Sign In

Tyrphanax

User Group
Members
Join date
2-Nov-2010
Last activity
22-Sep-2019
Posts
6,827

Post History

Post
#1208052
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jay said:

Jeebus said:

TM2YC said:

Jay said:

mass killings… why didn’t we see them when guns were even more readily available?

When were guns less prevalent in the US than today?

Interestingly, the murder rate has been going down for quite a while now. It raised a bit in recent years, but its nowhere near the rate it was in the 80s.

EDIT: That’s just the general murder rate, gun murders are, indeed, going up.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-u-s-murder-rate-is-up-but-still-far-below-its-1980-peak/

Maybe I’m reading it wrong, but it looks like the percentage of murders committed with firearms went up, not the absolute number. But yeah, crime is relatively low, though you’d think it was the purge based on media coverage.

Jeebus said:

Jay said:

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

I think Jay’s argument is that those arguing for anything approaching a ban on guns don’t account for the fact that so many of the killings will still happen. And I think that’s right.

We can’t stop all the killings, so let’s not try to stop any of the killings.

Sounds great.

How many of the killings will stop if we ban the scary guns? That’s an honest question. I’d like to know how many of the people who would die this year would not die if the scary guns were banned, because those are the only ones that stand a chance of being banned outright.

In 2014, 248 people were killed with rifles. That accounts for 3% of all gun deaths, 4% of all gun deaths excluding non-classified firearms. If we took that 4% figure and applied it to the 1,959 gun deaths caused by non-classified firearms, that would be an additional 78 people killed. So, 326. Assuming that “scary guns” just refers to assault weapons and not all rifles, then the number would be less than 326. The question is “how much less?”

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/expanded-homicide-data/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2010-2014.xls

Disclaimer: There’s a decent chance I don’t know what I’m talking about.

Thanks. This is the core of what I’m arguing. Even banning ALL rifles, including the non-scary ones, would have a minimal impact on overall gun deaths, and that’s assuming that at least some of those rifle users wouldn’t commit the same crime with a handgun. We’d have to be far more restrictive in our application of gun control to have a significant impact on gun deaths.

Yeah, I believe I’ve made a few in depth posts like this before with many facts and figures and statistics that show that gun crime is fractional (but over-reported) and that we see many hundreds more deaths from automobiles and cars every year, but generally they are glossed over and not talked about.

Post
#1208049
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jay said:

I’m amazed at how few questions I see about the WHY behind all this. TM2YC seems to think that humans simply kill each other because that’s what we do, so if we ban the tools we use to kill, the killings will stop; I suppose banning delivery trucks is next. But why are we seeing so many mass killings, and why didn’t we see them when guns were even more readily available? Has anyone considered we’ve started behaving in ways that imply a deeper and more troubling issue? How do we prevent people from ending up in such a painful and hopeless place that they think murdering a bunch of people is the way to deal with those feelings?

Nobody I ever talk to is interested in this. It’s just about putting band-aids on the issue or slowly making things harder and harder to get while side-stepping any actual causes.

Post
#1207823
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

It makes me super sad when people clamor to give up rights.

TM2YC said:

Jay said:

Ask Londoners if they feel safe with people getting stabbed every night

Broadly speaking the answer would be yes. London is one of the most populous cities in the world. One murder is statistically tiny and no danger to the majority but one is still far too many. The UK politicians, police etc are all working together to reduce it again by further restricting access to knives. That’s how you tackle a problem caused by dangerous weapons. Action, not inaction and prayer.

But what’s being done to address why people want to stab other people to death? I doubt that access to knives is the reason people stab one another.

Post
#1207794
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Jay said:

TV’s Frink said:

Banning scary looking rifles can’t hurt.

If I can buy a hunting rifle that’s functionally the same as the scary rifle, it’s a useless gesture.

Do we need a useless gesture that panders to angry voters and doesn’t solve the problem?

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

The lack of gun control is the only reason that these school shootings happen so often in America.

Or society is sick. Machine guns were readily available many years ago — actual machine guns, not black plastic rifles that look like something out of a movie, but are functionally the same as a hunting rifle. Where were all the mass shootings back then?

Banning scary-looking rifles won’t solve the problem. I went shooting with family and friends a few weeks back for my dad’s birthday. I can tell you that someone packing a couple semi-automatic handguns and a few magazines can do a tremendous amount of damage in a short period of time.

Background checks and mental health checks would probably help. There’s something going on out there that goes beyond availability of firearms.

There were more people incarcerated in mental institutions decades ago, which is why I think there were less shootings then.

We still put many people with mental issues in jail. In fact, I’d guess we put more mentally ill people in jail today than we did back then. It’s easier to throw them away in prison than to tackle something as complex as mental illness.

Also, who said anything about rifles? I don’t even know if this shooter used rifles. I want almost all guns to be nearly inaccessible.

Never happen.

Well said.

For the record, what I’ve seen is that it was a shotgun and a .38 revolver.

Post
#1202782
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

Weird little story about Paul Ryan trying to get rid of the chaplain of the House. The chaplain claims that Ryan’s chief of staff said, “maybe it’s time that we had a Chaplain that wasn’t Catholic.”

Violation of free exercise of religion?

There shouldn’t be any government employed Chaplain.

Ding ding ding.

The fact that there is even such a position is bad form in my opinion.

Post
#1202510
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

I just want to take a moment to talk about what an utterly bullshit waste of tax dollars this stupid RealID act is.

By 2020 if you plan to do any air travel or entering of federal buildings, you need to get a new ID card (which can also be a driver’s license) which serves the exact same purpose as your current state ID card/driver’s license. But it’s federal.

Another fantastic quasi-dystopian power grab by our federal government on the heels of 9/11 that is costing millions in tax dollars that will have literally no effect on our security or the betterment of the nation, but I am sure is heavily lining the pockets of some already-rich white dude.

Post
#1202206
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus said:

Yeah, that’s just it. Taking a well-designed, modern nuclear carrier and parking it offshore to power a remote town doesn’t actually sound like a half-bad idea, at least as some sort of stopgap. But this thing? They just launched it and it looks like a Soviet-era museum piece.

I hate to judge a book by its cover, but come on.

At least put some new paint on it.

Seriously, everything in Russia looks post-apocalyptic.

Post
#1201897
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

LordZerome1080 said:

Possessed said:

I’ve kinda fallen off the wagon the last week or so. Nothing too bad, usually just literally one or two drinks a day, which isn’t really a problem and is practically nothing compared to the past of having 3 or 4 drinks before even going to work. But I should still probably get back on or at least force myself to start limiting it to a couple times a week. But the thing is I don’t want to. I’m miserable, it’s the only thing that helps, and I don’t care about myself anyway.

Here are the ways to help yourself: get therapy, ask a friend or family member for advice, get a dog or something so you will have to take care of something besides yourself and go to aa.

Nice post.

Post
#1201037
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

CatBus said:

Trying not to get too optimistic about Korea. On one hand, this would be great for all parties concerned and the world. On the other hand, we had basically the exact same fanfares and promises in 2000 which turned out to just be cover for a half-billion dollar bribe. Hope is appealing, but cynicism is maintaining a slight lead in my head right now.

Yeah, let us not forget Kim Jong Un is the guy who has had multiple people assassinated (that we know about).

Post
#1201033
Topic
The Place to Go for Emotional Support
Time

DominicCobb said:

I was going to say something long and winded but Trident pretty much nailed it. Don’t worry so much. Just enjoy what you have and be yourself. If you do end up losing her, it’s actually won’t the end of the world, even if it might feel like it. Let whatever happens happen.

Also, if it means that much, tell her exactly how you feel. Awkward but important.

Word. Overthinking will always lead you to disaster.

I mean look at Anakin Skywalker. Just chill, live life, enjoy.

Post
#1199161
Topic
Star Wars "Official" Canon Content Thread
Time

I haven’t read them but it’s pretty annoying when they just reference the same handful of planets from the movies. I mean you could come up with a thousand original planets with gourmet coffee, but it seemingly has to be one from the movies. It’s like if Han told Luke he looked like he was strong enough to pull the ears off a Tusken Raider or something; instead of an interesting new thing, we just get an old thing again. Make a moon called Kona IX or something, it’s automatically better.

Also it’s pretty clear to me (at least) that the Story Group isn’t really vetting stuff and is just signing off on broad strokes, so it’s literally just the old EU rubber stamp strategy applied to what is mostly garbage again. Sure, we had some good stuff, but for every Thrawn Trilogy, there was a Children of the Jedi and a New Jedi Order and a Courtship of Princess Leia. Yuck. I felt like they were saying they’d be really closely looking at stuff to ensure it all jived and made sense and that would mean there would be a quality control element and we’d have a new EU that was mostly good with some bad, but I suppose not.

Post
#1199061
Topic
What is/was the best SW Game ever, on any platform?
Time

DominicCobb said:

canofhumdingers said:

The Rogue Squadron games were always really cool with great environments and neat storylines. But I HATED their control scheme. Having the yaw and roll combined into one control where you effectively made flat turns and could get further away from or closer to the ground but without having true three dimensional freedom always drove me nuts. Especially in the space levels where there is no ground reference! Let me loop, roll, immelman, and split-s 'til my heart’s content dang-it!

Exactly why I would love the people who made the flight mode in Battlefront to work on a new one.

Yeah, I wasn’t a huge fan of the new Battlefront games, but the flight stuff was top notch and getting into the cockpit view felt like being in the movies. Definitely a lot of fun in the beta.