Political Discussion Thread II

Well…. I’m all for concealed carry. (Shocking!!!11) So I like this ruling. I like it a lot.

As for abortion…. Sigh. I have many opinions on it, most of which make both sides incredibly angry. But what the hell? Let’s do it. It’s kicked back the states because federalism. People in Massachusetts have different values than those in Alabama.

The gun case involves the 2A, and as it’s been incorporated it applies not just to the Feds but all the states. You could apply my above abortion reasoning to this but that would miss the point of an incorporated right enshrined in the Constitution. (I’ll spare you all a reciting of my Manifesto.)

Personally, I don’t care what people do so long as they don’t steal my weed, shoot me or abort my baby. What they do with theirs is on them.

Now you can make a case regarding the rights of the unborn. I won’t because I assume most of you are insane. But what I will say is that I do NOT agree with abortion for an “Oops! I’m pregnant and young! Oh noes!” I think that’s awful, but I also do not want it illegal. Why you ask? Because valid reasons like danger to mother, ■■■■, nonviable fetus, etc., should be allowed everywhere. So in light of this how would you enforce a ban on abortion as birth control? You can’t. Hence my opinion.

I haven’t read about the Miranda warning yet. I’m of two minds on it. One, a ■■■■■■■ citizen should know their rights already. Two, DONT TALK TO THE COPS. You’ll never talk your way out of being arrested. So don’t try. You’ll just give them info. If they think you did some ■■■■, you won’t dissuade them. Let them make their own case - don’t do it for them.


I’m not sure how the issue of concealed carry is actually a 2nd amendment issue though? Nothing in that says anything about concealed vs. open but, if anything, the concept of a “well-armed militia” doesn’t really bring a bunch of people with bulging armpits to mind.

If by “both sides” you mean the most vocal groups on each extreme, polling would suggest you’re actually in the majority? That’s my takeaway from the more nuanced surveys, anyway.


Bulging armpits? Bruh no one packs in their pits. Well… not firearms anyhoo.

Ha, yes that’s actually exactly what I mean. People suck balls.

But a textual reading of the 2A implies - rather, says - people have the right to keep and bear arms. Nothing about concealed vs open. Quite honestly, I’m my view it’s unconstitutional to require a license.

1 Like

As a note here, I still haven’t read that ruling VH, but if I understand it properly NY requires concealed carry for having a gun at all.

Anyways, past that even ignoring the ninth amendment (which I don’t), my view on rights stems from a fundamental advocacy of government that not only doesn’t go after rights, but is obligated at a basic level to defend the smallest minority from infringments on their freedom in any form before it harms someone else.

And seriously, ■■■■ that miranda rights ruling. No it should not be legal for police to violate your miranda rights, and that’s what this amounts to.


Justifications FOR concealed (for citizens)?

Honestly I have no idea, not actually busting balls here (not yet anyways).


I’m kinda surprised you’re commenting on this one. I know how much you -heart- gun debates!

1 Like

My understanding was that concealed carry required a separate, second application/licence? Only going on the summaries being reported this side of the border though, and we’ve got our own problems here.

Gun violence has escalated quite dramatically over the past 2 years, along with a more general erosion of what I would call ‘common decency’ or ‘core moral values’. That goes with the widening poverty gap and hollowing out of the middle class as decent well-paying full time jobs with benefits continue to disappear.

And it’s mainly the young who are ending up as the perpetrators/victims - a shocking number of teenagers involved in what would appear to be gang turf war killings, armed robberies of pharmacies, and violent car-jackings.

I suspect many of these teens were ‘groomed’ into doing this stuff thinking it would gain then acceptance, when in reality they’re probably just being used as disposable patsies.

The current inflation situation and cost of housing isn’t helping any, either.


Well I mean does open carry cramp my style? or ruins my tailoring lines? or invites conflict?

I guess those arguments are……arguments. Just curious what drives concealed advocates to advocate.


Health problems. It all comes back to health problems. I’ve said before that most crime has root causes that aren’t seemingly directly related to the crime (abuse, bullying, exposure to lead as a child, health in general, poverty, etc), but one thing I’ve been seriously worried about lately? What the impact of COVID will have been on peoples mental health. I honestly have a strong suspicion it was… well, lets say I’m not totally shocked by the homicide rate numbers.

1 Like

To be clear, I’m frankly more upset that servicemen are more strictly regulated when it comes to possession of firearm than the average citizen. But I think that if abortion, which Benjamin Franklin had a recipe for added to an edition of a book he published, can be a states rights issue then how much control a woman has on her uterus should be that at the very least, and I’m sure we all know I think it’s none of my damn business. (Screwed this up, I meant I think gun control should also be a states rights issue. FFS, I’m too tired for this ■■■■. My bad, boys.)

That said, less guns on the streets and higher stakes for using them makes me feel safer in this burg. I’d also like to see more citizens educated and familiar. But, you know, common sense.

Like an endorsement for different vehicles on your driver’s license, but you had to prove a need for it, which isn’t exactly easy. I think the lowest threshold I’ve heard of is routinely carrying large quantities of cash ($20K+?) or otherwise valuable material.


Oh. Well if one is going to tote a gat, openly carrying it 1) scares some people, 2) makes you a target.

Concealed carry is much preferred.

1 Like

On the flip side, it’s a fun and easy way for me to pick out cowards or small penis havers on the street, so that’s a plus.

Totally unrelated, but I listened to the last podcast on the left’s 4 episode run on the Oklahoma City Bombings followed almost immediately by HBO’s Jan 6 movie and I’m now pretty convinced that we’re all a year or two away from the next major white supremacist bombing.

All the same works of literature are still doing their work like they have since before Ruby Ridge, and the people who are “serious” about this are getting smokescreened by the 1776 larpers to the point that somehow we’re still not taking them seriously, at all. Even these hearings are more set on bashing trump and proving a timeline than actually getting at the people who intended actual national chaos.

We helped make this baby by throwing these militia groups on the back burner before the second plane hit on 9/11. We can help abort it (see what I did there) by taking these groups seriously again and going after them.

1 Like

Did anyone take them seriously 20 years ago? Pockets of fringe wackos were always all over the place. I’m in no position to say whether any of them individually had any impact on the nation. But then. There’s always the Great Galvanizer in

I know I keep referring to Idiocracy but since I just watched it again, it seems fresh and relevant :

I like guns (and Trump). I can’t believe you like guns (and Trump) too. We should totally hang out.

1 Like

Pre 9-11 they were taken very seriously, especially after OKC. It’s easy to forget the “edgy” years of the 90s but especially after OKC people were bringing on the KKK and any skinhead group they felt like to make fun of them. The FBI definitely started hunting them more aggressively, as did other national intelligence agencies. We’d known for a while that these “patriot militias” were dangerous, separatist groups and that they had big footholds in the south and northwest and there were a lot of ops to deal with them to break up the more serious cells planning on follow ups with more turner diaries horseshit like McVeigh was on it about.

Then 9/11 happened and basically every other ATF/FBI op has either been dealing with Radical Muslim groups or Mexican Narcos. The groups basically got a free pass through all of the bush presidency and were even able to attach to some of the more “fringey” groups hanging on the edges of the big tent. Of course all of that accelerated quickly as the alt-right got some juice and several online sources started saying the quiet part out loud.

Jan 6 should be proof that we need to start hitting these groups again before they get off the ground, but again I think we’re going to drop the ball right up until one of them gets lucky and does something way bigger than a school shooting.

1 Like

Question. If more people conceal carry, doesn’t that raise the prospect of more pre-emptive police shootings?

1 Like

Well, that’s not an unreasonable suspicion. However, crime data doesn’t seem to support that. Very generally, and this talking point is one that does admittedly get a little twisted, but CCW holders tend to commit fewer crimes than police officers. But that’s likely - in my view - due to police drawing their weapons way more often and using force as that’s their job. The average CCW holder isn’t looking to arrest people or deal with criminals. They’re mostly carrying just cause.

The gun debate does indeed get very tedious and very nonsensical very quickly. Emotions are very high on both sides, and this leads to more emotion-based rather than data based arguments. Hard for either side to discuss when they’re both too busy making villains of those who disagree.

But back to your original point: New York State will now have to have the same CCW laws as 43 other States. We haven’t witnessed an increase in police shootings in those states in relation to carrying. That being said, and related to my emotion comments above, I’m sure we could both find breathless articles and studies that would ‘support’ both our views.

The problem here is that pesky human tendency towards cognitive bias, and particularly the form where we tend to interpret situations in light of our presumptions or preconceived notions.

We already have many instances in which what a cop thought was a weapon turned out to be a non-weapon. If you add an increased suspicion that any random person might be concealed carrying to an already stressful situation - such as a night-time traffic stop in a poorly lit area - it just seems inevitable that the number of pre-emptive shootings will go up. And I’m not sure it would be possible to train that away.

Do they actually have before/after stats on that, or are they just comparing overall rates between states that do and do not have concealed carry? If the latter, that is a statistically dubious comparison unless there are additional factors (socioeconomic and racial status, rates of other crimes, etc) included.


Perspective makes monsters of us all. To people who feel disproportionately targeted by the police those officers represent the tyranny against which they need protection. Miss me with “to protect and serve,” they only exist to safeguard the prosperity of people that can afford politicians.

The root cause of crime is poverty. If we exercised our compassion and worked to solve that societal inequity rather than vilifying those in the trap (ie- “get a job,” “they’re just lazy and want handouts,” etc.), I bet we’d see a lot less crime. But, you know, common sense.


Again, I don’t disagree really. 20 years ago when CCW stuff really got going - and back when I was a Democrat - I wondered the same thing. But we just haven’t seen that happen. (Then again - how would you quantify that? Just the rate of shootings wouldn’t be enough as that can be influenced by a MILLION different variables.)

I look at the above with correlations between CCWs and crime rates. As the first goes up the second goes down. ….Until the last few years. But again, crime rates are influenced by many factors. As my hippie friend mentioned, poverty being a good indicator. But that too is correlative with all kinds of stuff. Ah, social science!