Support NeoGAF

[benjipwns]

involving an object that ends up killing thousands of people every year.

This is how the police write their reports.

 

[Retromelon]

Um
Have things cooled down?
I'm glad people liked it

 

[HyperionX]

I mean, the social security tax is life and death. Lead paint is life and death. Politics is about life and death. Guns are personal.

The gun control debate is a lot like abortion -- one side sees it as a fundamentally obvious life and death issue, the other sees it as a fundamentally obvious personal liberty issue. And just like abortion, the actual mainstream American position is actually much more nuanced and compromising, which is problematic for everybody arguing about it because they've painted themselves into a philosophical corner by justifying the most extreme version of their thesis and can't find a way back to the middle.

Actually it's not. Abortion is fundamentally a question of when the baby is a human being and when it is still part of its mother. However, no one disputes whether humans dying in large numbers with it comes with guns violence. Furthermore, it is a problem unique to the US among developed nations. Meaning it is a obviously solvable problem that's not being solved purely out of political inertia and public ignorance. That's a huge part why it is so contentious. Like the Iraq war debates that got insanely testy back in the day, it's purely unnecessary deaths (and highly publicized deaths at that) that could have easily been avoided.

I never said they "must be wrong" I disputed your claim that they "proved" anything. Or even found anything beyond a correlation.

Never said that it was proof, but credible evidence. Enough to suggest that is really is guns that is the problem more than anything (I've yet to see any studies suggesting any other causes).

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Fridays 10pm HBO

ftfy

 

[NYCmetsfan]

This is how the police write their reports.

They'd right it more passively:

"thousands of people every year lose consciousness permanently due to a object-involved incident"

 

[benjipwns]

And it's a little silly to then suggest that benji's position represents all America. benji probably doesn't even represent ONE American. Partly because of the sovereign nation surrounding him at all times and partly because based on the timing of his post history he lives in China or something.

I work on-off-on-off. And I seem to have two monitors always which is not a good thing ultimately if I don't really have enough to fill them.

Also, our nation recognizes an altered draft of the Constitution as a temporary organizing contract and appreciates the American attempts to enshrine liberal values against reactionary forces such as John Adams, Benjamin Harrison, Woodrow Wilson, FDR and others. Due to a lack of manpower I currently sit as President, the Speaker of the House, the lone Senator, and also the Chief Justice. Almost nothing gets done due to heavy partisan gridlock.

Despite regular and hotly contested election campaigns the gridlock has not let up. Nor has the obstructionist Chief Justice stepped down overturning almost any legislation the President has not vetoed.

The Communist Party recently gained control of the Senate to call on the state to dissolve itself after the workers seize the means of production. The Liberal Party President has condemned them as acting too hastily but the Conservative Party Speaker has shown some signs of seeking an agreement due to displeasure with recent Presidential vetoes. No word on what the Voluntaryist Chief Justice will rule on the question of if the state has the power to dissolve itself or if a class can claim ownership on its own labor as if it were the labor of another.

 

[NeoXChaos]

 

[Ninja Of Chaos]

Haven't posted here in a while, but I wanted to add my view on the gun debate:

First: To the people arguing about those studies showing causation - they don't. For causation you need to show that guns are both necessary and sufficient for violence. And the studies show neither. This is not an opinion thing, "causation" has clear logical definitions.

Secondly: Even though I am usually for a repeal of the 2nd, Benji is making one hell of a good argument against. It's kinda making me change my mind. Anytime the state enters (what should be legal) public interactions negatively (prohibition), there are far reaching negative outcomes. The drug war being a good example. It brings a strange variable into a peaceful exchange. I.E. incarceration and more general violence into people taking and selling drugs. And that is a place where violence was not a factor before. Therefore, I must kind of a agree with him: end negative state entry and you SHOULD be able to resolve the violence issue in that instance.

But I want to expand into something Benji might disagree with: positive state intervention. Offer a guarantee of employment and healthcare. I feel that would resolve the "choice" part of the violence without having to ban guns.

 

[B-Dubs]

What a jackass.

 

[HyperionX]

Haven't posted here in a while, but I wanted to add my view on the gun debate:

First: To the people arguing about those studies showing causation - they don't. For causation you need to show that guns are both necessary and sufficient for violence. And the studies show neither. This is not an opinion thing, "causation" has clear logical definitions.

I know what those terms mean. We don't causation studies because they would be nearly impossible to conduct, as would studies for nearly all social issues.

Secondly: Even though I am usually for a repeal of the 2nd, Benji is making one hell of a good argument against. It's kinda making me change my mind. Anytime the state enters (what should be legal) public interactions negatively (prohibition), there are far reaching negative outcomes. The drug war being a good example. It brings a strange variable into a peaceful exchange. I.E. incarceration and more general violence into people taking and selling drugs. And that is a place where violence was not a factor before. Therefore, I must kind of a agree with him: end negative state entry and you SHOULD be able to resolve the violence issue in that instance.

But I want to expand into something Benji might disagree with: positive state intervention. Offer a guarantee of employment and healthcare. I feel that would resolve the "choice" part of the violence without having to ban guns.

This is a nonsense post. Most developed nations has successfully passed strict gun control with minimal downsides and with enormous benefits in terms of safety. It's pure concern trolling at this point to make these types of suggestions.

 

[speculawyer]

Well your gun isn't really concealed any more is it?


And do you really think a gun would have helped the cameraman who was operating his camera and shot from behind? You just have your movie-fantasies, clown.

 

[FyreWulff]

Because it's not about self defense, it's the fantasy of getting to use the gun on the shooter.

Which is a wide swath of these conceal carriers, a solution looking for a problem.

 

[Ninja Of Chaos]

I know what those terms mean. We don't causation studies because they would be nearly impossible to conduct, as would are studies for nearly all social issues.



This is a nonsense post. Most developed nation has successfully passed strict gun control with minimal downsides and with enormous benefits in terms of safety. It's pure concern trolling at this point to make these types of suggestions.

First part: So? Still not causation.

Second part: I don't understand what this has to do with what I posted. All I said was that introduction of violence by the state = violent interactions by the public. If the drug war did not exist, one SHOULD expect drug related crimes to go down (since you know, there IS causation here). The other part about healthcare and guarantee of employment is just speculation from my part. You can ignore it if you disagree.

 

[HyperionX]

First part: So? Still not causation.

Nearly no social science studies have proven causation. Short of completely dismissing all of social science, this is not a tenable position to take.

Second part: I don't understand what this has to do with what I posted. All I said was that introduction of violence by the state = violent interactions by the public. If the drug war did not exist, one SHOULD expect drug related crimes to go down (since you know, there IS causation here). The other part about healthcare and guarantee of employment is just speculation from my part. You can ignore it if you disagree.

There's no evidence that that has happened in other countries that enacted similar laws. So it's a meaningless fear. There is also no proof of causation between the drug war and drug crimes either (remember, nearly no proven causation in social sciences altogether!).

 

[RustyNails]

I wonder how many gun loons like this are out there that think they are Tom Cruise's character from Collateral.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

 

[Ninja Of Chaos]

Nearly no social science studies have proven causation. Short of completely dismissing all of social science, this is not a tenable position to take.



There's no evidence that that has happened in other countries that enacted similar laws. So it's a meaningless fear. There is also no proof of causation between the drug war and drug crimes either (remember, nearly no proven causation in social sciences altogether!).

Dismiss all of those without causation...yes. Why wouldn't I? They hold no value.

And it's not a fear. The introduction of state violence into a non-violent interaction is a cause of violence. And it's very easy to prove causation. The act of consuming drugs does not include a violent aspect against the user. Making it illegal is necessary for the violence (easiest example: cops can arrest you) and sufficient (you don't need any other laws or things to bring police violence on the user). You can go down the line through all the kinds of interactions in a drug deal and prove that enacting the drug war was the CAUSE of the violence.

 

[Retromelon]

Its not enough that you live better than 3 billion people, you want to be glorified for it.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a wealthy person to see the inherent immorality of their existence

 

[speculawyer]

Well Laffer's economics lead to a permanent dynastic class, so it is no wonder he loves someone with inherited wealth and craps on poor people.

 

[Bowdz]

It is cracking me up to either read news stories about the GOP and not see Rubio's name mentioned once or to see various GOP consultants shit all over Rubio.

The man must be regretting not running for his Senate seat again (watch as he completely proves me wrong and wins the nomination).

 

[HyperionX]

Dismiss all of those without causation...yes. Why wouldn't I? They hold no value.

So nearly all of social science is gone now? Nothing of economics, political sciences, history, etc. have no value under that viewpoint.

And it's not a fear. The introduction of state violence into a non-violent interaction is a cause of violence. And it's very easy to prove causation. The act of consuming drugs does not include a violent aspect against the user. Making it illegal is necessary for the violence (easiest example: cops can arrest you) and sufficient (you don't need any other laws or things to bring police violence on the user). You can go down the line through all the kinds of interactions in a drug deal and prove that enacting the drug war was the CAUSE of the violence.

You're making a very obvious double standard here. Without proven causation, you can't make that claim. For all you know, ending the drug war will skyrocket random arrests for no reason by the police. Furthermore, gun violence is clearly not a non-violent interaction, so the analogy doesn't hold. Obviously, no one expects gun control to pass perfectly smoothly, but all real world examples and the evidence suggests that downside will be very small and very large reductions in the homicide rate.

 

[benjipwns]

but all real world examples and the evidence suggests that downside will be very small and very large reductions in the homicide rate.

What real world examples are there of states with years of existing U.S. level homicide and gun homicide rates? What was the policy enacted in that country and what was the subsequent long term reduction?

 

[NeoXChaos]

Another day another Bernie thread.

 

[PantherLotus]

I had to skip like 10 pages but my takes on the gun debate. I mean, obviously there should be a worldwide ban on handguns and assault rifles but until then:

1. It's never gonna happen unless a conservative President forces the issue.

2. Liability insurance similar in vein to car insurance -- age based, training based, mental health based, multiple gun penalties/reductions, etc ... is kinda brilliant.

 

[Ninja Of Chaos]

So nearly all of social science is gone now? Nothing of economics, political sciences, history, etc. have no value under that viewpoint.



You're making a very obvious double standard here. Without proven causation, you can't make that claim. For all you know, ending the drug war will skyrocket random arrests for no reason by the police. Furthermore, gun violence is clearly not a non-violent interaction, so the analogy doesn't hold. Obviously, no one expects gun control to pass perfectly smoothly, but all real world examples and the evidence suggests that downside will be very small and very large reductions in the homicide rate.

But you CAN prove causation. Why else would the state cause harm to a drug user (for the drug use)? Your point about skyrocketing arrests is nonsense. What if the cops decided to band together and murder every person under 6 feet tall because they like the word drug? These are hypotheticals that consider state power unlimited.

And this isn't an analogy. This is, as Benji has stated, a CAUSE for the gun violence.

My argument is basically: Non-violent interactions = non-violent interactions; non-violent interactions + state violence on the interactions = violent interactions. Hence my point about negative government entry. Remove the entry of the state in a violent manner, and you make previous non-violent interactions...non-violent.

 

[Teggy]

Urg, what a douche. Did he even watch the video?

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Made a thread for the recent NLRB decision that says franchise workers can bargain with their parent company. Good news

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1102903

 

[HyperionX]

But you CAN prove causation. Why else would the state cause harm to a drug user (for the drug use)? Your point about skyrocketing arrests is nonsense. What if the cops decided to band together and murder every person under 6 feet tall because they like the word drug? These are hypotheticals that consider state power unlimited.

You haven't. You've literally just laid the situation where your hypothesis can failed. Now please create a control universe where the drug war doesn't end and an alternative experimental universe where it does. Otherwise you have not proved causation.

And this isn't an analogy. This is, as Benji has stated, a CAUSE for the gun violence.

My argument is basically: Non-violent interactions = non-violent interactions; non-violent interactions + state violence on the interactions = violent interactions. Hence my point about negative government entry. Remove the entry of the state in a violent manner, and you make previous non-violent interactions...non-violent.

Which there is no evidence support your claims that this would happen with regards to gun control, and there numerous real world examples where it didn't. You're making an abstract argument that boils down to a claim of suggesting it might happen because you can't prove it won't.

 

[FiggyCal]

So nearly all of social science is gone now? Nothing of economics, political sciences, history, etc. have no value under that viewpoint.



You're making a very obvious double standard here. Without proven causation, you can't make that claim. For all you know, ending the drug war will skyrocket random arrests for no reason by the police. Furthermore, gun violence is clearly not a non-violent interaction, so the analogy doesn't hold. Obviously, no one expects gun control to pass perfectly smoothly, but all real world examples and the evidence suggests that downside will be very small and very large reductions in the homicide rate.

I don't know why ending the drug war would cause random arrests from the police or even if it would that it would be allowed or legal. Imagine if you could buy cocaine from a local store; so much less violent than the way we currently do it.

 

[Retromelon]

I just beat the first boss of r type 2 with touch controls

 

[Black Mamba]

Yes, it's an accurate and good idea.

She basically said that the other candidates were like Trump except with boring personalities and without bad hair today, lol.

Rand Paul, so forgotten.

 

[Wilsongt]

Dear Obama:

“Although I understand that your emphasis in New Orleans will – rightly – be on economic development, the temptation to stray into climate change politics should be resisted,” Jindal states in the letter. “While you and others may be of the opinion that we can legislate away hurricanes with higher taxes, business regulations and EPA power grabs, that is not a view shared by many Louisianians. I would ask you to respect this important time of remembrance by not inserting the divisive political agenda of liberal environmental activism.”

Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

it sucks that a place like New Orleans has to call such a fuck wit as their governor. Especially when NO is probably the major impact zone of climate change in the state.

 

[BertramCooper]

Dear Obummer:

Fuck you for trying to save my state from being swallowed by the ocean.


Sincerely,

Piyush

 

[NeoXChaos]

Dear Obama:




Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

it sucks that a place like New Orleans has to call such a fuck wit as their governor. Especially when NO is probably the major impact zone of climate change in the state.

Vitter will be Jindal x2.

 

[Retromelon]

Dear Obama:




Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

it sucks that a place like New Orleans has to call such a fuck wit as their governor. Especially when NO is probably the major impact zone of climate change in the state.

People get the government they deserve. Voters gonna vote

 

[HyperionX]

Dear Obama:




Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

it sucks that a place like New Orleans has to call such a fuck wit as their governor. Especially when NO is probably the major impact zone of climate change in the state.

I'm honestly curious what these guys are going to say when their state is literally absorbed back into the sea.

 

[NeoXChaos]

DNC announces fundraising agreement with Clinton campaign

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/dnc-democratic-committee-hillary-clinton-fundraising-agreement-2016-121813.html?hp=l4_4

 

[Black Mamba]

People get the government they deserve. Voters gonna vote

Eh, that's a bit unfair because a city like New Orleans can overwhelmingly oppose Jindal but still lose a state election because there's enough rural votes to outnumber them.

Granted this is anecdote, but I was in New Orleans for a few days this past February and the disdain for Jindal in that city (among all types of people) was pretty evident.

 

[speculawyer]

Dear Obama:


“Yeah, we decide to stay the stupid party. So get your sciency stuff outta hear. An let us go back to creationist classes in skool.”

Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

 

[ivysaur12]

...oh?

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...bt-ceiling-battles-worth-the-fight-trump-says

Asked whether his proposed changes meant he was prepared to raise taxes on himself, the billionaire framed his answer in terms of fairness.

"That's right. That's right. I'm OK with it. You've seen my statements, I do very well, I don't mind paying some taxes. The middle class is getting clobbered in this country. You know the middle class built this country, not the hedge fund guys, but I know people in hedge funds that pay almost nothing and it's ridiculous, OK?"

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Dear Obama:


“Yeah, we decide to stay the stupid party. So get your sciency stuff outta hear. An let us go back to creationist classes in skool.”

Love, Presidential Never

Bobby Jindal

He really needs to be called by his given name, Piyush.

 

[DarthWoo]

So has anyone seen the new anti-Iran-deal commercial by the American Security Initiative? It kind of reminds me of the Daisy ad from decades ago. It starts out in what appears to be some suburban neighborhood with a bunch of kids (pretty much ALL white, with maybe one token black kid sitting on some stairs) playing and an ice cream truck pulling up. One of the kids buys one of those red white and blue (oh hurr, what symbolism!) Popsicle things. All the while some woman with the cliche concerned voice is rambling on and on about how evil Iran is, and at the end you see the kid drop the Popsicle with an explosion going off, as the narrator is saying "what if we can't trust them?"

 

[darkblade77]

Eh, that's a bit unfair because a city like New Orleans can overwhelmingly oppose Jindal but still lose a state election because there's enough rural votes to outnumber them.

Granted this is anecdote, but I was in New Orleans for a few days this past February and the disdain for Jindal in that city (among all types of people) was pretty evident.

Pretty much, his approval rating is under 30% last time I checked.

 

[Retromelon]

He really needs to be called by his given name, Piyush.

He really doesn't. Disagree with the guy's politics all you want, but respect what he wishes to be known by. It's basic human decency.

 

[HylianTom]

I'm honestly curious what these guys are going to say when their state is literally absorbed back into the sea.

Ever since becoming politically aware, I've pretty much always held to the belief that the rest of the state only cares about New Orleans to the extent that we're able to provide tax revenue. I've heard plenty of awful things about the city from people who live just outside it, people who once lived here but moved (read: white-flighted) away in the second half of the 20th Century, and people who visit regularly for business or pleasure. Dirty, of poor moral fiber, decadent, lazy.. we're all that.

If we're lucky, we'll remain an island tenuously connected to the mainland via aging bridge infrastructure. If we're not, we'll sink. It might happen in my lifetime. It'll most likely happen via traumatic weather. I'm pretty resigned about the area's fate.

Eh, that's a bit unfair because a city like New Orleans can overwhelmingly oppose Jindal but still lose a state election because there's enough rural votes to outnumber them.

Granted this is anecdote, but I was in New Orleans for a few days this past February and the disdain for Jindal in that city (among all types of people) was pretty evident.

He is loathed in the city proper. Not a surprise; over 80% of NOLA voted for Obama in 2012.

2012 was my first election in Louisiana as an adult of voting age. My first Presidential votes took place in the 90s, when I was away at college. Election Night 2012 in New Orleans was fun.. everyone was incredibly happy.

 

[Avon Barksdale]

Jeb! got the all-important endorsement from Eric Cantor today. LOL.

 

[Aaron Strife]

Jeb! got the all-important endorsement from Eric Cantor today. LOL.

Congress is better without him.

Well not really.

 

[speculawyer]

He really needs to be called by his given name, Piyush.

Oh I think he's earned his name "Bobby". I work with a lot of Indian guys, so I have too much respect for them to call Bobby by the name Piyush.

 

[Retromelon]

Because he's selling out his people through his conservative policies? The jindal hatred is real

 

[Wilsongt]

So has anyone seen the new anti-Iran-deal commercial by the American Security Initiative? It kind of reminds me of the Daisy ad from decades ago. It starts out in what appears to be some suburban neighborhood with a bunch of kids (pretty much ALL white, with maybe one token black kid sitting on some stairs) playing and an ice cream truck pulling up. One of the kids buys one of those red white and blue (oh hurr, what symbolism!) Popsicle things. All the while some woman with the cliche concerned voice is rambling on and on about how evil Iran is, and at the end you see the kid drop the Popsicle with an explosion going off, as the narrator is saying "what if we can't trust them?"

Yep. Seen it. Made me shake my head. Because ignoring the deal with effect children the most in the future, and not the old farts fighting against it.