Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III
Comments
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »Teachers needing guns in a first world country is insane. It's an insane situation to find yourself in. If I lived somewhere that I needed an ar-15 to feel safe at home or sending my children to school I would move somewhere else as soon as possible and not look back.
Do you think it's a coincidence that so many gun lovers homeschool? They know exactly what their guns can do and they want none of that for their own kids.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »Teachers needing guns in a first world country is insane. It's an insane situation to find yourself in. If I lived somewhere that I needed an ar-15 to feel safe at home or sending my children to school I would move somewhere else as soon as possible and not look back.
Not merely insane, but depraved. It shames every single American.0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »It's not objectively insane.
I will agree with a number of adjectives. Distressing. Unpleasant. Unfortunate. Awful. Horrifying, even. Not a preferred situation.
That does not make it insane.
The rest of your post goes on to describe how arming teachers is a rational response to a society in which school shootings are an inevitable facet of life.
If you've allowed your society to become one where it makes sense on any level to train teachers how to kill people in schools, then that entire society is objectively insane.
So I'll qualify my initial remark: arming teachers is objectively insane in a sane society. If arming teachers makes sense in your society, your society is broken.0 -
jobbridge4life wrote: »
Not merely insane, but depraved. It shames every single American.
It should but it doesn't. In any other country Trumps suggestion would cause uproar, probably calls to resign.
It the US they are actually discussing it, even when the cop that failed to act proves the major flaw in the very concept, even before we get to the rights or wrongs and the operational issues.
The focus on the failures of the FBI and the cops etc and this nonsense about arming teachers is aimed at one thing. Avoiding have to talk about guns.0 -
NPR have a multi part expose series on Trump on the Embedded podcast. It’s so brilliant but really eye opening too in the scary sense. Everyone should listen to it.0
-
Advertisement
-
-
everlast75 wrote: »Linky please?
Here ye go
https://itunes.apple.com/ie/podcast/embedded/id1091709555?mt=20 -
The most recent Obstruction one is very interesting. Thanks!0 -
No worries. Great to see journalists doing deep dives into this stuff.
He can’t call this stuff lies or fake news when it’s all a matter of record.0 -
No worries. Great to see journalists doing deep dives into this stuff.
He can’t call this stuff lies or fake news when it’s all a matter of record.
Interesting to hear the bits from Comey's testimony. Comey does not strike me as a man that'd completely concoct a narrative from his meetings with Trump.
Whereas if you listen to Trump's account of events, Comey is a serial liar. Crazy times.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
The mantra of the US that applies in this situation is the Benjamin Franklin quote whereby if you trade liberty for security you deserve neither (paraphrasing).
It's a fairly black and white outlook on the problem, but naturally, they freely ignore it at other times (approach to religious interference in the state, approach to alcohol, drugs, curfews and other authoritarian beliefs).
The thing is, you do have to pay for security with freedom and it's entirely valid to be idealistic about that and not be willing to make that trade.
However, that doesn't stop them from approaching the problem in other ways, but as we've seen, they're happy to **** over their liberty with authoritarian measures or to avoid trying to solve problems when there is no freedom factor involved based on other beliefs. The USA talks the talk about freedom and liberty but seldom walks the walk.
There are plenty of ways they could tackle gun deaths without impingeing on the 2nd amendment at all, but they choose not to because the political system in the US is the biggest farce in the Western world and is utterly beholden to various powerful lobbies that don't give a toss about the well-being of the citizens.
Arming teachers is utterly insane, but there's nothing in and of itself wrong with allowing people firearms for personal protection or for sport.
The issues in the US are a fetishisation of violence, massive poverty, institutional racism and rampant anti-intellectualism.
Even if you fixed everything else, you might still have an elevated number of gun deaths, but if they were 25% higher than other western countries, rather than 10 times higher, that might be reasonably seen as a price worth paying.0 -
The mantra of the US that applies in this situation is the Benjamin Franklin quote whereby if you trade liberty for security you deserve neither (paraphrasing).
It's a fairly black and white outlook on the problem, but naturally, they freely ignore it at other times (approach to religious interference in the state, approach to alcohol, drugs, curfews and other authoritarian beliefs).
The thing is, you do have to pay for security with freedom and it's entirely valid to be idealistic about that and not be willing to make that trade.
However, that doesn't stop them from approaching the problem in other ways, but as we've seen, they're happy to **** over their liberty with authoritarian measures or to avoid trying to solve problems when there is no freedom factor involved based on other beliefs. The USA talks the talk about freedom and liberty but seldom walks the walk.
There are plenty of ways they could tackle gun deaths without impingeing on the 2nd amendment at all, but they choose not to because the political system in the US is the biggest farce in the Western world and is utterly beholden to various powerful lobbies that don't give a toss about the well-being of the citizens.
Arming teachers is utterly insane, but there's nothing in and of itself wrong with allowing people firearms for personal protection or for sport.
The issues in the US are a fetishisation of violence, massive poverty, institutional racism and rampant anti-intellectualism.
Even if you fixed everything else, you might still have an elevated number of gun deaths, but if they were 25% higher than other western countries, rather than 10 times higher, that might be reasonably seen as a price worth paying.
The issue is the American people themselves also. The fact that a certain percentage of the population will vote for poorer health care, welfare etc, while wanting more access to firearms and belive Trump is their saviour, is not a mindset which most Irish people apart from some right wing free marketers can comprehend.
While RTE etc are definitely government mouth pieces in my opinion, fox news (Oxymoron if there ever was) run so many fear based items, the same percentage of the population believe they are constantly under threat and a scared population if one that's easy to control.0 -
So I'll qualify my initial remark: arming teachers is objectively insane in a sane society. If arming teachers makes sense in your society, your society is broken.
I agree. I fully agree. I have been saying so since Post 1 on these threads, all those years ago. There is something wrong with our society. We have a societal or sociological (or both) problem.
But fixing that is going to take years, even if the politicians actually try to do it. In the meantime, school shootings are going to keep happening. If we have the money to do it, which we probably don't, sure, put armed cops in every school. The Arapahoe School shooting was over in less than a minute and a half, the amount of time it took the cop to get from one part of the school to the shooter. And, honestly, I think an expensive cop is better served actually policing the populace, perhaps helping to address the societal issues resulting in our ridiculous murder rate, than being paid to sit around a peaceful school for 20 years until he draws retirement, in case of the very slim chance of a shooting happening at their location. Maybe private security, but also not cheap. A practicable compromise, which does not cost so much, is a partially armed staff: A route chosen by a number of districts thus far, and it seems a number will join them.0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »I agree. I fully agree. I have been saying so since Post 1 on these threads, all those years ago. There is something wrong with our society. We have a societal or sociological (or both) problem.
But fixing that is going to take years, even if the politicians actually try to do it. In the meantime, school shootings are going to keep happening. If we have the money to do it, which we probably don't, sure, put armed cops in every school. The Arapahoe School shooting was over in less than a minute and a half, the amount of time it took the cop to get from one part of the school to the shooter. And, honestly, I think an expensive cop is better served actually policing the populace, perhaps helping to address the societal issues resulting in our ridiculous murder rate, than being paid to sit around a peaceful school for 20 years until he draws retirement, in case of the very slim chance of a shooting happening at their location. Maybe private security, but also not cheap. A practicable compromise, which does not cost so much, is a partially armed staff: A route chosen by a number of districts thus far, and it seems a number will join them.
And what happens when a member of that partially armed staff decides that they too want to kill students? There are plenty of abusive teachers, there are plenty of teachers who 'lose it'. What about the argument that more guns in a situation actually makes it harder for law enforcement to deal effectively with the crisis?
I don't think it is a practicable compromise, I don't think it is a palatable compromise, I think it is utter capitulation. The NRA will have won. More guns and even more when those extra ones don't do the trick has failed every single time.
I remember as a child watching movies about 'ghetto' schools in America and being frightened by the notion of metal detectors and the militarized security. Now, those are the official policy of the President, and large sections of the populace are supporting it!0 -
aloyisious wrote: »It made the news last week that Russia soldiers were killed in Syria following a clash with US allies there. The response from Russia was that the men were NOT serving Russian soldiers.
The Washington Post is running a story that the men were mercenaries allegedly in the employ of a company called Wagner which is connected to Yevgeniy Prigozhin and that intercepts of messages between him and a Syrian Govt official had him as telling the official that he had "secured permission" from a Russian Minister to move ahead with a "fast and strong" initiative that would take place early in Feb.
Yevgeniy is the Russian allegedly behind the hackers base used to hack and interfere with the US presidential election system and is also named in the group of Russians indicted by Rob Meuller a few days ago. Yevgeniy is allegedly a very close [chef] friend of Vlad Putin. If the reports are true and correct, then Don Trump should have some questions to put to Vlad Putin, who's word he trusts in respct to the hacking attacks.
I googled for aother source to the story: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/putins-shadow-army-suffers-a-setback-in-syria. Please note that I do not have previous history knowledge of the New Yorker publication or how trusted it's reporters, commentators and inputting sources are in the media world, in respect of verity. I don't hve a W/P account so couldn't copy and paste it's own story link here...
Good opinion piece in the WSJ on this incident.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-attack-on-u-s-troops-15194298550 -
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/967436225211781120
So, it appears that the father of the child who refused to appear on the CNN Rubio panel because of being given scripted questions doctored emails to back up the claim.
Trump jumped on this one to attack the media for fake news.
I wonder if he'll retract the statement:D0 -
It should but it doesn't. In any other country Trumps suggestion would cause uproar, probably calls to resign.
It the US they are actually discussing it, even when the cop that failed to act proves the major flaw in the very concept, even before we get to the rights or wrongs and the operational issues.
The focus on the failures of the FBI and the cops etc and this nonsense about arming teachers is aimed at one thing. Avoiding have to talk about guns.
And avoids talking about removing rifles from the street and school, and keeping them solely for use on the firing range and battlefield.0 -
jobbridge4life wrote: »And what happens when a member of that partially armed staff decides that they too want to kill students? There are plenty of abusive teachers, there are plenty of teachers who 'lose it'.
There is nothing magical about the boundary of a school classroom door which suddenly changes the personality of someone. Many people who are teachers have guns. Many are licensed to carry concealed weapons off the school grounds, in public. If the argument is "What if he goes nuts", there's not a hell of a lot stopping him from bringing his or her firearm into the classroom as it is, just like anyone else.What about the argument that more guns in a situation actually makes it harder for law enforcement to deal effectively with the crisis?
It does not yet seem to have caused any significant issues. For example, in the Trolley Square Mall shooting, responding local law enforcement showed up to a fully engaged two-way firefight already in progress. Ditto U-Texas.I remember as a child watching movies about 'ghetto' schools in America and being frightened by the notion of metal detectors and the militarized security. Now, those are the official policy of the President, and large sections of the populace are supporting it!
I don't like it any more than you do. However, until we can drill into our kids to actually have respect for each other, and not shoot someone because they have a nice pair of Nike sneakers you like or 'dissed' you, the metal detectors are likely to stay.0 -
The Democrats counter memo to Nunes has been published.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/24/read-the-democratic-rebuttal-to-the-nunes-memo-annotated/?utm_term=.2d62c1a2929d
It makes for interesting reading.
The Steele dossier did not inform the decision to begin an investigation.
It shows Nunes memo up for the hack job it is.0 -
Advertisement
-
[Deleted User] wrote: »The Democrats counter memo to Nunes has been published.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/24/read-the-democratic-rebuttal-to-the-nunes-memo-annotated/?utm_term=.2d62c1a2929d
It makes for interesting reading.
The Steele dossier did not inform the decision to begin an investigation.
It shows Nunes memo up for the hack job it is.
The delay in the release of this has done it's job though in terms of ensuring the base has its truth already. Sure it doesn't matter what the fake news media or the Dems try to push. How convenient they only found their memo now after all."People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."
0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »There is nothing magical about the boundary of a school classroom door .
I don't like it any more than you do. However, until we can drill into our kids to actually have respect for each other, and not shoot someone because they have a nice pair of Nike sneakers you like or 'dissed' you, the metal detectors are likely to stay.
There is something magical about it your kids should be allowed to go there with no guns involved.
Jesus Christ you make some amount of excuses so you can keep your automatic weapons in your house .
Do you really honestly not find it odd no other country in the world as this problem or attitude at all.
The country is like an alcoholic in denial.0 -
An interesting anecdote may show how very different our thinking in this country is.
My grandfather was a trustee of the local national school during the time of civil war in Ireland 1922/23. He thus had a key to the school and we were on the anti treaty side. He was asked to store guns in hiding, in the school. He refused, saying the school and the children were, out of bounds.
This was in the teeth of a civil war.
Might just illustrate, the madness in the USA. Schools should be sacred places.0 -
I think what many people outside of the US fail to understand is that the gun is seen as an essential part of America. Their entire culture resolves around it. From the wild-west to winning wars, Americans see their position in terms of strength, and the gun is a really big example of that, one that everyone can own.
Unlike, say democracy or international soft power, that it is hard for people to understand or contextualise. America is powerful and free and this is summed up by my ability to own and fire this weapon.
On that basis, you can understand why any attempt to restrict access is seen as a direct attack on the citizen themselves. The NRA have been very successful is increasing this feeling, so much so that anyone who even attempts to talk about it is labelled as anti-American or trying to destroy the constitution.
IMO, that is why logical discussion about type of guns, ammo or whatever won't work. Gun advocates see any roll back on their 'rights', not because they fundamentally believe in whatever type of gun, bit more so that that can't be seen to give an inch.
It is exactly this reason why Trumps latest wheeze is so troubling. All it does is reinforce their position, rather than attempting to start a gradual move away from the illogical position.0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »I agree. I fully agree. I have been saying so since Post 1 on these threads, all those years ago. There is something wrong with our society. We have a societal or sociological (or both) problem.
But fixing that is going to take years, even if the politicians actually try to do it. In the meantime, school shootings are going to keep happening. If we have the money to do it, which we probably don't, sure, put armed cops in every school. The Arapahoe School shooting was over in less than a minute and a half, the amount of time it took the cop to get from one part of the school to the shooter. And, honestly, I think an expensive cop is better served actually policing the populace, perhaps helping to address the societal issues resulting in our ridiculous murder rate, than being paid to sit around a peaceful school for 20 years until he draws retirement, in case of the very slim chance of a shooting happening at their location. Maybe private security, but also not cheap. A practicable compromise, which does not cost so much, is a partially armed staff: A route chosen by a number of districts thus far, and it seems a number will join them.
There is nothing coming in yo turn around American gun culture. Indeed teachers guns simply reinforces it.
I lean seriously how many teachers are properly trained? I don't mean they can shoot at a gun range I mean trained to deal with a high pressure situation with kids running for their lives and someone with an automatic rifle coming for them? This isn't a movie and the vast majority of people can't deal with that on instinct.
Remember currently the police seem undertrained in this aspect never mind the teachers. Think of all the issues policemen face. Who is going to train all those teachers about proper crisis management and pay for it? Will it be part of a few teachers job description? Qualification in Geography and have John McClain as a spirit animal?
Plus even in action movies innocent people die. A teacher is unlikely to get to an attacker before they start shooting. This is not a solution but it is being presented as one. There is no grand plan coming down the line to stop these attacks. Their only method to stop them being attacks is to turn them into gun battles in the middle of a school.
Who pays for the training? Who double checks that the teachers who say they know how to do stuff can do it.0 -
http://www.golfpunkhq.com/news/article/trump-golf-club-pays-out-millions-in-members-lawsuit
More impressive work from the dealmaker-in-chief.
Reneged on an agreement with prior members of a club he bought & ends up settling for around 5.5m
All of these stories of settlements & court cases over the years must fill his supporters with so much confidence in his ability to make the best deals ever for America!!!
Also, to touch on the guns in school piece, read this from an American school librarian which is in line with a previous point I made that the idea of shooting someone is a very tough concept for people who work with children:
https://medium.com/@aelaineo/on-guns-in-schools-6757bb7621090 -
Lots of good stuff in this weeks Medium.com/@Amy_Siskind. I particularly liked how the Hurricane Harvey rebuild is taking like 4x longer than Katrina did - and Katrina was a disaster! Of course, the Texas pol running it, is yet another Bush: George P. Bush, GWB's nephew, Jeb's son.
https://www.apnews.com/431ef59b5d8746c385f48b11982e3c59
Trump's getting paid by the RNC: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/23/rnc-paid-trump-campaign-trump-tower-rent-after-paying-legal-bills.html
Oh, and Forbes is tracking who pays the big rents in Trump Tower and other Trump property: It's foreign goverments, like China:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2018/02/13/trump-conflicts-of-interest-tenants-donald-business-organization-real-estate-assets-pay/#771ace4748f9
Money quote from that article, explains a lot of Trump's actions: "Boiled down, the Trump Organization is more a collection of deals than an operating business. While Wal-Mart and General Motors rely on millions of customers around the world, the Trump Organization relies on a handful of large entities."0 -
Deleted User wrote: »The Democrats counter memo to Nunes has been published.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/02/24/read-the-democratic-rebuttal-to-the-nunes-memo-annotated/?utm_term=.2d62c1a2929d
It makes for interesting reading.
The Steele dossier did not inform the decision to begin an investigation.
It shows Nunes memo up for the hack job it is.
It's a "nothing" according to Donnie, though. :rolleyes:0 -
Manic Moran wrote: »There is nothing magical about the boundary of a school classroom door which suddenly changes the personality of someone. Many people who are teachers have guns. Many are licensed to carry concealed weapons off the school grounds, in public. If the argument is "What if he goes nuts", there's not a hell of a lot stopping him from bringing his or her firearm into the classroom as it is, just like anyone else.
That is argument for more gun control generally, so I'm glad we have an accord on that.
There is a difference however with a state sanctioned and encouraged (remember Trump suggested bonuses for those militarized teachers) system designed to bring more guns into the classroom. To turn the classroom into a militarized zone. The beast has his teeth sunk further into your children.Manic Moran wrote: »It does not yet seem to have caused any significant issues. For example, in the Trolley Square Mall shooting, responding local law enforcement showed up to a fully engaged two-way firefight already in progress. Ditto U-Texas.
i'm very surprised by your dismissive attitude on this point. You need to read into this further. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/12/06/good-guys-with-guns-can-be-dangerous-too-dont-gut-concealed-carry-laws/?utm_term=.fcb61d10c6e4Manic Moran wrote: »I don't like it any more than you do. However, until we can drill into our kids to actually have respect for each other, and not shoot someone because they have a nice pair of Nike sneakers you like or 'dissed' you, the metal detectors are likely to stay.
If the issues were not quite so serious I would suggest the above was comic. 'The guns aren't the problem the kidz are'. Guns are what kill your children. Guns are what killed the attendees at Pulse Nightclub, at the musical festival in Las Vegas, in the Church in Texas... Not sneakers... not being "dissed".0 -
Advertisement
-
Maybe some or most of you have seen this video before, but it really sums up both how maddening the gun control debate can be and the wider problem of Trump's presidency : https://youtu.be/6imFvSua3Kg
What we have here is President Obama giving an excellent, thoughtful, respectful response to a question about taking a guns away from law-abiding citizens. Obama was not perfect -- nobody is -- and being President of country like the USA invariably means that the decisions you make can cost many lives and change the course of history, but my God what would we give to have someone of his level-headed intellectual calibre leading the USA again?
And yet, in my travels through the US, the level to which Obama is not just disliked but despised is simply incredible. It's more than just not agreeing with his policies, but actually there are a significant number of people who think he was a budding tyrant, along with the long-peddled hysteria over his birthplace and his religion. I could never get my head around it -- their suspicion of Obama was comparable to how many of us in Europe view parties like UKIP and Le Front National. The reason for this is that America's sociopolitical environment is crippled by a poisonous 'us and them' mentality -- an absolutist attitude of American vs. un-American. This attitude drags them into a servile homage to their Constitution and a mistaken belief that the contemporary intent of the Founding Fathers must be applied for all eternity, regardless of how the world changes. I roll my eyes at it much in the same way I roll my eyes when some people talk about the 'Republic envisaged by the 1916 Proclamation' -- as if we must all chain ourselves to 1916 and never think differently.
The Obama campaign's talk of 'Change' became an irritating soundbite, that's for sure, but at the very least it encouraged going beyond a backward-looking mentality of 'make America great again' to one of 'making America something better than it has been'. I think it's only now that we realise how good Obama was as a President -- in terms of being a President who was willing to listen, articulate in his answers, but above all humble in his acknowledgement that the 'American way' is not some infallible doctrine of physics, but an imperfect ideology which requires constant and intellectually honest criticism in order for it to evolve and thrive. Obama recognised that, despite America's hysterical fear of socialism, there were elements of socialism that can healthily complement a capitalist society -- hence the establishment of Obamacare which Republicans have tried to undermine ever since. And yet, the pro-gun lobby tells us that the gun violence problem requires mental health to be tackled before gun ownership, but simultaneously despise the man who made significant steps towards helping ordinary Americans get better access to healthcare and perhaps in time contribute partly to easing the rife inequality which is fuelling much of America's societal ills.
Sadly, Trump seems to have resurrected the view of 'American-ness' being a religion with its own incontrovertible and unquestionable dogma. He is the perfect personification of this ideology -- full of bluster, arrogance, pigheadedness and unwillingness to accept any challenge to his world view.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement