FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / MIKES GRIPES /  Differences - Democrats & Republicans in US

Differences - Democrats & Republicans in US

Started by sharkbok153 REPLIES2,657 VIEWS· 03 Jan 2020, 18:17
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
SH
sharkbokCaptain23,216 posts
03 Jan 2020, 18:17
#1
03 Jan 2020, 18:17#1

Some interesting points here, while it also shows certain ideological groups on this board.  However, in reality, there are not 2 groups, but shades all the way from moderate to the extreme on each side. 

So some people who are "more" left" might sometimes have ideals that are more commonly right side, and vice versa. Typically this is going to be the more central or moderate people. 

Tax will be influenced by earnings, self-employment etc. For example, if a Democrat has higher earnings, they certainly will not want the higher tax. 

It is also clear that more religious areas support Republicans, even if they do not benefit from many of the ideals. For example, if someone in Alabama worked in Mcdonalds they could support the Democrat ideal of a minimum wage, but then again they might not... Many of the red areas are more inland farmers and Southerners, who are typically more religious.

Some believe that Trump won the elections because many of these people do not vote, but were out in record numbers when Trump had a chance of winning the election. (e.g Alabama)

https://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican



This comparison examines the differences between the policies and political positions of the Democratic and Republican parties on major issues such as taxes, the role of government, entitlements (Social Security, Medicare), gun control, immigration, healthcare, abortion, environmental policy and regulation. These two parties dominate America's political landscape but differ greatly in their philosophies and ideals.

Special Link for the Nov 6, 2018 election: Find your polling place

Comparison chart

Democrat versus Republican comparison chartDemocratRepublicanPhilosophyLiberalleft-leaning.Conservativeright-leaning.Economic IdeasMinimum wages and progressive taxation, i.e., higher tax rates for higher income brackets. Born out of anti-federalist ideals but evolved over time to favor more government regulation.Believe taxes shouldn't be increased for anyone (including the wealthy) and that wages should be set by the free market.Social and human ideasBased on community and social responsibilityBased on individual rights and justiceStance on Military issuesDecreased spendingIncreased spendingStance on Gay MarriageSupport (some Democrats disagree)Oppose (some Republicans disagree)Stance on AbortionShould remain legal; support Roe v. WadeShould not be legal (with some exceptions); oppose Roe v. WadeStance on Death PenaltyWhile support for the death penalty is strong among Democrats, opponents of the death penalty are a substantial fraction of the Democratic base.A large majority of Republicans support the death penalty.Stance on TaxesProgressive (high income earners should be taxed at a higher rate). Generally not opposed to raising taxes to fund government.Tend to favor a "flat tax" (same tax rate regardless of income). Generally opposed to raising taxes.Stance on Government RegulationGovernment regulations are needed to protect consumers.Government regulations hinder free market capitalism and job growth.Healthcare PolicySupport universal healthcare; strong support of government involvement in healthcare, including Medicare and Medicaid. Generally support Obamacare.Private companies can provide healthcare services more efficiently than government-run programs. Oppose Obamacare provisions like (1) requirement for individuals to buy health insurance or pay a fine, (2) required coverage of contraceptives.Stance on ImmigrationThere is greater overall support in the Democratic party for a moratorium on deporting - or offering a pathway to citizenship to - certain undocumented immigrants. e.g. those with no criminal record, who have lived in the U.S. for 5+ years.Republicans are generally against amnesty for any undocumented immigrants. They also oppose President Obama's executive order that put a moratorium on deporting certain workers. Republicans also fund stronger enforcement actions at the border.Traditionally strong in statesCalifornia, Massachusetts, New YorkOklahoma, Kansas, TexasSymbolDonkeyElephantColorBlueRedFounded in18241854Websitewww.democrats.orgwww.gop.comSenate LeaderChuck SchumerMitch McConnellChairpersonTom PerezRonna Romney McDanielFamous PresidentsFranklin Roosevelt (FDR), John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Woodrow Wilson, Jimmy Carter, Barack ObamaAbraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Richard NixonSeats in the Senate45/100 (not including 2 independent Senators who caucus with the Democratic Party)53/100Seats in the House of Representatives235/435200/435Governorships23/5027/50Membership44.7 million (as of 2017)32.8 million (as of 2017)2016 Presidential CandidatesHillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'MalleyDonald Trump, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, others.




DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
03 Jan 2020, 18:47
#2
03 Jan 2020, 18:47#2

Free stuff crowd vs work for what you want.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
03 Jan 2020, 20:15
#3
03 Jan 2020, 20:15#3

There can never be a discussion on policy concerning the Democrats,  The have no real policies since they are dominated by elements from time to time.  At this stage the leaders are all linked to Social Democrats or sympathetic to them - so they are using socialist and oppressive ideology as the norm.   

The above policy directions are not true.  The Democrats are spendthrifts and the story under Obama was shocking - he doubled the loans of the government from $11 trillion to $22 trillion on his 8 years in office.

The above may be the "policies" the DP wants to sell to the voters - what they actually propose now and intends to do if they gain power is vastly different,   

         

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,216 posts
05 Jan 2020, 10:36
#4
05 Jan 2020, 10:36#4

Watching Trump saying that America is now a reborn again Christian country, it is clear that Trump won the elections by getting the religious inlanders to vote, also known as the rednecks (e.g. Alabama). 

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
05 Jan 2020, 11:40
#5
05 Jan 2020, 11:40#5

Rednecks over hipsters.

I choose Rednecks. Every day.

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
05 Jan 2020, 11:58
#6
05 Jan 2020, 11:58#6

It is not the rednecks - it is the ordinary working class that suffered badly under Obama and caused the downfall of the Democrats in 2016.   

AJ
AJHPro3,183 posts
05 Jan 2020, 17:43
#7
05 Jan 2020, 17:43#7

DbDraad has summed it up perfectly in nine words.

Free, let someone else pay your way or earn it and appreciate the fruits of your labor.

Simple but difficult for Snowflakes to understand.

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,216 posts
13 Jan 2020, 19:59
#8
13 Jan 2020, 19:59#8

This covers many topics in addition to taxes. 

  1. Taxes, 
  2. Role of government, 
  3. Entitlements (Social Security, Medicare), 
  4. Gun Control, 
  5. immigration, 
  6. Healthcare, 
  7. Abortion, 
  8. Environmental Policy
  9. Regulation.
  1. Some Democrats are billionaires
  2. Some Republicans are poor even though it would be in their interest to have minimum wages, or taxing higher earnings more than lower earnings.
  3. ----------------------


CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 Jan 2020, 01:10
#9
14 Jan 2020, 01:10#9

So who is to pay for all the above free services to be provided by the State   In terms of calculation it would cost $93  trillion over a ten year period.  So let the billionaires pay 90% and in the process in the first year between 15  and 25 million people will lose their jobs because nobody will invent in businesses if they have to pay those kind of taxes,   It will provide he Government over a year with $3 trillion dollars - so where is the other $6 trillion to come from,   the $6 trillion will have to be borne by the workers,

The above is a story with no real way to succeed,  In any event it will collapse the whole economy in record time.   The role of Government the Democrats want is virtual  control of the economy and that means a system that has never worked in any country.   One can deal with each of the above issues and the rednecks are too wise to buy into a system that was collapsing their livelihood over a 30 year period.   They know the Democrats made promises galore and voters knew that they never deliver on promises.                 ,    

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,216 posts
14 Jan 2020, 01:42
#10
14 Jan 2020, 01:42#10
Clevermike, 
You worked in the government, and most civil workers are socialist bureaucrats that would want richer people to be taxed more. Ruling governments parties change, but the people working in the day to day jobs of the government stay the same. 

In the UK, for example, you have civil workers walking around giving parking tickets. They especially love to give parking tickets to the nicest cars, as this is some type of social justice for them. 
Anyone with a lower salary would probably want lower tax, even if that means offloading it to richer people. 
  1. The Democrats on low pay salaries are smart enough to want a minimum wage legislation
  2. The Republications on low pay salaries are too stupid to want a minimum wage legislation. 

It is obvious that some people who are rich will vote for Republicans because it is less tax - even if they share more of the values of Democrats. (other than tax). 
Republicans claim that tax should be decided by the open market mechanics naturally. The problem is that there are more and more monopolies and oligopolies, which gives employers more control instead of the market. It is not perfect competition capitalism, where market dynamics work as they should - so sometimes there does need to be legislation to prevent poorer people from being turned into slaves.
However, you make the Democrats in the US to be like Brussels where there is 33% corporate tax- about double the UK.  The US still has low tax compared to most places in the world, so to compare the Democrats to Socialist countries is inaccurate. The US has always been one of the most capitalist places in the world, regardless of whether it was run by Democrats or Republicans
Sure, there may be some far left-wingers within the Democratic Party- but they have never won elections to be a president in America. Some of thier outbursts are just planned PR to target campaigns for minority groups- and squeeze more votes.
Look at Corbyn the leader of the Labour who is about to be fired in the UK. He was too far left, and he lost votes. Tony Blair was in charge of Labour, and he was moderate or even slightly right. People voted for him- and he was in power for 12 years. Tony Blair recently said that if Labour want to be taken seriously, they need to be more centre. 
It is obvious that more tax creates a larger government, and turns it into a more socialist place. However, there does need to be some legislation to prevent companies like Amazon turning everyone into their slaves. So the right set of legislation can actually help capitalism- by helping to create more competition, protect the consumers and even ensure lower-paid people actually have some money to buy stuff.
Their needs to be more legislation in financial markets to ensure that investors act in the best interest of the economy, instead of benefiting from corruption and incompetence such as insider trading. This will make capitalism work better, and help prevent economic crashes like the last one. 
CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
14 Jan 2020, 05:15
#11
14 Jan 2020, 05:15#11

SB

I worked in Government service for 50 years and know how incompetent the majority of Public  Servants really are,  Socialist ideas are to my mind lunacy.   The bigger the Public Service is  - the more incompetent the Government Service becomes.   

Take for example regulations relating to starting up of new businesses written by individuals in the public service who have zero experience and knowledge in developing and running of business enterprises.   The famous red tape rules make it extremely difficult to start new businesses.   Result - there is no small business development  or the starting ups are delayed for long periods often entailing major additional costs for a starting entrepreneurs,   .

In the 1980's  Ronald Reagen increased tax rates and the effect was that the State collected less revenue in total than they did before the increased taxation.    That is a worldwide phenomenon . That is why unwise increase in taxation reduce real income from taxation.

Trump did two things that had massive impact on economic growth,   He reduced taxation levels for everybody putting more money in the pockets of everybody.  That money flows back into the economy by increased consumer spending and creates a bigger market for entrepreneurs,   He scrapped thousands of petty red tape regulations making is easier for new businesses to start up/  The result became clear soon.  Economic growth rates doubled within in two years and in the process more than 8 million new jobs were created,

That resulted in more money flowing into Government coffers than ever before anyway.    The effect of increased taxation are two-fold, namely -

*   it remove money boosting economic activity;  and

*   have a negative impact on the economy and factually decrease job creation and even lead to negative growth in the job market.

What was happening in the Bush, Clinton and Obama years,   Real incomes for workers over the last 30 years declined in value and unemployment had a serious negative impact on Government spending to support the unemployed.   At this stage the unemployment figures for White workers are the lowest in 50 years since the Vietnam War and unemployment rates for Blacks and Hispanics are the lowest it ever was in the history of the USA.   Incidentally the Vietnam War was started by the Democrats because of rising unemployment in the USA and the trend was reversed through drafting hunderds of thousand of men into the army and related services and upping military and related employment in factories,      

Government spending is normally a non-contributor to economic growth.   Minimum wage determination has the same negative impact.   It actually leads to job losses on a major scale - since it results in the reduction of funds available for employment purposes.

Fewer workers may to some extent benefit from a minimum salary determination while it does not have a real basis for anybody - since the wages at present are higher than  the determined   minimum wages laid down by the government.  .   

Unless Government expenditure is on development of infrastructure the impact on the economy is negative.   Towards the end of  the 1990's the Municipality of Dolphin Coast  on my initiative decided to privatize the loss-making water and sewerage  services.   In the process the Development Bank of SA sent various senior officials and engineering experts to the United States on a factfinding mission.  When they returned they told the Municipality they were shocked by the fact that in those services  in the USA developed in the 1950's were maintained - but never updated to cater for modernization.   There were cities in the USA where deficient purification lead to illnesses - eg Flint in Michigan leading to a scandal in the 2000's and th situation has not really been resolved.

Where does money in fact go in the Public Service.   Too much of it went into salaries which benefit a minority of workers and a lot of it is absorbed in red tape and incompetence.   

I will give you another practical example.   In 1998 Council approved the  laying  out of a new commercial area in Ballito - the infrastructure to be provided by the developer.  The infrastructure went in  but no business development took place.  I then suggested that the municipal rates on the properties for two years be suspended and to implement a scale of rates over a five year period starting off with 20% in the third year.   The CFO wanted to have a fit because of decrease in potential revenue in the first two years, but I won the argument.   Development took off massively and whereas the Municipality got a loss in rates to the value of R2 million per year in the two years when no rates were charged, by the fifth year the Municipality collected R350 million in rates and service income from the same properties.  That is an example of what taxation impact in fact represents.

There is no way that incompetence in Government service is eliminated by regulation.  You made the following statement:-

"However, there does need to be some legislation to prevent companies like Amazon turning everyone into their slaves. So the right set of legislation can actually help capitalism."

I am, not aware of what happened that cause that statement to be made - so I would like to have some clarification please.  How are people turned into slaves by Amazon? 

I do know that Amazon wanted to open a new business facility in New York that would have created 25 000 jobs - but in their wisdom the Democratic run New York City Council turned down the application.  New York also implemented laws banning the use of steel and glass in putting up new buildings in the city since steel and glass production add to global warming,  That is to the extent to which the Democrats have gone in their silly drive to socialism and the New Green Deal.   No wonder the residents start to flee from that city to other parts of the country, 

My own experience over a period of more than 50 years taught me that socialism is an abomination and the ideas attached to it destroy economies.   But then Socialist-leaning political parties never learn and can't understand why things go wrong in the economy when they take over.  

The fact is that the 70 to 90% taxation proposed by DP candidates will cause departure from the USA of the billionaires and they will get zilch income from them in future,  Beside that one thing is certain.   If a Project is foreseeing a cost estimate of $1 trillion the reals cost is likely to be $3 trillion.  

You are welcome to support the lunatic notions of what the DP preaches in their campaign  - but the outcome will be an economic catastrophe,   Have you never wondered why countries like Russia and China under communism became dictatorships.   The answer is that the catastrophe they caused will never allow them to retain power in democratic elections.  Look at Cuba and Venezuela as present practical examples.                   

 The last democratic election in the USA will be held when the DP take power again in future   .  Thereafter they will crook elections to retain power.  The illegal and major scandal involving the DP in the 2016 election to prevent the Republicans from winning is slowly becoming clearer.  They lied about the Russian Hoax and that is becoming clear only now.  What will happen in future will even be 10 times worse.  They already use drivers licenses  to register illegal migrants as voters and that will become a flood in future,   They want to bring in 10 million of potential voters and by devious means register them as voters when they set foot in the USA,

They do not want citizenship indicated in census forms because when compared with the voters roll - the illegal registrations will be exposed - especially in California  where voter registration fraud is the norm and not the exception.      

                                  

                

               

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
14 Jan 2020, 21:55
#12
14 Jan 2020, 21:55#12

"Are you a Republican, a Democrat, or a Southerner? This little test will help you decide:


    You’re walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children.


    Suddenly, a Terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges at you…


    You are carrying a Kimber 1911 chambered in .45 ACP, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family. What do you do?


    ******************************

    Democrat’s Answer:


    Well, that’s not enough information to answer the question! What is a Kimber 1911 and what does .45 ACP mean?


    Does the man look poor or oppressed? Is he really a terrorist? Am I guilty of profiling? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?


    Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation?


    Does the pistol have an appropriate safety built into it? Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?


    Is it possible he’d be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?


    Should I call 9-1-1? Why is this street so deserted? Can we make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.


    I need to debate this with some friends for a few days and try to come to a consensus. This is all so confusing!


    ******************************

    Republican’s Answer:


    BANG!


    ******************************

    Southerner’s Answer:


    BANG!

    BANG! BANG!

    BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

    Click…..


    (Sounds of reloading)


    BANG!

    BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!

    BANG!

    Click.


    Daughter: “Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Speer Gold Dots or Federal Premium hollow points?!”


    Son: “Can I shoot the next one?!”


    Wife: “You are NOT taking that to a Taxidermist!”

XA
XaviPro1,924 posts
15 Jan 2020, 09:30
#13
15 Jan 2020, 09:30#13
Lol excellent!
CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
15 Jan 2020, 11:04
#14
15 Jan 2020, 11:04#14


CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
15 Jan 2020, 11:41
#15
15 Jan 2020, 11:41#15

SB

I answered you - why the silence?   

Just some further comments - when the Conservative and Lib Dem Coalition took over Government the UK was effectively a bankrupt country from a Government fiscal perspective - so why do you think the Labour Government was effective?

As to the issue of USA  election all the Democratic Candidates have all preached the socialist dogma - accept Biden who is  good in crooking and totally without principle.   The endless promises of both the Republicans and the Democrats were never implemented and the Washington political elite was very happy with the status quo,   

Trump came along and basically implemented what he promised the voters - that is I believe he is so hated by the Democrats and even elements in the RP.   What he did was so unnatural ibn Washington politics - it sets a norm which  changed the issue of election promises totally,   The promises made must in future b implemented and that will be the death of the Democrats.   According to the latest opinion polls in states about 42% of Democratic the voters support the leftist dogma  of  Sanders and Warren - while about 20% support the rudderless less socialist left.  So why will they not select an extreme Socialist as DP candidate?

The Democrats ricked the primary selections in 2016 and cheated Sanders in beating Clinton as DP candidate,   What will they do this year?                 

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 15:03
#16
15 Jan 2020, 15:03#16

@DbDraad 

I know what you said was said in a joking manner but I'd imagine the democrat similar to most people in nations with sane gun laws would point out such circumstances were a gun in civilian hands actually prevents violence are exceptional rare and in general guns cause far more violence than they stop. 

America and its obsession with guns always baffles me. 


CE
CeradynePro9,374 posts
15 Jan 2020, 15:56
#17
15 Jan 2020, 15:56#17
Outlawing guns/buyback schemes iro guns/confiscation of guns/etc, only penalises law abiding legal gun owners and enthusiasts. Enforcing any of those will not stop gun violence one bit. The problem is and will always be illegal guns and gun owners. That makes it a law enforcement issue and not a law making issue.
DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
15 Jan 2020, 16:34
#18
15 Jan 2020, 16:34#18

If they let you drive a car, you should be able to own and use a gun. Cars kill more people than guns. Why is it still legal to own cars?

ATM i don't own a gun, but l want the option to own one when I deem it necessary...and that time is approaching fast. I can't leave the protection of my family up to an incompetent government who does not care about me and my kind...some (maybe most) even hate us.

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 16:41
#19
15 Jan 2020, 16:41#19

@ceradyne

Except the statistics show in the majority of mass shootings in the US the guns where legally owned, that's not to say illegal guns aren't a problem as well.

So its both a law enforcement and law making issue.


CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
15 Jan 2020, 16:57
#20
15 Jan 2020, 16:57#20

In the USA there should be stricter background tests applied to applications to by firearms.   However, mass shootings alone are not the problem.   In Baltimore this past weekend there were 12 murders on one day and that was not a mass shootng at all.

The fact is that in most gun incidents in the USA it is use of illegally owned fire-arms in the possession of criminals and secondly inadequate control of sale of firearms. 

Incidentally if farmers in SA do no have fire-arms to protect themselves - they would have been wiped out already by criminals and murderers acting on instructions of crooked politicians.       

DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
15 Jan 2020, 16:59
#21
15 Jan 2020, 16:59#21

"Incidentally if farmers in SA do no have fire-arms to protect themselves - they would have been wiped out already by criminals and murderers acting on instructions of crooked politicians.   "


Indeed Mike, and it acts more like a deterrent in most cases.

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 17:18
#22
15 Jan 2020, 17:18#22

@DbDraad

Because cars are not designed to kill people or injure people as their primary purpose but simply to transport people around and are a vital part of societies infrastructure in terms of transporting people to work. Cars are used constantly day in, day out around the world, and are used far more constantly than guns are used. Accidents happen for a variety of reasons, drive error, drink driving, mechanical failure, poor road maintenance, bad weather etc, the overwhelming number of people in are killed by cars are killed accidentally not on purpose. 

Perhaps where you live you have genuine need of protection. I'm sorry if that's the case. With American the gun proponents seem to see threats everywhere even where none really exists. They seem a very fear based and frightened society, to the point where some of them can't leave their house with carrying a gun. Its difficulty to imagine when you come from a society were almost no one wants guns .


AJ
AJHPro3,183 posts
15 Jan 2020, 17:39
#23
15 Jan 2020, 17:39#23

DbDraad......guess that makes me a Southerner because I have always appreciated the "CLICK" sound as a job completed and well-executed.


MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
15 Jan 2020, 17:43
#24
15 Jan 2020, 17:43#24

So Stavanger almost every hit movie and video game glorifies violence. The ritual of the gun, the loading of the ammunition.....the elevation of the shooter.


In the States kids are inundated with this stuff. Would you advocate legal changes to entertainment to help sanitize the mindset as well. After all a gun is an inanimate object. 


As for an Irishman  deploring violence, that's a bit rich. My wife and children walked past the spot where the IRA blew up the horse guards  5 minutes before the event occurred. How many non combatants died as a result of Irish violence?

PL
PlumCaptain21,007 posts
15 Jan 2020, 18:15
#25
15 Jan 2020, 18:15#25

Star

Ever heard the expression, everyone is polite in Texas?

There's a reason for it.

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 18:23
#26
15 Jan 2020, 18:23#26

@mozart

How come other western countries like the UK and Ireland do not an issue with mass gun killings yet have the same exposure to Hollywood and video games that the US does. Even the non English speaking European country get all the American moves and TV series only they get dubbed  Japan has for years been the dominant force behind video game development. They don't have an issue either. I believe at this stage several studies in both the UK and US have found no link between video games and violet tendencies.

You have said before you are in favor of tighter gun controls which is a good thing but the whole lets blame movies and videos games is a complete right wing red hearing designed to distract people from blaming guns. There isn't the slightest bit of evidence to back that claim up.

Yes I'm an Irishman who deplores violence. I never supported the IRA, nor did the vast majority of the population here. Are you saying that because of some Irish people who committed violence you have a right to typecast all Irish people as violent. Does this apply to other nationalities too and if so how far back in history can we go, because you know if we do that everything is a bit rich!

Do you know how many mass shootings have occurred in the history of the Irish State where a school, cinema, shopping mall or night club was targeted by some lunatic brandishing legally owned automatic and semiautomatic firearms. The answer is 0.


ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 18:27
#27
15 Jan 2020, 18:27#27

@Plum

Maybe they just happen to be polite in Texas, but gun ownership there hasn't stopped mass shootings from occurring. Wasn't there one last year in El Paso?

AJ
AJHPro3,183 posts
15 Jan 2020, 18:52
#28
15 Jan 2020, 18:52#28

Unfortunately, it took two bombs to get the Japanese to become placid.

Prior to that, they were murderers and perhaps the cruelest folks to walk this planet with guns.

Just to be clear when I lived in RSA legal guns were forbidden for black folks.

Yet armed robberies occurred regularly, folks getting shot in their own homes all by folks forbidden to carry arms.

Those guns were all illegal arms.

So if all legal arms were recovered or confiscated only illegal arms would exist and you know as well as I do the folks possessing those arms would be the criminal element that exists in all countries. 

On most, if not all raids carried out by security forces in and around RSA  firearms, ammunition and associated explosives were found all intended to harm the general population irrespective of race.

These were all illegal weapons meant for illegal uses.

Everyone has the right to legally defend themselves, family or property and RSA is a great example of why law-abiding folks should be armed.




DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
15 Jan 2020, 19:15
#29
15 Jan 2020, 19:15#29



"Because cars are not designed to kill people or injure people as their primary purpose but simply to transport people around and are a vital part of societies infrastructure in terms of transporting people to work. "

Invalid argument, sorry.  Private gun ownership is also not to kill people. The purpose of design of something has got absolutely nothing to do with the actual use...

As soon as self navigating cars become the norm, I'll bet my house that some idiots will start calling for strict regulations of private cars...Give it 15 years.

The legal use of guns hurt nobody...if you start making legal use illegal just to curb some uses that are already illegal, you are chipping away at someone's freedom. It might not impact yourself now, but the gradual removal of freedoms of choice will impact you some day. What's next? Butcher's knives? Rat Poison? Cars?

So we are taking away the rights of many, just because a small minority can't use these right responsibly? 

We are individuals...the hivemind thing won't work for us in the long run. If you give the masses too much power, society will crash and burn...and it's already happening...Stupid outbreeds Clever every time.


MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
15 Jan 2020, 19:26
#30
15 Jan 2020, 19:26#30
What nationality were Bugs Moran, Whitey Bulger and Mickey Spillane? The Irish were the original gangs in the USA:
As American society and culture developed, new immigrants were relocating to the United States. The first major gangs in 19th century New York City were the Irish gangs such as the Whyos and the Dead Rabbits.
It's dangerous to assume you have the solution Stav. Ireland is steeped in violence. I love the country and the people and I especially love Ballybunion. But you chaps have caught the European disease called 'holier than thou'. 
Like the Germans who after all they have done, now lecture the US on how to behave.
Unwelcome advice.


AJ
AJHPro3,183 posts
15 Jan 2020, 19:32
#31
15 Jan 2020, 19:32#31

Well said, guys.

ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 19:57
#32
15 Jan 2020, 19:57#32

@AJH

So just to confirm Japan plays a lot of video games and doesn't have a problem with mass shootings?

I admit I wouldn't be hugely knowledgeable about the RSA but it does have a reputation of having very high crime rate. But I don't believe the US is near having a crime level that necessitates owning a gun, never mind needing a gun to protect yourself against terrorism.

I reckon if you live in a country where you feel the need to own a gun for safety your living in a failed state. Something has gone very wrong.

@DbDraad

The purpose of gun ownership if for protection and I also assume its a hobby/sport for some as well. The problem is that gun ownership likely leads to more deaths than it prevents. If you want a gun for a hobby, then hire or store a gun at shooting range. As for hunting, you don't need automatic weapons for that.

Ah the classic if they take something they will eventually take everything argument. The smokers said the same thing here when smoking was banned in public places, soon it will be banned in private places and then what next alcohol will be banned!!!

I don't have a problem with the "legal" use of guns its, the illegal use or both legal and illegal guns to kill people. s 

Some limits on freedoms are required. Putting speed limits on roads or drink limits on drivers is a limit to freedom but its done for the protection of society on the whole. At this point in time a majority of Americans do favor tougher gun controls than are in place now (I'm not saying they are calling for a total ban)

Tell me why is other countries can function without widespread gun owenship and don't complain about their freedoms being taken away?

SH
sharkbokCaptain23,216 posts
15 Jan 2020, 20:10
#33
15 Jan 2020, 20:10#33
Everyone should be allowed to have their own personal nuclear bomb to deter violence, and as a means to express their rights to freedom.Then if you have an argument with a neighbour you can let them know you have not just a gun, but a nuclear bomb that you will detonate if they show aggression.

The third world is a different scenario with guns where it may be more justified to have them.However many first world countries have proven it is safer to not have them. It is better to make them illegal and then punish the people more severe that get caught with them- and even the producers with life sentences. 
Imagine losing a family member to a stray bullet between two trigger happy morons that got into an argument about 20 metres away as you walked around a street corner.
The worst knife crime in the UK is often from people that are not born in the UK- it is third world kids brining their violence here.
America is the largest producer of arms in the world, it might just be economic reasons to allow people to have them in the US. 
ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
15 Jan 2020, 22:08
#34
15 Jan 2020, 22:08#34

@mozart

I just looked those 3 up. They where all American.

No country doesn't have some violence in its history or violent people among its populous but if you want to dismiss an argument or point of view because of that your basically disqualifying ever nationality on earth.

Why is it dangerous to think having no guns is better than having guns. Not like someone here is going shoot me for saying it . 

Steeped in violence?. How many wars has Ireland been involved since it gained independence, again the answer is 0. There is crime here, there is organized gangs and murders, but in general it is a peaceful country.

As for Ireland/Europe been "holier than thou" that's just another dodge to avoid having to actually debate someone. European people see these mass shootings in the US in the news, are horrified by them and are just baffled why no action is taken year after year, just the same old refrain, thoughts and prayers. It just seems so blatantly obvious on this side of the world that guns are the issue, Europe in general doesn't have guns and doesn't have mass shootings. Get rid of the guns get rid of the problem.

WW2 ended 75 years ago, how long are you going hold that over the Germans. Should we go back to when America invaded and stole half of Mexico or where busy wiping out the Indians. Did America only help beat the Nazi's so Germany for then and ever more would agree with America on everything?

Unwelcome advise can also be good advise you just don't want to hear.


DB
DbDraadCaptain26,388 posts
15 Jan 2020, 22:22
#35
15 Jan 2020, 22:22#35

"Everyone should be allowed to have their own personal nuclear bomb to deter violence" 

Another irrelevant argument.  Individuals were never allowed to have nuclear bombs, so no rights are being taken away by that prohibition. 

South Africa, like The States and to a lesser degree Australia, are frontier countries, built on the backs of explorers who went to tame the wild against all odds. Owning and using guns responsibly has been part of our heritage for almost 4 centuries.  It's part of our DNA and frankly still a necessity on our farms.

Mass shootings are terrible but banning guns is treating the symptoms and not the problem...a quick fix that's not really a fix. The "greater good " is almost never good at all, only an excuse for doing the wrong thing. The easy way is almost never the right path ....the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. 

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2020, 00:41
#36
16 Jan 2020, 00:41#36
Okay I tend to agree guns should be carefully controlled. In the navy the guns were always under lock. But guns are not the sole  reason for mass killings. In some cases they are just the instrument, in other cases they are a proxy for other motivations.
There is plenty of evidence that the interaction of the unique US culture and gun glorification in entertainment has been a motivation for violence. And this glorification of violence  has also been a factor in isolated cases elsewhere. Hell those ISIS ceremonies are pure Hollywood.
There is also plenty of evidence eg the recent Texas killing,  that guns can save lives.
Most thinking people in the US accept there is a gun problem, but that  it's far more complex than simply making the rules tougher. If somebody wants to kill a lot of people guns may be the most direct way to do that but not the only way or even the most dangerous way. You have to fix the impulse.
Violence occurs in all societies, but there is a huge difference between a society that has violent criminal elements versus countries where the mass of society or large segments of society buy into the violence....like Germany or like the nest  in Ireland that nourished the IRA, dramatically reversed after 9/11 because that form of behavior was no longer going to be ignored in the States.
In the States we field a lot of flak....Europe finds so many reasons to despise their two time saviors. But when Kuwait was invaded, when Ebola exploded in Central Africa....once again they happily accepted US leadership .
Hey, accepting this bad mannered super power may be tough for a Parisian. But it's better than speaking German or Russian for heaven sake!
ST
Stavanger1Pro4,532 posts
16 Jan 2020, 03:12
#37
16 Jan 2020, 03:12#37
@mozart
Its not really complex. Regardless of persons impulse if he can't access guns he can't commit a mass shooting. Taking away the easiest most direct way of killing people will deter many alone.You don't need guns to have a functioning and safe society as other western nations prove.
No one disputes that violence occurs in all societies and yes we know there is a difference between criminals and Nazi Germany and a terrorist organization (which only had minority support, and was funded to a large degree by Americans). Not sure why you keep bringing them up.

Yes America does get a lot of flak and I do think some of it is unfair and yes Europe does sometimes use you when it suits them. America did the world a huge favor with the military support in both world wars (savior is a bit too strong a term, partner wold be a better term). The marshal plan and the aid in rebuilding Europe after WW2 was also extremely important for Europe.
But as I said was America's goal only to liberate Europe so forever more Europe would follow Americas lead on everything? Do the French get to expect America follows its lead considering them gave them significant assistance during their war of independence.
As a superpower your gonna have critics and even with the best of intention ever country makes mistakes. It doesn't mean other countries are wrong or right, each argument has to be taken on its own merit.
I know its tough for a Bostonian to accept, but hey its better than having high taxes on your tea imports!




CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
16 Jan 2020, 03:46
#38
16 Jan 2020, 03:46#38

Bad elements in society are always dangerous,   When I went to Paris in 1973 - I stayed in a hotel near the Gare D'Nord,   In 2000 I visited  Paris again and stayed at a hotel in the St Denis area after the booking of reservations in the internet - but getting to the hotel was problematic - the taxi I took would not take me to the hotel because the area around it was so dangerous because of gangsters.   I had to work part of the way to the hotel.   

In 2007 I thought I would not make the same mistake  so back to the Gare D'Nord area,   I had two rather nasty experiences in the area,   However,  on return to SA I told a French friend of mine that I stayed in the latter area and he said it was madness  beaue there are gun battles between the Police and armed criminals in the area,   

They keep the latter out of the media - but on reflection I remembered that the Police in the area  were armed with sub-machine guns.    Ireland do not have gangsterism as a major problem at present, but in Paris and Brussels the situation is different.   The end result is the legal ownership of guns is outlawed -  but gangsters ignores the law and gun violence is rampant,  Most of the terrorism activities that killed more people than killed in mass killings in the USA  through Local terrorists with links to the gangsters and they all carry guns  and bombs despite legislation.   

Just to forbid law-abiding citizens from gun ownership is the easy answer, to solve the problem op gun violence by criminals is becoming more important - but Governments seems to be powerless to protect ordinary people.

I am in favour of stricter laws iro gun ownership - but the main problem still remains with the more serious problem of armed gangsters who killed more people than mass killings ever do,  The weapon of choice for criminals seems to be the knife nowadays - should knives be band too?

Sorry - it is not the people who own gums legally - it is a minute number of bad elements in communities that should not own guns and must be forbidden to have guns in the first place,  Mass shootings are mostly caused by psychologically problematic people and criminals who  will get guns even if the law forbids people from owning guns,            

                   

MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
16 Jan 2020, 04:59
#39
16 Jan 2020, 04:59#39

America is a vast, diversified, politically balkanized country.....with a constitutionally guaranteed right to bear arms and different laws in 50 states. Even the most anti gun politician appreciates the complexity of even limiting gun rights.


BE
Beeno1Captain40,032 posts
16 Jan 2020, 09:06
#40
16 Jan 2020, 09:06#40

Surprised no body has mentioned the most crucial point. 

The Americans will NEVER give up their guns as they rightly see them as a protection against enslavement by a corrupt government. 

The demonrats are now full blown socialist/communists seeking to take over the country. They are totally intolerant of opposing views, seek to suppress free speech and have Antifa as their armed wing.

Any attempt by the communist one world government forces to take over America will be met with the force of an armed citizenry.

The left are full on fascists now. Lawless people only interested in power.

As for Stav, he is an Irish traitor wanting Brussels to rule and destroy the Irish people, their customs, traditions and values via population replacement and relentless brainwashing. Fortunately it's looking like the demise of the globalists ruling the EU could save the Irish.

As for that bone head sharktwit he makes one blunder after another. Then without reflection goes on to the the next blunder. Hahahahahaha what a crazy loon he is. ??

Guns are not the problem. Like cars and so many other objects it all depends on the people involved. Those wanting to kill have so many options. 

Stav and poor sharktwit are very clearly not very bright and lack any common sense. 

The continued schooling of these two loons will, I regret to say, bear scant fruit. They are serious dumbasses. They have lost the ability to reason. Their "minds" have been programmed to suck up whatever the globalist MSM  sell them. Mindless zombies, mere playthings of their masters. Parrots mouthing off platitudes and a never ending stream of BS. 

????



↓ LOAD MORE (page 2 of 4)

More from Mikes Gripes