HomerJS
Lifer
- Feb 6, 2002
- 36,671
- 28,824
- 136
Gavin Newsom steps in the ring with Hannity and puts him down with a liver shot. Amazing the results you can get when prepared with truth and facts. Dems take notes.
Hannity invited him via a Tweet and Newsom accepted. Newsom does not play it close to the vest. He informs himself and speaks his mind freely. He also watches Fox News, so he knows what they are purveying. Heard these things on local news tonight, NBC, Bay Area. He won't run for president if Joe or Kamala will.Gavin Newsom steps in the ring with Hannity and puts him down with a liver shot. Amazing the results you can get when prepared with truth and facts. Dems take notes.
One of the issues, mentioned by others, is the Democratic party needs to better get the word out on how shitty of a job the GQP is doing.
Are you sure about that?My point was very simple. I never argued that a cure to mental illness would end gun deaths. I made the argument that gun deaths that are the product of mental illness would end if we did not have mentally I’ll people using guns to act out their illness.
I believe that the seeds of mental illness lie in the fact that as children the disciplinary techniques used to insure the acquisition of good behavior consisted of a good deal of physical and mental threat, and in particular, verbal abuse as put downs.
Notice when I say so people put me down. They think that by verbally attempting to abuse me they can stop me from reminding them of their pain. Good luck. The pain isn’t going away unfaced.
So I am not ignoring what you said other than that you are up in arms about a point I never intended and never made.
Only intentional violence to others by gun will decline if the degree of general mental health in the country improves. That is the area that really needs our attention, in my opinion. I am open to rational gun control and like others have opinions as to what that should mean. Nothing I would call rational would interfere with the right of self defense.
What did you say there? 99% of all Gun deaths come from gun violence, which includes suicides which is violence inflicted on ones self! You have to cure the mental illness to prevent it numb nuts. Which means YOU DID argue that curing mental illness would end gun deaths. Granted, that does not include accidental deaths which only makes up 1% of gun deaths, but as you argued already, you are not talking about accidental gun deaths. So, the context of YOUR argument, you are claiming curing mental illness would end gun deaths. (It won't because there are a lot of murders that are not a result of being mentally ill). But in all reality, even accidental gun deaths is a sub category of gun violence because a gun is violent in nature, as it's created purpose is to kill. That purpose does not disappear if you just target practice or shoot for sport, and the violence that inherently comes with a gun is always there.The reason there are more mass shootings in America is because more mentally ill people have availability to guns than in countries where fewer guns put fewer people at risk so fewer people feel a need for counter measures. So, as I described above, would you take a gun I could use were it the only way I could prevent somebody from throwing children off a cliff?
Look at it this way. You can stop gin violence by eliminating all guns. You can stop all gun violence by preventing the mental illness that creates it. You have no idea and are actually motivated never to see how to fix the source of violence so you focus on guns instead. But that is just another bag the cat long ago escaped. Guns are everywhere in the US and are constitutionally legal. Enlightened government would solve the former and fascism the latter. I know which will be preferred and why.
Sarcasm? Sorry, I'm tired, and my sarcasm meter is broken.You're only saying that because you're so full of self-hate yet unaware of it that you unconsciously reject the uncomfortable feelings of the truth he brings to offer, blah blah blah![]()
Though they tend to get less public attention than gun-related murders, suicides have long accounted for the majority of U.S. gun deaths. In 2021, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (26,328), while 43% were murders (20,958), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were accidental (549), involved law enforcement (537) or had undetermined circumstances (458). So gun violence includes 54% suicide, 43% murders and 3% other causes like gun accidents. Accidents, part of the 3% included in 2021 549 instances. Where you get the idea that this tiny percentage is violence and not accidental I have no idea. I was never talking about accidental gun deaths ending if mental illness behind gun violence, Murders and suicides, violence against one's self. I was only taking about deaths due to violence. You made a huge issue about accidental gun deaths which in addition to not being the result of violence, account for around 1% of gun deaths, so even if you could prove that accidents are violence, since accidents are accidents and not volitional much less violent actions, I would still be 97% correct while you get a big fat ZERO.What a bold face liar you are!!!
What the fuck did you say there? Gun deaths are part of gun violence! You have to cure the mental illness to prevent it numb nuts. Which means YOU DID argue that curing mental illness would end gun deaths.
What? You think you are 97% right? Are you using common core math? You are not even 3% right with your argument, or your math, What is 549 (accidental gun deaths)/48830 (total number of gun deaths)? (it's .0112 which is 1.12% or rounded to the nearest precent is... drumroll.... 1%) Correct link with the actual numbers you quoted:Though they tend to get less public attention than gun-related murders, suicides have long accounted infor the majority of U.S. gun deaths. In 2021, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (26,328), while 43% were murders (20,958), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were accidental (549), involved law enforcement (537) or had undetermined circumstances (458). So gun violence includes 54% suicide, 43% murders and 3% other causes like gun accidents. Accidents, part of the 3% included in 2021 549 instances. Where you get the idea that this tiny percentage is violence and not accidental I have no idea. I was never talking about accidental gun deaths ending if mental illness behind gun violence, Murders and suicides, violence against one's self. I was only taking about deaths due to violence. You made a huge issue about accidental gun deaths which in addition to not being the result of violence, account for around 1% of gun deaths, so even if you could prove that accidents are violence, since accidents are accidents and not volitional much less violent actions, I would still be 97% correct while you get a big fat ZERO.
Hey Moonie,Though they tend to get less public attention than gun-related murders, suicides have long accounted for the majority of U.S. gun deaths. In 2021, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (26,328), while 43% were murders (20,958), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were accidental (549), involved law enforcement (537) or had undetermined circumstances (458). So gun violence includes 54% suicide, 43% murders and 3% other causes like gun accidents. Accidents, part of the 3% included in 2021 549 instances. Where you get the idea that this tiny percentage is violence and not accidental I have no idea. I was never talking about accidental gun deaths ending if mental illness behind gun violence, Murders and suicides, violence against one's self. I was only taking about deaths due to violence. You made a huge issue about accidental gun deaths which in addition to not being the result of violence, account for around 1% of gun deaths, so even if you could prove that accidents are violence, since accidents are accidents and not volitional much less violent actions, I would still be 97% correct while you get a big fat ZERO.
Well and good but if The Don is their guy come the 2024 general how in hell can they ignore taking shots at the low hanging fruit of all the shitty things he's done? It's mind boggling to say the least. And anyone who isn't in the habit of blocking out all that stuff is gonna think "yeah, do I really want him in the white house???" The baggage is just way too much.I don’t know if they should run on, “the other guys suck” messaging. People as pretty tired of partisan fighting (another good messaging opportunity for Biden). I think they should just a stick to talking about their accomplishments.
I sort of thought the "blah blah blah" would act as a good indicatorSarcasm? Sorry, I'm tired, and my sarcasm meter is broken.
Same here, and I got the /s just fine.I sort of thought the "blah blah blah" would act as a good indicator
I think he's full of rubbish and projection and am glad I finally put him on my ignore list, I'm not missing out on anything. I occasionally expand a post of his just to see if he's still beating the same sad drum.
I don’t know if they should run on, “the other guys suck” messaging. People as pretty tired of partisan fighting (another good messaging opportunity for Biden). I think they should just a stick to talking about their accomplishments.
They do that though?In a better world, sure, don't take pot shots at anyone. I think everyone would be better that way.
The problem is, the GOP's platform is built on lies, and trashing other people. They take credit for actions and legislations that they opposed.
The democratic party needs to call it out when they see it. They need to say, we (the democratic party) did this for you. The GOP politician touting this as an achievement voted against it.
Things like that.
Do you think that there are as many criminals born in Tibetan Buddhist families as there are in Mafia families? How would you rate the inner life of a monk that vows to save all sentient beings and someone who profits from making others miserable.
That you don’t see criminality as a a form of profound mental illness clarifies your position for me.
While I think it's an outstanding idea, I can absolutely guaranty that it would be decried as racist within the first year after it was enacted.How about something not so subjective like a mental competency test?
I think a more practical problem is how you could possibly make one that was both valid and easily administered enough to do millions a year affordably. Neither seem likely.While I think it's an outstanding idea, I can absolutely guaranty that it would be decried as racist within the first year after it was enacted.
Glad at least that you have dropped equating accident attributed gun deaths to acts of gun violence because to act is to do willfully while accidents are acts that one does not intend to happen. That leaves us with the what you think is mental illness and what I think it is. I define mental illness completely differently than most people due. That is the basics behind why I post. How many times have I expressed the idea here that the so called experts are ignorant and that humanity is asleep living in an upside down backward world. The definition of mental illness for me is characterized by unconscious self hate, the last thing anybody will recognize or face. The mentally ill are everybody in the world that lives behind the denial armament that is the ego. All those acts of violence that you say are not caused by mental illness are caused by mental illness and the people we call mentally ill commit fewer acts of violence because they are mentally more consciously aware. Mentally ill people of the kind you think of as sick are generally not as sick as the rest of us because they are more likely to know there is something wrong with them.What? You think you are 97% right? Are you using common core math? You are not even 3% right with your argument, or your math, What is 549 (accidental gun deaths)/48830 (total number of gun deaths)? (it's .0112 which is 1.12% or rounded to the nearest precent is... drumroll.... 1%) Correct link with the actual numbers you quoted:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/26/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s
I know, you are trying to remove the police gun deaths, as you don't want to consider them gun violence (they are), and you want to remove the undetermined gun deaths as well.
Regardless, you are still 100% wrong, that gun violence/gun deaths will end if we cure mental illness. Curing all mental illness, all thought impossible, still won't stop all the gun deaths or prevent gun violence in the 98.9% or even in your common core math of 97% of gun deaths or gun violence, which you admit is the context of your argument. It won't stop 100% of the suicides by gun, which is the ONLY category that mental illness is a predicator of. But even then, not all suicides by gun, are are committed by mentally ill people, even if curing all mentally ill was possible. It won't even stop 100% of murders, as menially ill is NOT a predicator of violence, the only thing that is a predicator of violence is previous violence. Gun violence/gun deaths committed by the mentally ill is only 4%. But for some backwards reasoning, you think that all violent gun deaths and or gun violence in general, are being committed by the mentally ill. That is not supported by the facts. So it doesn't matter what fucked up math you use, you are 100% wrong claiming curing mental illness will end gun violence, it will only reduce it by 4% at most.
Hell, only 5% of mass shootings is related to mental illness:
![]()
Is There a Link Between Mental Health and Mass Shootings?
Findings from the Columbia database help dispel the myth that having a severe psychiatric illness is predictive of who will perpetrate mass murder.www.columbiapsychiatry.org
Developing the test and setting up the testing process would be straight forward, cheating would be the issue. There would quickly be schools devoted to passing the test.I think a more practical problem is how you could possibly make one that was both valid and easily administered enough to do millions a year affordably. Neither seem likely.
Developing the test and setting up the testing process would be straight forward, cheating would be the issue. There would quickly be schools devoted to passing the test.
Beyond that, owning a firearm is a right.
I think developing the test would be extremely, extremely difficult, maybe impossible, if you’re trying to make a validated instrument to measure various forms of derangement.Developing the test and setting up the testing process would be straight forward, cheating would be the issue. There would quickly be schools devoted to passing the test.
Beyond that, owning a firearm is a right.
