I'm talking about losing gun rights, and not in the short-term. What will the landscape look like in 50 or 100 years. What do we need to do now to protect the future of gun rights? We need a strategy that will be successful long-term, which will require different thinking than one focused on the short-term.
Again, I'm referring to the long-term. And I'm not saying gun restrictions are inevitable. I'm saying some kind of change is inevitable, and I hope we can address the problem outside of gun control (e.g., social issues, mental health, etc.).
How do you propose we address the underlying social issues? And you've already noted that some of those disproportionally affect black people more than white people, so that needs to be in the plan (unless, of course, ethnicity really doesn't matter).
There is no addressing the underlying social issues. Sorry to be a downer, but the bottom line is, it's not acceptable to point out the emperor's new clothes in America today. Things will have to become unsustainable and come crashing down before anything will change substantially. It just won't happen. People WILL NOT honestly address the issues of lack of personal responsibility and will continue to blame anything and everything BUT that.
Until honesty becomes more important than political correctness, NOTHING will change. Not for the better, anyways.
I disagree.
No need to be a sorry. I appreciate your opinion, even if we disagree.
I think they are already unsustainable.
That's my point... I don't think our current culture will ALLOW us to properly address the social issues. They would rather see the ship sink while the band plays than to admit the real problems.
^^^ This is the hard truth. And until it's no longer the hard truth a "strategy" is pretty easy to come up with...
We need to shame people who steal and do violence. As it is, in some circles, being a thug is an aspiration; that behavior should be shamed and pointed out as dishonorable.
We're not going to get that kind of leadership from anywhere I can see.
People have to want to change, but right now there's no incentive. We can say better education and more jobs, but people have to want to go to school and LEARN, not show what a bad ass they can be in class.
And any kind of job needs to be seen as honorable and worth doing well, and not a reason to demand an unreasonable wage.
We're not going to get that kind of leadership from anywhere I can see.
People have to want to change, but right now there's no incentive. We can say better education and more jobs, but people have to want to go to school and LEARN, not show what a bad ass they can be in class.
And any kind of job needs to be seen as honorable and worth doing well, and not a reason to demand an unreasonable wage.
I've addressed this ^^ above, but also add the caveat, that is not all the black population that is contributing to the majority of gun violence, easily researched in the FBI data. I just brought out the #1 because you asked for data.
I totally agree with this. Because a neighbor saw middle eastern men coming and going, along with an abnormal package delivery, she was suspicious, but because she was afraid to be labeled a racial profiler, she did not report it to the police. 14 people died and 21 were injured because of political correctness.
A kid of middle eastern descent brought an object to school for show and tell. The teacher didn't' know what it was, so reported it. It turned out to be a home made clock with a lot of wires and other objects inside.
The school and the teacher are now plaintiffs in a 15 million dollar law suit by the family. Ostupid praised the kid and Quatar gave him a scholarship. Meanwhile, 50 people including police officers were shown the device and ALL said it looked like a bomb. The older sister had some school issues a couple of years earlier along the same lines. Was this a set up to further political correctness? I don't know, but it sure seems like that family had a plan.
All it takes is the Supreme Court to re-interpret the 2nd Amendment, and we're fu!cked, no matter what it means to you. We need a different strategy.
How do you propose that? The nominations to the Supreme Court are by the administration. I've never understood that, as the supreme court is supposed to be the third security to keep our constitution on line, yet its an appointment by Potus subject to the political party in strength at the time. That doesn't make sense to be a part of checks and balances.
Similar threads
