Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 9:53 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
On a scale of 1 to F-16 in your driveway, how Libertarian are you?
This a general question for everyone? Me. I don't know if I am Libertarian at all. I am still trying to validate the position in my mind. We all know that at some point some a hole will try and subjegate the masses. In the early century, it was business leaders. Historically it is religions and government. The Libertarian position seems to laissez faire. I almost feel like it is children stamping their feet. I don't want any rules and no accountability. I may be missing the mark, but that is how it feels to me.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 9:56 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
This morning we learn Jesus Campos the security shot before the real shooting started wasn't even a registered security guard in NV. NV requires all security guards armed or not be registered. So why was he there?
That is an odd deal with that guy. When you hear the story told, my first gut reaction was he was the shooter. I know it is not that simple. Just an odd little twist.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:01 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Exactly. And that's how we end up with militias, ANTIFA, idiots on facebook openly talking about civil war. Openly stating they want to take guns by force "preferably from their cold dead hands" as several celebrities have stated. The ones arguing for gun control are actually making the argument on the dangers of giving them up.
NAILED IT!!!

Irony alert. They think trump is a fascist. Oh the irony. Do you really want to give up your arms to a fascist regime? haha. This stuff just writes itself.

Here is more food for thought.

The left does believe in guns. Don't let anyone say otherwise. They only believe in guns in the hands of the people they believe hold the values they believe in. How do they think they are going to disarm the population? It would have to be at the end of a gun. Think about that.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 10:05 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
I absolutely argue that people back then were 100 times more in tune with society and it's down falls than Americans today. Hell vast majority of Americans in the cities and surrounding areas don't even know their neighbor never mind their elected official.
That's my point. You are arguing that people 200 years ago know more about how to deal with today's problems than the people of today even though they weren't even aware that blacks and women should be included in the "all men are created equal". I think that your romanticizing of the past is clouding your judgement.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 10:16 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
This a general question for everyone? Me. I don't know if I am Libertarian at all. I am still trying to validate the position in my mind. We all know that at some point some a hole will try and subjegate the masses. In the early century, it was business leaders. Historically it is religions and government. The Libertarian position seems to laissez faire. I almost feel like it is children stamping their feet. I don't want any rules and no accountability. I may be missing the mark, but that is how it feels to me.
I think they're borderline retarded with "taxation is theft" & being against all forms of Gov while saying they're not anarchists. What they do show me though is, not one political party has any answers & that's how we end up in the **** we're in now. And when our Gov collapses, and it will, you will be forced to live the libertarian way & be on your own. So they're not all wrong. I think right now people are childish, stomping their feet demanding free stuff & they'll be screwed when it all comes crashing down just like what happened when the soviet union fell apart. Don't fool yourself on what life will be like when this happens. We've already seen first hand how people act when their EBT cards don't work.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 10:18 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
NAILED IT!!!

Irony alert. They think trump is a fascist. Oh the irony. Do you really want to give up your arms to a fascist regime? haha. This stuff just writes itself.

Here is more food for thought.

The left does believe in guns. Don't let anyone say otherwise. They only believe in guns in the hands of the people they believe hold the values they believe in. How do they think they are going to disarm the population? It would have to be at the end of a gun. Think about that.
And you know they would love to have all "nazis" at the end of those guns. The seething hatred the left spews is damn near a call to arms. Sadly, it's going the way of Hungergames. That movie, minuns the game itself, is a prophecy.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:18 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
That's my point. You are arguing that people 200 years ago know more about how to deal with today's problems than the people of today even though they weren't even aware that blacks and women should be included in the "all men are created equal". I think that your romanticizing of the past is clouding your judgement.
I will take your comment under consideration. You are not absolutely wrong. However, how do we know that they did not add "the all men created equal" phrasing to the Constitution in order to fight that exact issue?

Thomas Jefferson was the one who said those words:

https://www.monticello.org/site/plan...on-and-slavery

Throughout his entire life, Thomas Jefferson was a consistent opponent of slavery. Calling it a “moral depravity”1 and a “hideous blot,”2 he believed that slavery presented the greatest threat to the survival of the new American nation.3 Jefferson also thought that slavery was contrary to the laws of nature, which decreed that everyone had a right to personal liberty.4 These views were radical in a world where unfree labor was the norm.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-12-2017, 10:33 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
I will take your comment under consideration. You are not absolutely wrong. However, how do we know that they did not add "the all men created equal" phrasing to the Constitution in order to fight that exact issue?
I dunno maybe you can point us to that clause in the constitution?
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:33 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
I think they're borderline retarded with "taxation is theft" & being against all forms of Gov while saying they're not anarchists. What they do show me though is, not one political party has any answers & that's how we end up in the **** we're in now. And when our Gov collapses, and it will, you will be forced to live the libertarian way & be on your own. So they're not all wrong. I think right now people are childish, stomping their feet demanding free stuff & they'll be screwed when it all comes crashing down just like what happened when the soviet union fell apart. Don't fool yourself on what life will be like when this happens. We've already seen first hand how people act when their EBT cards don't work.
First people who would be prepared to take power vacuums would be armed street gangs.

Look what happened in New Orleans. They were ready to turn on each other in 3 days.

Not sure if living without government is libertarian. human nature is to try and find some sort of order. We are social beings. Most people would come together to do the right things. organize leadership and so on. However, you will have your gang leaders who see opportunity and all people would need to prepare to fight.

I always wonder if the big city liberals ideas are just projections of their own fear of the inner city populations. Look at the hollywood melt down. They are always projecting their crap on the general population. Like Ashley Judd and her meltdown. Turns out they were all rapping each other and subjegating each other for decades to get ahead. The ones who are angry about it are lashing out at the people who are against that type of thing as if they were the ones who victimized them.
Old    deltahoosier            10-12-2017, 10:38 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
I dunno maybe you can point us to that clause in the constitution?
Correction. Declaration of Independence.

However it signaled the mission statement of the men who would establish their independence from the King of England. Those men went on to create the Constitution.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 10:42 AM Reply   
We have the largest military in the world to defend our Constitutional Republic. When the 2nd was penned it was necessary for the citizens to be armed to assemble armed forces to defend the nation. The 2nd amendment is an anachronism because it was intended to maintain an armed citizenry to defend the nation when necessary, as is the idea that citizens could mount a defense against the military. Anyone who has the opinion that the citizens need to be armed well enough to beat the armed forces maintained by the US govt is out of touch with both reality and the opinions of the public in general. I'd bet dollars to donuts that a poll of the public would reveal a strong opposition to citizens flying Apache choppers equipped with Hellfire missiles.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       10-12-2017, 10:47 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
We have the largest military in the world to defend our Constitutional Republic. When the 2nd was penned it was necessary for the citizens to be armed to assemble armed forces to defend the nation. The 2nd amendment is an anachronism because it was intended to maintain an armed citizenry to defend the nation when necessary, as is the idea that citizens could mount a defense against the military. Anyone who has the opinion that the citizens need to be armed well enough to beat the armed forces maintained by the US govt is out of touch with both reality and the opinions of the public in general. I'd bet dollars to donuts that a poll of the public would reveal a strong opposition to citizens flying Apache choppers equipped with Hellfire missiles.
That's not exactly the way the Supreme Court read it in Heller. It's worth a fresh read if you haven't read it in a while.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-suprem...t/554/570.html

Regardless of what you or I think it means (or should mean), this is the law of the land for the time being.
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-12-2017, 11:08 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
LOL, because all abortions are by black people, and the Vietnamese aren't people so they were left out of the equation.


What are you even talking about?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 11:11 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawndoggy View Post
That's not exactly the way the Supreme Court read it in Heller. It's worth a fresh read if you haven't read it in a while.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-suprem...t/554/570.html

Regardless of what you or I think it means (or should mean), this is the law of the land for the time being.
Did not mean to infer that the law of the land is determined by the text in the Constitution. I would never claim that it's anything other than what the court decides. We are all entitled to argue the meaning of the text and it's intent, regardless of the decision of the court.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 11:15 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdlangston13 View Post
What are you even talking about?
Obviously I'm talking about your claim that I quoted. Did you suddenly forget how to read?
Old     (rdlangston13)      Join Date: Feb 2011       10-12-2017, 11:28 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
Obviously I'm talking about your claim that I quoted. Did you suddenly forget how to read?


I know how to read but what you said makes no sense.

I'm not even sure where the conversation got morphed into racial violence. It is common knowledge though that during the war in Vietnam the US purposely draft large numbers of black people to go an fight in an effort to reduce white casualties. This is a very wrong and disturbing policy and is one of the many stains on Americas record in the past. That being said every 4 days in America, more black people are killed than were killed in the military fighting the Vietnam war. Abortion is the most effective negative eugenics strategy since it was legalized in a effort to commit genocide on the black population in America. Again, another horrible thing about Americas past.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       10-12-2017, 11:46 AM Reply   
"That being said every 4 days in America, more black people are killed than were killed in the military fighting the Vietnam war."

Bull$hit.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 12:00 PM Reply   
Since someone bought up Vietnam. It's odd to me that we went to war to stop communism & the North Vietnamese to stop capitalism. Fast forward a few years & they have a communist Gov that has embraced open market capitalism. Same with China, Russia & other communist nations. Yet here we're pushing for communism & damning the open market & capitalism.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-12-2017, 12:17 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Since someone bought up Vietnam. It's odd to me that we went to war to stop communism & the North Vietnamese to stop capitalism. Fast forward a few years & they have a communist Gov that has embraced open market capitalism. Same with China, Russia & other communist nations. Yet here we're pushing for communism & damning the open market & capitalism.
Pretty clear you haven't a ****ing clue what communism or capitalism is.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-12-2017, 12:43 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWakeIsReal View Post
Pretty clear you haven't a ****ing clue what communism or capitalism is.
Speaking of clueless, how are you today?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-12-2017, 2:02 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdlangston13 View Post
I know how to read but what you said makes no sense.

I'm not even sure where the conversation got morphed into racial violence. It is common knowledge though that during the war in Vietnam the US purposely draft large numbers of black people to go an fight in an effort to reduce white casualties. This is a very wrong and disturbing policy and is one of the many stains on Americas record in the past. That being said every 4 days in America, more black people are killed than were killed in the military fighting the Vietnam war. Abortion is the most effective negative eugenics strategy since it was legalized in a effort to commit genocide on the black population in America. Again, another horrible thing about Americas past.
What I said made perfect sense in the context of the statistics you presented. Let me explain....

1) Millions of Vietnamese died in the Vietnam war. Not sure exactly how many were specifically in the American supported conflict, but probably over a million. So you have to leave out the Vietnamese that died to even remotely have a chance of your stats making sense. You didn't say "the number of Americans that died in the war", so your post suggested that the Vietnamese just don't count when tallying the dead.

2) The number of Americans that died in Vietnam numbered about 55,000. So to compare that to a 4 day total of abortions there would have to be 55k/4 or about 14K per day. If you look at the quoted number the consensus seems to be about 3K per day. But only about less than 40% are blacks. So if you are to even get your quoted numbers to within an order of magnitude of error you would have to assume that 100% of them are blacks.

So to even come close to getting your numbers to within 25% of being correct, you have to assume that Vietnamese deaths aren't worth counting and blacks are responsible for all abortions.

Although black abortions are higher per capita than whites, in total numbers they are not that different. It seems to me that characterizing black abortions as some sort of racist eugenics plot is pretty absurd. The first thought that comes to mind is that abortions are higher in poorer demographics because of the high cost of raising a child. If you have to work long hours and don't have the luxury of a stay at home spouse then it's reasonable that the motivation for abortion is household logistics vs a nefarious plot orchestrated behind closed doors.

Also the idea that any American was drafted and forced to sacrifice their life to defend a govt halfway around the world that was not crucial to America freedom is a example of how wrong we can be without any repercussions. The message after the war was "let's put this behind us", when it should have been "how could we be so wrong".
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-13-2017, 9:24 AM Reply   
Where in the world is Jesus Campos? Did he run off with Carmen Sandiego?
Old    deltahoosier            10-13-2017, 9:41 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
We have the largest military in the world to defend our Constitutional Republic. When the 2nd was penned it was necessary for the citizens to be armed to assemble armed forces to defend the nation. The 2nd amendment is an anachronism because it was intended to maintain an armed citizenry to defend the nation when necessary, as is the idea that citizens could mount a defense against the military. Anyone who has the opinion that the citizens need to be armed well enough to beat the armed forces maintained by the US govt is out of touch with both reality and the opinions of the public in general. I'd bet dollars to donuts that a poll of the public would reveal a strong opposition to citizens flying Apache choppers equipped with Hellfire missiles.
Interesting. Didn't the Veitcong do just that type of thing to the US? Didn't Afgahns do that to the Russians? Who would say that the entire military would stand with each other? Point is, if it came to that type of issue, there most likely would not be a all vs few.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-13-2017, 9:56 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Interesting. Didn't the Veitcong do just that type of thing to the US? Didn't Afgahns do that to the Russians? Who would say that the entire military would stand with each other? Point is, if it came to that type of issue, there most likely would not be a all vs few.
Most will simply follow the orders of who cuts their pay check
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 10:10 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Interesting. Didn't the Veitcong do just that type of thing to the US? Didn't Afgahns do that to the Russians? Who would say that the entire military would stand with each other? Point is, if it came to that type of issue, there most likely would not be a all vs few.
In the case of Vietnam we decided with the help of the "actual" moral majority to forego mass murder to win the war. I'm pretty sure that anyone will tell you that we could have won if we were willing to resort to bombing the s**t out of anything that moved.

Don't see any parallels between Afghanistan and the US. Afghanistan has little value to anyone. At some point you are going to be smart and realize that and stop throwing lives and money at it. It's not a matter of not being able to secure the land well enough to harvest it's bounty. It's a matter of whether it's worth it and if there is any bounty to be had. Where's the return on investment? What's ironic is that the imperialists appear to think that conquering a land is progress. But the reality is that's it's just spending a lot of money and lives to adopt a costly dependent.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 10:20 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Point is, if it came to that type of issue, there most likely would not be a all vs few.
Forgot to address this. I get the reasoning behind your hypothetical. But if you want to see the damage that an armed citizenry can do in your hypothetical, then you need to look no further than Syria. IOW, there is plenty of evidence that people who believe they can overthrow the govt are extremely dangerous and destructive to a society. If you believe that you can fight the govt, not only will you get yourself killed, but you will likely get everyone else killed and destroy everything that makes us a civilized society.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-13-2017, 11:30 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
In the case of Vietnam we decided with the help of the "actual" moral majority to forego mass murder to win the war. I'm pretty sure that anyone will tell you that we could have won if we were willing to resort to bombing the s**t out of anything that moved.

Don't see any parallels between Afghanistan and the US. Afghanistan has little value to anyone. At some point you are going to be smart and realize that and stop throwing lives and money at it. It's not a matter of not being able to secure the land well enough to harvest it's bounty. It's a matter of whether it's worth it and if there is any bounty to be had. Where's the return on investment? What's ironic is that the imperialists appear to think that conquering a land is progress. But the reality is that's it's just spending a lot of money and lives to adopt a costly dependent.
I agree it's a waste but it's also a situation of "we broke it, we own it". Puling out & leaving all the innocent people who helped us to be slaughtered while the Taliban come roaring back will have very costly implications for the US both in treasure & allies who count us under the military umbrella.
Old    deltahoosier            10-13-2017, 11:37 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
Forgot to address this. I get the reasoning behind your hypothetical. But if you want to see the damage that an armed citizenry can do in your hypothetical, then you need to look no further than Syria. IOW, there is plenty of evidence that people who believe they can overthrow the govt are extremely dangerous and destructive to a society. If you believe that you can fight the govt, not only will you get yourself killed, but you will likely get everyone else killed and destroy everything that makes us a civilized society.
Well of course. No one is advocating taking on the government, however there may be a time and that is what that right is about. Hopefully we will continue to have somewhat sane people in charge of the country. Wait until the ANTIFA crowd gets old enough to be in leadership positions.
Old    deltahoosier            10-13-2017, 11:39 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Most will simply follow the orders of who cuts their pay check
depends. If society got to that point, there would be a considerable societal pressure. You have to look at what society would look like in that type of world. It would be nothing like we have at this moment.
Old    deltahoosier            10-13-2017, 11:43 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
In the case of Vietnam we decided with the help of the "actual" moral majority to forego mass murder to win the war. I'm pretty sure that anyone will tell you that we could have won if we were willing to resort to bombing the s**t out of anything that moved.

Don't see any parallels between Afghanistan and the US. Afghanistan has little value to anyone. At some point you are going to be smart and realize that and stop throwing lives and money at it. It's not a matter of not being able to secure the land well enough to harvest it's bounty. It's a matter of whether it's worth it and if there is any bounty to be had. Where's the return on investment? What's ironic is that the imperialists appear to think that conquering a land is progress. But the reality is that's it's just spending a lot of money and lives to adopt a costly dependent.
I am not agruing the merits of current or past wars. I am talking about entrenched populations fighting for their homelands against a vastly overpowering force. Eventually that force loses the will to be there. Much of that is based on what you just laid out. Is it worth it to the overwhelming force? Is the overwhelming force committed to the cause?
Old     (jarrod)      Join Date: May 2003       10-13-2017, 11:49 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier View Post
Well of course. No one is advocating taking on the government, however there may be a time and that is what that right is about. Hopefully we will continue to have somewhat sane people in charge of the country. Wait until the ANTIFA crowd gets old enough to be in leadership positions.
A lot of people have already drawn the line. I'm sure you've seen the "Come and take it" message. I think very few people are actually willing to die on their door step to protect gun rights and the 2A, but hopefully we never have to find out.

To the point about fighting the government turning into a situation like Syria. I think you also have to consider what our military folks would do in a situation where the government is now ordering the armed forces to go door to door confiscating guns and effectively abolishing the 2A. My thought and hope is that the military folks side with the people in that situation, not with the government. In that scenario, the government is powerless.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 12:07 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
I agree it's a waste but it's also a situation of "we broke it, we own it". Puling out & leaving all the innocent people who helped us to be slaughtered while the Taliban come roaring back will have very costly implications for the US both in treasure & allies who count us under the military umbrella.
You just made the argument for not breaking any country that isn't a clear threat to the US. If a country attacks, then you break them. I wouldn't advise ownership or even assume an obligation.
Old     (racer808)      Join Date: Jan 2013       10-13-2017, 12:37 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly135 View Post
You just made the argument for not breaking any country that isn't a clear threat to the US. If a country attacks, then you break them. I wouldn't advise ownership or even assume an obligation.
Well that's the problem, our military isn't a rebuilding force. We didn't attack Afghanistan cause they attacked us, we attacked them for housing Bin Laden & refusing to turn him over. America simply needs to step up its war by proxy game just like the middle east nations so while we're not technically invading we're still putting an end to their funneling of money to terrorist organizations & the death & destruction they cause. Sadly every other nation has the upper hand in that game cause we're only nation dumb enough to allow unfettered immigration & our internal security is weak.
Old    TheWakeIsReal            10-13-2017, 12:45 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Well that's the problem, our military isn't a rebuilding force. We didn't attack Afghanistan cause they attacked us, we attacked them for housing Bin Laden & refusing to turn him over. America simply needs to step up its war by proxy game just like the middle east nations so while we're not technically invading we're still putting an end to their funneling of money to terrorist organizations & the death & destruction they cause. Sadly every other nation has the upper hand in that game cause we're only nation dumb enough to allow unfettered immigration & our internal security is weak.
Yes, because leaving vacuums of power has worked out so well in the past. How did ISIS start again?
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       10-13-2017, 12:46 PM Reply   
Obama founded it, didn't you know?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 1:00 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
I agree it's a waste but it's also a situation of "we broke it, we own it". Puling out & leaving all the innocent people who helped us to be slaughtered while the Taliban come roaring back will have very costly implications for the US both in treasure & allies who count us under the military umbrella.
You just made the argument for not breaking any country that isn't a clear threat to the US. If a country attacks, then you break them. I wouldn't advise ownership or even assume an obligation.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 1:05 PM Reply   
Can't delete double post.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 1:07 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by racer808 View Post
Well that's the problem, our military isn't a rebuilding force. We didn't attack Afghanistan cause they attacked us, we attacked them for housing Bin Laden & refusing to turn him over. America simply needs to step up its war by proxy game just like the middle east nations so while we're not technically invading we're still putting an end to their funneling of money to terrorist organizations & the death & destruction they cause. Sadly every other nation has the upper hand in that game cause we're only nation dumb enough to allow unfettered immigration & our internal security is weak.
we attacked Afghanistan for protecting those who attacked us. We should not adopt the idea that we are responsible. We should have finished the job and left. I believe proxy wars are immoral.
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       10-13-2017, 5:47 PM Reply   
Just to throw out another thought. It's been nearly 70 years since we engaged in what many people might think is the most successful military intervention that had nothing to do with America or it's defense. I'm speaking of Korea. There is no question that S Korea is an example of successfully spreading democracy. It would be hard to pinpoint exactly how that benefited America. Trade maybe. But the most prominent foreign policy problem in the news today is the result of that intervention. Even a glowing success is causing us significant problems today. Seventy years later.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-05-2017, 3:42 PM Reply   
Well that didn't take long. Do we start a "Texas" thread or is it pointless?
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       11-05-2017, 4:12 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
Well that didn't take long. Do we start a "Texas" thread or is it pointless?
Start it.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-05-2017, 4:25 PM Reply   
I don't really see the point, there is no will in the US to do anything about happiness, mental health or gun control.
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       11-05-2017, 4:27 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
I don't really see the point, there is no will in the US to do anything about happiness, mental health or gun control.
Damn man that's brutal.Slap to the face to everyone in the US i mean what can we do about mentally ill people going out and shooting people do you really think taking guns away from the people is gonna stop all the shootings ? its not they will just get the guns somewhere else lol.

Last edited by wakeslash; 11-05-2017 at 4:30 PM.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-05-2017, 4:44 PM Reply   
It's been rehashed to death on this thread, but yes I think reducing the number of guns in society will reduce the number of gun deaths, and I think improving mental health services will reduce mental unwell people killing other people, and yes I think if society becomes fairer there will be less people becoming mentally unwell. It's too easy to say these people are just an anomaly and there is nothing you can do about it but IMO, these people are a product of the environment they are living in. It won't be like a switch which turns these problems off but you have to start moving in the right direction to improve the environment. Other countries are managing these issues much better than the US and have much lower mass shooting incidents yet all you get is a shrug from most Americans.
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       11-05-2017, 4:58 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by ralph View Post
It's been rehashed to death on this thread, but yes I think reducing the number of guns in society will reduce the number of gun deaths, and I think improving mental health services will reduce mental unwell people killing other people, and yes I think if society becomes fairer there will be less people becoming mentally unwell. It's too easy to say these people are just an anomaly and there is nothing you can do about it but IMO, these people are a product of the environment they are living in. It won't be like a switch which turns these problems off but you have to start moving in the right direction to improve the environment. Other countries are managing these issues much better than the US and have much lower mass shooting incidents yet all you get is a shrug from most Americans.
Man idk anymore not much an average citizen can do it has to go through congress and what not so even if a law was passed it would take forever before it was put in effect and shooting at people ranging from 5 year old toddlers to seniors has no words to describe this "thing" you have to be possessed to do such a sickening act.
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-05-2017, 5:18 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wakeslash View Post
Man idk anymore not much an average citizen can do it has to go through congress and what not so even if a law was passed it would take forever before it was put in effect ....
All you can do as a citizen is apply pressure to your polititions to do the right thing. Call them up, write a letter, etc etc. If enough people did it then things would change. 100% it will take time but you have to make a start.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakeslash View Post
....has no words to describe this "thing" you have to be possessed to do such a sickening act.
IMO, these people are not born monsters, the environment they inhabit has turned them in to them.
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       11-05-2017, 5:44 PM Reply   
Call them up?? i think a lot of people dont even care about politics here to be honest everyone is just doing there own thing work/family etc... yeah i know they are not born monsters but to come to this is mind boggling i think everyone is still reeling from the las vegas attack then the truck attack and now this i think a lot of people here just see it as a tragedy and shrug and move on its sad its come to that now.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       11-05-2017, 8:18 PM Reply   
Kelley, 26, served in the U.S. Air Force in Logistics Readiness at the Holloman Air Force Base in New Mexico from 2010 until 2014, the Air Force confirmed to the Daily News Sunday night.

In 2012, he was court-martialed after being accused of assaulting his spouse and child, spokeswoman Ann Stefanek said.

Kelley was confined for 12 months and was reduced to E-1 rank, airman basic, which is the lowest rank possible.

He received a bad conduct discharge in 2014, which does not prohibit the possession of firearms, unlike a dishonorable discharge.

He reportedly purchased the assault rifle in April 2016 from an Academy Sports & Outdoors in San Antonio.
Old     (onlyinboards)      Join Date: Oct 2014       11-06-2017, 6:25 AM Reply   
i am firmly in the increased gun control camp. We need to reduce the number of guns there are in this country.
Old     (wakeslash)      Join Date: Sep 2017       11-06-2017, 7:18 AM Reply   
Something needs to be done there are far too many lives lost for nothing its becoming a one sided battlefield out here.
Old     (plhorn)      Join Date: Dec 2005       11-06-2017, 12:25 PM Reply   
I'm so sick of politician offering their "thoughts and prayers" every week when this happens then not doing a damn thing about it. Trump signed a law to help mentally ill people get guns, for gods sake.

So far we've had a guy shoot up an elementary school and they did nothing, some dude tried to shoot up republican congressmen but he was a liberal so he only shot one of them, and congress changed nothing now two more over 25+ shootings buy crazy white dudes and we will do..... brace yourself.... NOTHING.

Actually we are doing something, the current budget substantially decreases funding for the treatment of mental issues while reducing the taxes for the "GOP defined middle class: people earning over $500,000 a year)

This country has enough people choking themselves while jerking off that they had to come up with a name for it... We are not meant to survive.
Old     (95sn)      Join Date: Sep 2005       11-06-2017, 12:31 PM Reply   
Ive heard recently that many of the Las Vegas victims are suing. Suing the Mandalay Hotel or the event sponsor, or??? How could they have known this could possibly happen or what could they have done in advance to stop Paddock?
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       11-06-2017, 3:13 PM Reply   
Also sick of “thoughts and prayers” which do nothing but make those offering them feel better about doing nothing.

A little common sense (and the dissolution of the NRA) would go a long way.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...smtyp=cur&_r=0
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-06-2017, 4:22 PM Reply   
Turns out it wasn't a tragedy after all. God was just answering their prayers.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/06/...ering-prayers/
Old     (ralph)      Join Date: Apr 2002       11-06-2017, 6:53 PM Reply   
This is from Senator Chris Murphy, I thought it was pretty good.
Attached Images
 
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-07-2017, 7:40 AM Reply   
It's all really sad. I wish I had a path forward for us. White guys with guns are apparently a failure of our mental health system (and not terrorists at all?). Immigrants with trucks are terrorist enemy combatants (with zero mental health problems?).

Both are probably a little true and mostly not true.
Old     (denverd1)      Join Date: May 2004       11-09-2017, 9:28 AM Reply   
sounds like main stream media and anti-gun lobby has duped everyone once again
Old     (brettw)      Join Date: Jul 2007       11-09-2017, 9:57 AM Reply   
Make sense - just a matter of odds/#s.
Attached Images
 

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:49 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2016 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us