MTG: How to stop mass shootings

[Vol8188]

I said larger families place a greater burden on the system which is undeniably true. The “net benefit” thing you keep saying is a subjective metric when paying taxes should be simply black and white.

What’s subjective about my metric? Population increase has lead to increased wealth. Families do not burden the system. Families make the system work

 

[C-south]

What’s subjective about my metric? Population increase has lead to increased wealth. Families do not burden the system. Families make the system work

You said families were a “net benefit” to the system. It would work either way and work better if those that placed the greatest burden wasn’t rewarded at the end of the year regardless of what they contributed during the year. A family of 4 should contribute more.

 

[MercyPercy]

We need 20 more in congress just like her.

Yikes

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Yikes

What's the worse that could happen?

 

[Vol8188]

You said families were a “net benefit” to the system. It would work either way and work better if those that placed the greatest burden wasn’t rewarded at the end of the year regardless of what they contributed during the year. A family of 4 should contribute more.

Yes, families are a net benefit. If they're a net benefit, by definition they're not a burden. A family of four vs a family of 1 is the only thing that keeps the system functioning.

 

[C-south]

Yes, families are a net benefit. If they're a net benefit, by definition they're not a burden. A family of four vs a family of 1 is the only thing that keeps the system functioning.

I said place the greatest burden on the system which they undeniably do. You’re saying the welfare they receive is worth it.

 

[Vol8188]

I said place the greatest burden on the system which they undeniably do. You’re saying the welfare they receive is worth it.

I’m not defending welfare at all. I’m simply stating the fact that expanding population or even maintaining requires a family of at least 4, which you seem to have issues with.

Population growth (families of more than 4) has a net positive impact. Therefore it’s not a burden. At no point have I referenced or defended welfare. I’ve defended tax benefits for marriage

 

[C-south]

I’m not defending welfare at all. I’m simply stating the fact that expanding population or even maintaining requires a family of at least 4, which you seem to have issues with.

Population growth (families of more than 4) has a net positive impact. Therefore it’s not a burden. At no point have I referenced or defended welfare. I’ve defended tax benefits for marriage

Deductions, credits, etc are all forms of welfare. They are used to lessen someone’s tax burden for no reason other than personal life choices that they made. I’m for lessening the tax burden for everyone not just those that place the greatest burden on it.

 

[Vol8188]

Deductions, credits, etc are all forms of welfare. They are used to lessen someone’s tax burden for no reason other than personal life choices that they made. I’m for lessening the tax burden for everyone not just those that place the greatest burden on it.

Not taking someone's money is not welfare. I'm also not speaking of child tax credits. I'm specifically speaking to marriage credits.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Not taking someone's money is not welfare. I'm also not speaking of child tax credits. I'm specifically speaking to marriage credits.

It's wild that we have even some on the right that fall for this.

 

[Vol8188]

It's wild that we have even some on the right that fall for this.

Good morning. I’d like to remind you that I stole 0 of your things while you were asleep last night. You’re welcome for the welfare

 

[happy-go_vol]

Oh, cool. All we need to do to stop mass shootings is to accomplish the impossible.

Saying "we need more Fathers in the picture" is not a solution because the government isn't going to do anything to fix that problem. It's the right's equivalent of thinking banning guns is going to solve anything.

Government is one of the causes of the problem, if we're being real. MTG offers no details, and I'm sure if she actually has a plan for making us less fatherless, it's going to be genius, executed perfectly by the government, and there will be no unintended consequences.

And the points about shooters being on meds...come on, LOL.

It took over 50 years to kill the normal, nuclear family. It's not going to be fixed over night. She is right though. The statistics prove it. Look at the black community over 50 year span and you'll see the correlation how black violence in increased as the natural,nuclear family dissolved.

The modern left would rather go kamikaze on the nation than to agree to Support fatherhood, and the natural family.

 

[happy-go_vol]

Ridiculous garbage that they just eat right up because it deflects from the real problem. Guns.

Just When we think queeny can't post any thing more stupid.

 

[Volatility]

I think she’s trying to tiptoe around the issue without upsetting her donors. Of course easy access guns is part of the problem. But it’s not the only problem. I think this yahoo article does a better job of explaining the uniquely American problem(though I disagree with coronavirus being a cause, we had mass shootings way before it ever existed):

The staggering scope of U.S. gun deaths goes far beyond mass shootings

“There is not one clear answer as to what is driving the rise in bloodshed, experts said, but possible factors include the stress of the coronavirus pandemic, fraying ties between the police and the public, mounting anger, worsening mental strain and the sheer number of guns in the United States.”

"You put all that into a pressure cooker," said Alex Piquero, a criminologist at the University of Miami, "and you let the pressure cooker blow up."

 

[happy-go_vol]

I think she’s trying to tiptoe around the issue without upsetting her donors. Of course easy access guns is part of the problem. But it’s not the only problem. I think this yahoo article does a better job of explaining the uniquely American problem:

The staggering scope of U.S. gun deaths goes far beyond mass shootings

“There is not one clear answer as to what is driving the rise in bloodshed, experts said, but possible factors include the stress of the coronavirus pandemic, fraying ties between the police and the public, mounting anger, worsening mental strain and the sheer number of guns in the United States.”

"You put all that into a pressure cooker," said Alex Piquero, a criminologist at the University of Miami, "and you let the pressure cooker blow up."

The clear answer is that we've become a pagan, Godless society. Kids are taught they're just evolved goo and there are no truthes, your morality is just relative.

 

[Volatility]

The clear answer is that we've become a pagan, Godless society. Kids are taught they're just evolved goo and there are no truthes, your morality is just relative.

We’re less religious, but far from pagan: Religious Landscape Study

 

[n_huffhines]

It took over 50 years to kill the normal, nuclear family. It's not going to be fixed over night. She is right though. The statistics prove it. Look at the black community over 50 year span and you'll see the correlation how black violence in increased as the natural,nuclear family dissolved.

The modern left would rather go kamikaze on the nation than to agree to Support fatherhood, and the natural family.

You sure about that?

The left doesn't support Fatherhood? LOL. The fact that you only blame their actions and attribute a position of not supporting Fathers shows how incredibly biased you are. Can you honestly say that (the mostly left's) welfare has done more to hurt families than the (mostly right's) war on drugs has? I think I'd put my $ on the war on drugs, cabron.

 

[Vol8188]

You sure about that?

The fact that it's in the 20s (that's the number I've always used but this chart may imply 30s is more accurate, maybe the 2016 lower) relative to the white rate that's around 2 per 100k seems to prove that we do not have a gun problem in this country beyond any reasonable doubt.

Also can you provide your source for this? I'd e curious to see the study.

 

[Majors]

Hey hey hey... she's been reading my posts.

Taboo to talk about. Political exile to platform on it.

 

[n_huffhines]

The fact that it's in the 20s (that's the number I've always used but this chart may imply 30s is more accurate, maybe the 2016 lower) relative to the white rate that's around 2 per 100k seems to prove that we do not have a gun problem in this country beyond any reasonable doubt.

Also can you provide your source for this? I'd e curious to see the study.

What are you talking about? How can that little bit of information prove a subjective judgment? Prove? Do you guys have any clue what "prove" means? On top of that, you're not even talking about the same points as us.

He said that black violence proves that it took over 50 years to destroy the family, but the truth is black violence exploded and then slowed down over decades, so something major in his theory doesn't work.

Stark racial disparities in murder victimization persist, even as overall murder rate declines

 

[Gandalf]

I do find it interesting that over the last 20 years, ant-depressant prescription meds to the young are up something like 30x. Can't tell me that isn't a major factor, if not the primary one. Big Pharma strikes again.

 

[Vol8188]

What are you talking about? How can that little bit of information prove a subjective judgment? Prove? Do you guys have any clue what "prove" means? On top of that, you're not even talking about the same points as us.

He said that black violence proves that it took over 50 years to destroy the family, but the truth is black violence exploded and then slowed down over decades, so something major in his theory doesn't work.

Stark racial disparities in murder victimization persist, even as overall murder rate declines

That's simple. The white population of country has more guns than any other group yet they have homicide rates equivalent to those of Canada or the EU. So if guns are the problem, why would that not show up within the data?

Rather what you see is there is a problem within the black community. Yes, racial differences in homicide victimization still persist. Despite similar (most studies would say lower) gun ownership among black citizens.

If everything I have said is true (I can defend anything you wish, but I imagine we actually agree on all of those), how is it possible that guns are in fact the problem?

 

[Vol8188]

I do find it interesting that over the last 20 years, ant-depressant prescription meds to the young are up something like 30x. Can't tell me that isn't a major factor, if not the primary one. Big Pharma strikes again.

Over 20 years you'll find a reduction. Same with 30 years. From the data I've seen mass shootings seem to have peaked in the 90s.

 

[n_huffhines]

I do find it interesting that over the last 20 years, ant-depressant prescription meds to the young are up something like 30x. Can't tell me that isn't a major factor, if not the primary one. Big Pharma strikes again.

That's a flaw in your thinking, then, bro. As you probably know, these shootings are rare. How can anybody be certain that a huge increase of one variable is responsible for a marginal uptick in another, just because they appear correlated?

For all we know, diet is a the biggest factor. We're just guessing.

 

[Gandalf]

Over 20 years you'll find a reduction. Same with 30 years. From the data I've seen mass shootings seem to have peaked in the 90s.

I would agree there were a LOT in the 90s, which tapered down in the early 2000s, likely due to an actual war and 911. Nothing like actual hardships and the sense of something exists greater than yourself to bring cohesion and purpose at least for a time. I suspect that was just a temporary pause tho and also because a lot of those young men may have gone off to war. But I am not arguing over data here, I have not looked it up so I could be completely wrong on this.

That's a flaw in your thinking, then, bro. As you probably know, these shootings are rare. How can anybody be certain that a huge increase of one variable is responsible for a marginal uptick in another, just because they appear correlated?

Absolutely true that correlation is not causation, much like circumstantial evidence. Even so, it seems unlikely to me to have such a vast increase in medication without severe adverse side effects at the extreme margins. You do almost anything to 50 million people and unpredictable anomalies will appear.