Donald Trump Presidency discussion thread III

Leroy42

Yet almost nobody wants to ask “why” and deal with it. (This applies to both parties).

Plenty of people want to know why. The NRA have lobbied very successfully to make sure that no research can be done into this area on the basis that it is anti-gun.

Those people on the march want to know why. The majority of people in the US who want something done about the continued gun violence would love to know why.

But gun advocates don't want people to know why, as they are scared that at some point people might question the gun itself.

The whole gun debate is carried out under a lack of information. And that suits the gun lobby just fine. If nobody has any facts then every debate becomes nothing more than opinions, and they can be easily dismissed.

strandroad

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yet almost nobody wants to ask “why” and deal with it. (This applies to both parties).

There are many whys being asked, it's just that to explain the phenomenon of American shooting massacres you would need a why that does not exist outside of US, seeing how it demonstrably dominates all mass shooting tables.

So far there doesn't seem to be a factor that would explain it better than American gun loving mentality (access + mythos).

Manic Moran

But we have -always- had that mentality here, and it used to be stronger. Fewer households than ever now have firearms. Children bringing firearms to school used to be routinely permitted and was never a problem because they were used appropriately after school hours. If anything, the ‘gun culture’, for better or worse, has reduced in the US over time, yet the problems of mass shootings has increased. Note that the problem of homicides has actually decreased, much of the furore is over a very particular subset of activity. All the figures are trending in the correct direction, except the frequency of mass shootings.

So what is special about mass shootings that this, in particular, is an increasing phenomenon? This increase is happening worldwide, even if the rate of incidents are certainly at a much lower level than the US. Any such incidents in Europe, for example, that I can think of have also only been happening in the last decade or two. A look on wiki for “rampage killings” shows commonality with the US in that it really only seems to have taken off since the mid 1980s in Europe, with incidents increasing in the 2000s. Is it really the guns?

Nate--IRL--

Manic Moran wrote: »

.........Is it really the guns?

A combination of the Media's reporting of such occurrences... and the availability of guns, I would say.

Nate

strandroad

Manic Moran wrote: »

So what is special about mass shootings that this, in particular, is an increasing phenomenon? This increase is happening worldwide, even if the rate of incidents are certainly at a much lower level than the US. Any such incidents in Europe, for example, that I can think of have also only been happening in the last decade or two. A look on wiki for “rampage killings” shows commonality with the US in that it really only seems to have taken off since the mid 1980s in Europe, with incidents increasing in the 2000s. Is it really the guns?

Media reporting and internet consumption; the idea of shootings as solutions taking root. But if there is no fertile ground of easy gun access such ideas die on the vine or lead to very limited (self-)destruction.

Professor Moriarty

Manic Moran wrote: »

But we have -always- had that mentality here, and it used to be stronger. Fewer households than ever now have firearms. Children bringing firearms to school used to be routinely permitted and was never a problem because they were used appropriately after school hours. If anything, the ‘gun culture’, for better or worse, has reduced in the US over time, yet the problems of mass shootings has increased. Note that the problem of homicides has actually decreased, much of the furore is over a very particular subset of activity. All the figures are trending in the correct direction, except the frequency of mass shootings.

So what is special about mass shootings that this, in particular, is an increasing phenomenon? This increase is happening worldwide, even if the rate of incidents are certainly at a much lower level than the US. Any such incidents in Europe, for example, that I can think of have also only been happening in the last decade or two. A look on wiki for “rampage killings” shows commonality with the US in that it really only seems to have taken off since the mid 1980s in Europe, with incidents increasing in the 2000s. Is it really the guns?

Seriously? Yes, it is the guns. Crazy people with guns = massacres. Crazy people without guns = no massacres.

Until you accept that basic fact then everything you say looks like a deflection.

Nody

Manic Moran wrote: »

Is it really the guns?

Yes because the guns is what makes it mass shootings; if all you can get hold of are homemade pipe bombs (built after usually poor instructions on the internet) and knives the mass part of the whole deal becomes much harder. I'll use Sweden as an example; the amount of gang related killings have gone up drastically in the last few years and the driver for this is someone figured out an easy buck by shipping in weapons from ex Yugoslavia etc. that people kept at home to resell. People were just as pissed on each other before but due to easy access to weapons suddenly the amount of deaths drastically increase.

Now would removing weapons and making them a lot harder to get/require secure storage magically stop mass shootings? Of course not but they would drastically reduce the deaths and several would most likely never happen (trying to stab a class to death is a tad different compared to being able of going in and simply shooting down people which means several cowards would never dare do it). There will always be mass killings; I'm sure we'd see some new ways (poison in air vents/school food/water supply for example) but once again those would be much more difficult to pull off for your average person and more likely to fail. There will always be psychos etc. that will kill no matter what but making it harder for them to kill more people is a good first step on the way of preventing it; it will always be there but there's no reason to give them easy access to a multiplier in killing efficiency.

Ludo

Manic Moran wrote: »

Is it really the guns?

Mental health is also a major issue of course. But that is much harder to solve than gun availability especially in the short term. That doesn't mean we shouldn't do it though. Absolutely research and try the absolute best to deal with the mental health issues but while that is going on, why not pick off the low hanging fruit and remove the means to perform the crime.

Water John

A certain cohort of people are easily subject to signalling. For example a certain site in a local area may become the go to place for people wishing to take their own lives.
This is similar, with some disturbed individuals, maximising their anger and also possibly, knowing it will be the end of their own life.

Guns are available to a greater or lesser extent, in various societies. The types of guns and how easy it is to obtain them is a particular USA problem.

Loafing Oaf

dudara wrote: »

Occasional muterrings on Twitter today that Daniels was pregnant and was made have an abortion. Pure speculation at the moment, but if in any way true, I wonder how his user base would receive that news

That would explain the emphasis on them having 'unprotected' sex, which I found a bit odd...

Ludo

Only a couple of hours before this goes out. No firing or tweet yet to distract from it. I think it will be a whole load of nothing to be honest. He had an affair (probably more than one). No one should be or will be surprised by that. Not a fan of Trump but I do feel this is a money making exercise by Stormy Daniels. She presumably realises the 130K hush money is a lot less than her story is worth.

I feel the signing of the spending bill has done far more damage to him than this will. His base is pissed at what he did there. Just look at Drudge right now...not exactly what you would expect from a pro-Trump website. Warning shots being fired across his bows I think there.

Water John

Yes Trump was very Catholic in looking for, unprotected sex. Said he didn't like condoms. Well do you like STD? Did he presume the female would take care of pregnancy risk, one way or another?
Very much reflects a particular mindset.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

Yes Trump was very Catholic in looking for, unprotected sex. Said he didn't like condoms. Well do you like STD? Did he presume the female would take care of pregnancy risk, one way or another?
Very much reflects a particular mindset.

One shared by a few alpha males over the years though. Berlusconi apparently can't be doing with them either. Marlon Brando apparently kept two doctors on retainers to clear up any little 'accidents' resulting from his amorous activities, which is one way of 'taking responsibility' I suppose...

everlast75

I've utter disdain for this man. To me, he has no redeeming features. He is a bully, an ego maniac, a coward, utterly cruel and devoid of compassion.

Even if nothing comes from tonight, I'm happy melania is over 1000 miles away from him tonight and that he is probably feeling very alone.

Regardless of what he says after this (and it is a new low, despite all that has gone before), he won't even be able to deny her story. Any press conference could contain questions about it and he will not be able to deny it for fear of defamation proceedings.

He will be known as a President who had an affair with a porn star, tried to cover it up and got schooled by her lawyer.

He will know now that any leader of any other country will look at him like he is something to be scraped off their shoe.

pixelburp

I believe the only thing that could damage Trump politically would be the revelation of an abortion, enforced or not. It's about the only act that's quatifiably a red line with conservative, evangelical / religious leaders or voters, one that might stir them into outright revolt against his presidency. It's still a bullet point used for and against candidates running in deeply red areas, so seems like the only thing that'd truly enrage his shrinking base.

recedite

pixelburp wrote: »

seems like the only thing that'd truly enrage his shrinking base.

The sight of a porn star in lingerie might do that to him...

Ludo

pixelburp wrote: »

I believe the only thing that could damage Trump politically would be the revelation of an abortion, enforced or not. It's about the only act that's quatifiably a red line with conservative, evangelical / religious leaders or voters, one that might stir them into outright revolt against his presidency. It's still a bullet point used for and against candidates running in deeply red areas, so seems like the only thing that'd truly enrage his shrinking base.

There would have to be absolute proof though or it would be dismissed by his base. Not sure how there could be absolute proof of something like that so even IF the claim is made, I think it won't matter.

jooksavage

Manic Moran wrote: »

But we have -always- had that mentality here, and it used to be stronger. Fewer households than ever now have firearms. Children bringing firearms to school used to be routinely permitted and was never a problem because they were used appropriately after school hours. If anything, the ‘gun culture’, for better or worse, has reduced in the US over time, yet the problems of mass shootings has increased. Note that the problem of homicides has actually decreased, much of the furore is over a very particular subset of activity. All the figures are trending in the correct direction, except the frequency of mass shootings.

So what is special about mass shootings that this, in particular, is an increasing phenomenon? This increase is happening worldwide, even if the rate of incidents are certainly at a much lower level than the US. Any such incidents in Europe, for example, that I can think of have also only been happening in the last decade or two. A look on wiki for “rampage killings” shows commonality with the US in that it really only seems to have taken off since the mid 1980s in Europe, with incidents increasing in the 2000s. Is it really the guns?

From my time in the states, gun cultute, or what I, as a gun owner myself, would regard as the garish fetishisation of firepower is in no danger of disappearing.

Is it really the guns? Yep. A couple of weeks ago a man in the Netherlands walked into a school and attacked students with knives. Luckily the students fended him off by pummelling him with their schoolbags. Trended on twitter for a few days. The students themselves were thankful this person didnt have any guns or it would have ended very differently.

aloyisious

Steve Mnuchin says the US does not want a trade war with China, that tariffs may not be employed. It seem's they may be the stick in the "the carrot and stick" act. There was a passing reference on the CNN screen of China preparing tariffs of it's own to the sum of US $3 Billion.

CNN has a source as saying President preparing to oust the VA secretary, Mr Shulkin, as early as next week, on the grounds of the taxpayer funding the Shulkin family trip to Europe.

EDIT: CNN has Don Trump reversing his decision to appoint Joe diGenova as his lawyer.

Now this is weird... Russia, apparently in response to expected US plans to expel some of it's diplomats next week in line with Europe, has said the US developed the Novichok weapon. I guess Vlad has dropped the "From Russia With Love" angle with the US as well as the UK. Disinformtion deployed.

For Forks Sake

What time (irish ) and which broadcaster is this circus on?

everlast75

aloyisious wrote: »

Steve Mnuchin says the US does not want a trade war with China, that tariffs may not be employed. It seem's they may be the stick in the "the carrot and stick" act. There was a passing reference on the CNN screen of China preparing tariffs of it's own to the sum of US $3 Billion.

CNN has a source as saying President preparing to oust the VA secretary, Mr Shulkin, as early as next week, on the grounds of the taxpayer funding the Shulkin family trip to Europe.

CNN has Don Trump reversing his decision to appoint Joe diGenova as his lawyer.

Shulkin was to be gone, as was Carson (both because of expenses scandals) at the same time as Tillerson but Trump couldn't help himself and fired Tillerson by tweet.

Why Mnuchin gets a pass when he has his own expenses scandal I don't know.

40 mins to Stormy.. Let the distraction begin

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/978032047137738753?s=19

mcmoustache

For Forks Sake wrote: »

What time (irish ) and which broadcaster is this circus on?

12, i think.

recedite

jooksavage wrote: »

The students themselves were thankful this person didnt have any guns or it would have ended very differently.

Loads of people have been killed in the EU by terrorist knife attacks, hatchet attacks, bomb attacks, lorry attacks.

The worst ever attack was 9/11 in the US; airplane attacks. They regularly foil attempts at mass killing not involving guns.

Trigger

Ludo wrote: »

There would have to be absolute proof though or it would be dismissed by his base. Not sure how there could be absolute proof of something like that so even IF the claim is made, I think it won't matter.

The only thing I could think of to back that up would be that it’s in writing in the NDA that she cannot talk about it. If they have a copy of that to show, it could really hit hard as he wouldn’t be able to deny it

jooksavage

recedite wrote: »

Loads of people have been killed in the EU by terrorist knife attacks, hatchet attacks, bomb attacks, lorry attacks.

The worst ever attack was 9/11 in the US; airplane attacks. They regularly foil attempts at mass killing not involving guns.

For all their successful preventions, there were over 300 mass shootings last year. More than 30,000 people die by firearm each year. In 40 years more Americans have died domestically because of guns than were killed in all wars since the founding of the United States. This old palaver that argues against gun control on the basis that bad guys will just use planes or trucks or bombs is nonsense. Its like arguing against a cure for cancer because heart disease could just as easily kill you.

recedite

aloyisious wrote: »

Now this is weird... Russia, apparently in response to expected US plans to expel some of it's diplomats next week in line with Europe, has said the US developed the Novichok weapon.

He probably didn't say the US developed it first though?
A Russian involved in the lab creating the formula (Mirzayanov) went to live in the US and leaked what he knew. Also the testing ground was in Uzbekistan which became independent of the USSR in 1991 and US personnel then took over the site under the Nunn-Lugar program
Its thought that several countries have developed stockpiles, including Iran.

recedite

jooksavage wrote: »

For all their successful preventions, there were over 300 mass shootings last year. More than 30,000 people die by firearm each year. In 40 years more Americans have died domestically because of guns than were killed in all wars since the founding of the United States. This old palaver that argues against gun control on the basis that bad guys will just use planes or trucks or bombs is nonsense. Its like arguing against a cure for cancer because heart disease could just as easily kill you.

How many americans died in road accidents? Don't answer that, I'm not really interested in arguing over stats.

I was just pointing out that the suggestion that in countries with strict gun controls, terrorists can be defeated by kids armed with schoolbags, does not hold up.

Professor Moriarty

recedite wrote: »

How many americans died in road accidents? Don't answer that, I'm not really interested in arguing over stats.

I was just pointing out that the suggestion that in countries with strict gun controls, terrorists can be defeated by kids armed with schoolbags, does not hold up.

Yeah. Where is your kid going to be safer going to school. America or Holland?

david75

1.2 million gun deaths since John Lennon was shot in New York.

America has a cancer.

One million two hundred thousand people. Insanity.

PropJoe10

david75 wrote: »

1.2 million gun deaths since John Lennon was shot in New York.

America has a cancer.

One million two hundred thousand people. Insanity.

It's utter madness. If only there was something that could be done about it....