Conversation
Notices
-
The only shootings that make the news these days are the ones not stopped by the second amendment.
When do you ever see "Mass shooting stopped by man with concealed weapon" in the highlights these days?
That's why we think gun control is a real problem.Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 10:20:25 UTC from web-
@azureblaze Highlighting the instances of an armed civilian stopping a shooter would fatally undermine their anti-gun agenda.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:03:50 UTC from web-
@m14brony I dunno, it seems classier than using the deaths of 50 people to justify a pro-gun one.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:13:53 UTC from web-
@ceruleanspark There's a world of difference between countering with facts after being placed on the defensive by anti-gun types and blindly pursuing an agenda regardless of what the facts say.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:18:32 UTC from web
-
-
@m14brony Please don't take this as confrontational, but do you have incidents to cite? I see and hear so much "They don't tell you about when it works," and I know the news has the "if it bleeds, it leads" mentality, but I don't ever hear specifics, just hypotheticals.
-
@scribus I haven't dissected the methodology thoroughly, but as I stated an another forum in the past, a CDC study estimates there are between 500,000 and 3 million defensive uses of firearms a year: http://www.everypony.com/threads/general-chat-thread-3-this-thread-transcends-titles.7131/page-2225
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:27:36 UTC from web
-
-
@m14brony it's either freedom of the press vs right to bear arms or the government vs the right to bear arms. Either way the right to bear arms is in a bad position because the other side is acting like a whiney feminist. Rip gun owners.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:19:40 UTC from web-
@azureblaze Part of the problem is that gun ownership is often seen as a "partisan" issue. Hispanics, LGBT, women, etc. are put off by what some Republican politicians say, and there are liberal politicians with anti-gun views who prey on their emotions by trying to link gun ownership with such things.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 20:56:29 UTC from web-
@m14brony I am having trouble putting A and B together here. I mean I can see how you can pander more to LGBT people when something terrible happens that happens to involve a LGBT-thing ( bonuspoints for not naming but implying a very recent thing that happened ). But isn't that just "Politics 101" ?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:02:22 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker In the US, the most vocal opponents of stringent gun control are often conservatives, and the most vocal proponents of more stringent gun control are often liberal. Women, LGBT, and Hispanics are gaining political clout due to demographic changes, and they often lean Democratic due to being repulsed by things like a call for a Berlin Wall at the US-Mexico border. If the Democrats can successfully use "Politics 101" to get these people to associate gun ownership with the things some Republicans are saying, gun owners like myself are in a lot of trouble in the long run (a permanent ban on "assault weapons" and "high capacity" magazines, "may issue" concealed carry laws, etc.).
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:11:30 UTC from web-
@m14brony Yes but the political landscape is always changing. Groups are always "competing" for exposure in one way or another ( and sometimes it drops in their lap due to something that happened, usually a tragedy ). Just because Women, LGBT and Hispanics are at a high point compared to historical data does not mean that everything will change. Now this is where conservatives come in. It is important for a country not to change everything all the time when a group gains numbers. Whereas liberals always try to see that no man is left behind. These are opposing idea's but necessary to run a country. Now if a political group manages to demonize another political group in the eyes of a certain demographic by use of attack advertisements ( Poison the well in essence ). Then I think the country has a real problem on it's hand... I have seen nothing of that since I do not live in America though, but I am afraid that is exactly what is happening ?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:27:48 UTC from web-
@critialcloudkicker I'm not saying that things will automatically change. I am just saying that attempts are being made to use "Politics 101" to demonize people, and I am saying what could possibly happen. All sorts of scapegoating is done by politicians to divert attention away from their failures.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:41:34 UTC from web-
@m14brony I never said things will automatically change either, however the liberals and the concervatives have to work together to come up with a sollution that is acceptable to both sides of the coin. Now that you have confirmed that at least one side of this coin is actively demonizing the the statements of the other side. Yeah I now do understand why you brought up those groups when you did. It is way more easy to get people to listen to your political agenda's about gun control if said group just got a big problem with guns.
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 23:00:02 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@azureblaze Wait, lets assume that there was a mass shooting planned and some guy who happened to conceal carry put an end to his plan, there is no incentive for every press to pick up on that story since it is not big enough. ... Doesn't that mean the "media problem" is bigger than the "gun problem" ?
Tuesday, 14-Jun-16 21:08:42 UTC from web
-
