.
Or not because it's not the guns... it's our society that needs fixing.