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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:06 PM
 
Location: North of Canada, but not the Arctic
21,151 posts, read 19,736,448 times
Reputation: 25689

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sholomar View Post
It takes 60 votes to pass something due to senate filibuster rules. We don't always need to "do something" every time something bad happens. The price of having more freedom is sometimes bad things happen.

Not all of us want to live in a micro-managed nanny state... we don't want to trade more freedom for security/safety, or the illusion of it.

I would support raising the age you can own firearms to 21. Most of these shootings happen by young men who feel like they are not part of some social tribe.. basically the socially awkward outcasts. You are not going to fix that because human nature sort of prevents it.
Oh, I agree. I'm not saying I agree with the Democrats that we need a nanny state. I'm just pointing out the Democrats' hypocrisy. They blame the Republicans for not passing laws when it is really their fault.

Regarding the 60 vote cloture. Again, if they want to legitimately blame the Republicans, let 41+ Republican Senators obstruct it and blame them. But the Democrats won't do this. Why? If they really believed the American people would vote out those obstructing Senators, why would they not give the American people that opportunity?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:07 PM
 
8,943 posts, read 2,968,029 times
Reputation: 5168
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom View Post
Exactly. Why have they done nothing. They all talk so big until it's time to actually pass legislation. It's unconscionable.
There's no "legislation" that would stop this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:07 PM
 
1,877 posts, read 2,238,204 times
Reputation: 3042
The simple answer is because Democrats do not have practical control of Congress. Manchin and Sinema do not support any known gun legislation. Then there's the political side of favoring or supporting any legislation that might jeopardize their re-election or the consensus of their constituency. The other issue that it's not a simple majority vote that is needed so it'll take more than one party to get anything done...perhaps as it should, but I don't think any founder of democracy ever thought the parties would be this resistant to work together.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,496,494 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizualizax90 View Post
Lol, another clown.

Please do tell what programs and acts Republicans have raised and sponsored that are to fund more money into mental health. I’ll make it easier for you.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bil...al_health/6176

Look at the link above and notice MOST of the programs to address mental health issues are sponsored by democrats. The main funders of mental health advocacy are usually left-wing.

Here’s a thought. If the shooter of 19 kids was aborted would he have been alive to go and do it?
guess what....I actually support abortion....

the problem here and all the other cases of school shootings is not about guns, or gun laws... its that we as a country (meaning both parties) don't do a thing about mental health.

this kid, the one from Sandy Hook...if they had been addressed and institutionalized, the shootings would not have happened...that is a fact...


when republicans (and the NRA even) suggested mental health be part of the background checks.....liberals balked
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:13 PM
 
25,449 posts, read 9,817,016 times
Reputation: 15343
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord View Post
There's no "legislation" that would stop this.
If it slowed it down even a little bit, I'd be happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,496,494 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizualizax90 View Post
Ronald Reagan was a liberal? This is news to me.

https://calmatters.org/commentary/20...-then-and-now/
it happened while the President was Carter


wasnt reagan..this started under CARTER....and was the liberals in congress that states institutions was ""in-humane""


Early 1980's: the liberal congress directed the Social Security Administration to pare the SSI and SSDI rolls. Social Security administrators responded by developing definitions of mental illness that diverged from those used in the past and those employed by mental health professionals. The resulting dislocations ultimately produced a public outcry that compelled the administration and Social Security to back down.
1981: The 1981 the Democrat controlled congress passed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act which repealed the provisions of the National Mental Health Systems Act, cut federal mental health and substance abuse allocations by twenty-five percent, and converted them to block grants disbursed with few strings attached. New York State, which used block-grant monies to fund community-based programs, and other states have to cut mental health programs.

1979 in Texas and around the country, state governments got this brilliant idea to close the state hospitals for being "inhumane" in favor of opening neighborhood outpatient centers. What they really wanted to do was take that money and blow it on their pet projects. All neighborhoods said not in our backyard. So you have mental patients on the street. Which incidentally indirectly affected Reagan personally when John Hinckley shot him.

Mayor Dianne Feinstein (now a us senator) gathered religious leaders together in 1982 to discuss a shocking wave of homeless people on city streets.

The solution, they thought, was to temporarily set up cots and soup kitchens in a few church basements.

What they didn't realize then was they faced the genesis of a generational crisis brought on by complicated social factors out of their control.

At the time, Feinstein said, she thought homelessness was only a temporary problem, and the solution was to provide short-term housing. Her attention was also split with the emerging AIDS epidemic.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
its like when you hear about the so-called ""AUTISM EPEDEMIC"""...prior to 1985 most childhoold autism was classified as """juvenile schitzipherenia"""(forgive my spelling) and retarded.....the percent of kids with (using an old outdated term) retardation/mental incompacity/autism has stayed mostly level...the difference is that instead of having 3 JS, 1 AUT, 6 retards (10 kids) out of 1000....now its just 10 autism/asperger out of 1000 (1 in 100)

the same with in the 80's when the liberals have many of the institutions closed because it was 'inhumane' to lock these people up....now they are the growing population of HOMELESS (85% of homeless at mentally ill).
.
.
.
.
.
The problem with the mentally ill is that there really isn't some magic drug or treatment plan that will cure them all. They might decide they don't like some side effect of the drugs they were given and stop taking them. Or they might decide they like some of the street drugs better or in addition and make themselves worse.



how about better mental testing

how about bringing back mental institutions instead of dropping them off at the nearest homeless shelter

the VT, aurora, and ct shooting were ALL done by individuals who has BEEN SEEN BY PROFESSIONALS and were not mentaly stable


liberals, who pushed for years to close institutions that hold the menatlly ill, calling them 'in-humane'


this kid should have been committed years ago

but liberals have pushed to close mental institutions/sanitariums because they want to call them "in-humane"

the point is if someone is mentall unstable.. and a danger to society..then they should be put in a place for protection
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:17 PM
 
Location: A Beautiful DEEP RED State
5,632 posts, read 1,770,332 times
Reputation: 3902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizualizax90 View Post
Because Republicans are in bed with the gun lobbyists that would stop it and money is supreme in this country. Every single problem that persists in this climate is because politicians’ careers are dependent on them not getting fixed and okay with it because it won’t hit close to home. Could “tough on crime” politicians exist if there’s no crime? Out of all these school shootings how many of the children are the children of politicians? That’s why it won’t get fixed.

Children getting aborted in Texas is more important than children getting shot in the same state because “mUh fREedOms”.
Republicans don’t control anything now. Stop blaming them and ignoring who is in control. Democrats.

Democrats had a super majority for a time under Obama/Biden and still refused to pass gun laws because they are hypocrites. They don’t want a solution. They want a campaign issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:19 PM
 
15,864 posts, read 14,491,391 times
Reputation: 11976
The guns used in the Buffalo attack were bought in NY. So that undermines your claim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyfan View Post
They did. They passed an assault weapon ban in 1994 that had a 10 year sunset. W. forgot to renew it because he was too busy looking for WMD's in Iraq.

NY has a very strict gun control law the effectiveness of which is limited because it's easy to get gun in NJ, PA, etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:20 PM
 
Location: A Beautiful DEEP RED State
5,632 posts, read 1,770,332 times
Reputation: 3902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizualizax90 View Post
No they couldn’t because again, money rules over parties and everything you said. There’s too much and business in the problems continuing than stopping.

Let’s say a Democrat proposed the laws you mentioned. Are you saying Republicans would just say “sure. Let’s do it!”
Republicans have no say. Democrats control everything. Are you saying the Democrats in control are being bought off? Sounds like you are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2022, 12:23 PM
 
187 posts, read 68,351 times
Reputation: 137
Anyone have scoops on states moving forward with anything? I imagine CA NY IL WA etc have things continuously in the pipeline.


Huge national level gun control won't happen soon, but as demographics continue to change, maybe it will be possible. Yes demographics matter, colored voters are usually about 70-80% pro gun control. Yes I know your black friend Jon might be different, but we are talking about average behavior of millions of people.
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 09:36 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