The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Yeah, he was a paranoid bastard, but he got us out of Vietnam, founded the EPA and OSHA, passed the Equal Rights Amendment, and negotiated the first SALT treaty.
Both Eisenhower and Nixon built upon Social Security and did it during balanced budgets. That's pretty baller.
Edit: and they both supported desegregation.
Nixon's a pretty good example of how easy it is for a politician's legacy, no matter how positive in the large scale, can be completely overshadowed by a few bad decisions that in the long run didn't matter a great deal.
Political corruption, and attempting to act outside the law are pretty god damn high on the list of 'unforgiveable acts by a politician'.
Hell, I'd say that political corruption is the worst act you can take against society (as opposed to individuals).
Yeah? Well we've consistently avoided prosecuting Presidents for it.
Not once did anyone call Bill Clinton on his shit for bombing Iraq to take our minds off his perjury case. Which failed because it was just Bill's Dick 24/7.
Gooey, where do people who believe that home protection is a legitimate need but do not feel that assault rifles should be acceptable for that fall? (honestly curious here, not trying to argue with you)
Also, Nixon committed treason when he sabotaged the Vietnam peace process for his own political gain.
It seems that Ford pardoning Nixon opened the floodgates for corruption in the Presidency, since you're now virtually guaranteed immunity from prosecution.
corruption was rampant in pre-depression presidents. it's not like nixon really tuned a corner compared to dudes like mckinley.
we just had a pretty good run after the depression. and honestly our recent presidents haven't been particularly corrupt, even though i have disagreed with them plenty at times and the increased influence of money in politics is causing problems from county councils to the presidency.
Gooey, where do people who believe that home protection is a legitimate need but do not feel that assault rifles should be acceptable for that fall? (honestly curious here, not trying to argue with you)
Also, Nixon committed treason when he sabotaged the Vietnam peace process for his own political gain.
they're probably a gradient of 'normal' gun owners
most of us fall in varying places on the gradient of what is the right cutoff
Pure hunter people - People who say that the only reasonable need to have a gun is to hunt game - Other gun people call these guys "Fudds" after Elmer Fudd.
Regular gun people - People believe guns should be used for hunting, self defense, the protection of the people, etc. - People like Organ and I
Extreme gun people - People who believe that government should not restrict the sale of any kind of arms (including missles and tanks and stuff) - These are the tinfoil hat wearing dudes
and boooooooooooooooy do fudds like to throw us under the bus
fudds are the entire reason the awb was passed in 1994
and the entire reason the nra radicalized afterwards
Yeah how our process works we tend to use our primaries for that type of choice Pony. It does work sometimes, other times it doesn't. And sadly incumbents don't get primaried as much as I wish they would. But no system is perfect. To quote a rather decent leader.
"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."
Gooey, where do people who believe that home protection is a legitimate need but do not feel that assault rifles should be acceptable for that fall? (honestly curious here, not trying to argue with you)
"Assault rifle" is almost a nonsense term.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
Fudds sound like the jerks who want medical marijuana that doesn't get you high.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
0
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratorMod Emeritus
Pure hunter people - People who say that the only reasonable need to have a gun is to hunt game - Other gun people call these guys "Fudds" after Elmer Fudd.
Regular gun people - People believe guns should be used for hunting, self defense, the protection of the people, etc. - People like Organ and I
Extreme gun people - People who believe that government should not restrict the sale of any kind of arms (including missles and tanks and stuff) - These are the tinfoil hat wearing dudes
and boooooooooooooooy do fudds like to throw us under the bus
well
in fairness they probably don't have all that much in common with your views
just like the guy who keeps a shotgun at home for protection might not see the benefit of groups of dudes organizing a "strap on a piece and head to famous dave's" meetup.
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
BobCescaIs a girlBirmingham, UKRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
I think the thing that confuses me the most is the lobbyist culture and the sheer amount of money knocked about in US politics.
Not that we don't have this in the UK (see every government desperately trying to stay on Murdoch's good side, or the fact that there's a lot of talk but not much action about businesses that don't pay corporation tax cos they're registered in tax havens or whatever), but we don't seem to be as open about it as US politicians and companies are.
BobCesca on
0
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
It seems that Ford pardoning Nixon opened the floodgates for corruption in the Presidency, since you're now virtually guaranteed immunity from prosecution.
corruption was rampant in pre-depression presidents. it's not like nixon really tuned a corner compared to dudes like mckinley.
we just had a pretty good run after the depression. and honestly our recent presidents haven't been particularly corrupt, even though i have disagreed with them plenty at times and the increased influence of money in politics is causing problems from county councils to the presidency.
You wouldn't describe the entire Iraq-> no-bid contracts to Halliburton as corruption?
Thanks to some rather questionable decisions by the Supreme court over the last 130 years the corporations have little to fear about being open with their money.
but the nra fundamentally changed after the awb was passed. at the time it was basically run by Fudds and the nra didn't actively campaign against the awb because it was viewed that "giving anti-gun people this will satiate them from coming after our hunting guns" and that didn't really happen
after the awb was passed there was tons of talk of making certain calibers illegal, and extending what would be covered under the awb, and etc.
so the nra made a serious shift afterwards. it's the whole reason that they're the "we wont move one inch"-type of organization they are now.
In Canada, the majority of pro-gun folks are Fudds.
Stating you want guns for any other reason than hunting is enormously unpopular as an opinion, especially outside rural areas. Unlike the US, Canadians do not have an express right to bear arms, not in the same way, and self-protection and home defense arguments fall apart rapidly due to the way our self-defense and home defense laws actually work.
Bill C-60 was set to change all that, but that was a Conservative motion that was still being negotiated when Parliament was dissolved, and if the Conservatives don't win there's a very good chance it will get killed instead of passed.
Yet, even though I am pro-gun and C-60 is directly relevant to my future career in private security, I still wouldn't vote Conservative because many of their core issues run contrary to what I consider more important than guns and self-defense issues.
Gooey, where do people who believe that home protection is a legitimate need but do not feel that assault rifles should be acceptable for that fall? (honestly curious here, not trying to argue with you)
Pure hunter people - People who say that the only reasonable need to have a gun is to hunt game - Other gun people call these guys "Fudds" after Elmer Fudd.
Regular gun people - People believe guns should be used for hunting, self defense, the protection of the people, etc. - People like Organ and I
Extreme gun people - People who believe that government should not restrict the sale of any kind of arms (including missles and tanks and stuff) - These are the tinfoil hat wearing dudes
and boooooooooooooooy do fudds like to throw us under the bus
well
in fairness they probably don't have all that much in common with your views
just like the guy who keeps a shotgun at home for protection might not see the benefit of groups of dudes organizing a "strap on a piece and head to famous dave's" meetup.
of course they don't have a lot in common with our views
It seems that Ford pardoning Nixon opened the floodgates for corruption in the Presidency, since you're now virtually guaranteed immunity from prosecution.
corruption was rampant in pre-depression presidents. it's not like nixon really tuned a corner compared to dudes like mckinley.
we just had a pretty good run after the depression. and honestly our recent presidents haven't been particularly corrupt, even though i have disagreed with them plenty at times and the increased influence of money in politics is causing problems from county councils to the presidency.
You wouldn't describe the entire Iraq-> no-bid contracts to Halliburton as corruption?
or TARP? Or his Pharma deals?
Or how he even got into office to begin with?
Sheep on
0
Donkey KongPutting Nintendo out of business with AI nipsRegistered Userregular
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
Isn't it an automatic rifle fed by a fairly large magazine, basically intended for use in war?
Like, it's not all that specific but it has a meaning. Pistols are not assault rifles. Bolt action rifles are not assault rifles.
Donkey Kong on
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
I woke up this morning and I had this fantastic new idea. Like, I unlocked one of the secrets of the universe and it was really important that I let the world know about this revelation.
But now, after I rubbed the sleep out of my eyes and had some coffee this morning, I've forgotten it.
Dammit em, we could have really used some cold fusion with the current nuclear hysteria.
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
This is a good post. People should pay attention to this post.
Pure hunter people - People who say that the only reasonable need to have a gun is to hunt game - Other gun people call these guys "Fudds" after Elmer Fudd.
Regular gun people - People believe guns should be used for hunting, self defense, the protection of the people, etc. - People like Organ and I
Extreme gun people - People who believe that government should not restrict the sale of any kind of arms (including missles and tanks and stuff) - These are the tinfoil hat wearing dudes
and boooooooooooooooy do fudds like to throw us under the bus
fudds are the entire reason the awb was passed in 1994
and the entire reason the nra radicalized afterwards
God, the AWB.....the "we've been watching too many 80's action movies" law.
I think the thing that confuses me the most is the lobbyist culture and the sheer amount of money knocked about in US politics.
Not that we don't have this in the UK (see every government desperately trying to stay on Murdoch's good side, or the fact that there's a lot of talk but not much action about businesses that don't pay corporation tax cos they're registered in tax havens or whatever), but we don't seem to be as open about it as US politicians and companies are.
I hope so badly that the Met being so badly embarassed recently means they make sure to really crack down on TNW this time, they won't touch Murdoch of course, but I like to imagine some high level heads are going to roll given how clearly it extended to the top.
I woke up this morning and I had this fantastic new idea. Like, I unlocked one of the secrets of the universe and it was really important that I let the world know about this revelation.
But now, after I rubbed the sleep out of my eyes and had some coffee this morning, I've forgotten it.
Dammit em, we could have really used some cold fusion with the current nuclear hysteria.
Cold fusion? Hell, that's easy. Just glue two ice cubes together.
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
Isn't it an automatic rifle fed by a fairly large magazine, basically intended for use in war?
Like, it's not all that specific but it has a meaning. Pistols are not assault rifles. Bolt action rifles are not assault rifles.
Bolt action rifles were and still are regularly used as sniper rifles because their firing mechanism is more reliable. (So one could arguably call it an assualt rifle for use in war?)
Dark_Side on
0
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratorMod Emeritus
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
so i hear this a lot from gun afficianados. and i understand the point that they are making, which is that some of the definitions of "assault rifles" center around cosmetic differences that have little to do with lethality (black finish, pistol grips, etc)
but some of the elements that define "assault rifles" IIRC do have to do with meaningful differences in lethality - clip size is one, rate of fire is one, etc.
to some degree, i feel like the lolassaultrifle thing is often held up as a point of ridicule in place of addressing people's legitimate concerns about gun laws and proposing meaningful and practical gun restrictions. if people are really saying that all military-grade hardware should be unrestricted for sale and carry among civilians, then they should just say that instead of pretending as though any gun restriction is illegitimate because some of the provisions of some of the legislation or proposals are more centered around citizens' (often legitimate) fears and insecurities than rate of fire & stopping power considerations.
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
Isn't it an automatic rifle fed by a fairly large magazine, basically intended for use in war?
Like, it's not all that specific but it has a meaning. Pistols are not assault rifles. Bolt action rifles are not assault rifles.
the problem is that assault rifle and assault weapon are collated in a lot of nonsensical, uninformative ways
like, in the traditional military sense, yes- an AR is the primary infantry weapon, uses a formidable cartridge, and is selective fire (re: automatic). it also has a magazine that is removable.
but in american legalese, the AWB defined certain 'assault weapons' in totally disparate ways, and there has been language creep. to the uninformed, 'assault weapon' and 'assault rifle' are the same thing- when they're not, at all
as defined, an assault weapon can be a pistol, a rifle, a shotgun, can be automatic, can be semi-automatic, etc
I don't particularly like guns. In any form or use I find them to be somewhat disgusting. But I'm big on practicality and gun bans are not really practical.
Kind of like drug laws, I don't like them but its pretty clear just telling people they don't get to have them isn't working.
Styrofoam Sammich on
0
ThomamelasOnly one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered Userregular
Yeah, he was a paranoid bastard, but he got us out of Vietnam, founded the EPA and OSHA, passed the Equal Rights Amendment, and negotiated the first SALT treaty.
Both Eisenhower and Nixon built upon Social Security and did it during balanced budgets. That's pretty baller.
Edit: and they both supported desegregation.
Nixon's a pretty good example of how easy it is for a politician's legacy, no matter how positive in the large scale, can be completely overshadowed by a few bad decisions that in the long run didn't matter a great deal.
The issue is that it wasn't just a bad decision. It was a deliberate attempt to subvert the ideals the country tends to hold strongly. It was a betrayal of trust at a very deep level. We don't expect perfection out of Presidents but he crossed a line that we find intolerable to cross. And it's left a lasting scar on the American political landscape. I mean most people don't remember the Tea Pot Dome scandal but Watergate still lingers 40 years after the fact.
There's no nice way to say this. Using the phrase "assault rifle" in a policy discussion is going to make people think you have no idea what you're talking about.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
Assault Rifle does mean something. Assault Weapon does not.
Nixon was part of a trend of an increasingly expansive Presidency, that bit where he asserted being above the law wasn't unique to him - he was articulating an attitude that had been lurking under the surface since Truman (and FDR, but FDR could claim ongoing crises. Truman had less justification). The degree of expansive war powers and secrecy that, say, LBJ had were already historically unprecedented; the justification being the (also unprecedented) nature of government thought to be necessary, in military and economic spheres.
After Nixon, Congress did re-assert some powers, and the growth of presidential powers seems to have stagnated. The War Powers Resolution introduced in 1973 to restrain Nixon seems to represent the stalemate - presidencies have regularly disputed its constitutionality, but cooperate (in some sense) with t, and neither side seems to want to push the issue any more.
The AWB is a pretty good example of a "hysterical law". A law based entirely on emotional reactions to something a person doesn't know much about, in spite of any kind of reason.
Hilariously enough, things like bans on gay marriage are also "hysterical law", but while American liberals will be swift to point out how ridiculous those are and how baseless they are in reason and fact, the AWB nonetheless still has a lot of liberal support.
No political party or wing has a monopoly on hysteria.
Posts
Should have ignored that dude.
Yeah? Well we've consistently avoided prosecuting Presidents for it.
Not once did anyone call Bill Clinton on his shit for bombing Iraq to take our minds off his perjury case. Which failed because it was just Bill's Dick 24/7.
Also, Nixon committed treason when he sabotaged the Vietnam peace process for his own political gain.
corruption was rampant in pre-depression presidents. it's not like nixon really tuned a corner compared to dudes like mckinley.
we just had a pretty good run after the depression. and honestly our recent presidents haven't been particularly corrupt, even though i have disagreed with them plenty at times and the increased influence of money in politics is causing problems from county councils to the presidency.
they're probably a gradient of 'normal' gun owners
most of us fall in varying places on the gradient of what is the right cutoff
I got so tired of hearing about bill's dick.
But I think we're having a relatively sophisticated conversation, don't you? It's not all "trolololrepublicans"
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
fudds are the entire reason the awb was passed in 1994
and the entire reason the nra radicalized afterwards
Yup. At least I only got one infraction. But hey, maybe he'll get sick of all the mean liberal echo chamber shit.
i dunno....
whats better than one splinter?
And yes I know none of us has a pure democracy.
do they ever
"Assault rifle" is almost a nonsense term.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
well
in fairness they probably don't have all that much in common with your views
just like the guy who keeps a shotgun at home for protection might not see the benefit of groups of dudes organizing a "strap on a piece and head to famous dave's" meetup.
Unless the reason you're using it is to lol at people who think that "assault rifle" means something.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Not that we don't have this in the UK (see every government desperately trying to stay on Murdoch's good side, or the fact that there's a lot of talk but not much action about businesses that don't pay corporation tax cos they're registered in tax havens or whatever), but we don't seem to be as open about it as US politicians and companies are.
You wouldn't describe the entire Iraq-> no-bid contracts to Halliburton as corruption?
i dont think the nra is radical
but the nra fundamentally changed after the awb was passed. at the time it was basically run by Fudds and the nra didn't actively campaign against the awb because it was viewed that "giving anti-gun people this will satiate them from coming after our hunting guns" and that didn't really happen
after the awb was passed there was tons of talk of making certain calibers illegal, and extending what would be covered under the awb, and etc.
so the nra made a serious shift afterwards. it's the whole reason that they're the "we wont move one inch"-type of organization they are now.
Stating you want guns for any other reason than hunting is enormously unpopular as an opinion, especially outside rural areas. Unlike the US, Canadians do not have an express right to bear arms, not in the same way, and self-protection and home defense arguments fall apart rapidly due to the way our self-defense and home defense laws actually work.
Bill C-60 was set to change all that, but that was a Conservative motion that was still being negotiated when Parliament was dissolved, and if the Conservatives don't win there's a very good chance it will get killed instead of passed.
Yet, even though I am pro-gun and C-60 is directly relevant to my future career in private security, I still wouldn't vote Conservative because many of their core issues run contrary to what I consider more important than guns and self-defense issues.
Kinda sucks.
Not according to games like Halo 3! :P
of course they don't have a lot in common with our views
i think that's the point
or TARP? Or his Pharma deals?
Or how he even got into office to begin with?
Isn't it an automatic rifle fed by a fairly large magazine, basically intended for use in war?
Like, it's not all that specific but it has a meaning. Pistols are not assault rifles. Bolt action rifles are not assault rifles.
Dammit em, we could have really used some cold fusion with the current nuclear hysteria.
This is a good post. People should pay attention to this post.
God, the AWB.....the "we've been watching too many 80's action movies" law.
I hope so badly that the Met being so badly embarassed recently means they make sure to really crack down on TNW this time, they won't touch Murdoch of course, but I like to imagine some high level heads are going to roll given how clearly it extended to the top.
Cold fusion? Hell, that's easy. Just glue two ice cubes together.
Bolt action rifles were and still are regularly used as sniper rifles because their firing mechanism is more reliable. (So one could arguably call it an assualt rifle for use in war?)
so i hear this a lot from gun afficianados. and i understand the point that they are making, which is that some of the definitions of "assault rifles" center around cosmetic differences that have little to do with lethality (black finish, pistol grips, etc)
but some of the elements that define "assault rifles" IIRC do have to do with meaningful differences in lethality - clip size is one, rate of fire is one, etc.
to some degree, i feel like the lolassaultrifle thing is often held up as a point of ridicule in place of addressing people's legitimate concerns about gun laws and proposing meaningful and practical gun restrictions. if people are really saying that all military-grade hardware should be unrestricted for sale and carry among civilians, then they should just say that instead of pretending as though any gun restriction is illegitimate because some of the provisions of some of the legislation or proposals are more centered around citizens' (often legitimate) fears and insecurities than rate of fire & stopping power considerations.
the problem is that assault rifle and assault weapon are collated in a lot of nonsensical, uninformative ways
like, in the traditional military sense, yes- an AR is the primary infantry weapon, uses a formidable cartridge, and is selective fire (re: automatic). it also has a magazine that is removable.
but in american legalese, the AWB defined certain 'assault weapons' in totally disparate ways, and there has been language creep. to the uninformed, 'assault weapon' and 'assault rifle' are the same thing- when they're not, at all
as defined, an assault weapon can be a pistol, a rifle, a shotgun, can be automatic, can be semi-automatic, etc
it is an eminently unhelpful collation
Kind of like drug laws, I don't like them but its pretty clear just telling people they don't get to have them isn't working.
The issue is that it wasn't just a bad decision. It was a deliberate attempt to subvert the ideals the country tends to hold strongly. It was a betrayal of trust at a very deep level. We don't expect perfection out of Presidents but he crossed a line that we find intolerable to cross. And it's left a lasting scar on the American political landscape. I mean most people don't remember the Tea Pot Dome scandal but Watergate still lingers 40 years after the fact.
Assault Rifle does mean something. Assault Weapon does not.
After Nixon, Congress did re-assert some powers, and the growth of presidential powers seems to have stagnated. The War Powers Resolution introduced in 1973 to restrain Nixon seems to represent the stalemate - presidencies have regularly disputed its constitutionality, but cooperate (in some sense) with t, and neither side seems to want to push the issue any more.
IDK, there was a <SHUT UP WOMAN IM WOWING> for a while on our server.
Hilariously enough, things like bans on gay marriage are also "hysterical law", but while American liberals will be swift to point out how ridiculous those are and how baseless they are in reason and fact, the AWB nonetheless still has a lot of liberal support.
No political party or wing has a monopoly on hysteria.
Carbines are like rifles but are not rifles.
had sexy dreams (about webcomic characters
clearly i need to either read more or less webcomics
also in the dreams for some reason my mom interrupted us before the climax so
im kind of cranky
not a great way to wake up