Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'BS Forum' started by NYGalPal, May 24, 2022.
They police the internet in China. I dont think we want that here
They already do it here to sell you stuff. Also, if you make violent threats about someone they do care about…..stricter gun laws, yes. But if you think banning a certain looking style gun, that does the same as many other guns is the sole answer, we’ll be right back here again. Violent intent is a huge part of the equation.
No, private companies here in the USA do not police the internet like China at all, that's just false
And I think the reason people point to gun laws instead is because its simply easier to stop the sale of weapons than it is to scour every page of the internet looking for unstable people especially since unstable is a matter of opinion and the amount of new content added daily... is simply staggering
So you don’t think you’re being monitored online, through your devices etc to some degree?
If it’s not some type of monitoring, how are we red flagging these people? We’re certainly not relying on the like minded admirers they are talking to on the internet to turn them in?
That’s invasion of Privacy
Is that what you would give up to save your stash of automatic and semiautomatic toys?
So rest assured Negative ..the discussion is not about Second Amendment rights ..have a gun or shotgun that registered with a background check is fine
The decent and moral thing to do is just to have gun owners make some big boy decisions to do without Assault Rifles
That's a different question. "To some degree" yes, but not very effectively, and because of that its not enough to even be meaningful.
I don’t have a “stash of toys”, nor do I give a crap about them. I m not protecting them either… the idea that guns is the only problem, or even the main problem is ridiculous.
I hate the idea of internet privacy invasion, I’m just trying to come up with some different type of bandaids for this huge mass, just line you guys are.
Because I don’t hop the bandwagon on one focus for a broader problem, your first instinct was to assume I have rifles, or my intent is to protect them. That’s what we do best here, and in this country. We categorize people, outcast them, whatever…. Imagine how it is for kids. Start there… maybe they won’t want to pick up a gun in the first place.
There are 393 million guns in the United States. There are roughly 20 million AR-15's in the US. I don't know how many semi automatic weapons there are but I would guess that at least half of the 393 million are semi auto (semi auto means you do not manually reload after each trigger pull.)
Banning all guns or even just semi automatic guns is plausible and/or reasonable to the anti gun crowd but flagging obvious online activities like proclamations of violence is out of the question. I don't get it. Why is it they can monitor for child pornography but not violent speech?
Well we do have this thing called freedom of speech in America. Maybe China or Russia is more your thing
People are incredibly naive as to the extent our government spies on its people.
Not surprising really as they keep it on the down low... filtering contracts through sub-vendors.
Intelligence agencies buy information from big tech & phone companies.
First time I've seen them announce the weapon this Illinois shooter used. The state attorney announced it was a Smith & Wesson M&P15 semi automatic rifle. He fled to Madison WI and contemplated shooting that up too
My apologies..so you don't homer for any pro posts on here? Really..
And you have no stash of guns? And you don't care about them or "give a crap" ?
Then banning semi automatic weapons should not be a problem for you then..right? Are you ready to jump on the the Bandwagon of gun sanity?
The "broader problem" you address might be out there ..but like Browning said it's impossible to monitor the regular and dark web..FTMR as I posted 100xs .You Cant force people to seek mental health
So what's your other idea Negative?
I humbly and non aggressively disagree with every sentence in your post.
We don’t all agree on stricter gun policy. If we did, changes would have happened ages ago and/it passes with 0 nay votes. It didn’t.
- I remember being at a friend’s house and they had a NRA mailer on their table (the family were all members). This was about 20 years ago and federal background check was on a ballot somewhere. The flyer said something to the effect of “federal background checks are the liberals first step in their plan to ban all guns”. Many many people believe that any legislation is the first step down the road of banning all guns - No, we can’t all agree on striker gun policy.
Threatening someone “important” on “unimportant” is illegal and therefore can be investigated and/or charged.
From an article:
Crimo’s apparent YouTube account hadn’t posted in around eight months, based on The Verge’s viewing before the account was pulled. The most recent video included concerning language and imagery that appeared to involve classrooms and stick-art depictions of people being shot. Another clip seemed to be a music video for a rap song, which ended in Crimo wearing protective gear and handling bullets in what appeared to be a classroom. YouTube spokesperson Farshad Shadloo confirmed that “violative content” had been removed following the shooting.
Concerning language and images from a rapper… have fun investigating all the inflammatory language on the internet that doesn’t have have specific threats.
Pedos don’t post their wares on Instagram so wtf would a domestic terrorist use a place like FB. The dark web makes the tools you imagine using worthless.
TLDR; policing the internet to the extent implied in the earlier post is impractical. We do currently police the internet to an extent but using inflammatory language without specific threats is not illegal in this country.
Go yell "bomb" on an airline flight. Freedom of speech, right?
You just don't know when you quit.
Where have I “homered for pro posts”?
And no, I do not have a stash of guns, and I’m not an enthusiast, nor do I think about them until something like this happens. I own 2 hand guns, and I haven’t gone to the range in years. My belief is that guns should be owned and carried on one’s own private property only, unless there is a valid reason… like someone who works transporting money etc. so no, sorry to ruin your fantasy, but I don’t have a stash of “assault” rifles. For home defense, I’d prefer a shotgun anyway.
we have already had this discussion, and I don’t have any problem with whatever they can do sensibly to keep guns away from these people. But it shouldn’t end there.
Every Amendment seems to have caveats. The freedom of speech on leaves out a caveat on making a threat. Saying “I want to shoot up a school” isn’t a threat. Saying “I want to shoot up Riggle elementary” is a threat. It’s really not that complicated.
Even the 2nd amendment has a caveat… something about a well regulated militia. The caveat is probably why most states address gun ownership in their constitution.
Kentucky Constitution Section 1
All men are, by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: … Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.
I meant that we all here in this thread agree that some sort of change in gun laws needs to take place.
There just isn’t any easy answer to all of this. Givin the fact that keeping guns out of the hands of these people needs to happen… it’s not going to stop intent.
the broader problem, is what makes a kid/young adult want to pick up any weapon , and kill as many random people as he can. His mind is the biggest weapon, the gun is a tool. Neither one of us would be happy losing a friend because someone who could t get a gun, decided to instead build a bomb,drive a car into a crowd or any other way a bunch of people can be harmed or killed. Neither one of us would say, we’ll, atleast it wasn’t an asualt rifle. Again, do something to keep the guns out if their hands, but if that’s the only objective, it’s nothing but politics. When I see people in addition to that, also trying to get to the bottom of just wtf is creating the monster , just out of school, I’ll be happy.
Lol. I still disagree with the first sentence. Doing a quick read it seems some don’t want to change gun laws, but I get where you’re coming from.
There is rarely an easy answer to complicated problems but any answer is damn near impossible when we, as a country, can’t agree on the question.
The GOP loves using the phrase “use the laws in the books” but will never go along with allowing the states to follow the law (amendment) of a well regulated militia.
Requiring a license, insurance, registration etc doesn’t stop all traffic accidents but I’d imagine there’s be a lot more accidents if car ownership was left practically unregulated.
Countries with strict regulation of free speech: China and Russia
Countries with gun laws: every civilized country sans the USA
If it really came down to a choice between the two, which direction would you want to go?
A second post to address your last paragraph.
Angsty youth isn’t a new thing and it’s certainly isn’t exclusive to the USA.
Why do they grab a gun? Because it’s easy and will do the most damage.
If an angsty youth wanted to do damage and used a car… yes, many many many people would say “at least he didn’t have an assault rifle”
Could Gordon Ramsey cook a meal using only a microwave? Sure, but it would be a whole lot better if he had a full kitchen. Could an angsty youth still kill people with only a knife. Sure, but it would be a whole lot worse is he had a full arsenal.
Re: only politics, how do you figure? As this thread shows, there are plenty of ideas but a majority rarely agree on anything. It’s not politics to realize you can’t do everything so you’re willing to settle on something.
I do believe some things are politics. Not passing healthcare to your citizens and then blaming violence on shitty healthcare seems political. There’s a sucker born every minute. Do we blame the influencer, the sucker, or the society that makes manipulation so easy…. There are no easy answers.
Plato was not a fan of democracy and all of his concerns and reasons have been on full display in the USA