12 shot dead at movie theater

[thenammagazine]

What a bleak, nihilistic vision. I feel sorry for you that you look upon fellow human beings and think that rapacious, unforgiving competition is what is best for them. But then many of them are "worthless" in your mind.

Interesting that I recall you recently decrying the environmental notion of "over population" as 'talk that belonged in Auschwitz'. I guess those of us that support the notion of social welfare states are just mad when we also recognise notions like ecological carrying capacity or non-renewable resource depletion.

All your demands have historical precedents rooted in the nineteenth century. There is a reason literally all developed nations have moved away from that pure capitalist/libertarian/social darwinist model of society to some form of regulated markets and social democracy: because it decreased human suffering and increased socioeconomic stability. Does that mean it has no flaws? Of course not, but it is demonstrably better than the society that came before in terms of poverty rates, access to education, social mobility, distribution of wealth (becoming a problem again), environmental protection, etc.

Only drug prohibition of all those moves has proven a colossal failure and then chiefly because we have addressed it as a police-military enforcement issue, not a social issue.

i.e. "I was insulted because I leech of the system."

 

[devilof76]

I never said it would be flawless. What it would be is just (or would at the very least have justice as its goal). I'm sorry if you consider justice as belonging to an extremist point of view. Or, simplistic, inane, and/or absurd.

And yes, I believe your ideals are unjust. Which is why your idealism, as pragmatic as you may regard it, has created a system as broken as this. I have nothing against idealism. Irrational ideals are my problem, and worse, ideals that are imposed by force. You have no right to be throwing a yoke on the working class (or the rich) so that you can ensure that those who have no intention of providing for themselves may live in stagnant comfort.

The first step to reforming so corrupt a practice is abolition.

 

[Star Puffs]

i.e. "I was insulted because I leech of the system."

Pathetic and wrong. I have never used any form of need-based social welfare in my entire life, unless I suppose you count being alive and using the NHS. And unlike you I would never stigmatise someone who did.

The fact you take my statement and reduce to a personal attack based on a false premise really says it all about your inability to engage in an intelligent discussion. Dismissed.

 

[RonDMC]

I do not depend on statistics as there are many variables that go in to creating them. Statistics are fringe information that do not apply to issues they are used to support once they are dissected most of the time. Statistics are for politicians who can not actually prove their points so they want to color their argument and make it look pretty on the outside while changing nothing about the truth of it on the inside. And if I were to argue statistics I would tell you that the United States attempted an assault weapons ban for ten years and allowed it to expire because the statistics showed that it made no substantial difference. And I would tell you that the vastly smaller and tight-knit nature of the Australian population plays a vital part in your statistics such that I would bet that if your government opened the floodgates on guns in your nation...your gun violence statistics would not change dramatically either. And guess what, there are areas of the United States where you will find the same thing.

OK, though now I have addressed your fringe information, you still have not made any attempt to address the primary thing I offered for you to address.

Our Government is banned by our constitution from restricting our gun rights.

So you have no ideas at all on how to curb these types of mass killings in the future? You are resigned to the fact that these will continue to happen and there is not one thing at all Americans can do about it? When was the 10 year ban introduced? Was there any mass killings like this during that 10 year ban?

Here's some other things you could try:

1. Invent a Minority Report type machine so you can see the future just before it happens.

2. Lockup anyone who even looks remotely crazy.

3. Develop a cure for any type of mental illness

4. Ban/Limit the sale of guns.

Which of the above is the easiest? Which of the above uses common sense? I feel for the 60% of Americans who have nothing nor want anything to do with guns, so the minority can feel a false sense of security at night snuggled up to their AK and wave a 200 year old piece of paper around when someone even questions the need for gun ownership. All of your reasoning is a joke, this is why certain groups of people in your country are the laughing stock of the world!

I hope that the continual loss of life is worth your right to own a gun. Lets hope none of the pro-gun supporters on this forum aren't caught up in one of these massacres in the future as the assault rifle you have at home won't do you one shred of good? Owning a gun didn't do any of the Movie goers caught up in this incident any good and I am sure some of them would of owned guns.

End of story!

 

[EVILFACE]

Don't worry about it Ron.

 

[devilof76]

End of story!

How dare you blame us for these deaths.

You don't give a damn about the people who died. You're just using this as an opportunity to say, "I told you so."

Pretty ____ing low...

 

[Star Puffs]

You have no right to be throwing a yoke on the working class (or the rich) so that you can ensure that those who have no intention of providing for themselves may live in stagnant comfort.

Right there is the disconnect in your mindset. There is a reason it is called social democracy.

You react as if the social welfare system was imposed by dictatorial fiat as in Communist states. In Western Europe, North America and scattered other developed nations, social welfare systems have been implemented by democratic governments out of enlightened self-interest. And after almost a century, the only nation with entrenched, albeit minority opposition to the core of social democracy is the United States.

Your lot refuses ultimately to accept a populace and ultimately government that does not share your vision of society. The birther movement is the most absurd manifestation of that trend.

And if your views are that of some silent majority, then why do libertarian candidates barely make it into public office? Why did Ron Paul lose to Mitt in the primaries?

People do not want your vision of society because most voters, even conservative ones, realise that it has been tried and failed.

 

[devilof76]

I don't care how big your majority is, bub. You ain't the boss of me.

What's mine is not yours, nor is it anyone else's. If you want to rob me to flatter your own moral pretentions, hold a gun to my head and take it (oh wait...in your 'enlightened' self-interest, you already do).

Stop hiding behind your elitist bull____ and own up to what you're advocating.

 

[DarkArtist81]

Right there is the disconnect in your mindset. There is a reason it is called social democracy.

You react as if the social welfare system was imposed by dictatorial fiat as in Communist states. In Western Europe, North America and scattered other developed nations, social welfare systems have been implemented by democratic governments out of enlightened self-interest. And after almost a century, the only nation with entrenched, albeit minority opposition to the core of social democracy is the United States.

Your lot refuses ultimately to accept a populace and ultimately government that does not share your vision of society. The birther movement is the most absurd manifestation of that trend.

And if your views are that of some silent majority, then why do libertarian candidates barely make it into public office? Why did Ron Paul lose to Mitt in the primaries?

People do not want your vision of society because most voters, even conservative ones, realise that it has been tried and failed.

In a system without any social programs... i.e.... "Personal Responsibility"... People would only become more desperate. More crime, more homelessness, less money in the system, failed businesses, etc. Some of us have fought tooth and nail to get whatever we could, yet we still hang precariously close to the edge... one paycheck from falling off of a cliff into poverty.

This painting a portrait of people who use social welfare programs as "freeloaders" who are milking the system... laughing their way to the bank is insulting to the majority of us that were forced into using them... to our SHAME... because of flat out dire need.

I don't tell everyone that I am on Food Stamps or Medicaid, because you feel horrible for having to do it. I am a knot of tension all day long because I feel like I have no way to fix my scenario. I have filled out 40 applications in the past 3 months since school ended.

And I don't feel like minimum wage jobs are "beneath me"... like I am too good for them. It's just that the minimum wage is so laughable and insulting that it is impossible to live off of it, even if you work two jobs and never sleep. Especially if you have kids and live anywhere but rent regulated apartments. So why kill yourself just to pay for childcare and gas, when you could try to wait for a better job that will pay enough to take care of your family?

I know there are people who gladly abuse the system... but don't lump all people into that category and live in a fantasy world where things would be "awesome" if we just did away with the programs and let people fend for themselves.

 

[devilof76]

And those of us who can barely get by working two low paying jobs will promise not to complain when a third of our income goes to pay for you. And your education. And your healthcare. And your kid.

You're welcome.

 

[DarkArtist81]

It's part of living in society. I have paid taxes for years, and I never gave a damn that it paid for people who needed help. In fact, I was happy about it. It's a cost we pay to live in a society that has services such as roads, public workers, parks, safe streets, etc.

And when I put my degree to good use, I will pay BACK into the system. I'm not going to stay on it forever, nor will my kid..

And besides... I paid my debt to society. I served this country and bled for this place. I earned my college education, and paid for a good bit of it with my investment in the GI Bill when I was active duty. If I have to spend a few months on Food Stamps to make sure my family doesn't starve... I feel like I have earned the right to do so... with interest.

I will never cry about paying taxes. I'm a patriot doing my patriotic duty when I pay taxes. It's paying for this society we live in, and it's all necessary. Every last cent.

 

[devilof76]

You want a be a slave, that's your business. Don't tell me it's my duty. I'm not asking for anything other than to be allowed to live my own life. I wasn't put on this earth to support anyone other than myself, and those I choose to help.

 

[DarkArtist81]

You want a be a slave, that's your business. Don't tell me it's my duty. I'm not asking for anything other than to be allowed to live my own life. I wasn't put on this earth to support anyone other than myself, and those I choose to help.

I don't want to be a slave... to be a slave would be to not be compensated for what you do, and to have no rights or reparation for your work.

We live in a safe society (mostly) with services that we ALL use. So we are compensated for our taxes. It's just like paying a bill for DirectTV or electricity.

I'm not telling you that it's your duty... but if you don't want to pay for anything anyone else uses you are living in a dream world. There are not special roads that you alone paid for, no parks for you that were built only for your private use. You have no private police force, nor private firemen. Your taxes pay for all of that. You pay for social welfare to make sure the roads are not overflowing with diseased homeless who are looking to kill you for the pennies in your pocket.

I will agree that tighter controls are needed to weed out the abusers, but I've seen far too many hard working families fall into hard times and have to survive off of these programs to advocate the insane policy of getting rid of them.

People need help sometimes, it's the way it is. You get laid off, or your workplace is shut down. The state cuts back employees and you lose your job or can't find one. Your house burns down or you get sick and can't work. This can happen to anyone... and it does.

Not everyone has a church willing to help, or goes to church. Not everyone has family to call on. Social programs are a net to catch those people and to put them back into the social fabric so that they can be productive members of society (and pay taxes again!). Without the net we would be knee deep in impoverished people, desperate and dangerously in need.

 

[DarkArtist81]

Don't ____ing patronize me.

Dude, I'm not. I'm not attacking you or trying to belittle you in any way. I'm just coming at you with the cold honest truth. I really don't mean for it to be taken in such a negative way.

It's just the truth.

 

[devilof76]

It's not the truth, actually.

But one day, enough of you will believe it is. I hope I'm dead and buried before it happens. I don't want to see you get what you're asking for.

 

[EVILFACE]

You don't like paying for someone's kid that shouldn't have made in the first place?

 

[CelticPredator]

Just to clarify the facts. THIS IS IMPORTANT. The bull____ above, isn't.

That is all.

 

[devilof76]

You don't like paying for someone's kid that shouldn't have made in the first place?

I don't like paying for anything that I didn't agree to pay for.

The roads shouldn't even be government controlled. If a private company operated like that they'd have been run out of town a long time ago. Same for everything else the government 'provides'.

The simplest example of how this help your neighbor crap destroys on an invisible and massive scale is the housing meltdown. The last trillion dollars worth of mortgages Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac handed out were all sub-prime. This happened from 2006 to 2007. The banks had their ratings tied to how many 'affordable housing' mortgages they subjected themselves to, and knowing full well that those assets were high risk, they bundled them with low risk assets in an attempt to mitigate the danger. What happened to those GSE's that even George Bush was smart enough to be concerned about? Ask Bear Stearns and Goldman Sacks. Ask everyone who got their balls handed to them on an aluminum platter (silver was too expensive by that point) in the fall of 2008, and since.

It was the banks? Yeah, no. It was the affordable housing racket and everyone with their fingers in that oh so charitable pie. People can't find a job now? I wonder why...

...but I suppose I should just accept it, because that's how society is. People need houses, right? So they should get them whether they can pay for them or not. If they can't, then someone else can do it. Consequences be damned.

 

[hoodonit00]

Dude, I'm not. I'm not attacking you or trying to belittle you in any way. I'm just coming at you with the cold honest truth. I really don't mean for it to be taken in such a negative way.

It's just the truth.

I really don't even know how to respond to your post. It's such a damn shame that it's even gotten to this point. You and star puffs bemoan people like devil and others like him for his ideals. Say that we should strive to be more like Europe yet many of the countries in Europe are in dire financial shape, worse then the US, due to these programs that you and star puffs glorify.

You shake your head disapprovingly because we were raised to believe in taking care of our own. You consider it patriotic to pay taxes? Our forefathers fought and died to give us the freedom we have today because of taxation without representation and now it's patriotic?

I understand that we will always have social programs. These programs though need to be strictly regulated though. If you don't believe they are being abused then you are being disingenuous. You say that with less social programs that things will be worse. I say with less social programs people that can work will have to go out and fend for themselves. Once these people get used to taking care of themselves again the honor and dignity of once again being a productive member of society will work wonders.

We as a society need to get away from the mindset of "so and so makes more money than I do and I deserve more of it". That's the way things are, there will always be someone making more. If you don't make enough to afford an I-phone or whatever it is, tough, that's just the way it is.

 

[Valfar]

Yaussssssssssssss!!!! woooo!!