Op/ed, gun death, the real problem.

[LikelyToBreak]

Brian37 wrote in part:

Now you have bought into the stupid fucking lie that liberals are anti business. I can name rich people, and businesses that do try to do the right thing, there simply are not enough of them.

Not sure who you addressed this to, but I don't think liberals are anti-business.  I do think those in higher office in this country are for big business, regardless of whether they call themselves conservatives or liberals.  I would like to see the government agencies quit trying to drive small business's out of business, with conflicting and petty regulations.  Not to mention tax codes which Arnold Schwarzenegger on his best day couldn't lift, let alone read and understand them all.

To keep people working, which would help slow down the crime rates, they need to be able to feel they have some control over their life's.  This could be accomplished by assisting the small business's.  Instead of spending money on corporate welfare, which both sides of the house do, congress could listen to and take the advise of the small guys.

But, it isn't going to happen.  Ma and Pa Kettle's General Store doesn't have enough money to buy a politician.  The multinationals already have the politicians bought and paid for already.  And the politicians can keep Ma and Pa in the dark by getting them to argue about firearm ownership.

[Brian37]

Brian37 wrote in part:

Now you have bought into the stupid fucking lie that liberals are anti business. I can name rich people, and businesses that do try to do the right thing, there simply are not enough of them.

Not sure who you addressed this to, but I don't think liberals are anti-business.  I do think those in higher office in this country are for big business, regardless of whether they call themselves conservatives or liberals.  I would like to see the government agencies quit trying to drive small business's out of business, with conflicting and petty regulations.  Not to mention tax codes which Arnold Schwarzenegger on his best day couldn't lift, let alone read and understand them all.

To keep people working, which would help slow down the crime rates, they need to be able to feel they have some control over their life's.  This could be accomplished by assisting the small business's.  Instead of spending money on corporate welfare, which both sides of the house do, congress could listen to and take the advise of the small guys.

But, it isn't going to happen.  Ma and Pa Kettle's General Store doesn't have enough money to buy a politician.  The multinationals already have the politicians bought and paid for already.  And the politicians can keep Ma and Pa in the dark by getting them to argue about firearm ownership.

Really "small businesses" you really are blind to how that term is used. That is not for mom and pop shops. It is a term big business hides behind by giving its parts and divisions separate names so that they can get more tax breaks and or use it to play false victim when questioned. Orwellian doublespeak. Big business have duped the real "small businesses" and would run over them just like they do workers.

Ma and paw shops fuck themselves by siding with big business merely because of the label "business". Big business sets the tone and small business follows stupidly.

Go look at our economics over the past 100 years. When we had less regulation it caused the stock market crash. WW2 however was unfortunate, but the good thing that came out of it is that business invested in the nation and in its workers. And after we had higher taxes on the rich, lower pay gap, almost free higher education AND investment. 30 years go though, the gutting of unions and deregulation since has caused more people to have lower wages not keeping up with the cost of inflation, fewer full time jobs, more part time jobs and longer hours for less pay.

Now again, decline was NOT caused by the voting habits of the middle class and working poor. It was caused by global corporations in a race to create the same slave wages as third world countries. If you want us to lower our standards you can certainly try to convince people that the past 30 years have not happened. But I think less and less people are being fooled by that bullshit.

MOO CLUCK MOO makes a profit AND pays higher wages. COSTCO pays higher wages and allows unions and they are KICKING WALL MART'S ASS! So when other big businesses say they cant, the real answer from them should be "I don't want to".

Got any other bullshit you want to try to peddle here?

No this is not "both parties are the same". No the only problem democrats have had in all this time is having a weak backbone.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Look, gun owners for the most part live in relatively crime free areas because, and this is important, GUNS COST MONEY! Wages are generally higher and the fear of crime is sold more than fear of hell. I've lived in relatively gun free areas, but the crime rate is higher because wages are lower. The kicker is people are duped into a false sense of security because they have guns when the truth is you're more likely to get shot when there's a gun around then when there is no gun around. The same holds true of getting eaten by a lion. Lions around..odds go up of getting eaten. No lions around, no odds of getting eaten by lions.

[Brian37]

Good point.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Good point.

I need to see a therapist. We actually agree on something Brian, but sadly ABBA still sucks and so do the deadskins.

[LikelyToBreak]

See, that is the problem I am talking about.  I try to agree with Brian37 and he stuff's it in my face that if only the Democrats ruled we would have a utopia.  Which is one of the reasons I don't like Democrats.  They are right and the rest of us are just ignorant trailer trash not worth the bother to throw away.  Well, maybe we don't want to be considered trash.  And maybe we don't like how the Democrats say, "Well just get a job at that company which isn't hiring and all will be good."

Unless I sell my soul to the Democrats, they won't be happy.  Sorry, not for sale.  I insist on being able to think for myself.  

If you would like to consider real solutions to our problems, I would be glad to listen to your ideas.  Just don't blow smoke up my ass and tell me things which aren't true.  The Fed caused the Great Depression.  The unions gutted themselves by becoming part of organized crime syndicates.  And regulation has gone up in the last 30 years. //http://cnsnews.com/news/article/under-obama-11327-pages-federal-regulations-addedYes, some the big companies and banks have gotten regulations off their backs, but the guy on main street has more regulations then he can even read, let alone comply with.

I'm willing to listen are you?

[AllPurposeAtheist]

LTB, I'm a democrat, but don't march lock step with all democrats and frankly I don't know anyone who does. The party has always been a party of coalitions. The unions did indeed become corrupted, but so has big business. Government is corrupt and so are many small businesses. Many people cheat on taxes and most people occasionally speed and jaywalk. Welcome to humanity.
I'm also for sensible laws and solutions, but both parties keep electing corrupt motherfuckers.. When the whole works are corrupt you pick a side and there you are.
There are sensible ways to make guns freely available, but as it is anyone convicted of any sort of felony cannot legally own a gun regardless of it was murder or selling weed or swiping money from the till.
So the only people who can legally own guns are those who haven't been caught doing something wrong. Being mentally fucked in the mind doesn't count. Being suicidal doesn't count and there are shitloads of dont counts that should count.
Saying no gun regulation is plain stupid just as saying driving a car shouldn't be regulated.
I can buy as many guns as I want now, but can't get a drivers license. Does that make sense? I can rebuild cars, do body work and have millions of miles driving experience. I know little to nothing about guns. I've never taken a gun safety class and have never fired a gun, yet even though I've had multiple suicide attempts I could, if I had the money and desire go buy a garage full of guns and ammo.
There's no rhyme or reason involved there.

[Brian37]

Good point.

I need to see a therapist. We actually agree on something Brian, but sadly ABBA still sucks and so do the deadskins.

Thou art a smartith assith.

[LikelyToBreak]

AllPurposeAtheist, except for the part about choosing a side, I agree with you.  I'm not against reasonable gun regulations.  Confiscating all private firearms doesn't seem reasonable to me.  Some people do get their guns taken away from them if they are hospitalized for mental illness.  Unfortunately, some people who should be hospitalized for mental illness are not, and some who shouldn't be are.  Either way, it shouldn't be a lifetime ban for a what may very well be a temporary condition.  I also think felons should be able to apply for and get their rights back.  I'm talking about the guy carrying a little too much marijuana or lifting some out of the till.  Not those convicted for violent offenses.  I don't want the guy who held up a liquor store at 19 ever legally owning a gun.  

I think we can agree kids under 18 shouldn't be allowed to buy any firearm or any firearm ammo.  I'm not against making so no one under 21 can buy handguns or handgun ammo.  We have a test here in California which you have to pass before you can buy a handgun.  It is administered by the gun shops and only takes about 10 minutes, including the grading of it.  I am not against that.  I have to register my handguns when I buy them.  Okay, a hassle and the government will probably misuse this registry in the future, but I can live with it.  But, then if I want to buy another gun, I have to wait 10 days to pick it up, because I have to have a cooling off period.  Which doesn't make sense if I am already a registered gun owner.  Not a big deal, but damn, while you are screwing me, at least use some lubricant.  Is that asking too much?

Anyway, I think the reasons which guns are misused are more important to address, than trying to disarm America.  There is little chance for either, but at least we could be agreeing on things instead of letting the politicians and the advocacy press divide us as a nation.

[Brian37]

No one is screwing you but the industry and the NRA.

[Brian37]

than trying to disarm America

Reducing the amount is not the same as disarming. We are not talking about gutting the second amendment. We are talking about better economic conditions which would reduce crime and reduce fear, but that would undermine the profits of the manufactures because they need lots of fear otherwise people will feel less of the need to want them. PROFIT is what the gun manufactures are about. No crime, no fear, no fear, people buy less guns.

We do not need 300 million guns floating around. But the manufactures do, because the more gun death there is the more they can use fear to sell more guns.

[Jack89]

than trying to disarm America

Reducing the amount is not the same as disarming. We are not talking about gutting the second amendment. We are talking about better economic conditions which would reduce crime and reduce fear, but that would undermine the profits of the manufactures because they need lots of fear otherwise people will feel less of the need to want them. PROFIT is what the gun manufactures are about. No crime, no fear, no fear, people buy less guns.

We do not need 300 million guns floating around. But the manufactures do, because the more gun death there is the more they can use fear to sell more guns.

You have some interesting ideas, but they don't seem to fit very well.  For example, economic conditions in the 90s was pretty good compared to today, yet the homicide rate was considerably higher back then.  We also have many more guns in the US today than we've ever had before, and yet the homicide rate is the lowest it's been for what, 40 years now?

[LikelyToBreak]

Brian37, let me try to understand.  If we got rid of the firearm manufacturers, then the economy would improve?  

I don't buy it.  For one, as I tried to explain before, the firearm manufacturers aren't in the top 100 companies in the US.  I doubt any of them are in the top 500.  The weapon system manufacturers are in the top 100, like Lockheed-Martin.  They have more say in American political circles then the NRA and all of the firearm manufacturers put together.  Do the math.  10 companies worth 10 million a piece, or one company worth 10 billion.  And all companies are concerned with profit, or they go out of business.  Some companies just see sense in paying their employees more.

The fact of the matter is, Obama sells more firearms than the NRA.  Why, because he talks about taking guns out of the hands of private citizens.  

As to who is producing the fear, you only need to look at the press.  Any type of press you want.  They all harp on crime and crisis's.  Because it sells.  If they didn't have the Islamic terrorists as bogeymen, they would have to come up with someone else to scare us with.  Remember when Russia was the bogeyman.   It is pretty much like George Orwell's 1984.  Have to have a bogeyman.

I'm all for improving economic conditions.  I just don't see how reducing the number of firearms or firearm manufacturers would help.  And you have not explained how.  Ranting about PROFIT and too many guns just doesn't make sense.  Please explain it better.