PetrifiedExPat

You didn't do the thinking homework I set you, did you??

PetrifiedExPat

Interesting deflection, but a deflection nonetheless. It is almost mathematically certain I can help you, rather than vica versa. Complete your homework task and we will go from there.

Pulaski

I know exactly what is going on, thanks, I live here ... unlike some people contributing to this discussion.

I know what I am about to say is going to be rubbished by everyone else who has posted in this discussion, but the reality is that voters are faced with two choices, either [1] a party that seems to reject even a reasonable additional layer of background checking, registration, and monitoring, and [2] a party that apparently wants to revoke the Second amendment and disarm Americans, so given that simple choice, voting for the "no change" is nearer to what a large percentgae of Americans want than the alternative. So if "America" wants better controls the Dems need to back off on the "disarm America" rhetoric, though that seems to be so embedded in the philosphy of a few hardline, high profile Dems that there is more prospect of pigs flying to Mars than of the Dems adopting a moderate tone on gun control.

Anyway, I have no doubt that this whole debate has just ignited another gun-buying frenzy, so the exact opposite of what the gun control lobby wants.

Oakvillian

wait, what? Who is deflecting? You have suggested, several times now, that I have this wrong and you know all the answers. Elucidate, why don't you? Or are you all about the deflection and not actually about engaging in meaningful discussion after all?

PetrifiedExPat

Clever, but you have run into a brick wall on this one. One must study harder!

Giantaxe

No debate was needed. Gun and ammo sales went through the roof immediately after this massacre.

PetrifiedExPat

Will not rubbish it, since you are largely correct. I suspect secession is the only path forward for several States on many issues

Oakvillian

Horseshit. No mainstream politician is seriously suggesting revoking the second amendment. Show us a quote, if you can, where a Democratic legislator has said they want to revoke 2A.

Poll after poll shows that Americans, in a significant majority, would like some movement on the issue of access to firearms - at least as far as a better and more nearly universal system of background checks.

You don't have to live in the arse end of rural wherethe****ever to read news and analysis from the USA or to understand politics.

Pulaski

Thanks for proving my point precisely.

I had almost exactly this debate back in 2015, immediately before I withdrew from TIO, and IIRC, it might even have included an exchange with you, whereby I tried to explain from the point of view from someone actually rooted in "the God-fearing, gun-loving, bible belt" what was going on and why, and was roundly rubbished by people on the West Coast, in New England, Canada, or the UK, who for some reason think they have a better handle on what is going on and why, than someone down here in the weeds. ..... And the reason I left TIO was largely because it would be more productive arguing with a brick about whether gravity exists than with you lot "on the outside" who don't have the slightest idea about why America is in the mess it's in.

Oh, and if you think that "reading the news and media analysis" gets you the slightest idea on what people think out side of the big cities, then you must have lost your grip entirely!

Oakvillian

so that'll be a no, then, to an example of a Dem legislator proposing revocation of 2A. Methinks I'm not the one who is living in a bubble, listening to what the Conservative media want you to think the other side is saying.

Pulaski

Try again! .... I disengaged from "the media" almost entirely by early November 2020, even the BBC, and hadn't been watching CNN for a couple of years by then. Fox News was always a joke and virtually unreadable, so I had only ever rarely even looked there. We dropped cable service in 2012, so we don't get any direct TV services any way. And yet the mainstream media continues to toot their own horn about their own importance, and you idiots continue to believe them, even though the media themselves are completely confounded by what is happening down here in the weeds.

And you have completely missed the point about repealing the Second Amendment - it isn't important whether or not any specific politician has made that statement, the damage has already been done by years of lies, such that a large chunk of the electorate doesn't trust politicians not to change their mind once elected. The very fact that even senior Dems have to state that they support the Second Amendment is an inadvertent admission that the subject is up for debate, in other words it has had precisely the opposite effect from the one indended. ..... Bear in mind that Pres Obama said "I believe in the Second Amendment", had also said "If you like your health care plan, you'll be able to keep your health care plan." which almost immediately proved to be complete bo11ox.

Giantaxe

"They're going to take away our guns" has been a pretty effective scare tactic from those, like the NRA, who oppose reasonable regulation around firearms. Plus the NRA has been very effective at buying senators' loyalty.

Indeed. This poll in the aftermath of this massacre has 88% favouring background checks on all gun sales:

https://thehill.com/news/state-watch...all-gun-sales/

But, that support ebbs until the next massacre comes along. Some interesting graphs here:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-it-will-fade/

anotherlimey

Also most NRA members want changes. The members support universal background checks and red flag laws. The NRA leadership are a bunch of fraudsters (see recent scandals); they should transition to a non-political safety and training organization.

On a side note there are probably some more moderate Republicans who are worried about being primaried. Especially with Trump lingering.

robin1234

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...rer-donations/

The manufacturer of the weapon used in the Uvalde school shooting, Daniel Defense, is a big donor to Republican political candidates. The Daniel family, company owners, are big Republican donors too, in their private capacity. This interesting article in the Washington Post (it is fairly short,) also makes the point that NRA and gun manufacturers used to give money to Democrats and Republicans. Now, just republicans. Presumably a sign of the political polarization.

Daniel Defense has had advertising featuring children and guns. Coincidentally, all such advertising disappeared the day of the shooting.

Any chance of suing this company and putting them out of business? If I remember correctly, gun manufacturers are generally protected from being made responsible for deaths caused by their products, but an exception was made in one case where a manufacturer’s marketing strategy was aimed at children.

BristolUK

What's that lettering on the hill to the left?