Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:31 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
Only with those who choose not to read, or are incapable of understanding.
True, but not the only explanation...

//www.city-data.com/forum/polit...nt-theory.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:31 AM
 
10,730 posts, read 5,664,235 times
Reputation: 10863
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
In that case, nothing unfair about me pointing out that you are not thinking clearly. Right?
Feel free to support your contention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:33 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by NVplumber View Post
It is quite true that sporadically organized citizen militias armed only with semi auto firearms presents little threat to the military. Or even federal LE as it is now armed and equipped. The circumstances that would bring such a confrontation into being must be considered however. I take no stock in the theory of a second American civil war. There is just no way such a war could take place. It would take a great number of states, banded into a coalition with, as you brought up, the military assets, supply lines, communications, medical assets, oh the list goes on. And all of it organized and ready, with clear objectives and lines of battle. Such is VERY unlikely to ever happen.


Today's technology precludes such an effective alliance from ever forming. Will the US government ever turn on the citizens and order its armed forces, both military and LE to subdue the population? mmmmm.....maybe. I'm sure every administration since the beginning has looked at such a contingency. The big question is just how many of those assets would actually follow those orders without question. I tend to think the threats we need to be able to arm against are more criminal than civil. The gangs with heir cartel backing are growing and are actually at the level of oppression of the people who have to live in the areas they hold sway.


I've already gone into how I feel that could be effectively dealt with so I won't go on. But these gangs are more within militia level capabilities than talking about a government coup.
Good enough for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:36 AM
 
10,730 posts, read 5,664,235 times
Reputation: 10863
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
True, but not the only explanation...

//www.city-data.com/forum/polit...nt-theory.html
From your OP:

Quote:
Having been in many forums like this one and many discussions with people in general, ever since high school, I have come to develop a theory that people "cement" their opinions and beliefs about politics, religion and such while they are in their 20s. After that, no matter the facts or truth, people for the most part do not change their minds about those fundamental beliefs. A result of what I call my "Cement Theory" that so far has proven quite sound all considered for a long time now, again by way of these threads. Which begs the question, why do we debate? Who has changed their mind? Why bother? Is time spent pounding sand not time better spent?
I would agree with the first two sentences. As for why do we debate? I can't speak for everyone, but I think that reasonable people are fully capable of changing their minds, even on deeply held siginificant issues. I know I have.

But it is an interesting question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:36 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
That may be how YOU feel about black violent crime, but there was nothing in the post that you responded to that was in any way racist.
Better, in MY opinion, to speak in terms of what causes people to be violent rather than the color of their skin, and by doing so MY suspicion of racist tendencies is lessened, as it is lessened for just about anyone who ISN'T racist. Capice?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:39 AM
 
10,730 posts, read 5,664,235 times
Reputation: 10863
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Better, in MY opinion, to speak in terms of what causes people to be violent rather than the color of their skin, and by doing so MY suspicion of racist tendencies is lessened, as it is lessened for just about anyone who ISN'T racist. Capice?
Agreed. But that wasn't what was happening in the post that you responded to.

Pointing out the high rate of violent crime in the black community is not the same thing as claiming that that crime is caused by "being black."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:39 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
Feel free to support your contention.
Nice try, but...

I wrote, "To equate an M16, for example, to a kitchen knife in this respect is utterly daft."

You wrote, "Only if you really don't care about saving lives."

That suggests I don't care about saving lives. You're the one that needs to support that contention, but just a hint. You are incorrect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:43 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
From your OP:

I would agree with the first two sentences. As for why do we debate? I can't speak for everyone, but I think that reasonable people are fully capable of changing their minds, even on deeply held siginificant issues. I know I have.

But it is an interesting question.
My personal experience, especially when it comes to debate in these threads, is that people don't change their minds, about anything. Or, they are the great exception rather than the rule, as my Cement Theory also accounts for.

For me, it's mostly for entertainment that I bother with these threads, and once again that entertainment must come to an end for me this morning as now it's time to get on with things that actually do make a difference...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:47 AM
 
29,544 posts, read 9,713,411 times
Reputation: 3469
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd View Post
Agreed. But that wasn't what was happening in the post that you responded to.

Pointing out the high rate of violent crime in the black community is not the same thing as claiming that that crime is caused by "being black."
You must read the statement I quoted in comment #3429 a good deal differently than I do.

"Exactly. Blacks."

Hardly gets more black or white than that!

Have a good Sunday...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-22-2017, 10:54 AM
 
10,730 posts, read 5,664,235 times
Reputation: 10863
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
Nice try, but...

I wrote, "To equate an M16, for example, to a kitchen knife in this respect is utterly daft."

You wrote, "Only if you really don't care about saving lives."

That suggests I don't care about saving lives. You're the one that needs to support that contention, but just a hint. You are incorrect.
Self-evident statements generally require little, if any support. However. . .

1) Pro gun control arguments are generally put forth as a response to a tragedy.
2) The contention is that controlling guns would either prevent or significantly reduce the number of lives lost.
3) A significant number of lives are lost due to things such as knives, swimming pools, cars, stair cases, etc.
4) Given that all lives have value, #3 should be addressed with the same fervor as gun crime is addressed. In fact, given the number of lives lost to factors other than guns, it would be reasonable for those causes to addressed with greater fervor than the gun issue.
5) While #3 is not really an arguable point (the data is clear and pretty much irrefutable), the same gun control advocates are not only silent on the other significant causes of death, but attempt to short-circuit such conversations by deriding those who would entertain such arguments as "ridiculous."
6) Given the significant number of deaths brought about by preventable causes other then guns, and the fact that no workable gun control solutions currently exist (or have been put forth), failure of #4 above is prima facie evidence that gun control advocates don't care about lives, but rather they care about control.
7) You have clearly engaged in #5 above.

As such, it is clear that you really don't care about saving lives.

QED
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:02 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top