Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Jackrabbit

I Pray

Recommended Posts

On 11/5/2017 at 3:52 PM, mysfit said:

As I said, it brings solace to some. So don't stop.

 

I just find it a rather empty response when employed by our so called leaders.

 

I'm tired and disgusted when time and again they offer prayer.....and nothing else.

I've read a lot of your posts and the one thing I've noticed is your use of "they"....a lot. This isn't a "them" issue. You don't like the power the NRA has, then the only way to offset that is to band together with an equally influential group of people. You are disgusted that things aren't the way YOU want them to be. You believe that the guns are to blame and not the people. I hate to break it to you, but this is a very complex issue that has a ton of implications on both sides. If it were as simple as democrats/liberals having their way and banning guns, then the 8 years that Obama was around would have been the time, but there are no easy answers. If there were, we wouldn't be talking about it. For every Devin Kelley that moves the needle one way, there is a Stephen Willeford that moves it back. If there weren't guns, there would be vehicle attacks like the one in Barcelona that killed 13 and injured 130, or stabbings like the ones in China where 25 were killed and 115 injured. And with the 2nd amendment so tightly woven into the culture of this country, it isn't going anywhere soon. As mentioned in another post, Prohibition, the war on drugs and the death penalty for murdering has done zero to stop those crimes....why would gun control be any different? So rather than waving our arms in disgust, call your congressman or try to affect change in some other positive way.  They offer prayer......what have you offered? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Thoughts and prayers" translates to "we are all okay with this." I don't care if people pray, and i certainly wouldn't call it a waste nor begrudge anyone their faith, but using it as a substitute for meaningful action is gutless and cowardly. It's just a way for people absolve themselves of complicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

"Thoughts and prayers" translates to "we are all okay with this." I don't care if people pray, and i certainly wouldn't call it a waste nor begrudge anyone their faith, but using it as a substitute for meaningful action is gutless and cowardly. It's just a way for people absolve themselves of complicity.

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. To suggest that anyone is okay with an act like that is absurd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Slapdad said:

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. To suggest that anyone is okay with an act like that is absurd. 

If people weren't okay with it, didn't just accept it as a consequence of American life, then columbine would have been our port Arthur. It wasn't, we learned nothing, and we keep thoughtting-and-prayering our way to more tragedy. It's an ugly conclusion, but it's the only one I can draw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

If people weren't okay with it, didn't just accept it as a consequence of American life, then columbine would have been our port Arthur. It wasn't, we learned nothing, and we keep thoughtting-and-prayering our way to more tragedy. It's an ugly conclusion, but it's the only one I can draw.

Then I suppose the only conclusion to draw from people still dying in car accidents after so many have died is that nobody cares. That is a overly-dramatic conclusion to draw. It is a slippery slope to try and tell someone what they feel or how much they do or do not care about something....especially something as heinous as this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Slapdad said:

Then I suppose the only conclusion to draw from people still dying in car accidents after so many have died is that nobody cares. 

That's true, I don't care on a personal level, just like I don't care about the number of workplace deaths in the construction business. Those accidents are regrettable, but they are just numbers to me, and they are accidents. If however, hundreds of people got intentionally run over by drivers every year, I'd care a lot about that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, I am Ram said:

That's true, I don't care on a personal level, just like I don't care about the number of workplace deaths in the construction business. Those accidents are regrettable, but they are just numbers to me, and they are accidents. If however, hundreds of people got intentionally run over by drivers every year, I'd care a lot about that. 

Well....like In London? Or Times Square? Or Barcelona? Or Jerusalem? Or any of the other number of vehicle attacks? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Slapdad said:

Then I suppose the only conclusion to draw from people still dying in car accidents after so many have died is that nobody cares. That is a overly-dramatic conclusion to draw. It is a slippery slope to try and tell someone what they feel or how much they do or do not care about something....especially something as heinous as this. 

But cars are constantly being made safer. Auto accident deaths have decreased dramatically precisely because people care. We did not just accept that dying in auto accidents was a consequence of freedom. 

Same with construction accidents like @I am Ram mentioned above. I worked for a construction company for awhile and the resources poured into safety are unbelievable. It goes way beyond hard hats and harnesses. Injuries and deaths are way, way, way down as a result of people caring enough to do something. 

Also, I'm not telling people what they feel. I'm explaining how empty gestures come across. And yes, if you thought-and-prayer me and then turn around and vote for representatives who won't stand up to the NRA, then it's an empty gesture. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

But cars are constantly being made safer. Auto accident deaths have decreased dramatically precisely because people care. We did not just accept that dying in auto accidents was a consequence of freedom. 

Same with construction accidents like @I am Ram mentioned above. I worked for a construction company for awhile and the resources poured into safety are unbelievable. It goes way beyond hard hats and harnesses. Injuries and deaths are way, way, way down as a result of people caring enough to do something. 

Also, I'm not telling people what they feel. I'm explaining how empty gestures come across. And yes, if you thought-and-prayer me and then turn around and vote for representatives who won't stand up to the NRA, then it's an empty gesture. 

An automobile accident is completely different than someone intentionally mowing people down in an act of violence. Vehicle safety improvements are meant to protect the driver, not to protect those people that are being run down. To equate the two is outlandish. If you're going down that road, you could argue that guns have been improved to make them safer when compared to early guns without safety mechanisms and that misfired or malfunctioned....but that's not what gun control arguments angle towards. 

"It's just a way for people absolve themselves of complicity." That certainly sounds like you're inserting your own motive and drawing your own conclusions from someone else's otherwise outwardly heartfelt words. If someone truly thinks that our leaders truly don't care about the lives lost and their real motivation is what you wrote above, then it would seem that they've swung so far to one side or the other that their contempt for the opposing view is the filter through which they see those who hold it, regardless of how legitimate that view may or may not be, but just because it isn't the belief that they hold. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Slapdad said:

Well....like In London? Or Times Square? Or Barcelona? Or Jerusalem? Or any of the other number of vehicle attacks? 

So how does that compare to all the killings in the US number-wise? It doesn't. No even close. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Ram said:

So how does that compare to all the killings in the US number-wise? It doesn't. No even close. 

Do the numbers need to be equal in order to draw comparisons? The point of the conversation was that you're suggesting that our leaders don't care about these horrific acts based solely on the fact that their view that the man who pulled the trigger is to blame while you apparently believe that the existence of guns is to blame. the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but to fix the problem isn't as simple as taking all the guns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Slapdad said:

An automobile accident is completely different than someone intentionally mowing people down in an act of violence. Vehicle safety improvements are meant to protect the driver, not to protect those people that are being run down. To equate the two is outlandish. If you're going down that road, you could argue that guns have been improved to make them safer when compared to early guns without safety mechanisms and that misfired or malfunctioned....but that's not what gun control arguments angle towards. 

"It's just a way for people absolve themselves of complicity." That certainly sounds like you're inserting your own motive and drawing your own conclusions from someone else's otherwise outwardly heartfelt words. If someone truly thinks that our leaders truly don't care about the lives lost and their real motivation is what you wrote above, then it would seem that they've swung so far to one side or the other that their contempt for the opposing view is the filter through which they see those who hold it, regardless of how legitimate that view may or may not be, but just because it isn't the belief that they hold. 

You compared them.

All I'm saying is that there has not been a single meaningful, actionable response to any of these mass shootings, despite that we are the only country that routinely suffers them and that the solution (not, fwiw, banning all guns) has already been modeled by numerous other countries. Every single person who has died in a mass shooting since columbine has died needlessly, and the Republican Party and those who vote for them are squarely to blame. Their thoughts and prayers, however well-intended, mean shit. 

The nra too, but they're a soulless corporate entity whose sole motive is profit, so idk why we would expect anything different. Lawmakers are supposed to not let them get away with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

You compared them.

All I'm saying is that there has not been a single meaningful, actionable response to any of these mass shootings, despite that we are the only country that routinely suffers them and that the solution (not, fwiw, banning all guns) has already been modeled by numerous other countries. Every single person who has died in a mass shooting since columbine has died needlessly, and the Republican Party and those who vote for them are squarely to blame. Their thoughts and prayers, however well-intended, mean shit. 

The nra too, but they're a soulless corporate entity whose sole motive is profit, so idk why we would expect anything different. Lawmakers are supposed to not let them get away with it. 

The way to beat the NRA (and the NAGR while we're at it) is to match every dollar contributed to politicians. Why there is no National Firearm Control Association is beyond me, but that's how to achieve the goal. There are lobbying groups out there dedicated to the cause though....support them. The democrats have had control of Congress from 1995 through 2016 with the exception of a couple years around 2010......why was nothing done then? You can't blame the Republicans when there are Dems who are also in the pocket of the NRA and who missed their opportunity to put tighter restrictions on gun rights. You complaining that the NRA is a soulless corporate entity whose sole motive is profit is off base. It is a non-profit made up of American citizens who contribute money to lobby, just as the Sierra Club is and the Abortion Rights Groups are. If one is evil, then they're all evil. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

You compared them.

All I'm saying is that there has not been a single meaningful, actionable response to any of these mass shootings, despite that we are the only country that routinely suffers them and that the solution (not, fwiw, banning all guns) has already been modeled by numerous other countries. Every single person who has died in a mass shooting since columbine has died needlessly, and the Republican Party and those who vote for them are squarely to blame. Their thoughts and prayers, however well-intended, mean shit. 

The nra too, but they're a soulless corporate entity whose sole motive is profit, so idk why we would expect anything different. Lawmakers are supposed to not let them get away with it. 

The Democrats have really been hamstringing themselves with this too, though. Any time there is a mass shooting, the Republicans say "it is a mental health issue". 

I don't get why the Democrats don't jump all over that. Just... agree, and start drafting bills to improve mental health aspect. Push them hard, hold Republican lawmakers accountable to these statements. The worst thing that happens is that, hey, we have a competent mental health system (which SHOULD be a democratic goal...). The middle ground is that mass shootings actually decrease. The best thing, from their perspective in a very realpolitik way, is that mass shootings don't decrease (or take a decade to do so), and Republicans painted themselves into a corner and now will accept at least some gun control. 

I don't get it. Well... I do get it. Democrats don't actually want gun control in the same way Republicans don't want immigration reform. As long as we have both mass shootings and poorly managed immigration, each party can use the issue to rile up the base. What's a few hundred Americans dying every few years or a few thousand migrants being murdered and raped on our soil compared to electoral advantage?

(sorry for the thread jack, jackrabbit)

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Slapdad said:

Do the numbers need to be equal in order to draw comparisons? The point of the conversation was that you're suggesting that our leaders don't care about these horrific acts based solely on the fact that their view that the man who pulled the trigger is to blame while you apparently believe that the existence of guns is to blame. the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but to fix the problem isn't as simple as taking all the guns. 

I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. I think the issue that a lot of people have is there is very little to no action on gun control at all. There does not seem to be much appetite for many of our leaders to pursue it. It seems there are compromises that should and need to be made, but nobody wants to change their position, even when we have mass casualty incidents that have extreme costs. There is total lunacy on both sides ("ban all guns" vs "banning silencers is a step towards taking away our guns"). We simply can't have a reasonable discussion on this. 

7 hours ago, happycamper said:

The Democrats have really been hamstringing themselves with this too, though. Any time there is a mass shooting, the Republicans say "it is a mental health issue". 

I don't get why the Democrats don't jump all over that. Just... agree, and start drafting bills to improve mental health aspect. Push them hard, hold Republican lawmakers accountable to these statements. The worst thing that happens is that, hey, we have a competent mental health system (which SHOULD be a democratic goal...). The middle ground is that mass shootings actually decrease. The best thing, from their perspective in a very realpolitik way, is that mass shootings don't decrease (or take a decade to do so), and Republicans painted themselves into a corner and now will accept at least some gun control. 

I don't get it. Well... I do get it. Democrats don't actually want gun control in the same way Republicans don't want immigration reform. As long as we have both mass shootings and poorly managed immigration, each party can use the issue to rile up the base. What's a few hundred Americans dying every few years or a few thousand migrants being murdered and raped on our soil compared to electoral advantage?

(sorry for the thread jack, jackrabbit)

I agree with this too. I really want to see some comprehensive mental health treatment in this country. I have no idea what that looks like, and we are going to run into "over reach of the Feds," and if we leave it up to the states, well that's why we are where we are, isn't it?

And the problem with treating mental health is that it can't be forced without abridging freedoms. So what then? Are the people who are so mentally ill that they seek out ways to kill as many people as possible before they kill themselves really the people who will willingly seek mental health treatment? I don't know. Does it even work? Again, I don't know. I don't really have a lot of confidence that mental health treatment is advanced enough to solve the problem, even if the people who need it most are willing to improve themselves. It's not like cardiac surgery where you can go in and unclog the pipe or reroute it. Treatment takes the active participation of the patient over the course of a long time. The person has to have the will power and determination to see it through. In lots of cases taking a drug will stop some of the symptoms, but doesn't solve the underlying problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...