Society as a whole would be safer if nobody drove cars too. In fact, I think far more people are killed and injured by cars than firearms. Maybe everybody should stay home just to be safe...
If I didn't have a car, I couldn't have spent 2,000 hours volunteering at the homeless shelter.
If I didn't have a gun...
Of course you could. Your driving a car is not required. You could take a bus or a cab. They also have special licenses that probably require background checks and checks for a a criminal record (not sure about mental health). Clearly they are far more able to safely transport you to your destination than you are. Cars are deadly machines that are best left to the professionals.
I actually would like stronger public transportation; the system in my hometown isn't fast enough for me to get places on time. If it's properly funded, public transportation is safer, cheaper, and more energy efficient. Lord knows a lot of folks at the homeless shelter would have had jobs months earlier if their would-be employers could rely on them getting to work on time without having a car! A lot of employers require their workers to own cars before they can get hired.
I would settle for self-driving cars as well. Even now, completely self-driving cars (not the partly self-driving kind; those are less safe) are actually safer than human drivers, on top of being more energy-efficient. Driving is a highly mechanical task that requires fast reaction time, adherence to precise rules, procedural thinking, memorizing routes, and sobriety. Computers are better at all of those skills; it's not surprising tests have found they're better at driving than humans.
The biggest problem with self-driving cars (which is not very big, and easy to fix) is that they need to be trained to drive at the same speed as other drivers, instead of rigidly obeying the speed limit.
Society as a whole would be safer if nobody drove cars too. In fact, I think far more people are killed and injured by cars than firearms. Maybe everybody should stay home just to be safe...
If I didn't have a car, I couldn't have spent 2,000 hours volunteering at the homeless shelter.
If I didn't have a gun...
Of course you could. Your driving a car is not required. You could take a bus or a cab. They also have special licenses that probably require background checks and checks for a a criminal record (not sure about mental health). Clearly they are far more able to safely transport you to your destination than you are. Cars are deadly machines that are best left to the professionals.
I actually would like stronger public transportation; the system in my hometown isn't fast enough for me to get places on time. If it's properly funded, public transportation is safer, cheaper, and more energy efficient. Lord knows a lot of folks at the homeless shelter would have had jobs months earlier if their would-be employers could rely on them getting to work on time without having a car! A lot of employers require their workers to own cars before they can get hired.
I would settle for self-driving cars as well. Even now, completely self-driving cars (not the partly self-driving kind; those are less safe) are actually safer than human drivers, on top of being more energy-efficient. Driving is a highly mechanical task that requires fast reaction time, adherence to precise rules, procedural thinking, memorizing routes, and sobriety. Computers are better at all of those skills; it's not surprising tests have found they're better at driving than humans.
The biggest problem with self-driving cars (which is not very big, and easy to fix) is that they need to be trained to drive at the same speed as other drivers, instead of rigidly obeying the speed limit.
This self-driving car phenomena isn't ready to take off yet. First of all, convincing the general public to give up that kind of control while they travel will be a hurdle in and of itself. And I still do not understand how a machine can account for human error, which happens nearly every time ANYONE steps into a car, much less people on cell phones, someone getting really into a song on the radio, someone who is intoxicated, etc etc etc. I simply don't understand how these variables can be accounted for. I don't doubt the car itself drives well, but how can it account for the hundreds of people it will likely run into on a trip who AREN'T??
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
Society as a whole would be safer if nobody drove cars too. In fact, I think far more people are killed and injured by cars than firearms. Maybe everybody should stay home just to be safe...
If I didn't have a car, I couldn't have spent 2,000 hours volunteering at the homeless shelter.
If I didn't have a gun...
Of course you could. Your driving a car is not required. You could take a bus or a cab. They also have special licenses that probably require background checks and checks for a a criminal record (not sure about mental health). Clearly they are far more able to safely transport you to your destination than you are. Cars are deadly machines that are best left to the professionals.
But he has more training on how to handle a vechile, needing to pass a test prior to operating it legally.
Society as a whole would be safer if nobody drove cars too. In fact, I think far more people are killed and injured by cars than firearms. Maybe everybody should stay home just to be safe...
If I didn't have a car, I couldn't have spent 2,000 hours volunteering at the homeless shelter.
If I didn't have a gun...
Of course you could. Your driving a car is not required. You could take a bus or a cab. They also have special licenses that probably require background checks and checks for a a criminal record (not sure about mental health). Clearly they are far more able to safely transport you to your destination than you are. Cars are deadly machines that are best left to the professionals.
I actually would like stronger public transportation; the system in my hometown isn't fast enough for me to get places on time. If it's properly funded, public transportation is safer, cheaper, and more energy efficient. Lord knows a lot of folks at the homeless shelter would have had jobs months earlier if their would-be employers could rely on them getting to work on time without having a car! A lot of employers require their workers to own cars before they can get hired.
I would settle for self-driving cars as well. Even now, completely self-driving cars (not the partly self-driving kind; those are less safe) are actually safer than human drivers, on top of being more energy-efficient. Driving is a highly mechanical task that requires fast reaction time, adherence to precise rules, procedural thinking, memorizing routes, and sobriety. Computers are better at all of those skills; it's not surprising tests have found they're better at driving than humans.
The biggest problem with self-driving cars (which is not very big, and easy to fix) is that they need to be trained to drive at the same speed as other drivers, instead of rigidly obeying the speed limit.
Public transportation is great in cities. It is not so great in rural communities that need to service a large distance between towns to be effective.
An example from my life: I work two jobs in two neighboring towns to mine. Both rural. It takes me about 20-30 minutes to drive to either job.
But if I were to use the bus (which I've had to do a lot until recently), my 30 minute commute becomes a lot longer. For Job A, it takes about 30-40 minutes to arrive to work by bus. In order to catch the bus on time, I need to leave my house and walk to the station about 20 minutes early. To allow enough wiggle-room between the time it takes the bus to arrive and the start time of my shift, I typically need to leave an hour early before my shift actually begins, which means I arrive--at the latest--a half-hour early. And that's on a weekday; if I work on a Saturday or Sunday, when service is greatly reduced, that down-time could be even longer.
That's almost 2 hours of my day already gone before my job even starts.
That was Job A.
Job B is even worse. To reach Job B in time before my shift begins, I have to leave my house 20 minutes before the bus leaves. The time slot I'm hoping to catch leaves town a full three hours before my shift. I have to do this because I need to bus into the city--a one-hour route by itself--then take another bus back into the town my Job B resides in.
But unlike my other job, which drops me off right in front of Job A, neither of the to busses I've used so far to get to Job B service anywhere near its location. So I have to take a third bus to the specific neighborhood it belongs. The down-time for that third bus can be anywhere from ten minutes to an hour, depending on when I got off the second bus. Finally, I take the third bus, about a ten-fifteen minute route, and get off in front of the elementary school, and then walk another ten minutes the rest of the way.
Remember: a drive to Job B takes 30 minutes max. What should be a 30 minute commute instead becomes three hours on public transportation.
And good luck getting back. Some nights I work so late, I can't get home via public transportation even if I wanted to. The busses stop running after nine o'clock.
So.
There's really no comparing the "need" between cars and guns. There are too many people like me living in rural areas who desperately need a car to get to work, earn money, and feed themselves, because relying solely on public transportation is simply impossible. You don't "need" a gun for day-to-day life the same way you "need" a car.
(All that being said, I am 100 percent in-favor of improving public transit. Because turning a 30 minute drive into three hours is effing ridiculous. -_- )
Well, who says "being able to protect yourself" automatically equates to owning a gun? In this situation, I'm sure martial arts and self-defense training would've come in handy. Maybe we should be encouraging people to join a dojo instead of buy a gun.
Not really. Virtually every martial arts instructor in the world (at least the reputable ones) will tell you that any martial artist, no matter how well-trained they may be, will *never* try to overpower or take out someone wielding a gun. Those moves you see in movies--sometimes they are fancy, sometimes they are direct and no-nonsense--are all choreographed, staged, and might have required three or four takes to execute correctly. Taking on someone who is armed with a gun using only your bare hands and martial arts skills is essentially a guarantee that you will wind up being shot, possibly killed.
Where martial arts training *will* help you is if you find yourself in a situation where someone has drawn a gun you won't "freeze" with that "deer in the headlights" look.
*************
I agree that the number one problem with Democrats these days is that they aren't FDR-style Democrats and no longer care about their blue-collar core group.
Where many people make a mistake in thinking about FDR's legacy is that a social program such as the WPA or the CCC is not the same thing as socialism.
The two things which made the Great Depression so awful was that most lower- and middle-class families had very little savings to weather the economic downturn and that it lasted a long time (relatively speaking--most recessions last between two to five years but that depression lasted a full decade).
*************
It takes me 15 minutes to get to/from work if traffic is flowing nicely; about 45 minutes if traffic is bad. It is possible for me to take public transportation most of the way to the house but I have to allow at least two hours for this. As @Nonnahswriter notes, public transportation doesn't work very well in rural areas.
Think about something for a minute. If you were going to go to a location you visit often, do you measure how far away it is in terms of distance (the mall is 20 km away) or time (it takes me 10 minutes to drive to the mall)?
The two things which made the Great Depression so awful was that most lower- and middle-class families had very little savings to weather the economic downturn and that it lasted a long time (relatively speaking--most recessions last between two to five years but that depression lasted a full decade).
Well, yes, there was the fact that the people had very little savings. And it was also the fact that the savings they did have disappeared when the banks started failing. This is why Roosevelt basically nationalized the banks for a brief period after he was sworn in to stop the run on them. It's also why we have the FDIC, ensuring the government insures your money up to a certain threshold even if the banks do go under.
Society as a whole would be safer if nobody drove cars too. In fact, I think far more people are killed and injured by cars than firearms. Maybe everybody should stay home just to be safe...
If I didn't have a car, I couldn't have spent 2,000 hours volunteering at the homeless shelter.
If I didn't have a gun...
Of course you could. Your driving a car is not required. You could take a bus or a cab. They also have special licenses that probably require background checks and checks for a a criminal record (not sure about mental health). Clearly they are far more able to safely transport you to your destination than you are. Cars are deadly machines that are best left to the professionals.
But he has more training on how to handle a vechile, needing to pass a test prior to operating it legally.
That same licencing isnt applied to guns.
Well if you're not trained for using firearms you're more likely to miss. That might be a good thing.
Gun training may help reduce accidental deaths and injuries but it won't reduce the intentional ones. Personally, however, I'm not against making training a requirement for gun purchase. We do have to take driver's training after all...
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
And yet many countries around the world manage to do just fine without police everywhere and without people armed to the teeth out of fear of armed people.
So now it turns out Michael Flynn was ACTIVELY acting as an agent of Turkey all the way through NOVEMBER, and no one even seems to dispute this. So besides the Russia connections, he was now also a puppet of Erdogan, who is now closely allied with Putin?? Yeah, this is totally normal. Exactly the kind of guy you give the position of National Security Adviser. Be wary of ANYTHING Trump does on Syria, because it most assuredly will not be done in the interest of THIS country, but one that starts with an R and ends with an A.
Turkey and Russia have not had a good relationship, since they basically threatened each other repeatedly. So unless Flynn is a super-agent playing off entire sovereign states against each other, It doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
I would settle for self-driving cars as well. Even now, completely self-driving cars (not the partly self-driving kind; those are less safe) are actually safer than human drivers, on top of being more energy-efficient. Driving is a highly mechanical task that requires fast reaction time, adherence to precise rules, procedural thinking, memorizing routes, and sobriety. Computers are better at all of those skills; it's not surprising tests have found they're better at driving than humans.
I think the best 'automated' transport system is the rail system.
I don't think self-driving cars can handle all the edge cases you get on the road, They would probably screw up solving this weird jam and then everything would go bonkers.
"We are very happy our inter-state relations have are restoring rather quickly" says Putin. I'm sure both of them bonded over the ability to bomb some more civilians. What's one shot down fighter jet when that kind of opportunity presents itself.....
Whats happening in Turkey is really damn sad. One of the few Muslim countries that became modernized and was a model for other countries to follow, but their sliding backwards.
Whats happening in Turkey is really damn sad. One of the few Muslim countries that became modernized and was a model for other countries to follow, but their sliding backwards.
Trump's afraid of the press. Won't answer questions and hiding from the press, what a coward.
President Trump dodged inquiries from the press again on Friday, as administration officials continue to shield him from reporters. Following a late morning appearance by Trump in the White House's Roosevelt Room, where he reiterated his support for the House Republicans' effort to replace Obamacare, the president did not respond to multiple questions shouted by reporters. An official entered the room shortly thereafter and "began yelling loudly" for reporters to clear out, according to a White House "pool" report that detailed the event.
A pool allows a small group of reporters to stand in for the press corps at large to accommodate space limitations. They are used frequently in Washington media. The official was later identified as Keith Schiller, Trump's former private security chief who now acts as director of Oval Office operations. Schiller "loudly thanked" the reporters gathered "and directed them to exit the room," according to the pool report. In response to the pool, a spokeswoman said only that the "staff asked the press to leave the room" and declined to comment further. (A White House spokeswoman did not respond to CNNMoney's request for comment.) Related: White House cancels open press events by Trump Trump canceled two open press events this week, a decision his team chalked up to limited space. Many reporters were skeptical of that explanation, given that the White House pool is small. Trump held one open press event on Thursday, but he managed to avoid engaging the press. When one reporter asked him about Wikileaks' CIA dump, Trump smiled and did not respond. Journalists have been left with similar frustrations over a lack of access and engagement with other administration officials. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will travel to Asia without reporters, a departure from precedent that prompted Washington bureau chiefs from several major news organizations -- including CNN -- to send a letter in protest to the State Department. At a photo-op earlier this week, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell shouted several questions to Tillerson. Like Trump, Tillerson simply ignored them.
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
And yet many countries around the world manage to do just fine without police everywhere and without people armed to the teeth out of fear of armed people.
And yet many other countries also have higher violent crime rates than us, while maintaning more strict gun control than us.
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
And yet many countries around the world manage to do just fine without police everywhere and without people armed to the teeth out of fear of armed people.
And yet many other countries also have higher violent crime rates than us, while maintaning more strict gun control than us.
Apples and oranges. The violent crime rates are defined differently in different countries. In the UK a fist fight in a bar is a violent crime, while in the US it won't even make the list.
@smeagolheart I wonder if politicians in the UK want to ban fists to reduce violent crimes.
I think they take a more realistic approach to things across the pond. No need to hide statistics over there, just give people information and they can make their own minds up.
I actually find it hilarious that the very people who warn about the U.S. becoming a fascist country are the very same folks who are least able to protect themselves from it by turning in their weapons. Come on liberals, start arming yourselves before it's too late! You may find some allies if the proverbial excrement hits the fan...
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
Well, who says "being able to protect yourself" automatically equates to owning a gun? In this situation, I'm sure martial arts and self-defense training would've come in handy. Maybe we should be encouraging people to join a dojo instead of buy a gun.
Not really. Virtually every martial arts instructor in the world (at least the reputable ones) will tell you that any martial artist, no matter how well-trained they may be, will *never* try to overpower or take out someone wielding a gun. Those moves you see in movies--sometimes they are fancy, sometimes they are direct and no-nonsense--are all choreographed, staged, and might have required three or four takes to execute correctly. Taking on someone who is armed with a gun using only your bare hands and martial arts skills is essentially a guarantee that you will wind up being shot, possibly killed.
Where martial arts training *will* help you is if you find yourself in a situation where someone has drawn a gun you won't "freeze" with that "deer in the headlights" look.
*************
It takes me 15 minutes to get to/from work if traffic is flowing nicely; about 45 minutes if traffic is bad. It is possible for me to take public transportation most of the way to the house but I have to allow at least two hours for this. As Nonnahswriter notes, public transportation doesn't work very well in rural areas.
Think about something for a minute. If you were going to go to a location you visit often, do you measure how far away it is in terms of distance (the mall is 20 km away) or time (it takes me 10 minutes to drive to the mall)?
That's why I said "in this situation" as in refering to the axe-wielder. I'm well aware martial arts won't do squat against a gun, thanks.
Also, I measure in time, but that's mostly because I'm bad at measuring distance. *shrugs*
I actually find it hilarious that the very people who warn about the U.S. becoming a fascist country are the very same folks who are least able to protect themselves from it by turning in their weapons. Come on liberals, start arming yourselves before it's too late! You may find some allies if the proverbial excrement hits the fan...
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
I still can't believe that Armon Bundy and those yahoos were able to hold out in a federal facility and all the law enforcement were like "hmm ok." and did nothing for what seemed like months. Then people go to North Dakota and protest the pipeline and they get ate by dogs, frozen water showers, sound weapons, police brutality, etc. So maybe those DAPL protestors should have been armed it worked for Bundy. Or why not Black Lives Matters - do the Armon Bundy. Wouldn't that work? We need to find out what the hell's going on here.
I actually find it hilarious that the very people who warn about the U.S. becoming a fascist country are the very same folks who are least able to protect themselves from it by turning in their weapons. Come on liberals, start arming yourselves before it's too late! You may find some allies if the proverbial excrement hits the fan...
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
I still can't believe that Armon Bundy and those yahoos were able to hold out in a federal facility and all the law enforcement were like "hmm ok." and did nothing for what seemed like months. Then people go to North Dakota and protest the pipeline and they get ate by dogs, frozen water showers, sound weapons, police brutality, etc. So maybe those DAPL protestors should have been armed it worked for Bundy. Or why not Black Lives Matters - do the Armon Bundy. Wouldn't that work? We need to find out what the hell's going on here.
Those guys committed sedition on national television, and not only were they allowed to do so for the better part of a month and a half, they were allowed to go to and from the federal land they had taken over to the nearest town to pick up mail. There has perhaps never been a bigger, more stark example of how justice in this country works differently if you are conservative and white. You can lead and armed takeover of federal land and broadcast it on TV, giving interviews to the media for WEEKS on end. If the Bundy boys had been black or Muslim they would have all been shot dead within 24 hours.
I actually find it hilarious that the very people who warn about the U.S. becoming a fascist country are the very same folks who are least able to protect themselves from it by turning in their weapons. Come on liberals, start arming yourselves before it's too late! You may find some allies if the proverbial excrement hits the fan...
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
I still can't believe that Armon Bundy and those yahoos were able to hold out in a federal facility and all the law enforcement were like "hmm ok." and did nothing for what seemed like months. Then people go to North Dakota and protest the pipeline and they get ate by dogs, frozen water showers, sound weapons, police brutality, etc. So maybe those DAPL protestors should have been armed it worked for Bundy. Or why not Black Lives Matters - do the Armon Bundy. Wouldn't that work? We need to find out what the hell's going on here.
Those guys committed sedition on national television, and not only were they allowed to do so for the better part of a month and a half, they were allowed to go to and from the federal land they had taken over to the nearest town to pick up mail. There has perhaps never been a bigger, more stark example of how justice in this country works differently if you are conservative and white. You can lead and armed takeover of federal land and broadcast it on TV, giving interviews to the media for WEEKS on end. If the Bundy boys had been black or Muslim they would have all been shot dead within 24 hours.
I remember the David Koresh and Waco showdown, they also let those religious nuts hole up for two months before they decided that they had enough and they went in - guns blazing. But yeah if they were minorities that wouldn't have got 51 days. Anyway, white conservative or religious and you get a lot of slack, is that the secret?
I actually find it hilarious that the very people who warn about the U.S. becoming a fascist country are the very same folks who are least able to protect themselves from it by turning in their weapons. Come on liberals, start arming yourselves before it's too late! You may find some allies if the proverbial excrement hits the fan...
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
I still can't believe that Armon Bundy and those yahoos were able to hold out in a federal facility and all the law enforcement were like "hmm ok." and did nothing for what seemed like months. Then people go to North Dakota and protest the pipeline and they get ate by dogs, frozen water showers, sound weapons, police brutality, etc. So maybe those DAPL protestors should have been armed it worked for Bundy. Or why not Black Lives Matters - do the Armon Bundy. Wouldn't that work? We need to find out what the hell's going on here.
Those guys committed sedition on national television, and not only were they allowed to do so for the better part of a month and a half, they were allowed to go to and from the federal land they had taken over to the nearest town to pick up mail. There has perhaps never been a bigger, more stark example of how justice in this country works differently if you are conservative and white. You can lead and armed takeover of federal land and broadcast it on TV, giving interviews to the media for WEEKS on end. If the Bundy boys had been black or Muslim they would have all been shot dead within 24 hours.
I remember the David Koresh and Waco showdown, they also let those religious nuts hole up for two months before they decided that they had enough and they went in - guns blazing. But yeah if they were minorities that wouldn't have got 51 days. Anyway, white conservative or religious and you get a lot of slack, is that the secret?
Everyone needs to pay close attention to how every GOP member of Congress and surrogate is answering the question "will everyone be covered"?? To a person, they will say "everyone will have ACCESS to coverage. I have "access" to purchasing a luxury sports car. I sure as hell can't actually buy one.
And to the issue of health savings accounts, someone put it very nicely on Twitter yesterday. Telling someone without insurance and without the means to pay for it they can have a health savings account is like giving a person who is starving and asking for food a cook book.
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
the problem (as I see it) isn't even that I might want a gun. The problem with gun control is that there is no way that all of the guns can/will get taken off the street. So then gun control only prevents people who are likely to obey the law from owning them. Those that actually are okay with breaking the laws can and will continue to get them.
The infrastructure for weapons manufacture and distribution is so baked into our society that ripping it out at the roots would cause all manner of chaos, cost jobs, decrease tax revenue..... And still not solve or even noticeably reduce the problem.
Quite a lot of those who clamor for gun control are merely scared (largely by sensationalism in the media or by what the government wants the people to be) and don't want to think it through. It is yet another distraction for the masses. "Let em fight it out and hope that they don't look too closely at what is really going on."
@jjstraka34 There are always ways to get ahold of just about anything, legal or not. I want to be able to protect myself/family from the person who illegally purchased a gun specifically to go on a killing spree. The alternative is to have police EVERYWHERE to prevent shootings from happening, which 1. is unfeasible and 2. Law Enforcement is responsible for its own share of killings and atrocities.
the problem (as I see it) isn't even that I might want a gun. The problem with gun control is that there is no way that all of the guns can/will get taken off the street. So then gun control only prevents people who are likely to obey the law from owning them. Those that actually are okay with breaking the laws can and will continue to get them.
The infrastructure for weapons manufacture and distribution is so baked into our society that ripping it out at the roots would cause all manner of chaos, cost jobs, decrease tax revenue..... And still not solve or even noticeably reduce the problem.
Quite a lot of those who clamor for gun control are merely scared (largely by sensationalism in the media or by what the government wants the people to be) and don't want to think it through. It is yet another distraction for the masses. "Let em fight it out and hope that they don't look too closely at what is really going on."
And yet Australia had guns and the government was able to take them out of circulation. They decided that enough was enough with the mass shootings.
Comments
I would settle for self-driving cars as well. Even now, completely self-driving cars (not the partly self-driving kind; those are less safe) are actually safer than human drivers, on top of being more energy-efficient. Driving is a highly mechanical task that requires fast reaction time, adherence to precise rules, procedural thinking, memorizing routes, and sobriety. Computers are better at all of those skills; it's not surprising tests have found they're better at driving than humans.
The biggest problem with self-driving cars (which is not very big, and easy to fix) is that they need to be trained to drive at the same speed as other drivers, instead of rigidly obeying the speed limit.
That same licencing isnt applied to guns.
An example from my life: I work two jobs in two neighboring towns to mine. Both rural. It takes me about 20-30 minutes to drive to either job.
But if I were to use the bus (which I've had to do a lot until recently), my 30 minute commute becomes a lot longer. For Job A, it takes about 30-40 minutes to arrive to work by bus. In order to catch the bus on time, I need to leave my house and walk to the station about 20 minutes early. To allow enough wiggle-room between the time it takes the bus to arrive and the start time of my shift, I typically need to leave an hour early before my shift actually begins, which means I arrive--at the latest--a half-hour early. And that's on a weekday; if I work on a Saturday or Sunday, when service is greatly reduced, that down-time could be even longer.
That's almost 2 hours of my day already gone before my job even starts.
That was Job A.
Job B is even worse. To reach Job B in time before my shift begins, I have to leave my house 20 minutes before the bus leaves. The time slot I'm hoping to catch leaves town a full three hours before my shift. I have to do this because I need to bus into the city--a one-hour route by itself--then take another bus back into the town my Job B resides in.
But unlike my other job, which drops me off right in front of Job A, neither of the to busses I've used so far to get to Job B service anywhere near its location. So I have to take a third bus to the specific neighborhood it belongs. The down-time for that third bus can be anywhere from ten minutes to an hour, depending on when I got off the second bus. Finally, I take the third bus, about a ten-fifteen minute route, and get off in front of the elementary school, and then walk another ten minutes the rest of the way.
Remember: a drive to Job B takes 30 minutes max. What should be a 30 minute commute instead becomes three hours on public transportation.
And good luck getting back. Some nights I work so late, I can't get home via public transportation even if I wanted to. The busses stop running after nine o'clock.
So.
There's really no comparing the "need" between cars and guns. There are too many people like me living in rural areas who desperately need a car to get to work, earn money, and feed themselves, because relying solely on public transportation is simply impossible. You don't "need" a gun for day-to-day life the same way you "need" a car.
(All that being said, I am 100 percent in-favor of improving public transit. Because turning a 30 minute drive into three hours is effing ridiculous. -_- )
Where martial arts training *will* help you is if you find yourself in a situation where someone has drawn a gun you won't "freeze" with that "deer in the headlights" look.
*************
I agree that the number one problem with Democrats these days is that they aren't FDR-style Democrats and no longer care about their blue-collar core group.
Where many people make a mistake in thinking about FDR's legacy is that a social program such as the WPA or the CCC is not the same thing as socialism.
The two things which made the Great Depression so awful was that most lower- and middle-class families had very little savings to weather the economic downturn and that it lasted a long time (relatively speaking--most recessions last between two to five years but that depression lasted a full decade).
*************
It takes me 15 minutes to get to/from work if traffic is flowing nicely; about 45 minutes if traffic is bad. It is possible for me to take public transportation most of the way to the house but I have to allow at least two hours for this. As @Nonnahswriter notes, public transportation doesn't work very well in rural areas.
Think about something for a minute. If you were going to go to a location you visit often, do you measure how far away it is in terms of distance (the mall is 20 km away) or time (it takes me 10 minutes to drive to the mall)?
Well, yes, there was the fact that the people had very little savings. And it was also the fact that the savings they did have disappeared when the banks started failing. This is why Roosevelt basically nationalized the banks for a brief period after he was sworn in to stop the run on them. It's also why we have the FDIC, ensuring the government insures your money up to a certain threshold even if the banks do go under.
Gun training may help reduce accidental deaths and injuries but it won't reduce the intentional ones. Personally, however, I'm not against making training a requirement for gun purchase. We do have to take driver's training after all...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/03/08/marines-have-arrived-in-syria-to-fire-artillery-in-the-fight-for-raqqa/?utm_term=.5eadf121a410
So unless Flynn is a super-agent playing off entire sovereign states against each other, It doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
I think the best 'automated' transport system is the rail system.
I don't think self-driving cars can handle all the edge cases you get on the road, They would probably screw up solving this weird jam and then everything would go bonkers.
"We are very happy our inter-state relations have are restoring rather quickly" says Putin. I'm sure both of them bonded over the ability to bomb some more civilians. What's one shot down fighter jet when that kind of opportunity presents itself.....
Whats happening in Turkey is really damn sad. One of the few Muslim countries that became modernized and was a model for other countries to follow, but their sliding backwards.
Following a late morning appearance by Trump in the White House's Roosevelt Room, where he reiterated his support for the House Republicans' effort to replace Obamacare, the president did not respond to multiple questions shouted by reporters.
An official entered the room shortly thereafter and "began yelling loudly" for reporters to clear out, according to a White House "pool" report that detailed the event.
A pool allows a small group of reporters to stand in for the press corps at large to accommodate space limitations. They are used frequently in Washington media.
The official was later identified as Keith Schiller, Trump's former private security chief who now acts as director of Oval Office operations. Schiller "loudly thanked" the reporters gathered "and directed them to exit the room," according to the pool report.
In response to the pool, a spokeswoman said only that the "staff asked the press to leave the room" and declined to comment further. (A White House spokeswoman did not respond to CNNMoney's request for comment.)
Related: White House cancels open press events by Trump
Trump canceled two open press events this week, a decision his team chalked up to limited space.
Many reporters were skeptical of that explanation, given that the White House pool is small. Trump held one open press event on Thursday, but he managed to avoid engaging the press. When one reporter asked him about Wikileaks' CIA dump, Trump smiled and did not respond.
Journalists have been left with similar frustrations over a lack of access and engagement with other administration officials.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will travel to Asia without reporters, a departure from precedent that prompted Washington bureau chiefs from several major news organizations -- including CNN -- to send a letter in protest to the State Department.
At a photo-op earlier this week, NBC News chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell shouted several questions to Tillerson. Like Trump, Tillerson simply ignored them.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/03/10/media/donald-trump-white-house-press-pool/index.html
This is only somewhat tongue in cheek. It wasn't the military that brought the Nazis and Communists their power. It was the secret police and party thugs. In other words, not tanks, planes, or helicopters. Totalitarian governments actually fear the military because they have the power to topple them.
Also, I measure in time, but that's mostly because I'm bad at measuring distance. *shrugs*
And to the issue of health savings accounts, someone put it very nicely on Twitter yesterday. Telling someone without insurance and without the means to pay for it they can have a health savings account is like giving a person who is starving and asking for food a cook book.
The infrastructure for weapons manufacture and distribution is so baked into our society that ripping it out at the roots would cause all manner of chaos, cost jobs, decrease tax revenue..... And still not solve or even noticeably reduce the problem.
Quite a lot of those who clamor for gun control are merely scared (largely by sensationalism in the media or by what the government wants the people to be) and don't want to think it through. It is yet another distraction for the masses. "Let em fight it out and hope that they don't look too closely at what is really going on."