• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mightynine

Member
Enjoyed this gem from a C-SPAN caller (paraphrasing) that since criminals don't buy guns, they steal 'em, there's no point. Maybe if there was a law against criminals breaking into your home and stealing them...

You mean, like, I don't know - breaking and entering, for one?

This whole "Criminals just break laws, so we don't need them" argument drives me up a wall. The end result of that logic to me is "Why do we bother arresting and prosecuting them in the first place for anything?"
 
R

remist

Member
RDreamer said:
Fund research into the connections of violent video games and violence? Meh... I suppose that research will probably come out that there isn't much of a connection, but whatev.
Click to expand...

Even supposing the research does show a strong link between violent video games and violent behavior, what kind of regulations are people proposing that would address the issue and not violate the 1st amendment?
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
remist said:
Even supposing the research does show a strong link between violent video games and violent behavior, what kind of regulations are people proposing that would address the issue and not violate the 1st amendment?
Click to expand...
Bans against gay marriage violate the constitution too and it doesn't seem to matter. Republicans are great at violating the constitution for their own sake and getting people to agree with their side through fear etc. It's unfortunate.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
remist said:
Even supposing the research does show a strong link between violent video games and violent behavior, what kind of regulations are people proposing that would address the issue and not violate the 1st amendment?
Click to expand...

I really don't know. I mean, I guess they could do more enforcement of the ratings system, but that would do jack shit, since I think the majority of gun crime even in that sort of age group happens when you're older than 17. I think a lot of the rise in gun crime I saw was those from like 18 to 25 or so.

mightynine said:
This whole "Criminals just break laws, so we don't need them" argument drives me up a wall. The end result of that logic to me is "Why do we bother arresting and prosecuting them in the first place for anything?"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I really dislike that shit, too. It's such lazy, stupid reasoning. I'm not some big anti-gun nut or anything, but I really want to punch every single person that posts stupid shit on facebook about "Hur hur, criminals don't obey laws. This only affects law-abiding citizens." Because, yeah, we just put a law on the books and then do nothing to actually enforce it at all. And yeah, because every single person who ever commits a gun crime is some life-long criminal that would spend all the time getting a gun on the black market... like there aren't crimes of passion in there at all...
 
R

rSpooky

Member
Someone on my FB , is freaking over the flag behind Obama not being the US flag? I really only noticed the US one. anyone know what the hell she is freaking over?
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
rSpooky said:
Someone on my FB , is freaking over the flag behind Obama not being the US flag? I really only noticed the US one. anyone know what the hell she is freaking over?
Click to expand...
ySyMc.jpg
 
L

lednerg

Member
Pretty crazy how Obummer is confiscating all the guns now. Shoulda listened to Glenn and Alex, I guess. Oh well. Come at me, bad guys...
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Dax01: I now have mixed feelings about that Justin Long avatar.

Should have used a different character! Or not done it at all, but I already felt that before.
 
M

mightynine

Member
Oh, here's your list of executive orders decrees from Dictator Obama, Our Lord:

1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.

2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.

3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.

4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.

5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.

6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.

7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.

8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).

9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.

10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.

11. Nominate an ATF director.

12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.

13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.

14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.

15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.

19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.

20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.

21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.

22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.

23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
Click to expand...
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
Hitokage said:
"11. Nominate an ATF director."

The inclusion of this entry is so depressing.
Click to expand...
Don't tell me this has been going on for 4 years now... How can they possibly not nominate someone for any unreasonable amount of time? Why is there no law that states congress shall appoint someone within so and so time or else the president gets free reign?
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Usually committees tend to release a report and disappear. Biden got shit done, took it seriously, and even if a law doesn't pass he made a difference with the executive orders. I'd imagine he will be doing outreach to the senate in order to sell the bill, and perhaps bargain the AWB away in order to win more votes.

And apparently his job approval has spiked to 59% If only he was a few years younger, 2016 would be looking good for him if Hillary is sidelined. I wonder if he'd pledge to serve one term.
 
F

FLEABttn

Banned
mightynine said:
Enjoyed this gem from a C-SPAN caller (paraphrasing) that since criminals don't buy guns, they steal 'em, there's no point. Maybe if there was a law against criminals breaking into your home and stealing them...

You mean, like, I don't know - breaking and entering, for one?

This whole "Criminals just break laws, so we don't need them" argument drives me up a wall. The end result of that logic to me is "Why do we bother arresting and prosecuting them in the first place for anything?"
Click to expand...

RDreamer said:
Yeah, I really dislike that shit, too. It's such lazy, stupid reasoning. I'm not some big anti-gun nut or anything, but I really want to punch every single person that posts stupid shit on facebook about "Hur hur, criminals don't obey laws. This only affects law-abiding citizens." Because, yeah, we just put a law on the books and then do nothing to actually enforce it at all. And yeah, because every single person who ever commits a gun crime is some life-long criminal that would spend all the time getting a gun on the black market... like there aren't crimes of passion in there at all...
Click to expand...

Just pocket this logic and save it for the next time someone tells you that abortion should be banned.
 
H

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
Rocket Scientist said:
Don't tell me this has been going on for 4 years now... How can they possibly not nominate someone for any unreasonable amount of time? Why is there no law that states congress shall appoint someone within so and so time or else the president gets free reign?
Click to expand...
The requirement that ATF directors be approved by the Senate was made in 2006, but it has yet to actually happen. NRA lobbies against all nominations, just like they lobby against the ATF's ability to act in general.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Hitokage said:
The requirement that ATF directors be approved by the Senate was made in 2006, but it has yet to actually happen. NRA lobbies against all nominations, just like they lobby against the ATF's ability to act in general.
Click to expand...

55 dem senators, perfect time to approve him if not for Reid shitcanning filibuster reform.

Dems better show up in 2014 or it'll be a bloodbath
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
Rocket Scientist said:
If filibuster reform still happens they can get the nomination through?
Click to expand...
Yes, they should have enough senators to approve him if the filibuster is changed. I don't see republicans spending weeks trying to block him with an oral filibuster, it would be horrible optics. The optics are the reason we need filibuster reform IMO. Silent filibusters only ensure voters aren't familiar with what's going on, whereas if you force senators to physically hold the floor then the country can see what's going on.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Cyan said:
wat

Edit: glad we've got someone for the binders!
Click to expand...

Looks like we're all a little shocked at that one.

Hitokage said:
The requirement that ATF directors be approved by the Senate was made in 2006, but it has yet to actually happen. NRA lobbies against all nominations, just like they lobby against the ATF's ability to act in general.
Click to expand...

This is the stupidest shit ever. Well not quite as stupid as the silent filibuster but it's sure as hell up there.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
Usually committees tend to release a report and disappear. Biden got shit done, took it seriously, and even if a law doesn't pass he made a difference with the executive orders. I'd imagine he will be doing outreach to the senate in order to sell the bill, and perhaps bargain the AWB away in order to win more votes.

And apparently his job approval has spiked to 59% If only he was a few years younger, 2016 would be looking good for him if Hillary is sidelined. I wonder if he'd pledge to serve one term.
Click to expand...
This is what I've been thinking, that Biden will run explicitly for one term to hold down the fort while choosing a younger VP to set him up for 2020.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
I continue to find all this gun control stuff relatively uninteresting compared to exciting conversations about the deficit, so here's Jonathan Chait:

ny mag said:
Last night’s House vote to approach disaster aid for communities hit by Hurricane Sandy may turn out to be one of the signal moments of President Obama’s second term. The significance lies not in the bill itself — though obviously, if you are reading this from the ruins of your flattened house, your mileage may vary — but what it says about the power of the crazy caucus of the House Republicans.
Here is the central dilemma in American politics since 2010: You need to enact laws even to do very basic things like not crash the world economy for no reason. You can’t enact a law without passing it through the House. The House is controlled by Republicans. And many if not most of these Republicans appear to be stark raving mad — which is to say, not merely ideologically extreme but unable to rationally connect means with ends, as evidenced by such things as the Plan B fiasco.
The crucial piece of this dilemma is the "Hastert Rule,” coined by former House Speaker Denny Hastert, which holds that all bills passing the House must have, in addition to the support of 218 members required for passage, the support of a majority of Republicans....
The Hastert Rule was part of what drove the negotiations over the Bush tax cuts to the very end — most Republicans simply wouldn’t vote for anything that appeared to raise taxes, even if the alternative was even higher taxes. Ultimately, as the expiration deadline approached, John Boehner had to violate that rule and pass a Senate-backed deal with mostly Democratic votes.
It looked like it might be a one-off, a panicked response to the unique circumstances of a looming automatic tax hike and breathless media coverage. But Boehner did it again last night. On the Sandy bill, a mere 49 Republicans voted aye, against 179 nays.
Now why, you might ask, would Republicans tolerate the passage of a bill they overwhelmingly oppose? They didn’t have to pass it — they could have kept it off the floor and only brought a bill that had their party’s support, or possibly no bill at all. It appears they decided the negative publicity, and the damage to the party’s brand, outweighed their own preferences. House Republicans wanted to vote no so they could signal opposition to their own base, and protect themselves against a possible primary challenge, but they didn’t care enough to actually stop the bill....
The next such event is the debt ceiling vote. This seems like the perfect setup for another let’s-forget-the–Hastert Rule vote. Republican elites are increasingly coalescing around the view that they just have to raise the thing. (Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity is the latest right-wing group to throw in the towel.) The natural solution is to just let the bill pass with mainly Democratic support and give a bunch of angry speeches — the way the debt ceiling used to work.
Click to expand...

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/01/house-gops-intentional-losing-strategy.html

Parliamentary government, here we come. The Hastert Rule is the primary thing standing in the way of the coalition of the sane that the pragmatist GOP members need to form to survive. Relevantly, any gun control legislation, as well as fiscal stuff or immigration reform, will have to break the Hastert Rule to pass without a rider defunding Obamacare. And most everybody's goals align here -- Obama gets to push for his priorities and splinter the GOP, Boehner gets to pass legislation that makes the government not fall over, and the Tea Party gets to be as loud and crazy as they want to without the negative consequences they'd face if they were in charge. The question to answer really is whether that's enough for the Tea Party.
 
R

Rocket Scientist

Member
PhoenixDark said:
The optics are the reason we need filibuster reform IMO. Silent filibusters only ensure voters aren't familiar with what's going on, whereas if you force senators to physically hold the floor then the country can see what's going on.
Click to expand...
The fact that it's so easy to solve one of the biggest problems in US politics at the moment, makes Reid's pussyfooting around even more infuriating.

Edit: I don't understand the Hassert rule... it's just a joke, right?
 
T

Tim-E

Member
Aaron Strife said:
This is what I've been thinking, that Biden will run explicitly for one term to hold down the fort while choosing a younger VP to set him up for 2020.
Click to expand...

I'd be all for this. I think a one-term pledge would make him a bit more appealing. A lot of McCain's advisers wanted him to do this to silence concerns about his age but he was pretty against it so they never went through with it.
 
T

Tim-E

Member
It does make me pretty happy to see a President be able to go forward with the most comprehensive gun control proposal in decades after years of people looking away every time waves of people are murdered and saying that it's political poison. I know that the AWB and possible the clip restrictions probably won't make it through, but there's a lot of good to be done from the other proposals.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Cyan said:
What in the hell, how is this a thing?

I just read up on this, it explains so much of the dysfunction.
Click to expand...

i'm pretty sure its not an official rule, but a rule that the GOP has continued to use when they were the majority. Boehner's breaking of it twice in quick succession now leads me to believe the GOP is starting to move away from extremist run. If it gets broken for the debt ceiling i'll have some excitement for future prospects of the next 2 years
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
"Most Americans agree that a president's children should not be used as pawns in a political fight," Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement. "But to go so far as to make the safety of the president's children the subject of an attack ad is repugnant and cowardly."
Click to expand...

NRA's response:

NRA spox: "Whoever thinks the ad is about Pres. Obama's daughters are missing the point completely or they're trying to change the subject."
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kid these days will never...
Social 2 3 4
174
7K
Agent_Nobody replied
SAW 3 | A Finale on Life Support (HyperBitHero)
Opinion
4
919
HyperBitHero replied
  • Locked
RTX 4070 TI Super for sale. Never gamed on.
1
727
LSWilson replied
Scalable games should be the standard on consoles from now on
Opinion
31
1K
GHG replied
How is it that I own a bunch of Xbox 360 games I never bought digitally?
9
1K
dragonyeuw replied
Top Bottom