The What Has Trump Done Now Thread

[Yaz]

I will argue for more gun control until I die, probably from a gun since I'm ten times more likely to die from gun violence in America than any other country, but I honestly don't think it will happen. If dead elementary school children at Sandy Hook didn't do it, nothing will. I thought maybe when the DC shooting took place it might happen since members of congress were the victims, but nope. As long as the NRA exists and keeps funneling money into pockets of elected officials, it won't ever change.

[Phoenix]

I will argue for more gun control until I die, probably from a gun since I'm ten times more likely to die from gun violence in America than any other country, but I honestly don't think it will happen. If dead elementary school children at Sandy Hook didn't do it, nothing will. I thought maybe when the DC shooting took place it might happen since members of congress were the victims, but nope. As long as the NRA exists and keeps funneling money into pockets of elected officials, it won't ever change.

Agreed. As someone who moved to the US, I never understood the need for guns. They only have one purpose and that is to take away life. In the past few years, I've seen every argument to oppose gun control and they truly lack any logic except for selfish needs to own one. I'm not going to break down the specifics but as you rightly pointed out, Sandy Hook should have been the event to end this and we know how that went.

[Yaz]

It is such an all or nothing argument from pro gun people. They act like anyone who wants tougher and tighter laws wants to take all the guns away. No, I don't want that. I own a gun, I used to go hunting with my dad. I understand they do serve some purpose for the common man, but you don't need an assault rifle to hunt deer and if you are stupid enough to want to hunt dangerous animals like bears, then maybe you deserve to get mauled.

[klunderbunker]

I'm of a similar thought process. There are reasons to have guns without being a raging psycho. Owning a gun for your house or for hunting is a far cry from having virtually no restrictions on what you can have one for. The NRA/GOP (they're kind of the same thing on this) loves to scare people into thinking that common sense gun laws are going to take away every gun, but that's not even close to what is being suggested. There's a very easy middle ground and if that's something people are looking at, it has a chance. Granted that won't happen under the current GOP dominance, but it could one day.

[HBK-aholic]

Honestly, I find your obsession with the constitution bordering ridiculous. People are literally indoctrinated at such a young age into the thinking that the constitution is the be all and end all of life - at least when it comes to the 2nd amendment. Whenever anyone discusses gun control, the only replies are 'well the constitution says so!'. Dear America, your constitution is not perfect. In fact, sometimes it is stupid. Like allowing any Tom, Dick or Harry access to weapons they are not trained to use. If your only pro-gun argument is that a piece of paper written over 200 years ago says you can, you've already lost.

If I had to undergo 2 different kinds of tests and hours of practice in order to drive a car, you should not be able to walk into a gun store and buy a gun on the basis you haven't been convicted of a felony. And when people say they need guns to stop the government attacking them, I do have to laugh. I hate the current US President with a passion, but if the government, with their very skilled military want you dead, a few shotguns are not going to help you.

[JGlass]

Honestly, I find your obsession with the constitution bordering ridiculous. People are literally indoctrinated at such a young age into the thinking that the constitution is the be all and end all of life - at least when it comes to the 2nd amendment.

No it's not just for the 2nd Amendment, it's for the whole thing.

I think the reason we're so infatuated with the Constitution is because for more than 200 years it's done a surprisingly good job of outlining how to run our country. It's pretty shocking that a huge portion of the rules laid out by a bunch of farmers in 1787 has worked pretty consistently for us for so long when so many things have changed. But it isn't perfect, and there are some things the founding fathers couldn't possibly have fathomed, and there are certain things in our country that very clearly need to be changed. Our relationship with guns should be one of them.

[Yaz]

Back in my early 20s I read Lies My Teachers Told Me and one of the things it covered was America's obsession with the Founding Fathers and how we view them as infallible. A lot of it was due to propaganda spread in our countries early days as a means to unite us. People who were pro America and before that pro independence, would spread stories that built of Washington and Jefferson and the others as these near god like figures. It was necessary to keep the colonies united and then necessary again to keep a young nation pointed toward growth. It just had the unintended side effect that 200 plus years later, we still believe these men to be perfect.

[Slyfox696]

Back in my early 20s I read Lies My Teachers Told Me and one of the things it covered was America's obsession with the Founding Fathers and how we view them as infallible. A lot of it was due to propaganda spread in our countries early days as a means to unite us. People who were pro America and before that pro independence, would spread stories that built of Washington and Jefferson and the others as these near god like figures. It was necessary to keep the colonies united and then necessary again to keep a young nation pointed toward growth. It just had the unintended side effect that 200 plus years later, we still believe these men to be perfect.

My favorite part of any discussion about the founders is how people just automatically assume because they were in our past, they were naturally conservative (and devoutly Christian) men.

Which, of course, is absolute hogwash to anyone who has spent ten minutes thinking or researching it, but it's still fun nonetheless.

[JGlass]

So Mitt Romney, one of the few Republicans that has stood staunchly against Trump since the election, has finally gotten on his knees like the rest of his party and accepted Trump as his overlord: https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/...rce=vicenewsfb

I recommend reading the article just so you can see how Romney helped build Trump up as legitimate only to find himself at DJT's mercy 5 years later. Romney accepted Trump's endorsement when he was running against Obama and praised Trump's ability to understand our economy and how to create jobs. Now of course, those of us with even half a lick of sense have determined that this is fake news, I'd be surprised if Trump understands how the economy works, let alone how a belt buckle works, but Mitt Romney served as a nice reminder that not all Republicans are okay with what Trump's rhetoric and the real threat he represents to immigrants, trans people, the environment, and our world standing. In fact, he even put Trump on blast when he announced his candidacy for senate, and I think he was largely being hyped up as an anti-Trump Republican.

But now he's decided to play nice with Trump and graciously accept the endorsement. I think this is just an attempt to make it look like everything is fine in the Republican party, everyone is getting along, nobody has lost faith in 45, and they're all working together to make America Great Again. I'm hoping folks are making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is, that Romney will be the anti-Trump Republican he set out to be, but it seems like Trump has a way of turning his detractors to his side (he and Lindsey Graham have had a pretty tumultuous relationship but last I heard they were golf buddies).

Fucking Republicans, man.

[Yaz]

My favorite part of any discussion about the founders is how people just automatically assume because they were in our past, they were naturally conservative (and devoutly Christian) men.

Which, of course, is absolute hogwash to anyone who has spent ten minutes thinking or researching it, but it's still fun nonetheless.

Yeah, the whole debate on the religious nature of them is a fun one. Franklin was outspoken in his doubts of a higher being, as well as being a man whore. Jefferson was iffy and did his best to separate his religious and political life.

My favorite argument is "Well when people first came to America they came because they were seeking religious freedom because England wouldn't let them worship God how they wanted." While not entirely untrue, it simplifies the rather complex reasoning for traveling across the ocean to a new land.

On an unrelated note, I was home schooled for three years, my parents used this Christian based program called Abeka, which was associated with Pensacola Christian College in Florida. It was all the typical Young Earth Creationist and Biblical Literalism stuff that you would expect. Anytime the Civil War came up we were taught that Stonewall Jackson was a good man because he was a devout Christian.