Happy July 4th Y'all

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Of course life begins at conception. That’s a scientific fact. When that life should be protected. I don’t recall ever calling abortion “murder” but life/health of the mother is mitigating no matter what you call.

When do you think the life deserves protection - only after birth?

Well no, that's not a scientific fact, unless you are using a different definition of life. That's a question that is widely debated.

But since you believe (as do I for that matter) that life starts at conception, then intentionally ending that life would be murder, no? So you believe that a baby being conceived through rape/incest is justification for its mother to murder it. I'm not sure how the mother's health is a factor here. I don't think pregnancies that are caused by rape/incest are any more risky to the mother than any other pregnancy. I think everyone (except a select few on the fringe) believe that if the mother's life is in danger that abortion is justified.

I believe that viability is a reasonable compromise when it comes to abortion.

[Hards Alumni]

Of course life begins at conception. That’s a scientific fact. When that life should be protected. I don’t recall ever calling abortion “murder” but life/health of the mother is mitigating no matter what you call.

When do you think the life deserves protection - only after birth?

Very cool of you to make up that definition to fit your narrative.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

So anyone who has voted for a Republican, ever, is "part of the problem".  Got it.  That's a real rational take.

I don't presume to speak for Jockey, but I personally wouldn't go as far as that. But if you think back, there was not a fundamental disagreement between the two parties as recently as the 90's; they came together and passed what they hoped were reasonable gun laws to outlaw assault style weapons.

But what has happened since then? I would argue that only one party has radically changed positions. Gingrich decided there could be no compromise about anything and he was going to conduct all-out war--any compromise was viewed as weakness.

Now, that party subscribes to an extremist point of view that no reasonable restrictions can be implemented and guns must be available to virtually anyone, anytime, without restrictions. One reason is all that sweet, sweet NRA money pouring into their coffers, but another is that it has helped keep them in power by whipping up fear and perpetual anger amongst a whole bunch of dopes that listen to Fox News and their ilk.

So I would say that if you vote for politicians that subscribe to the extremist position, you are making an active choice to perpetuate the problem.

[Pakuni]

Well no, that's not a scientific fact, unless you are using a different definition of life. That's a question that is widely debated.

But since you believe (as do I for that matter) that life starts at conception, then intentionally ending that life would be murder, no? So you believe that a baby being conceived through rape/incest is justification for its mother to murder it. I'm not sure how the mother's health is a factor here. I don't think pregnancies that are caused by rape/incest are any more risky to the mother than any other pregnancy. I think everyone (except a select few on the fringe) believe that if the mother's life is in danger that abortion is justified.

I believe that viability is a reasonable compromise when it comes to abortion.

An even more complicated question ... if you believe life begins at conception, then what do you do with all the embryos created, but never used, during the IVF process? Is freezing them child abuse? Is disposing of them murder? Should a clinic be required to find adoptive parents? 

[TSmith34, Inc.]

When does life begin?

Do you support the use of birth control?

Still waiting on warrior69's answer on this...

[jesmu84]

Well no, that's not a scientific fact, unless you are using a different definition of life. That's a question that is widely debated.

But since you believe (as do I for that matter) that life starts at conception, then intentionally ending that life would be murder, no? So you believe that a baby being conceived through rape/incest is justification for its mother to murder it. I'm not sure how the mother's health is a factor here. I don't think pregnancies that are caused by rape/incest are any more risky to the mother than any other pregnancy. I think everyone (except a select few on the fringe) believe that if the mother's life is in danger that abortion is justified.

I believe that viability is a reasonable compromise when it comes to abortion.

That's a tricky one. As medicine gets more and more advanced, "viability" comes sooner and sooner in the developmental process.

[JWags85]

I believe that viability is a reasonable compromise when it comes to abortion.

Viability is tough for me because you're well into the second trimester passing a lot of milestones before that 23-24 week mark.  I mean, my pregnant wife was feeling our son moving and kicking at like 20 weeks.  So that feels far more unsettling to me personally.

I don't presume to speak for Jockey, but I personally wouldn't go as far as that. But if you think back, there was not a fundamental disagreement between the two parties as recently as the 90's; they came together and passed what they hoped were reasonable gun laws to outlaw assault style weapons.

But what has happened since then? I would argue that only one party has radically changed positions. Gingrich decided there could be no compromise about anything and he was going to conduct all-out war--any compromise was viewed as weakness.

Now, that party subscribes to an extremist point of view that no reasonable restrictions can be implemented and guns must be available to virtually anyone, anytime, without restrictions. One reason is all that sweet, sweet NRA money pouring into their coffers, but another is that it has helped keep them in power by whipping up fear and perpetual anger amongst a whole bunch of dopes that listen to Fox News and their ilk.

So I would say that if you vote for politicians that subscribe to the extremist position, you are making an active choice to perpetuate the problem.

Really the brutality of the two party system.  Forcing people to become single issue voters and suffer the rest of the party's platform is just awful.  Republicans do it with financial issues.  Dems do it with gun control/abortion.  Just allows the creation of scapegoats and vilification.

[Jockey]

So anyone who has voted for a Republican, ever, is "part of the problem".  Got it.  That's a real rational take.

That's not what I said at all. You did a very good imitation of chico, here.

But make no mistake. If you vote R in November, you ARE voting for more guns and less gun control.

[MuggsyB]

That's not what I said at all. You did a very good imitation of chico, here.

But make no mistake. If you vote R in November, you ARE voting for more guns and less gun control.

And  if you vote for Biden again things will be great for everyone with chocolate rivers, gumdrop smiles, and everything completely under control.

[Pakuni]

I generally shrug off the "Supreme Court justices are Christian theocrats" stuff as hyperbole, but yikes.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/roe-supreme-court-justices-1378046/

[tower912]

I generally shrug off the "Supreme Court justices are Christian theocrats" stuff as hyperbole, but yikes.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/roe-supreme-court-justices-1378046/

I used to. 

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Mass shooting problem solved:

[Lennys Tap]

But since you believe (as do I for that matter) that life starts at conception, then intentionally ending that life would be murder, no? So you believe that a baby being conceived through rape/incest is justification for its mother to murder it. I'm not sure how the mother's health is a factor here. I don't think pregnancies that are caused by rape/incest are any more risky to the mother than any other pregnancy. I think everyone (except a select few on the fringe) believe that if the mother's life is in danger that abortion is justified.

I believe that viability is a reasonable compromise when it comes to abortion.

TAMU
I’m confused by your answer. You say because I believe life begins at conception I therefore must believe that intentionally ending that life is murder. Then you say that you also believe that life begins at conception - but that you don’t have to believe anything of the sort. That’s a contradiction.

Regarding rape or incest I think your attitude is cavalier. If you don’t think the health of a women raped or victimized by incest can be further compromised by being forced to carry a child to term I don’t know what to tell you.

[Jockey]

And  if you vote for Biden again things will be great for everyone with chocolate rivers, gumdrop smiles, and everything completely under control.

Make all the jokes you want - but know when you cast a ballot that you are voting for either guns or for kids. It's your choice.

But it takes guts to vote for people who are nothing more than gun 'pushers' and then have the nerve to complain when those guns are used for what they are intended to do.

[MuggsyB]

Make all the jokes you want - but know when you cast a ballot that you are voting for either guns or for kids. It's your choice.

But it takes guts to vote for people who are nothing more than gun 'pushers' and then have the nerve to complain when those guns are used for what they are intended to do.

So if you voted for Democrats in Highland Park and Chicago, communities that are vastly Democratic btw, you have every right to "conplain" about what happened over the weekend.  My grandma who has lived in Highland Park for 67 yrs, cannot "complain", or show any emotion whatsoever, if she did not only vote for Democrats.   It's her fault, not Crimo or his asshead father. 

And as a voter, whether a Democrat or Republican, your vote should be solely based on one issue because Jockey says so.   If you have ever voted for a Republican, and someone is murdered, you are complicit and under no conditions can you grieve or be upset about it.  Makes perfect sense as all of these cases aren't nuanced at all. 

[Lennys Tap]

Make all the jokes you want - but know when you cast a ballot that you are voting for either guns or for kids. It's your choice.

But it takes guts to vote for people who are nothing more than gun 'pushers' and then have the nerve to complain when those guns are used for what they are intended to do.

How many more people are dying because of the fentanyl pouring in at our southern borders? How many more people are being pushed close to or into poverty by policies that encourage more inflation? And as awful as things are on that front, imagine where we’d be if “Build Back Better” had made it through Congress. Our President has the lowest approval rating at this point in his term of any president in the history of polling, even though he’s unscathed by scandal or personality disorders. He’s earned it by consistently passing the buck and being behind the curve on virtually every issue.

You can try to make the coming election about one issue and name call/vilify everyone who disagrees with you but I think you’ll be in for a rude awakening come November.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

TAMU
I’m confused by your answer. You say because I believe life begins at conception I therefore must believe that intentionally ending that life is murder. Then you say that you also believe that life begins at conception - but that you don’t have to believe anything of the sort. That’s a contradiction.

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.

TAMU
Regarding rape or incest I think your attitude is cavalier. If you don’t think the health of a women raped or victimized by incest can be further compromised by being forced to carry a child to term I don’t know what to tell you.

Of course it affects their health, but it doesn't put their life in jeopardy (anymore than any other pregnancy). You know what else affect's the mother's health? Being pregnant. Having to take on medical debt. Not having enough resources to take care of a child or another child on top of already having children. If the bar is "it effects the mother's health", then I would argue that all abortions should be on the table.

[Hards Alumni]

Make all the jokes you want - but know when you cast a ballot that you are voting for either guns or for kids. It's your choice.

But it takes guts to vote for people who are nothing more than gun 'pushers' and then have the nerve to complain when those guns are used for what they are intended to do.

You do realize you and talk like this is a large part of the problem.

[Hards Alumni]

How many more people are dying because of the fentanyl pouring in at our southern borders? How many more people are being pushed close to or into poverty by policies that encourage more inflation? And as awful as things are on that front, imagine where we’d be if “Build Back Better” had made it through Congress. Our President has the lowest approval rating at this point in his term of any president in the history of polling, even though he’s unscathed by scandal or personality disorders. He’s earned it by consistently passing the buck and being behind the curve on virtually every issue.

You can try to make the coming election about one issue and name call/vilify everyone who disagrees with you but I think you’ll be in for a rude awakening come November.

Fentanyl has been a problem for years, so I'm not going to put that on the administration.  As for your other polices, our entire legislative branch is broken so no meaningful policy can be passed.  Blaming supply side inflation is the free market's fault, not the Biden administration's. 

The rest I can generally agree with.  Biden is a feckless, relic, and a fading member of the old guard of the Democratic party.  His VP is managing Dan Quayle levels of public gaffes on a weekly basis.  Unless the overturning of Roe galvanizes a lot more Dems by November, there will be an enormous wipeout of vulnerable Dems, and the GOP will cruise.  And if you want my opinion, if the Dems don't DO SOMETHING or ANYTHING by November, they're going to lose the youth vote (ha) to apathy, and they will absolutely deserve it.

[Uncle Rico]

Fentanyl has been a problem for years, so I'm not going to put that on the administration.  As for your other polices, our entire legislative branch is broken so no meaningful policy can be passed.  Blaming supply side inflation is the free market's fault, not the Biden administration's. 

The rest I can generally agree with.  Biden is a feckless, relic, and a fading member of the old guard of the Democratic party.  His VP is managing Dan Quayle levels of public gaffes on a weekly basis.  Unless the overturning of Roe galvanizes a lot more Dems by November, there will be an enormous wipeout of vulnerable Dems, and the GOP will cruise.  And if you want my opinion, if the Dems don't DO SOMETHING or ANYTHING by November, they're going to lose the youth vote (ha) to apathy, and they will absolutely deserve it.

Yup, yup

[Jockey]

How many more people are dying because of the fentanyl pouring in at our southern borders?

Zero.

[dgies9156]

After watching the Highland Park shooting mess, there's a whole group of questions that needs answering as we move forward. In no particular order, they are:

1) What is the justification for allowing civilian ownership of high-powered assault weapons? I don't get what we need these weapons in civilian hands for. If some hunter out there can explain what we hunt for with assault rifles, I'm all ears. We ban very dangerous weapons such as explosives, hand grenades, nuclear bombs, from private ownership, so why not high-powered assault rifles?

2. In the "what was he thinking category," Why would a father whose son has shown known emotional issues sponsor the son's FOID application? I'm all ears on this one.

3, In Illinois, billions are wasted on everything from consultants, to cost overruns, to gold plated pensions to patronage employees. If Indiana can do it for $1.00, Illinois will spend $10 on the same thing. So, Why wasn't the State Police FOID Database Upgraded? Apparently, Highland Park reported the disturbances caused by Robert Crimo III to State Police but evidently, there was no centralized database that was easily accessible for the State Police to review Mr. Crimo's fitness for gun ownership.
 
With the Exception of Item 1 (which is sorely needed), the laws are on the books. Not sure any gun law can resolve Item 2 without Item 3.  And I guess Item 3 never happened because there wasn't enough juice in it to excite a corrupt Chicago politician!

Here's some answers:

2) The father apparently didn't know about the incidents at the Mother's home. I find that hard to believe but, absent any knowledge to the contrary, I'll take him at his word.

3) ISP said late yesterday that they had the evidence Highland Park sent them but it did not meet the standard in Illinois for Red Flag protection. I'll buy that as well but suggest ISP needs to have far more discretion. It may be time for more legislation.

[brewcity77]

So anyone who has voted for a Republican, ever, is "part of the problem".  Got it.  That's a real rational take.

And  if you vote for Biden again things will be great for everyone with chocolate rivers, gumdrop smiles, and everything completely under control.

Neither of these are things anyone said. I consider Biden has been disappointing so far and hope to see him step down in 2024. I also wouldn't favor VP Harris following him at this point (she wasn't my candidate in 2020, either).

But the point isn't about how you voted in the past, it's about how you vote this year. One party has virtually no interest in passing laws to try to stop gun homicides, individual or mass. If this is something you are interested in, you can make a decision based on that in November. Biden isn't on the ticket. This is a choice between what future we want. Do you want to expand rights for guns and enable more homicides, or do you want to protect American life?

We'll all have that decision to make, and we will all personally own the repercussions of that vote. At the end of the day, it comes down to the decisions of millions of voters. We'll blame the courts, the politicians, the gun manufacturers, but ultimately it will be the individual voters. If you want to be "part of the problem" as you said, vote Republican. Just do so recognizing that voting that way means you are personally casting a vote in favor of mass shootings like the ones dominating our headlines on a daily basis.

[nyg]

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2022/07/07/wife-of-killed-detroit-officer-he-loved-being-a-police-officer-but-he-also-loved-being-a-dad/


RIP Detroit Officer Courts.  Killed by subject with an AR-15. Father was a retired Officer and Officer Courts volunteered to do double shift.  He was killed on the second shift.   

[MuggsyB]

Neither of these are things anyone said. I consider Biden has been disappointing so far and hope to see him step down in 2024. I also wouldn't favor VP Harris following him at this point (she wasn't my candidate in 2020, either).

But the point isn't about how you voted in the past, it's about how you vote this year. One party has virtually no interest in passing laws to try to stop gun homicides, individual or mass. If this is something you are interested in, you can make a decision based on that in November. Biden isn't on the ticket. This is a choice between what future we want. Do you want to expand rights for guns and enable more homicides, or do you want to protect American life?

We'll all have that decision to make, and we will all personally own the repercussions of that vote. At the end of the day, it comes down to the decisions of millions of voters. We'll blame the courts, the politicians, the gun manufacturers, but ultimately it will be the individual voters. If you want to be "part of the problem" as you said, vote Republican. Just do so recognizing that voting that way means you are personally casting a vote in favor of mass shootings like the ones dominating our headlines on a daily basis.
[/quote

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.