CDZ Why aren't we addressing the gun issue as a cultural problem?

[mudwhistle]

Just when I thought you were taking steps to becoming rational again you take two steps back.

Yes, I get that from both ends, too.

Always a good sign.
.

Yes.....and you're God...impervious to taking positions.
We both know that's rubbish.

And here we go, for the ten thousandth time. My positions on the issues are here for all to see: 2. >>> For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

Why do you folks insist on making everything about me?

Maybe just throw your two cents in about guns and culture. Maybe that would be a good idea. That's what the thread is about.
.

Sorry if it bothers you, but trying act like you don't take positions....then taking leftist positions in your threads just doesn't fly anymore.

I just provided a link to my positions. I take positions all the time, taking heat from both ends.

Then you again say I try to act like I don't take positions.

I honestly don't get it. Alternate universe stuff. I don't know what to tell you. Please stick to the thread.
.

Do you have a problem with English?
I said you act like you don't take positions but take them in your threads.....and they're usually left or far left.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes, I get that from both ends, too.

Always a good sign.
.

Yes.....and you're God...impervious to taking positions.
We both know that's rubbish.

And here we go, for the ten thousandth time. My positions on the issues are here for all to see: 2. >>> For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

Why do you folks insist on making everything about me?

Maybe just throw your two cents in about guns and culture. Maybe that would be a good idea. That's what the thread is about.
.

Sorry if it bothers you, but trying act like you don't take positions....then taking leftist positions in your threads just doesn't fly anymore.

I just provided a link to my positions. I take positions all the time, taking heat from both ends.

Then you again say I try to act like I don't take positions.

I honestly don't get it. Alternate universe stuff. I don't know what to tell you. Please stick to the thread.
.

Do you have a problem with English?
I said you act like you don't take positions but take them in your threads.....and they're usually left or far left.

My apologies, I tend not to read posts very carefully when it's clear they're just whining about me personally.

That's been happening with other posters on this thread, so I'm not paying terribly close attention.

Now, perhaps you can just contribute to the thread.
.

 

[G.T.]

A culture in decay - I mean these charts go bananas back in the 90s when the internet and video games really took off! Fakkin Hollywood!

View attachment 273345

Yeah, wtf was going on in the 90's? I heard one official say "organized crime," but I was around in the 90's and the Mafia wasn't THAT bad. Jesus.

Michael Jordan was making the 90% of fans who the Bulls WEREN'T their team insanely angry and jealous : 0

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes.....and you're God...impervious to taking positions.
We both know that's rubbish.

And here we go, for the ten thousandth time. My positions on the issues are here for all to see: 2. >>> For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

Why do you folks insist on making everything about me?

Maybe just throw your two cents in about guns and culture. Maybe that would be a good idea. That's what the thread is about.
.

Sorry if it bothers you, but trying act like you don't take positions....then taking leftist positions in your threads just doesn't fly anymore.

I just provided a link to my positions. I take positions all the time, taking heat from both ends.

Then you again say I try to act like I don't take positions.

I honestly don't get it. Alternate universe stuff. I don't know what to tell you. Please stick to the thread.
.

Do you have a problem with English?
I said you act like you don't take positions but take them in your threads.....and they're usually left or far left.

My apologies, I tend not to read posts very carefully when it's clear they're just whining about me personally.

That's been happening with other posters on this thread, so I'm not paying terribly close attention.

Now, perhaps you can just contribute to the thread.
.

My first post was a contribution.....and then you went into this boring mess about how everyone thinks THEY are right and the other side is wrong.
I'm simply pointed out the facts.....and your knee-jerk reaction was to say it's BS without reading it and absorbing it.

 

[Crixus]

I don't have a simple legislative answer for the gun problem. There are already ten kazillion guns out there, and they're easily accessible by any maniac. So legislating along the fringes can only do so much. Can we do some legislating here and there? Sure, let's look at EVERYTHING. But legislation's efficacy will be limited and long term only.

Obviously, our poisoned political environment is going to slow down (or worse) anything major that we try to do. That appears to be the goal, for some reason. But is it possible for us all to look at this as a cultural issue? WHY is life so cheap now? HOW do people become so radicalized? WHAT pushes a damaged person over that last edge of sanity and turns them into a monster? WHEN can we step in without harming a person's liberties?

And perhaps most importantly, how can we COMMUNICATE, COLLABORATE and INNOVATE in this toxic political environment, to SAVE LIVES? Certainly we have to look at entertainment. Certainly we have to look at partisan politics from a macro perspective. Certainly we have to look at the internet. There are some things we all can consider. No?

I think MOST of our problems are cultural, directly or indirectly. This is another example. But we're tying our own hands.
.

Simple. Hold your politicians accountable at the ballot box. Every election it's the same. "If you vote democrat the commies will come git ya, and wet backs will rape all the white girls! Or, "if you vote republican the klan will come burn a cross in your front yard and abortions due to incest will skyrocket out of control!" Or, sit on the fence and sneer down at both sides and say how above it all you are, which is fine until both sides burn down your little fence and fuck it up for everyone. Honestly, the federal government has not addressed one issue without making it a worse mess then it already is/was. In the El Paso shooters manifesto there was a big answer. The dude pretty much lost all hopes of having his "dream job". Dude lost all hope and saw no reason to continue being a productive member of society. Why? That's the question that needs to be asked. For years, guns have been in school. My high school had a dozen. They were painted powder blue and there was about 2,000 rounds for them on hand. Not one time did anyone try and shoot anyone else. At any rate, as long as the current politicians are in Washington, this will continue to be a problem. Ban guns and mass shootings will continue. There are a whole slew of laws that were passed as a reaction to mass shooting that have been useless. Braidy bill anyone? How is that bump stock ban working? So until politicians are reminded why they are where they are, anything else addressing the issue is moot.

I agree in principle, but it sure is difficult to hold politicians accountable when we don't have term limits. A vast majority of incumbents are re-elected, not because they earned it, but because they have leveraged their position and increased their power base.

There have been a few hints here and there that some politicians are more willing to say "enough is enough". Let's see if some momentum can build.
.

I agree, congress needs to be term limited, big time. Then pass a law that no former congress critter can work on the hill as a lobbyist. That there takes care of a bunch of the money. At least until they figure a way around it.

 

[Olde Europe]

That's a polito-sphere phenomena - not an indictment on what the actual population is doing as a whole. America is largely outside of partisan politics...but if you listen to the "inside" of it for too long, you might become as hysterical as the folks who do.

As far as I understand the above, I don't agree. Neither is the popular apathy and tuning out politics a good thing, nor is following politics a straight path to hysteria.

Rather, a steady attention to politics, based on facts and evidence as much as is available, is the way towards sound judgment, and an antidote to the lure of the screeching, attention-seeking news cycle. The precondition, of course, is to have one's critical faculties intact, and a decent amount of skepticism towards sweeping, simplistic concepts - "left" - "right" - "both sides" - "it's the culture" - "Muslims!!" etc. etc. etc. - whatever Grand Theory of Everything is supposed to explain it all.

 

[OldLady]

We are skipping over a big part of the answer: Define what a person's liberties are. In no society should it be so easy to kill one another. That should not be a part of a person's "liberties."

Yep. You immediately went to restricting liberties. Without thought or hesitation. You caused this...and to fix it we have to burn the constitution.

Changing the Second Amendment -- or getting rid of it because it is outmoded and no longer applies -- is not burning the Constitution. As a matter of fact, the Constitution tells us exactly how to go about doing such.

Nope but it is burning basic human rights

Hey, TN! Good to see you.
God and Locke never said we were born with the right to own guns.

 

[G.T.]

That's a polito-sphere phenomena - not an indictment on what the actual population is doing as a whole. America is largely outside of partisan politics...but if you listen to the "inside" of it for too long, you might become as hysterical as the folks who do.

As far as I understand the above, I don't agree. Neither is the popular apathy and tuning out politics a good thing, nor is following politics a straight path to hysteria.

Rather, a steady attention to politics, based on facts and evidence as much as is available, is the way towards sound judgment, and an antidote to the lure of screeching, attention-seeking news cycle. The precondition, of course, is to have one's critical faculties intact, and a decent amount of skepticism towards sweeping, simplistic concepts - "left" - "right" - "both sides" - "it's the culture" - "Muslims!!" etc. etc. etc. - whatever Grand Theory of Everything is supposed to explain it all.

I wasn't prescribing that being apathetic to politics is the best, or even a good way forward - I was merely describing my perception of what-is.

Of course, Elections would be best with Education and critical thinking skills at their peak. Can't disagree, there!

 

[OldLady]

I don't think legislation like that is the answer. There are just too many guns. A psycho will be able to get his hands on a gun no matter what.

It seems to me to be smarter to address what is happening within our culture that is devaluing life, and I don't think identifying those things would be all that difficult. The problem is that everything is politicized and no one is willing to give a damn inch.
.

How is life being devalued when theres LESS people murdering people, than historically, Mac?

You base this thread on pure emotion ~ and want anyone to address some problem we might actually have based on a false premise and you shut down any dissenting opinion...and without critical thinking.

Your graphs yesterday led me to research some of my own, and I found some really good ones, too, that show our gun death rates are back to where they were in 1980 or 1960. That's not actually LESS people murdering people than historically. We're back to where we were. It's better than a poke in the eye, but we haven't suddenly become peaceful.

Gun Violence | National Institute of Justice

Your link shows the firearm crime rate in 1993 at 7.3, and your link ends in 2011 and its at 1.8...perhaps you're looking at the wrong column, the one that merely shows the % that guns are of all violent incidents?

Nonfatal Firearm Violence, 1993-2011
Year Firearm incidents Firearm victims Firearm crime rate Firearm crimes as a percent of all violent incidents
1993 1,222,701 1,529,742 7.3 8
1994 1,287,190 1,568,176 7.4 8
1995 1,028,933 1,193,241 5.5 7
1996 939,453 1,100,809 5.1 7
1997 882,885 1,024,088 4.7 7
1998 673,304 835,423 3.8 6
1999 523,613 640,919 2.9 5
2000 483,695 610,219 2.7 6
2001 506,954 563,109 2.5 7
2002 450,776 539,973 2.3 7
2003 385,037 467,345 2.0 6
2004 405,774 456,512 1.9 7
2005 446,365 503,534 2.1 7
2006 552,035 614,406 2.5 7
2007 448,414 554,780 2.2 7
2008 331,618 371,289 1.5 5
2009 383,390 410,108 1.6 7
2010 378,801 415,003 1.6 8
2011 414,562 467,321 1.8 8
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993-2011.

No, I was way way down to page 20 something....gun homicides by age, I think....Yes there is a lot of good information there. I am not contradicting you at all. I am simply clarifying your "historic" comment. Depends on how far back we go. I said "1960" and "1980"
You will find gun homicide rates comparing them by those years if you look. I couldn't get them to copy and paste, or I would have.

There are exponentially more guns than ever before ...here in 2019, and I think peak was around 1990 or 1991 and we're not even CLOSE to that per capita...

My underlying point here, is that the "kids these days" thing that Mac is always doing is a fabrication. Older people, not all of them but the more prudish among them...have always had this grudge against the Younger among us. It's a symptom of rigidity, seems like the older these type get, the more rigid their thinking.

For example, he mentioned Violence in Hollywood and in video games as possible causes of some weird cultural decay.... and yet Violence in SOCIETY has gone the exact OPPOSITE on a trend-line as both of those gained in popularity throughout the 90s and early 2000s.

We're all entitled to our own feelings, but not to our own sets of facts.

The rigid thinking folks think kids are "snowflakes" these days...but really, self-defense schools are opening and being popularized more and more across the Country than ever before.... and more kids know how to fight NOW than ever before, and LESS kids ACTUALLY fight now. That tells me that we have done something positive, and it's not all negative.

People walk around with their faces in their cell-phones and they're absorbing information and technology like pacman eating pellets. The upside is they're too busy to be going batshit over the neighbor mowing over the property line. The downside is they're less social - but - population increases seem to be mitigating this factor and I see sporting events and restaurants still filling up so I'm not sure how that all's gunna go.


You throw a mcdonalds and some wi-fi on every corner in afghanistan and watch the violence in their culture wane.

Okay. It didn't sound as if you were talking about the "damned kids these days" thing. It sounded as if you were trying to say we were killing each other less than ever. Sorry if I misunderstood.

 

[OldLady]

Yes, I get that from both ends, too.

Always a good sign.
.

Yes.....and you're God...impervious to taking positions.
We both know that's rubbish.

And here we go, for the ten thousandth time. My positions on the issues are here for all to see: 2. >>> For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

Why do you folks insist on making everything about me?

Maybe just throw your two cents in about guns and culture. Maybe that would be a good idea. That's what the thread is about.
.

Sorry if it bothers you, but trying act like you don't take positions....then taking leftist positions in your threads just doesn't fly anymore.

I just provided a link to my positions. I take positions all the time, taking heat from both ends.

Then you again say I try to act like I don't take positions.

I honestly don't get it. Alternate universe stuff. I don't know what to tell you. Please stick to the thread.
.

Do you have a problem with English?
I said you act like you don't take positions but take them in your threads.....and they're usually left or far left.

It's getting real boring there, Mud. I don't know why Mac doesn't just ignore you, but really. Contribute to the thread or leave it.

 

[G.T.]

How is life being devalued when theres LESS people murdering people, than historically, Mac?

You base this thread on pure emotion ~ and want anyone to address some problem we might actually have based on a false premise and you shut down any dissenting opinion...and without critical thinking.

Your graphs yesterday led me to research some of my own, and I found some really good ones, too, that show our gun death rates are back to where they were in 1980 or 1960. That's not actually LESS people murdering people than historically. We're back to where we were. It's better than a poke in the eye, but we haven't suddenly become peaceful.

Gun Violence | National Institute of Justice

Your link shows the firearm crime rate in 1993 at 7.3, and your link ends in 2011 and its at 1.8...perhaps you're looking at the wrong column, the one that merely shows the % that guns are of all violent incidents?

Nonfatal Firearm Violence, 1993-2011
Year Firearm incidents Firearm victims Firearm crime rate Firearm crimes as a percent of all violent incidents
1993 1,222,701 1,529,742 7.3 8
1994 1,287,190 1,568,176 7.4 8
1995 1,028,933 1,193,241 5.5 7
1996 939,453 1,100,809 5.1 7
1997 882,885 1,024,088 4.7 7
1998 673,304 835,423 3.8 6
1999 523,613 640,919 2.9 5
2000 483,695 610,219 2.7 6
2001 506,954 563,109 2.5 7
2002 450,776 539,973 2.3 7
2003 385,037 467,345 2.0 6
2004 405,774 456,512 1.9 7
2005 446,365 503,534 2.1 7
2006 552,035 614,406 2.5 7
2007 448,414 554,780 2.2 7
2008 331,618 371,289 1.5 5
2009 383,390 410,108 1.6 7
2010 378,801 415,003 1.6 8
2011 414,562 467,321 1.8 8
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1993-2011.

No, I was way way down to page 20 something....gun homicides by age, I think....Yes there is a lot of good information there. I am not contradicting you at all. I am simply clarifying your "historic" comment. Depends on how far back we go. I said "1960" and "1980"
You will find gun homicide rates comparing them by those years if you look. I couldn't get them to copy and paste, or I would have.

There are exponentially more guns than ever before ...here in 2019, and I think peak was around 1990 or 1991 and we're not even CLOSE to that per capita...

My underlying point here, is that the "kids these days" thing that Mac is always doing is a fabrication. Older people, not all of them but the more prudish among them...have always had this grudge against the Younger among us. It's a symptom of rigidity, seems like the older these type get, the more rigid their thinking.

For example, he mentioned Violence in Hollywood and in video games as possible causes of some weird cultural decay.... and yet Violence in SOCIETY has gone the exact OPPOSITE on a trend-line as both of those gained in popularity throughout the 90s and early 2000s.

We're all entitled to our own feelings, but not to our own sets of facts.

The rigid thinking folks think kids are "snowflakes" these days...but really, self-defense schools are opening and being popularized more and more across the Country than ever before.... and more kids know how to fight NOW than ever before, and LESS kids ACTUALLY fight now. That tells me that we have done something positive, and it's not all negative.

People walk around with their faces in their cell-phones and they're absorbing information and technology like pacman eating pellets. The upside is they're too busy to be going batshit over the neighbor mowing over the property line. The downside is they're less social - but - population increases seem to be mitigating this factor and I see sporting events and restaurants still filling up so I'm not sure how that all's gunna go.


You throw a mcdonalds and some wi-fi on every corner in afghanistan and watch the violence in their culture wane.

Okay. It didn't sound as if you were talking about the "damned kids these days" thing. It sounded as if you were trying to say we were killing each other less than ever. Sorry if I misunderstood.

Not less than ever, but per-capita (usually these statistics are done per 100, 000) we are in a relatively peaceful time and my reason for pointing that out is because it's evidence that contradicts Mac's "cultural decay seems to be devaluing human life" nonsense. That's ivory tower, rigid speech and it's asinine based on the data, and asinine if you go out and meet & experience people and what they're like. Psychotics who shoot up malls are not the norm...they don't speak for the majority or even a thousandth of a percent of any of us...and so it's downright disgusting to point to THEM as an example of OUR..."culture." They're not an indictment of our "culture" because our PEOPLE...don't actually act like that.

I think that Mac's analytical ability has been susceptible to, victim to a 24/7 news cycle. It's probably common...or, better put it IS common...but it's not an accurate state of affairs.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson's post was to inspire folks to think past their proclivity to panic, and it was socially daft to post it when he did but it was intellectually pertinent in spite of that. This thread proves it.

 

[TNHarley]

We are skipping over a big part of the answer: Define what a person's liberties are. In no society should it be so easy to kill one another. That should not be a part of a person's "liberties."

Yep. You immediately went to restricting liberties. Without thought or hesitation. You caused this...and to fix it we have to burn the constitution.

Changing the Second Amendment -- or getting rid of it because it is outmoded and no longer applies -- is not burning the Constitution. As a matter of fact, the Constitution tells us exactly how to go about doing such.

Nope but it is burning basic human rights

Hey, TN! Good to see you.
God and Locke never said we were born with the right to own guns.

Being able to defend yourself is the most basic human right is existence. Might as well be a law of nature.

 

[Blues Man]

Define liberties?

Here:
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." —Thomas Jefferson

How is that for a "liberty" definition?

.

I do love my Tommy, Bootney. Where I see gun control falling is "within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others."
I see those same limits as being kosher around not publicizing hate speech.

There are many others who do not agree. They see themselves, the individual, first, foremost and as far more important than others' needs.

But, Jefferson doesn't say "needs" he says "equal rights" of others.

The free exercise of your liberty cannot infringe upon mine. That's it. Nothing more.

.

We've all heard of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, right? Safety is second only to the physical needs that keep us alive. Yes, it is a need, I think.

So what one person thinks he needs to be safe may not be with you think you need to be safe.

You do not have the right to tell anyone else what they need or don't need

Safety isn't really a "think" thing. It has actual parameters, unless you're paranoid. Then it's opinion and all bets are off. The law seldom deals with people's "opinion."

What makes one person "feel" safe may not make another person "feel" safe. That fact alone makes safety a subjective thing.

You may feel safe if no one had a gun but in reality there will be people with guns and those people will be criminals. I feel safe knowing that there are millions of people who own guns and who use those guns responsibly because the people who own guns that will never commit a crime exponentially outnumber the people who would use a gun in a crime.

As I said more than 99.9973% of guns in the hands of the public will never be used to murder anyone

That one fact alone says that access to guns and the ownership of guns by civilians is not a safety hazard.

 

[Blues Man]

What does that mean? Ever since the 1966 Texas clock tower shooter, alarm bells should have gone off. That particular guy had a brain tumor that in all probability led to his violence. So how could any measure been created to address that? Then or NOW? We need to restrict gun ownership to certified hunters, sportsmen collectors or the police. I don't know how we do that, since the NRA and gun lobbies pretty much have total control over the issue. Like the fox guarding the henhouse. How about we have a NATIONAL referendum on guns, and winner takes all? Since this is a democracy...

I don't think legislation like that is the answer. There are just too many guns. A psycho will be able to get his hands on a gun no matter what.

It seems to me to be smarter to address what is happening within our culture that is devaluing life, and I don't think identifying those things would be all that difficult. The problem is that everything is politicized and no one is willing to give a damn inch.
.

We have to do BOTH Mac. Limit ownership of guns AND seriously address what is so broken in our culture. BOTH. A problem this complex does not have an either/or solution. It is everything we can think of all at once. Who cares which works--fling them all at the wall. I'll take anything I can get out of Congress right now because it will be a start.

Yes, as I said in the OP, we have to look at EVERYTHING. The problem is that there are so many guns already in circulation, and they're easy to access outside of any law.
.

If you do the math

393 million guns estimated to be in the public's hands in the US


11000 murders committed with guns

.0027% of guns used to commit murder

But the percentage is actually lower because one gun can be used to murder more than one person

So yes we have many guns but 99.9973% of them are never used to kill anyone.

In any other metric that number would simply be called 100%

That's .0027% used to commit murder in that one year. Are those same guns and same gun owners the same ones committing murder the following year? No, those people are in jail and their guns are sitting in an evidence locker somewhere. The following year it is another .0027% of guns used to commit murder.

I really like the article Task put up. Did you read it? People grab the gun from the closet and go when they've decided they can't stand themselves anymore and they want to end it taking a bunch of people with them. Bitter disappointment in who we are and where we've ended up is very strong juju. I guess we need to go hug a grumpy person today.

SO what? And the actual number is less than .0027% because one gun can be used to kill more than one person. There are guns out there that are in th underground, illegal gun market that have been used in multiple crimes over the course of years.



Tell me if you bought something that had a .0027% of injuring you would you think it was a safe product?

If only .0027% of drivers got into an accident wouldn't you say the auto accident rate was virtually zero?

 

[Blues Man]

Where's the STFU button? Actually I agree with Mac on this. The problem is cultural, not with guns. The guns have always been there, undisciplined apathetic grown tantrum babies have not.

Why do you think I posted a link about cultural decay because of the degeneration of music and Movies? Oh yeah, it is played in other countries and you dont see people going out and mowing down people with assault rifles. That is totally wrong, you go look in Europe and there is so much more violence per capita than is in the US. They also dont have open borders to drug cartels that cross daily.

Countries Compared by Crime > Total crimes per 1000. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
How Mexico’s Cartels Are Behind the Border Kid Crisis

But we understand that with liberal thinking, these things go unnoticed.

View attachment 273211

how does Europe get their drugs... who supplies them??


Your statistics site shows the USA with a higher Murder rate than Ireland, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, France, etc.... higher in the USA than ALL of Europe.

So what?

There are more differences between those countries and the US than gun ownership alone.

Violence in society is a result of a long list of variables interacting in a very complex manner

 

[Blues Man]

A culture in decay - I mean these charts go bananas back in the 90s when the internet and video games really took off! Fakkin Hollywood!

View attachment 273345

Yeah, wtf was going on in the 90's? I heard one official say "organized crime," but I was around in the 90's and the Mafia wasn't THAT bad. Jesus.

It was the height if the illegal drug trade and the violence that comes with all illicit markets

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

When I was a kid, there were guns all over the place. Eight year old boys got a 22 for their birthday. Family picnics found us out back shooting holes in targets.
We weren't shooting each other so it isn't the guns. It is something else. Let's look for that something else.

Bingo, exactly. Somewhere along the line, life became cheap.
.

Good thread topic as usual, Mac. To me, a lot of these things have been clearly seen to anyone paying attention, but threads like these make me doubtful, so, kudos.

Culture? America has never really had one to me. It's mostly a mixed bag borrowed from other cultures due to our diverse demographics. The 'love it or leave it' forced patriotism nonsense coming around again is a sign of the cyclical nature of our politics in society, and we don't seem to be too interested in learning from our own history, much less anyone else's. Moms, baseball and apple pie do really not make a culture, but some seem content with just that.

Americas priorities have always been screwed up to me, even before new mediums of entertainment turned the volume up to 11 (you're welcome). Remember the good old days when a stray nipple at a Super Bowl half time show was enough to bring America's comically puritanical standards to a standstill in our collective outrage? Whether you agreed or disagreed, we talked about it. We discussed the impacts of censorship. Yet, violence always gets a pass. We need to get a handle on why that is, because our time is running out.

In today's America, your 10-year-old can see death and murder on the screen multiple times a day, and that's without adding the option of cable, satellite and internet. Video games are ultra violent too, which may or may not be adding to this unsettling trend of dehumanization manifesting in some of the worst cultural decay I've ever seen in my lifetime. We let children become addicted to drugs early in their development because the challenge of actually raising children has become too hard for some (sometimes drug addicted) parents to cope with. That's a serious fucking problem to have. Even more so unaddressed. The dehumanization and child neglect I see nowadays has been normalized by parents suffering from what I can only assume to be a variant of Munchausen Syndrome. Those kids in cages on the border aren't 'ours', thus they are less than human, and an 'out of sight, out of mind' mentality becomes normalized behavior.

Nothing will change, because at the heart of the issue, we collectively don't want it to change. Pornography still has many stigmas attached to it, yet it's net worth wouldn't be $97 Billion dollars a year if people weren't watching it. We've turned into a nation that worships superficial. Mass shooters know they will get their misguided 'fame' because our media constantly fails and disappoints us in providing anything resembling objective news. They are more concerned with red meat and ad dollars to change at this point.

Privatization and corporate sponsorship is infesting all levels of the government and it's starting to rot. The prisons and damn near every level of the penal system is being replaced with private industry in a nation with the highest incarceration rate in the world. Think about that for one second, because it's fucking terrifying to me. Prison slavery and dehumanization has become a profit bearing business.

When our own government deliberately undervalues human lives, society tends to fall in line until it becomes normalized.

Yeah, when I refer to "culture" in this context, I mean the general rules of decency, behavior and standards to which we agree as a "civilized" society. All one has to do is look at our entertainment, our popular culture, and our politics to see a clear decay in our decency, behavior and standards.

Worse, there appears to be little attempt to change this trajectory. Some (as we're seeing on this thread) are perfectly fine with ignoring it. And once a problem becomes ingrained in our society, it becomes almost impossible to eradicate.

So in this context, the devaluing of human life seems to me to be clearly culture-oriented. It's just another example of how our culture is decaying.
.

Well I addressed it early on and got no responses.

Maybe you're a loser.

 

[Blues Man]

That's .0027% used to commit murder in that one year. Are those same guns and same gun owners the same ones committing murder the following year? No, those people are in jail and their guns are sitting in an evidence locker somewhere. The following year it is another .0027% of guns used to commit murder.

Funny how the statistician forgot to mention that.

Also, let's consider this:

11k murders in a 330 million population, that's 0,0033%. In any other metric, that would be zero. Murder, that is, doesn't happen. So let's do away with the portions of the criminal code prohibiting and penalizing murder.

Fewer regulations, baby, and freedom reigns supreme!

Murder is not the problem you all make it out to be.

You all are saying that the US is outright dangerous and the numbers don't agree with you.

The fact that you're all saying that you don't want to be afraid to walk out your door so we have to ban guns even though your likelihood of getting murdered is .0033% isn't realistic.

And you people say gun owners are paranoid

 

[G.T.]

That's .0027% used to commit murder in that one year. Are those same guns and same gun owners the same ones committing murder the following year? No, those people are in jail and their guns are sitting in an evidence locker somewhere. The following year it is another .0027% of guns used to commit murder.

Funny how the statistician forgot to mention that.

Also, let's consider this:

11k murders in a 330 million population, that's 0,0033%. In any other metric, that would be zero. Murder, that is, doesn't happen. So let's do away with the portions of the criminal code prohibiting and penalizing murder.

Fewer regulations, baby, and freedom reigns supreme!

Murder is not the problem you all make it out to be.

You all are saying that the US is outright dangerous and the numbers don't agree with you.

The fact that you're all saying that you don't want to be afraid to walk out your door so we have to ban guns even though your likelihood of getting shot is .0033% isn't realistic.

And you people say gun owners are paranoid

I'd take issue with your .0033% statistic, too. It's 0.0033% over the course of a year, not each time you walk outside...so you'd have to divide that into the times you walk out the door.

It's also far less than .0033% for the year, too, when depending on the types of social circles you run in. It could be more if you're a gangster, for example, and far less if you're a suburbanite.

 

[Blues Man]

That's .0027% used to commit murder in that one year. Are those same guns and same gun owners the same ones committing murder the following year? No, those people are in jail and their guns are sitting in an evidence locker somewhere. The following year it is another .0027% of guns used to commit murder.

Funny how the statistician forgot to mention that.

Also, let's consider this:

11k murders in a 330 million population, that's 0,0033%. In any other metric, that would be zero. Murder, that is, doesn't happen. So let's do away with the portions of the criminal code prohibiting and penalizing murder.

Fewer regulations, baby, and freedom reigns supreme!

Murder is not the problem you all make it out to be.

You all are saying that the US is outright dangerous and the numbers don't agree with you.

The fact that you're all saying that you don't want to be afraid to walk out your door so we have to ban guns even though your likelihood of getting shot is .0033% isn't realistic.

And you people say gun owners are paranoid

I'd take issue with your .0033% statistic, too. It's 0.0033% over the course of a year, not each time you walk outside...so you'd have to divide that into the times you walk out the door.

It's also far less than .0033% for the year, too, when depending on the types of social circles you run in. It could be more if you're a gangster, for example, and far less if you're a suburbanite.

the .0033 wasn't mine . I used it in my reply because it's what he used