Pittsburgh shooting

[Spurtacular]

Chumpy upset that a page went by without his narrative rodeo being involved.

[Spurs Homer]

Consider hate speech, for example. There's a push now to do something about it. Do you think the 1st Amendment will be altered?

We live in a country of people who have no concern for other people. In Japan, people will stand in long lines and wait their turn because they are conditioned over generations to consider the collective and use an honor system. In the US, it's every man for himself and has been since the onset. That will not change with legislation. When you have so many different cultures who fundamentally disagree with one another, all living together, you're going to have issues. Japan has a geneous culture and Americans living there often stand out because they bring with them American tendencies to bypass courtesy in favor of being 1st. Individualism is king in the US. We talk about players instead of teams. Players on their own teams to get ahead in the game (Kawhi Leonard) and the concept of honor is just a fancy talking point. That won't change in our lifetimes and it's not getting better.

We have talked about it for years. Nothing has changed. We don't move forward because the proposed changes are ineffective placebos ( https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...&highlight=gun ) and even those placebos are resisted by conservatives. The suggesting that a full gun ban be considered was treated like a radioactive waste drum because the left is afraid to go there in fear they will isolate a large portion of their voter base.

Public opinion doesn't move the supreme court.

My point is that "someday someone will do something about it" isn't a viable plan. I've asked people here what they would propose as a solution and the large majority of them either refuse to answer or they say something similar to "someone needs to fix it".

So what is your solution?

Defend Trump and defend guns?

[boutons_deux]

country of people who have no concern for other people

... the myth of Rugged Individualism.

When employees banded together in unions, progress was made, but the oligarchy has crushed union power, and ignorant Americans believe the oligarchy's propaganda that unions are evil, and the LIE that Capitalism is best for everybody

We don't move forward because the proposed changes are ineffective placebos

no, because the oligarchy runs the country and will spend $Bs to buy politicians, judges, regulators, to maintain the rigged status quo, so no "move forward", no PROGRESS are possible

Public opinion doesn't move the supreme court.

... with Gorsuch and K, SCOTUS has become a horrible unfunny joke, but the unstoppable oligarchy is laughing at the success of their decades-long strategy of tainting SCOTUS with 5 (at least) hard right political- s-in-robes. fait accompli

they say something similar to "someone needs to fix it".

... people, at least subconsciously, realize they are powerless. The system chooses political candidates to defend, continue the system of the party establishments (eg, any Bernies sidelined, Repug moderates primaried, purged), so no electoral victory For The People is possible.

Americans used to ridicule Euro-sclerosis, but guess which World Champion country is now fatally sclerotic (for the mass of the people)?

[ElNono]

Consider hate speech, for example. There's a push now to do something about it. Do you think the 1st Amendment will be altered?

Don’t think it will, tbh, but I also don’t think it’s off the table (even though I don’t agree personally with it). Wouldn’t be the first time there are exceptions carved out from the 1st Amendment. For example I can totally see a political push for that if the currrent specious environment continues. For good or bad, we’re reactionary by nature.

We live in a country of people who have no concern for other people. In Japan, people will stand in long lines and wait their turn because they are conditioned over generations to consider the collective and use an honor system. In the US, it's every man for himself and has been since the onset. That will not change with legislation. When you have so many different cultures who fundamentally disagree with one another, all living together, you're going to have issues. Japan has a geneous culture and Americans living there often stand out because they bring with them American tendencies to bypass courtesy in favor of being 1st. Individualism is king in the US. We talk about players instead of teams. Players on their own teams to get ahead in the game (Kawhi Leonard) and the concept of honor is just a fancy talking point. That won't change in our lifetimes and it's not getting better.

I think that has way more to do with community building than anything else. As the US has grown in population, it has slowly but steadily veered from conservatism to progressism and individualism to community. It’s a process that’s still ongoing and I don’t particularly think it’s reversible for obvious physical reasons. It can certainly be slowed down by the occasional misguided progressive policy.

But, again, I don’t think it’s the people, but the law that is the larger impediment. I have near zero doubt states like California or New York would implement a much tighter grip if it would be legal and I actually don’t think their citizens would be throwing a hissy fit about it.

We have talked about it for years. Nothing has changed. We don't move forward because the proposed changes are ineffective placebos ( https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/sho...&highlight=gun ) and even those placebos are resisted by conservatives. The suggesting that a full gun ban be considered was treated like a radioactive waste drum because the left is afraid to go there in fear they will isolate a large portion of their voter base.

I do think this issue will be coming to a head sooner rather than later (and by that I don’t mean immediately, but sooner than other politically charged issues). We’ll see if there’s a cathartic event that brings it to the fore where it can’t just be swept under the rug anymore. I also don’t agree that some of the proposals are placebo at all. I think some of them would be relatively effective, and might not even require a cons utional amendment. The usual suspects will fight them tooth and nail under the guise of freedom, but at the end of the day, reality speaks louder than words.

Public opinion doesn't move the supreme court.

My point is that "someday someone will do something about it" isn't a viable plan. I've asked people here what they would propose as a solution and the large majority of them either refuse to answer or they say something similar to "someone needs to fix it".

You would be wrong about that. The Supreme Court once stood for segregation also. It took public opinion, followed by Congress to force their hand.

I don’t blame you for taking the immediate view and feeling nothing will happen, I would actually agree with that sentiment up to a certain extent. I do think it makes much more sense to tackle this one challenge at a time rather than wait until a reactionary decision is made on the backs of some de able event.

[clambake]

where is the red hat that says "all i want to do is kill jews"

[boutons_deux]

where is the red hat that says "all i want to do is kill jews"

MAGAshooter did say he wants to kill all Jews

[boutons_deux]

Top Republican defends anti-Semitic ads attacking George Soros the day after synagogue slaughter


Republican Rep. Steve Stivers, who chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee,

went on TV to

defend anti-Semitic ads his organization has been airing

in a congressional race in southern Minnesota.

The ads are laden with anti-Jewish tropes

and portray philanthropist and Holocaust survivor

George Soros, a Hungarian-born Jew, as a malign puppet-master of the left.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1807977

[clambake]

when is it ok to wear red hats again?

[clambake]

idk boo, that picture looks ominous.

[clambake]

its too close to halloween for that spooky

[DMC]

Don’t think it will, tbh, but I also don’t think it’s off the table (even though I don’t agree personally with it). Wouldn’t be the first time there are exceptions carved out from the 1st Amendment. For example I can totally see a political push for that if the currrent specious environment continues. For good or bad, we’re reactionary by nature.

Which is why each party wants their people on the supreme court, since they will have the final say in these matters.

I think that has way more to do with community building than anything else. As the US has grown in population, it has slowly but steadily veered from conservatism to progressism and individualism to community. It’s a process that’s still ongoing and I don’t particularly think it’s reversible for obvious physical reasons. It can certainly be slowed down by the occasional misguided progressive policy.

Let's look at the hispanic community. It's written that only about 16% of registered voters actually vote. How many of the overall community do you think actually registers to vote? If a community of common goal folks cannot turn out to vote, what's the odds they are going to build their communities? So few get involved. , many people don't even want to mend family ties, much less community ones.

But, again, I don’t think it’s the people, but the law that is the larger impediment. I have near zero doubt states like California or New York would implement a much tighter grip if it would be legal and I actually don’t think their citizens would be throwing a hissy fit about it.

I have no doubt states would vote in laws that are uncons utional if they could get away with it. The framers of the cons ution knew this as well.

I do think this issue will be coming to a head sooner rather than later (and by that I don’t mean immediately, but sooner than other politically charged issues). We’ll see if there’s a cathartic event that brings it to the fore where it can’t just be swept under the rug anymore. I also don’t agree that some of the proposals are placebo at all. I think some of them would be relatively effective, and might not even require a cons utional amendment. The usual suspects will fight them tooth and nail under the guise of freedom, but at the end of the day, reality speaks louder than words.

I don't think it will because these are es on the radar, not long lasting signals. There too much political rhetoric from each side, and too little fact and understanding. Because of this, the debate gets condensed into "they want to take our guns" vs "They want moar gunz". Neither is true, but those strawmen prevent any real discourse and I believe that's the goal.

You would be wrong about that. The Supreme Court once stood for segregation also. It took public opinion, followed by Congress to force their hand.

But the supreme court doesn't act over night, nor does congress. Congress can pass a bill and it be signed into law, but if it's uncons utional, it will be challenged and overturned.

I don’t blame you for taking the immediate view and feeling nothing will happen, I would actually agree with that sentiment up to a certain extent. I do think it makes much more sense to tackle this one challenge at a time rather than wait until a reactionary decision is made on the backs of some de able event.

The term "immediate" is subjective. We only discuss it during these events. If that's any indication of what the rest of the country does, what does that tell you? Why would it change?

[pgardn]

Why did the police show up since guns weren't the answer?

Maybe because they are law enforcement?

[DMC]

Maybe because they are law enforcement?

Oh hey, welcome to "already covered". I'm your host.

[pgardn]

Oh hey, welcome to "already covered". I'm your host.

Then the question never should have been asked by our host.

[Pavlov]

Oh hey, welcome to "already covered". I'm your host.

That wasn't the question you asked. Why the edit?

[boutons_deux]

Trash's mob of bags, losers, fascist racists, knitter/Jew/mexican haters, including MAGAshooter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=opM6YIx3gA8

[DMC]

That wasn't the question you asked. Why the edit?

Rehashing same argument

[Chucho]

Trash's mob of bags, losers, fascist racists, knitter/Jew/mexican haters, including MAGAshooter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=opM6YIx3gA8

They would kick the out of you and your kind. Per par. You guys can't even beat up undereducated rednecks and inbreds. Buncha gotty pussies is what you and your ilk are, Boots.

[CosmicCowboy]

They would kick the out of you and your kind. Per par. You guys can't even beat up undereducated rednecks and inbreds. Buncha gotty pussies is what you and your ilk are, Boots.

Boots never gets off Spurstalk long enough to get outside and beat up. He is 24/7 playing internet warrior in his fake wood paneled bedroom in his momma's single wide.

[Winehole23]

DMC, following the president's lead, has turned a thread about an anti-semitic massacre into seminar on gun rights discourse and judicial supremacy

Nice deflection.

[Winehole23]

Anything to avoid talking about dead Jews and how we got there.

[boutons_deux]

Trash + Repugs: MAGAshooter? a lone wolf, we didn't radicalize him

Trash + Repugs: eg, Bataclan slaughter? they were radicalized by Muslim leaders, ALL Muslims bad

[Winehole23]

very true, but very hard to see how it will prevent white supremacists from voting for Republicans next month.

Silicon Valley is stifling political speech they disagree with to interfere in a US election.

https://www.businessinsider.com/gab-...upport-2018-10

[boutons_deux]

very true, but very hard to see how it will prevent white supremacists from voting for Republicans next month.

https://www.businessinsider.com/gab-...upport-2018-10

1st Amendment guarantees that govt can't block speech.

Private companies, eg on Internet platforms, are free to block any and all speech.

Since oligarchy's SCOTUS perversely ruled that "money is speech", then a private company blocking speech is an equally protected "expression"

( Why did Internet wait until a Gab-ber slaughtered a bunch of Jews to shut down Gab? )

[AaronY]

I'm noticing you seem upset lately boo