President Obama Is Pissed (Oregon Shooting Press Conference)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mifune said:
Introduce some legislation. Publicize it. Make a big deal about how Republicans are trying to kill anything reasonable. Most people are on the same page as the President. I wish he would realize this and actually fight. Not just say oh well and deliver a heartbreaking speech.
Click to expand...

Tried that after Sandy Hook, no one gave a shit. Welcome to American politics.
 
Good speech.

He should have called out the fact, though, that anti-gun talking points and legislation are pushed by lobbyist and corrupt politicians, not by any form of majority opinion or hypocritical interpretation of the constitution.
 
At this point we need to make gun ownership as vile as smoking has become in the public eye. Make people who own guns something of a pariah and the public opinion will eventually turn.
 
Fairfax said:
Japan has very strict gun control, yet a man was arrested there last year for having five 3D-printed guns. Two were lethal, but he didn't have bullets.
Here's a piece by Wired on a 3D-printed AR-15 they made.

Give it 10 years and people will be printing automatic rifles. No laws will be able to prevent blueprints from being shared over the internet. It's time to think about long-term solutions, background checks or whatever won't do shit to prevent any of this.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering about this as well. There doesn't seem to be a lot of information related to this out there.
 
Walpurgis said:
That's right. Divide and conquer. Conservative politicians have been using this for years. It's time liberals do the same.
Click to expand...

They've tried this angle for years. Its what the whole "I don't want to take your guns but we should ban assault rifles, have a national background check etc. angle they have played with for years now." These marginal improvements.

The problem is the moderate gun control people aren't that passionate about the subject. And you leave the more vocal gun control advocates in the dark with nothing to get excited about. So its basically Dems with little vocal support vs. the loud and fierce gun lobby.

I actually think what needs to happen is the opposite approach. Get the liberal base excited about gun control again and create a counter force. Work toward campaign finance reform, lobbyist reform and redistricting reform with the moderate Democrats and use the more liberal members to drum up support for strong gun control so when the topic does come up in a less toxic congress, there is a strong base of support for gun control to give political cover to win over more moderate congressmen.
 
Mifune said:
Try again. And again. And again. The struggle is as important as the outcome.
Click to expand...

They did, unless something drastic happens nothing will change. People stop listening after a while. Short of the NRA imploding we aren't getting any gun control in our lifetimes.
 
School children were gunned down and America refused to change. This is so hopeless...

Great speech by Obama though, you could feel his frustration and I share it.
 
Mifune said:
Introduce some legislation. Publicize it. Make a big deal about how Republicans are trying to kill anything reasonable. Most people are on the same page as the President. I wish he would realize this and actually fight. Not just say oh well and deliver a heartbreaking speech.
Click to expand...

we should re-instate the Fairness Doctrine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine.[1]

The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented. The demise of this FCC rule has been considered as a contributing factor for the rising level of party polarization in the United States.[2][3]
The main agenda for the doctrine was to ensure that viewers were exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. In 1969 the United States Supreme Court upheld the FCC's general right to enforce the Fairness Doctrine where channels were limited. But the courts did not rule that the FCC was obliged to do so.[4] The courts reasoned that the scarcity of the broadcast spectrum, which limited the opportunity for access to the airwaves, created a need for the Doctrine. However, the proliferation of cable television, multiple channels within cable, public-access channels, and the Internet have eroded this argument, since there are plenty of places for ordinary individuals to make public comments on controversial issues at low or no cost at all.
Click to expand...
 
Forget politics. Forget his position. Obamas speech was fucking absolutely on the money and delivered in a way screamed he as a person is sick of this.

Many of us are sick of this. But many more will defend their right to bear arms this way under the name of freedom and Rights.

It's a sad world.
 
NihonTiger90 said:
I think we're all tired of this, too.
Click to expand...

I am always amazed by the fact that all this shit is primarily happening because politicians need money from lobbyist to pay for ads that make voters vote for them.

Imagine how much would change if voters would just stop being influenced by shitty ads. In that sense, it's all in the people's hands. The people just choose to not give a damn about politics and issues beyond trash-level TV ads and cheap demagoguery.
 
This is so crazy.
There's another strike in France at the moment for god knows what reasons.
And I was just "jokingly" reflecting what strike are to France is mass shooting to the US and seconds later I learn about Oregon.
I can't wrap my head around the insanity, it's...
I don't have words for that.
 
What kind of laws were attempted to be passed after Sandy Hook? The assault rifle or magazine capacity ones?

Don't those account for a relatively small number of US gun deaths? Are gun homicides on the decline in the US?

There's always so many statistics posted after these events I get information overload or something.
 
ponpo said:
What kind of laws were attempted to be passed after Sandy Hook? The assault rifle or magazine capacity ones?

Don't those account for a relatively small number of US gun deaths? Are gun homicides on the decline in the US?

There's always so many statistics posted after these events I get information overload or something.
Click to expand...

iirc there was the "assault rifle" ban and also a relatively minor proposed shift in federal law re: background checks
 
ponpo said:
What kind of laws were attempted to be passed after Sandy Hook? The assault rifle or magazine capacity ones?

Don't those account for a relatively small number of US gun deaths? Are gun homicides on the decline in the US?

There's always so many statistics posted after these events I get information overload or something.
Click to expand...

There were also proposals for background checks, closing the gun show loophole, waiting periods, but all of that went nowhere despite a majority of Americans being totally cool with all of it.
 
stufte said:
At this point we need to make gun ownership as vile as smoking has become in the public eye. Make people who own guns something of a pariah and the public opinion will eventually turn.
Click to expand...

Oh really. So who is going to come and protect my property from the wildlife that roams around the area? You?
 
Valjean Lafitte said:
What evidence is there that this is the case?
Click to expand...

The evidence is in the fucking evidence:

Barry said it boils down to how the question is asked.

The Pew poll pitted gun rights vs. gun control, asking respondents which one they thought was more important.

Pick one.

The results appeared to show Americans have lost faith in gun control.

But drill down into specific policies, and you’ll find a broad base of support, Barry said.

The Hopkins 2015 study found large majorities favored gun regulations that are stronger than those currently seen in federal or most state laws.

For example, support for background checks for all gun sales stood above 80 percent for both gun owners and non-gun owners.

And even where support dropped between 2013 and 2015, clear majorities remained. People who supported an assault weapons ban fell from 69 percent to 63 percent. Banning large-capacity ammunition magazines went from 68.4 to 59.9 percent.

“The big picture shows Americans support these policies,” Barry said.

They just don’t support gun control in the abstract.
Click to expand...

Of course, you weren't interested in the evidence anyway. You could've very easily googled it yourself if you were.
 
TimeEffect said:
This is the *perfect* material for "Government staged the attacks to make it easier to take our guns" crowd.

And that crowd is deceptively huge, and dumb as fuck.
Click to expand...
Yep, my cousin is unfortunately one of them. He believes Sandy Hook was staged by the government to take *our guns away and throw *us into death camps. I'm just glad I have him blocked on facebook. Oh, and this is in California not some place in the South. They are everywhere.

*Read white people.
 
Whether you land on the left side of this issue or the right, the fact that we couldn't even have a bipartisan conversation about gun ownership in this country after children get mowed down in a classroom is what the biggest tragedy is.

It's the single greatest example of the damage super polarized politics and thick political lines can do to this country.
 
Powerful stuff, he sounds pissed and disheartened
 
ponpo said:
What kind of laws were attempted to be passed after Sandy Hook? The assault rifle or magazine capacity ones?

Don't those account for a relatively small number of US gun deaths? Are gun homicides on the decline in the US?

There's always so many statistics posted after these events I get information overload or something.
Click to expand...

handguns are the biggest killer but since they're the most popular it would be more difficult to pass restrictions on them

any limitation at all, even small ones applied to niche weapons, is fought by the pro-gun contingent as if it were the repeal of the second amendment
 
I am a legal gun owner. I think we need reform too. This is becoming a normalcy in American culture and all Americans should be ashamed and embarrassed right now that we've just stood by and let it. This is outta control.


I am looking forward to starting college here within the next few months and this shit scares me to think that a crazy person could just come and shoot up the school I'm in.
 
I just don't understand why a sensible compromise can't be met when it comes to gun control. Sure, we have a right to bear arms and defend ourselves. No, there's no reason to own assault weapons to accomplish this, and if we're providing open access, registration should be heavily regulated and monitored.

I mean the people I know who adamantly speak out against gun control don't even own a gun... If they do, it's a pistol or shotgun. So why are they so against assault weapons being flat-out banned or a sensible amount of regulation in registration?

Whatever. I'll try not to turn this into politics... I just don't get it sometimes, especially after how much has happened in recent years.

Hope the best for the victims' families and friends. Terrible.
 
A powerful and touching speech. Now, I'm not familiar with US politics, and he seemed to be asking for help, for change. Exactly how helpless is a president of the US, what kind of influence does they really have?
 
eBay Huckster said:
iirc there was the "assault rifle" ban and also a relatively minor proposed shift in federal law re: background checks
Click to expand...

B-Dubs said:
There were also proposals for background checks, closing the gun show loophole, waiting periods, but all of that went nowhere despite a majority of Americans being totally cool with all of it.
Click to expand...

aeolist said:
handguns are the biggest killer but since they're the most popular it would be more difficult to pass restrictions on them

any limitation at all, even small ones applied to niche weapons, is fought by the pro-gun contingent as if it were the repeal of the second amendment
Click to expand...

I see. I wonder what a workable solution is then. I imagine it would be upsetting for people to finally get some sort of mild legislation passed and still have the gun violence / murder / etc. rate be really high.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

What is going on with the Wicked press tour?
2 3 4
167
8K
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Pope Set To Hold Press Conference on Aliens and the Supernatural
Event 
45
3K
UltimaKilo replied
South Korea in chaos as President orders martial law
News  2
61
5K
DeafTourette replied
Sony CEO Insists ‘Madame Web’, "Kraven" Aren’t “Terrible” and Says the “Press Just Crucified It”
News 
39
2K
nush replied
  • Locked
Joel Osteen Church shooting.
2
57
5K
INC replied
Top Bottom