What can we, as gun owners, advocate for to decrease gun violence in the Us

[Axxe55]

Bullshit! As a former councilor of alcohol and drug abuse, I've seen them first hand. Does jail rehabilitate everyone? No. There are many who've turned there lives around after jail. So you can't tell me that it doesn't work. The problem I see, is for many, they don't get the help they need while incarcerated. But if you turn your back on a problem, thinking it's their problem, let them destroy their own life, then while your back is turned they come up behind you and beat you looking for money to continue their addiction.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make the horse drink.

One of the conditions of probation if you get a DWI or a drug offense conviction? You have to attend AA or NA as required by the courts.

They are being forced to go because the court says they have to, not because they want to get free of alcohol or drugs.

People get help for an alcohol or drug problem when they hit rock bottom usually. But no one gets the help they need until they make that choice for themselves.

If a person makes that choice and wants help, then yes, they should be helped. And no we should not turn our backs on them.

 

[easy rider]

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make the horse drink.

One of the conditions of probation if you get a DWI or a drug offense conviction? You have to attend AA or NA as required by the courts.

They are being forced to go because the court says they have to, not because they want to get free of alcohol or drugs.

People get help for an alcohol or drug problem when they hit rock bottom usually. But no one gets the help they need until they make that choice for themselves.

If a person makes that choice and wants help, then yes, they should be helped. And no we should not turn our backs on them.

Did you even attempt to watch either of those videos? Rock bottom for many is death. Everyone is different. If left to their own devices it's mostly a death sentence. Your whole point of legalizing drugs is exactly what the politicians have done in Seattle, and like a cancer it's growing. It effects everyone. Even if you are further away from the problem it will effect you in taxes.

 

[benenglish]

The externalities of drug availability need to be weighed against those of the war on drugs.

If drug laws were returned to their state circa 1910, we'd have opium dens. We'd also have great writers with a heroin habit. We'd have family members dying because they couldn't handle it or the encountered someone who couldn't handle it. We'd have families living hell on earth because of one addicted member. We'd have chronic pain patients who could actually experience relief.

There would be pluses and minuses and there would be a lot more minuses during the transition period.

The external costs of the war on drugs are basically a complete breakdown of the rule of law in many communities and cultures, the creation of a ridiculous enforcement industry that encourages lawlessness and violence, and more bad things. If there are any good things, they don't come to my mind at the moment.

I think the way those scales tip is pretty obvious but, then again, I've never been addicted to drugs.

No matter which way a society goes, there will be pluses and minuses. Pick your poison but don't pretend that either position or any in between is somehow moral.

This is a problem to be approached with an almost entirely utilitarian mindset.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

When they make it an eye for an eye and actually do it within a 30 period. Nothing will help.

 

[easy rider]

The externalities of drug availability need to be weighed against those of the war on drugs.

If drug laws were returned to their state circa 1910, we'd have opium dens. We'd also have great writers with a heroin habit. We'd have family members dying because they couldn't handle it or the encountered someone who couldn't handle it. We'd have families living hell on earth because of one addicted member. We'd have chronic pain patients who could actually experience relief.

There would be pluses and minuses and there would be a lot more minuses during the transition period.

The external costs of the war on drugs are basically a complete breakdown of the rule of law in many communities and cultures, the creation of a ridiculous enforcement industry that encourages lawlessness and violence, and more bad things. If there are any good things, they don't come to my mind at the moment.

I think the way those scales tip is pretty obvious but, then again, I've never been addicted to drugs.

No matter which way a society goes, there will be pluses and minuses. Pick your poison but don't pretend that either position or any in between is somehow moral.

This is a problem to be approached with an almost entirely utilitarian mindset.

Other than the import of drugs, I believe a war on addiction should be a community concern, not a national concern. You can't just turn your back on a problem and hope it will fix itself.

 

[Sam7sf]

This is a problem to be approached with an almost entirely utilitarian mindset

That’s why I have the opinions I do. Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions. Be it death early from overdose or death because they messed with the wrong person.

I can feel sorrow for people but if a friend or family member covers himself in hot dog juice and tries to make love to a grizzly bear I’m gonna call him a moron.

I have no problem viewing people who use drugs as weak that need help. However, they are weak and we shouldn’t be over complicating the discussion by what caused a drug users demise.

 

[A1Oni]

The externalities of drug availability need to be weighed against those of the war on drugs.

If drug laws were returned to their state circa 1910, we'd have opium dens. We'd also have great writers with a heroin habit. We'd have family members dying because they couldn't handle it or the encountered someone who couldn't handle it. We'd have families living hell on earth because of one addicted member. We'd have chronic pain patients who could actually experience relief.

There would be pluses and minuses and there would be a lot more minuses during the transition period.

The external costs of the war on drugs are basically a complete breakdown of the rule of law in many communities and cultures, the creation of a ridiculous enforcement industry that encourages lawlessness and violence, and more bad things. If there are any good things, they don't come to my mind at the moment.

I think the way those scales tip is pretty obvious but, then again, I've never been addicted to drugs.

No matter which way a society goes, there will be pluses and minuses. Pick your poison but don't pretend that either position or any in between is somehow moral.

This is a problem to be approached with an almost entirely utilitarian mindset.

The thing about 1910 is that they didnt have the information we have now, the discovery of penicillin was 18 years away in 1910 and in 1910 Marie Curie isolated radium, which they didn't know was bad for you until radium quackery lead to the deaths of people and radium clock dials were giving women Radium necrosis of the jaw, now days we have so much information at our fingertips that people CAN be "safe" with the poisons they choose. trying to compare the drug dens of 1910 to the Problems of the 2020's is like trying to compare a hussite handgonne to a G11. The thing I want is for the government to stop trying to force nannystate bullcrap and for funding drug cartels and other bad actors in south america. The DEA like the ATF is an organization of oppression on the common man that is a huge moneysink and only causes further division in communities.

 

[bbbass]

Sooooo, what's the plan for prisons then? We going to abolish them like BLM wants? We going to provide flowers and rainbows to prisoners? We going to wave a wand and turn evil phucks into nice guys?

BTW, drug counseling is not a panacea. The people that I know returned to drugs after each stint. My buddy, a former heroin user, that had been in prison for burglarizing a pharma factory, then got a job as a city worker, told me that an addict is always an addict, and just one bad decision away from using again.

Like me and failure to eat properly, exercise and lose weight, one has to WANT life to change. Some of us are just self destructive. All of these things change brain chemistry, some permanently.

Regarding living in the age of information.... we don't know jack. Only we have the arrogance to think we do. Nobody has all the answers. All we can do, both as humans and as SOCIETY, is to do the best we can. IMO best way to do that is via consensus, and today that is sorely lacking.

 

[A1Oni]

Sooooo, what's the plan for prisons then? We going to abolish them like BLM wants? We going to provide flowers and rainbows to prisoners? We going to wave a wand and turn evil phucks into nice guys?

BTW, drug counseling is not a panacea. The people that I know returned to drugs after each stint. My buddy, a former heroin user, that had been in prison for burglarizing a pharma factory, then got a job as a city worker, told me that an addict is always an addict, and just one bad decision away from using again.

Like me and failure to eat properly, exercise and lose weight, one has to WANT life to change. Some of us are just self destructive. All of these things change brain chemistry, some permanently.

Regarding living in the age of information.... we don't know jack. Only we have the arrogance to think we do. Nobody has all the answers. All we can do, both as humans and as SOCIETY, is to do the best we can. IMO best way to do that is via consensus, and today that is sorely lacking.

i said overhaul the prison system, not abolish it.

 

[bbbass]

i said overhaul the prison system, not abolish it.

Never said you did.... I said "as BLM wants to do". It was a question in a series of questions, not even addressed to you (there were other members lamenting prisons also), not an accusation. Accusations rarely bring answers to questions. Your reply is an example.

My question to you then is... what is YOUR plan??? Just exactly HOW would you overhaul the prison system?

 

[A1Oni]

Never said you did.... I said "as BLM wants to do". It was a question in a series of questions, not even addressed to you (there were other members lamenting prisons also), not an accusation. Accusations rarely bring answers to questions. Your reply is an example.

My question to you then is... what is YOUR plan???

well for one, arresting people for having drugs on them would need to stop, and for two prisoners should have more access to schooling programs and books, and instead of treating common criminals like thieves or scammers like murderers they should be treated like human beings. all the issues that lead to most of the crime in the world are socio economical issues, like poverty, or the availability of work, and some people are simply dealt a bad hand and born in some ghetto. yes there are bad people but ricividism rates would decrease if we didn't treat smaller crimes like mail fraud or wire fraud as felonies and what not.

 

[1911'S 4 Me]

well for one, arresting people for having drugs on them would need to stop, and for two prisoners should have more access to schooling programs and books, and instead of treating common criminals like thieves or scammers like murderers they should be treated like human beings. all the issues that lead to most of the crime in the world are socio economical issues, like poverty, or the availability of work, and some people are simply dealt a bad hand and born in some ghetto. yes there are bad people but ricividism rates would decrease if we didn't treat smaller crimes like mail fraud or wire fraud as felonies and what not.

Did YOU vote for Biden? Sounds like you did.

 

[CyberWolf]

...I haven't done any gaming in a long time but there used to be a thing called "griefers." They'd work to become part of a community, be very helpful, take on responsibilities, etc. They'd earn everyone's respect and trust. But it was all a ruse. At some crucial point in a giant this-means-everything battle, they'd turn on their own team and kill everyone they could, ensuring the destruction of their entire clan....

I had never heard of a "Griefer", but I've seen that kind of behavior in a lot of different communities.

It happens often with volunteers in charity work. A gung-ho individual rises through the ranks, gains inside info along the way, gets upset because they are not in-charge and does everything they can, using inside information, to destroy anything and everything they can. They cause havoc, make public accusations, & destroy reputations with zero regard for the original intent of the charity or the good things achieved by that organization.
Then, they just walk away.

Griefer. I'll have to remember that.

Hypothetically speaking (sort of) - based on your experiences in this area (and that of other members as well), how hard do you think it would be to begin defining an initial taxonomy of methods/vectors, early indicators, proactive defensive measures, and response playbooks against this general type of attack?

Feel free to reply via PM if more comfortable that way...

 

[bbbass]

arresting people for having drugs on them would need to stop,

Has nothing to do with prison overhaul, has to do with justice system.

and for two prisoners should have more access to schooling programs and books

Wow, I'll have to ask my Parole Board daughter about this one.... I was under the distinct impression that full libraries, internet access, and several schooling programs are available. In jail... not so much. But prison, yes AFAIK.

treating common criminals like thieves or scammers like murderers they should be treated like human beings.

AFAIK, all criminals in prison are treated equally. People that are locked up are only treated less than human in bad movies. That is not to say that there are not some bad bulls. Some are just as bad as the crims. But painting them all with the same brush is disrespectful and unfair to my friends that have worked as guards/COs.

all the issues that lead to most of the crime in the world are socio economical issues, like poverty, or the availability of work, and some people are simply dealt a bad hand and born in some ghetto.

Disagree intensely. IMO this is an oft repeated idealistic and simplistic trope that barely fits SOME cases. ALL? NO, NEVER!!! There are too many examples of people that were born in the ghetto, or were dealt a bad hand, that didn't become criminals. Instead they became leaders of their communities, etc. Your theory ignores the aspect of personal choice, responsibility, and accountability. Give me a George Floyd and I will raise you a Ben Carson.

yes there are bad people but ricividism rates would decrease if we didn't treat smaller crimes like mail fraud or wire fraud as felonies and what not.

Define "small" crime.

Agree with the concept, not sure what level of mail fraud or wire fraud deserves a felony. And, I thought MOST white collar crime got the white collar prison, so that would actually make it more pleasing to you if "small crimes" were treated like that.

 

[CyberWolf]

....not sure what level of mail fraud or wire fraud deserves a felony....

Oh, I can think of some examples that would make a lifetime sentence to 'hard labor' seem almost lenient.

 

[bbbass]

Oh, I can think of some examples that would make a lifetime sentence to 'hard labor' seem almost lenient.

What was Madoff guilty of? ... That guy shoulda hung til his head popped off!!!

Def not a Martha Stewart type of crime.

 

[Sam7sf]

well for one, arresting people for having drugs on them would need to stop, and for two prisoners should have more access to schooling programs and books, and instead of treating common criminals like thieves or scammers like murderers they should be treated like human beings. all the issues that lead to most of the crime in the world are socio economical issues, like poverty, or the availability of work, and some people are simply dealt a bad hand and born in some ghetto. yes there are bad people but ricividism rates would decrease if we didn't treat smaller crimes like mail fraud or wire fraud as felonies and what not.

Don’t take what I post as attacking you. I strongly disagree with not arresting people with drugs on em. Again, if we are talking hard drugs only, we need to arrest people with drugs on them. It’s clear when I say this where I stand on the war on drugs but that’s what it is. Hard drugs are a war on civilized society. If they can’t be arrested with drugs on them then it’s going to be harder to find where they came from. Yes they will talk. Again I’ll use meth as an example because of how it changes the brain. There isn’t a code among meth users.

Hard drug users are like varmints. You can hold a sign up that says love varmints, but I’m only going to tolerate so much damage to my property and it’s time to remove them. Same for society. No need to give people the ability to get away with crap when it’s really bringing society down the crapper.

 

[Army 1911]

well for one, arresting people for having drugs on them would need to stop, and for two prisoners should have more access to schooling programs and books, and instead of treating common criminals like thieves or scammers like murderers they should be treated like human beings. all the issues that lead to most of the crime in the world are socio economical issues, like poverty, or the availability of work, and some people are simply dealt a bad hand and born in some ghetto. yes there are bad people but ricividism rates would decrease if we didn't treat smaller crimes like mail fraud or wire fraud as felonies and what not.

Do you have a Phd in stupid or are you just professionally stupid?

Books and schooling in jails. Jails are short term. I remember when the courts said we had to furnish exercise gear to prisoners. My grandmother said that all we need is criminals who are more physically fit the the cops.

I've got to say that woman had uncommon good sense.

 

[Sam7sf]

Let’s hear him out. He hasn’t called any of us names.

 

[bbbass]

Let’s hear him out. He hasn’t called any of us names.

Agreed. I'm trying to keep my debate civil, and stay away from ad hominem, but it's hard for me...