Liberals, how do you respond to these two observations? (Brown, solution, stereotypes)

[katygirl68]

Originally Posted by golimar

Would KKK exist if there was no Christianity?

I know ISIS, Taliban, and hundreds of Jihadist Organizations wouldn't. The rewards of martyrdom in Islam are too damn high, it turns people into suicidal killing machines.

Of course the KKK would exist without religion. The truth is they're about hate, not God. Religion is not the central part of their beliefs. They don't hate people of color because they have different beliefs. They hate black people because they think they're superior to black people. The Taliban, Al Qaeda and ISIS do what they do because of their religion. The KKK did what they did because they are racists. It has nothing to do with religion.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Orlandochuck1

And when it is proven that your "more regulations" do not prevent mass shootings or the carnage in the urban ghettos that are responsible for the bulk of the gun violence stats, will you still want even more regulations, or will you just forget about it?

If regulation has no affect what so ever, then sure.

But the same question posed to you, if the opposite was shown, would you finally support it ?

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06

32,000 killed by guns. You are saying the 20,000 people who used a gun to commit suicide wouldn't do it in another way. I would like to see the data on that since it's pretty widely understood that people who want to commit suicide, will.

494,169 suicide attempts(number of people,not actual attempts) in 2013(last year i found data for) resulting in 41,149 deaths.

51.4% of all suicides were guns(21150 ), but guns only made up 4.5% of successful suicides. So yea, if their were less guns, more people would likely cut them selves realize it hurts and stop where as pulling a trigger is very final.

Again, it doesnt mean I would be for banning guns, only that the argument of public safety isnt a winning one for the pro unrestricted gun crowed.

The same is true of any drug(alcohol). We as a nation, chose liberty.

I have. It's generally 3 sales out. So initial purchase plus two more sales.

But I am willing to do UBCs if we remove EVERY other restriction.

There is a John's Hopkins study that says 2nd or 3rd sales as well, but it counts the first sale as the sale from the gun store to the private dealer, there for the second sale is the private sale to the one who commits the crime.

[rorqual]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

1) We are advised to not judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun-owners by the actions of a few lunatics.

There are many conservative gun nuts who want guns everywhere and even want to make it easier for suspected terrorists to get guns...NRA and conservatives may be for it, but liberals are not:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfj7OxwDIU4

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

I would add that an environment of "open thought" is also a dangerous environment for "progressivism" to exist. This is why the Left try to shut down the free speech (and dis-invite certain speakers) on college campuses across the US. The only acceptable thought on these campuses is PC and anti-Americanism. Conservative ideas are not tolerated.

What laws have the "left" passed in the United States to shut down free speech?

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by Scotty011

Exactly! The liberal mind is an impossible thing to figure out. ...

Not at all. A certain group is simply incapable of that depth of thought.

[PullMyFinger]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

1) We are advised to not judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun-owners by the actions of a few lunatics.

2) Seems we constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money. How come we never hear about welfare running out of money? What's interesting is the first group worked for their money, but the second didn't.

Funny how that works.

You will not receive any meaningful answers.

[Scratch33]

Originally Posted by Versatile

You very well know what she says is true. Are you KKK?

Of course I'm not KKK. But it takes only a cursory glance at anything the KKK itself says or publicizes to know that they do indeed openly and proudly self-identify as Christian - which answers my original question in this thread concerning them. One can certainly argue whether they're "real" Christians (FWIW the Klan doesn't consider Catholics "real" Christians - a belief shared by many Protestant sects); just as one can argue whether Islamic terrorists are "real" muslims. It's a fact that haters can find support for their actions in either the bible or the koran. But to summarily dismiss the Klan as having zero connection to Christianity in America is, IMO, just an attempt to avoid looking deeper into their history and ties to mainstream American Christianity, which I can assure you are substantial. If it makes some uncomfortable to explore that, too bad.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

So you always agree with what MLK said...or you just bring him up when what he said supports your feeble positions? Somehow I don't think MLK, if alive and participating on C-D would be in your corner much.

I guess you don't believe in the law of the land. It is the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the laws and their Constitutionality. I may have missed it, but I don't recall "dechatelet" mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.

So is the Supreme right after it reverses itself?

Or is it only right before it reverses itself?

Sorry, your argument holds no water.

Martin Luther King would be in my corner, not yours.

The Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment are also in my corner.

Don't complain to me about white racism when you support racial discrimination against whites.

Not unless you want me to laugh at you.

[dechatelet]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

synapse malfunction

Yes, yours.