US President to push proposals to prevent further shootings

Post Reply New Topic

I heard this news today:
NPR: Obama Asks Biden To Draft 'Concrete Proposals' On Guns By January : The Two-Way

I think it's a good idea to look out for any quick changes to "psychiatric care" or for "access denied" to those that need access to a gun for deterrence.

[Moved from General Autism Discussion to News and Current Events]

Can you please explain that sentence again?

Ha.

So, we do things "just because"? That has to be one of the dumbest things I've heard spoken by an elected leader. No, you find out what works via an objective review of all the evidence (without bias), and go with that if you want to promote a change of policy.

"But the complexity of the issue "can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing" means "push gun control anyway" even though there are things that could be done without the uselessness and waste of political capital that gun control amounts to.

f**k science.. I know the best.. *ooops!!*

There probably are too many guns in the wrong places with the wrong accessibility in the USA. There is probably also a serious problem with how the society cares for people.

His statistics regarding the number of victims of "gun violence" gives me cause to find where he got those figures and if suicides and accidents were included. They seem quite high...

can someone here who knows everything about guns please explain to me this question.
are they going to take are guns away just for being autistic?

We could be headed for second class citizenship, pure speculation though.

One might say we're there already, since we get treated like that from our peers and employers.

right now the language reads as guns and mental illness or mental retardation(which autism is niether)but that how the language reads.
one must be legaly ajudacated as mentaly incompetant by a court of law just having a disabilty in and of its self is no bar to owning a firearm.

i have heard reports though from people i have talked to that vets coming home who are DX with ptsd have there medical info forwarded to the ATF data bases used for gun store background checks.

That could be part of it but this guy didn't even try to buy his own gun and use it. The real concern should be these Doomsday Zealots and who has access to their powerful arsenals. Some of them have huge stockpiles. I mean, what if one of their kids decides to take some from the stockpile and pull the same thing at their school? If it happened here it could happen elsewhere.

This type of double talk jargon is known as (I call it) "Political Bulls**t". In other words, an excuse to do what they want to do so they don't have to explain themselves.
This is the gist of politics: Most people are fairly uneducated (yes, even today) in terms of what goes on in the inner workings of the government as well as a basic understanding of fact and logic. The government knows this, and uses double talk to make those people a bit confused by spilling a bunch of crap that sounds intelligent (but in reality isn't) so those people go along with it, not actually catching said bs. Those of us who are smarter than the average d**l hole are the ones that seem to call the gov on their bs and that's why there hasn't been more crap already. In the end, the government only acts in ways that benefits them directly in some way. So whenever they talk about stuff like that, ask yourself "what do they get out of the deal?" and if it's something that makes them more powerful and able to circumvent the constitutional right to disolve a government that is corrupt, then you have your answer, and 9 times out of 10 that's what it'll be.

Seriously, the first clause is saying that no law will actually change anything (whether it does or not; you can figure that out by looking at all the evidence), but the second clause says we must do something anyway (perhaps due to seemingly popular opinion, even if it's not actually the majority, but let's say it is, as he thinks it is the majority in a latter clause). You say it won't do anything, but we should do something anyway? Awesome logic there mister Obama.

You don't do something to pander to the majority who're being irrational and emotional about it. That's unethical.

Wow (that's easily George W. Bush dumb).

I really wish the powers that be would focus more on the causes of mass killings rather than how they are carried out. There are big problems with our society that lead people to do these things, and nobody seems to be looking there.

Proposing gun control measures is "doing nothing." It attempts to treat the symptom, not the illness. But as Jaden mentioned, their actions have little to do with what is best for the country. I see it as taking advantage of tragedies to push their own agenda, which sickens me.

Last edited by Blasty on 20 Dec 2012, 12:42 am, edited 1 time in total.

Has there been a recent opinion poll on this issue to back this up? I'm also under the impression that the majority of Americans now favour a ban.



Ha! ethics and politics? C'mon, you know the game here. Obama has to been to be acting, whilst he and every other intellectual knows that safety in America is a lost cause. He needs the public support but also the NRA money and lobbyists, or in an one word answer: power.