Happy July 4th Y'all

[brewcity77]

If you vote for progressives that want to defund police departments are you also part of the problem?  Personally, I don't understand why anyone needs an A-15.  A gun person would know why it's seemingly so popular and women like these weapons for protection.  I'm not at all against legislation that would lead to a national registry, raise the age limit, and make it far, far, more difficult to purchase a firearm.

All this said Brew we're not getting to the point where the 2nd Amendment is going to be overturned.  It's not happening.   Gang members and drug dealers illegally getting firearns have to be part of this discussion as well.   Single mom's insisting on owning a firearm to protect themselves and their children also need to be part of the discussion.  I will concede that when it comes to making it more difficult for people to acquire guns many Rebublicans and the NRA seemingly won't budge and that's wrong and a big problem.

If defunding the police means less inefficient operations like we saw in Uvalde and redirecting that money toward 21st century protective services that include dispatching appropriate personnel to emergencies rather than using the police as a hammer for every situation, I would say no. Defund the police was a poor slogan, but it's worth looking into the plans that were actually behind it and how it was more about reimagining public safety than simply decreasing budgets and spending the leftovers on booze and party hats.

And I'm sorry, but self-defense is not in the Constitution. And perpetuating the idea that you need a firearm because the criminals or your neighbor has one doesn't fix the problem, it exacerbates it. And while I don't expect a 2nd Amendment repeal, we only need to look at every other country ever that has dealt with these types of issues to see how effective it is. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, England, none of them have the firearm problems we do because they took definitive action. Will it be harder here because we have basically treated guns like an Oprah Winfrey show, with the NRA screaming "You get a gun, you get a gun, EVERYBODY GETS A GUN!!!" Yes. But just because a problem is hard to solve isn't a reason to refuse to solve it, or worse, grow the problem behind the auspices of that being the solution.

If the 2nd Amendment was treated as it was written and had been from the start, we wouldn't have the issues we do. But for generations, we've seen NRA-fueled lawmakers with the more recent assistance of the Supreme Court pour guns into the hands of any citizen that wanted one, which naturally led to more guns in the hands of people that really shouldn't have them. Proverbially speaking there's a giant mess because the ketchup is out of the bottle and instead of trying to wipe it up, we go get more bottles of ketchup and start squirting them in hopes it will clean up the problem.

The only way to fix the problem is to do the hard work of addressing and fixing the problem. It will be difficult, it will be messy, and it won't happen overnight, but we're here because we have continually tried to fix our problems with more problems, and it hasn't worked.

[Hards Alumni]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding (as many seem to) of what defunding the police means.  You should look into it, and I'm just here to help.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/19/what-does-defund-the-police-mean-and-does-it-have-merit/


I've said it for a long time, there needs to be a national gun registry.

[JWags85]

I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding (as many seem to) of what defunding the police means.  You should look into it, and I'm just here to help.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/06/19/what-does-defund-the-police-mean-and-does-it-have-merit/


I've said it for a long time, there needs to be a national gun registry.

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding on both sides to be honest.

People thinking defund means abolish all police..YAY!!!  F*** 12!

People thinking defund means getting rid of all police forces and allowing criminals and chaos to reign...NOOOO!!!!  We're all gonna die and be raped and pillaged in our homes!  BLUE LIVES MATTER

Both are incorrect and both think the other is the problem.

[Hards Alumni]

Oh for sure, check out the police union's website on the matter and you'll get their version.

And of course there is a large spectrum of what people 'want'.  I just don't take seriously the people who say, "Abolish the police!"... they're unreasonable.

[Jockey]

Oh for sure, check out the police union's website on the matter and you'll get their version.

And of course there is a large spectrum of what people 'want'.  I just don't take seriously the people who say, "Abolish the police!"... they're unreasonable.

they are also less than 1% of the population.

[🏀]

they are also less than 1% of the population.

Just enough for rocket to get scared.

[mu_hilltopper]

Not sure if this is in the previous 7 pages, but one of the Highland Park victims went to Marquette.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/7/6/23197272/highland-park-mass-shooting-katherine-goldstein-fourth-july-parade

[Lennys Tap]

The difference is that I am pro-choice. My personal belief is that life begins at conception. As such, I will never encourage another human being to get an abortion, except in cases where the mother's life is in jeopardy. But that is my personal belief. I don't believe that I or the government have the right to impose that belief on anyone else.  You have said you are pro-life which means that you believe that the government should have the right to impose that belief on others. You asked me when I thought life deserved to be protected, I answered that I thought viability was a reasonable compromise. I didn't mean that as my personal belief, I meant that as that's where the minimum bar should be set.

So in your own words you believe that life begins at conception and that taking that life is murder but you don’t want to be an imposition so you’re OK with it.

[Hards Alumni]

So in your own words you believe that life begins at conception and that taking that life is murder but you don’t want to be an imposition so you’re OK with it.

You do realize that it isn't necessary to force your beliefs on others... don't you?

[lawdog77]

You do realize that it isn't necessary to force your beliefs on others... don't you?

On this, we agree. To me, whomever has had an abortion, when it comes to meeting their higher power, whatever and whenever that may be, it is between them.

[Lennys Tap]

You do realize that it isn't necessary to force your beliefs on others... don't you?

You do realize that forcing one’s beliefs on others is what our legislative officials are elected to do…don’t you? And that as citizens our responsibility is to advocate on behalf of those beliefs.

If someone believes laws restricting gun ownership or abortions will save lives why shouldn’t he or she support such laws?

[lawdog77]

You do realize that forcing one’s beliefs on others is what our legislative officials are elected to do…don’t you? And that as citizens our responsibility is to advocate on behalf of those beliefs.

If someone believes laws restricting gun ownership or abortions will save lives why shouldn’t he or she support such laws?

Nuance here, Legislative official are elected to "force" the beliefs of their constituency, not their personal beliefs. Also, judicial should not be forcing anyone's beliefs  on anyone.

[Hards Alumni]

You do realize that forcing one’s beliefs on others is what our legislative officials are elected to do…don’t you? And that as citizens our responsibility is to advocate on behalf of those beliefs.

If someone believes laws restricting gun ownership or abortions will save lives why shouldn’t he or she support such laws?

Believe it or not Lenny, there is the ability to accept that your beliefs don't supersede the rights of others in this country.

You can believe that abortion is wrong, but lawdog has the right of it.  You can think it is wrong, but leave it up to the person who has to make the decision and their maker.

[brewcity77]

You do realize that forcing one’s beliefs on others is what our legislative officials are elected to do…don’t you? And that as citizens our responsibility is to advocate on behalf of those beliefs.

If someone believes laws restricting gun ownership or abortions will save lives why shouldn’t he or she support such laws?

Actually, that's not what are legislative officials are elected to do AT ALL. That is a radical misinterpretation of what they are elected to do. They are elected to represent and advocate in the best interests of their constituents. All of their constituents.

This is where the right has completely lost the plot. Instead of advocating for the people they represent they simply push minority positions in a manufactured culture war.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So in your own words you believe that life begins at conception and that taking that life is murder but you don’t want to be an imposition so you’re OK with it.

No, I recognize that my belief that life starts at conception is not based on fact but on my faith. I or the government have no right to impose that belief on others.

[Lennys Tap]

Believe it or not Lenny, there is the ability to accept that your beliefs don't supersede the rights of others in this country.

You can believe that abortion is wrong, but lawdog has the right of it.  You can think it is wrong, but leave it up to the person who has to make the decision and their maker.

So can you then believe that owning an AR-15 is wrong but you choose to leave that decision to other individuals and their maker.

Everyone here assumes the abortion debate is all about religion. I’m an agnostic, haven’t been a practicing Catholic for pretty much the last 50 years. My opposition to abortion has nothing to do with any church. I believe we should support a culture of life, not death. I don’t see how advocating for that (against abortion, against capital punishment) is unduly pushing my beliefs on others any more than the pro capital punishment, pro abortion crowd is pushing theirs.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So can you then believe that owning an AR-15 is wrong but you choose to leave that decision to other individuals and their maker.

Everyone here assumes the abortion debate is all about religion. I’m an agnostic, haven’t been a practicing Catholic for pretty much the last 50 years. My opposition to abortion has nothing to do with any church. I believe we should support a culture of life, not death. I don’t see how advocating for that (against abortion, against capital punishment) is unduly pushing my beliefs on others any more than the pro capital punishment, pro abortion crowd is pushing theirs.

Because pro-life is trying to take the option away from people and only allow their belief. Pro-choice is trying to leave it up to each individual. No one is trying force anyone to have an abortion. Pro-lifers are trying to force people to not have abortions.

[Hards Alumni]

So can you then believe that owning an AR-15 is wrong but you choose to leave that decision to other individuals and their maker.

Everyone here assumes the abortion debate is all about religion. I’m an agnostic, haven’t been a practicing Catholic for pretty much the last 50 years. My opposition to abortion has nothing to do with any church. I believe we should support a culture of life, not death. I don’t see how advocating for that (against abortion, against capital punishment) is unduly pushing my beliefs on others any more than the pro capital punishment, pro abortion crowd is pushing theirs.

Except an AR-15 is a killing machine, and affects OTHERS... like the 7 dead plus 20+ injured on 7/4 or the 19 dead at Uvalde.  A woman having a private medical procedure done in a clinic is none of my business since it doesn't impact me at all.  That is the simple difference.

You don't have to be religious to be anti-abortion, but you're still imposing your belief system upon women.  I'm all for supporting a culture of life as well, I just don't believe that life starts until viability.  Also, if we are being completely honest, men shouldn't have a say.  We aren't the ones carrying the child to term.  We don't sacrifice our lives, bodies, or careers.  So, why should we demand that women have to?   

[JWags85]

  I'm all for supporting a culture of life as well, I just don't believe that life starts until viability. 

So you're good with abortion at 21-22 weeks?

[Lennys Tap]

Because pro-life is trying to take the option away from people and only allow their belief. Pro-choice is trying to leave it up to each individual. No one is trying force anyone to have an abortion. Pro-lifers are trying to force people to not have abortions.

Forcing people is what many laws do - they can expand or limit freedoms as the legislators see fit. If one feels life begins at conception they SHOULD advocate for stringent limits on abortion. If one feels life doesn’t begin until the baby is born they SHOULD advocate for no limits on abortion. And if there aren’t enough people on either side to win the day our lawmakers should come up with compromises. As is the case with most issues at the federal level, most lawmakers don’t have the courage to do that - it might cost them their job. So they punt to courts or states to do their work for them.

[Hards Alumni]

So you're good with abortion at 21-22 weeks?

Not in love with it, but I'll default to the, "I'm not a woman".  I've said in previous posts that I'm okay with a line in the sand at some point as a means of compromise, but it's not my body. 

I wouldn't do it, but I also wouldn't stop a woman from making that decision on their own.

[JWags85]

Not in love with it, but I'll default to the, "I'm not a woman".  I've said in previous posts that I'm okay with a line in the sand at some point as a means of compromise, but it's not my body. 

I wouldn't do it, but I also wouldn't stop a woman from making that decision on their own.

Fair, I didn't mean it to be combative.  I'm just curious wiht people when it comes to the whole viability line in the sand.  As I said, there is a 4-5 week period period before the generally accepted viability benchmark that makes me uneasy.  I'm not a woman either, I realize its complicated, but thats well beyond the "time to think on a decision" "women don't always know they are pregnant right away" level for me.