Politics of the Sound Bite. What Are Your Thoughts?

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 08:00:45 -0400

Some things to think about, if you can actually think rather than parroting the currently popular sound bites:

We constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money. But we never hear about who spent the money and where it went. And we never hear that Welfare is running out of money. Isn't it strange that the fund for people who worked for their money is running dry and the fund for people who don't work for their money is flush?

The government and the current Washington D.C. culture tells us to not judge ALL Muslims be the actions of a few lunatics, but encourages us to judge ALL Gun Owners by the actions of a few lunatics.

And if you are one of those who rags on Islam, reverse it. You don't want Gun Owners judged by the actions of a few lunatics, but you are more than willing to condemn Islam for the actions of a few lunatics.

We are encouraged to not judge people by their looks, their race, or their color, but fearful people want us to judge weapons because they "look" military.

All Americans want less senseless tragedies, but some people are willing to accept any measure, no matter how little it has done to solve the problem. If you are in favor of gun bans, explain why they have worked so poorly in the two cities which vie for Murder Capitol of the United States every year, Chicago and Washington D.C.?

The number 2 illegal import into the United States (after drugs and before illegal aliens) is guns, and not hunting rifles and self-defense weapons, but machine guns and sawed-off guns which are ALREADY illegal. So even if you could take up every legally owned firearm in the United States, what are gun bans going to do to stem that flow?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 8:06 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 08:06:35 -0400

facts do not lie but they get twisted to agendas.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 8:19 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 08:19:56 -0400

We constantly hear about how Social Security is going to run out of money - because there isn't any money "saved". They all dumped into the general "spending", and left a lot of IOU notices. It had already run out of money in that sense. The current SSN is survive on the Ponzi scheme system.

About Gun and Islam, there is an ultimate different. One is an item, and the other is a idea of how a society should run and behave. So it is an absolutely wrong comparison. Guns don't go around and TEACH youth to kill those who disagree with guns, but Islam do. If they want to bring in Christian on this topic? fine, 1000 years ago, Christian behave the same ... but that is 1000 years ago. Christianity evolved, but Islam still remain at 1000 years ago.

About gun control, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun". learn anything yet? It is not about the safety of the citizen, it is about the threat of the citizen represented to the political elitist. In a nicer way, it is easier for politician want general public to depend on police force, and to campaign that he/she increased the police force funding, when crime rate is climbing.

Sound bites is to catch supports for those that have short attention span. It become so effective that ... politician take full advantage of it, and soon the power of the short spanned grow in political realm ... and eventually some politician realize that sound bites don't need truth to back them up, as long as it sound right or feel good. Here you go the whole story.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2015 9:09 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:09:15 -0400

SGM Private RallyPoint Member Great post!

Response by Cpl Chris Rice made Oct 7 at 2015 9:27 AM

Cpl Chris Rice — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 09:27:30 -0400

There were only 500 cases of homicides in the city of Chicago during 2012 (1), and Houston had 217 cases (2) during the same year. It seems funny that the post to tell everybody to look at facts starts with a giant distortion of them, garnished with bullshit.

Social Security is going to run out of money because it is quite a bit more expensive than welfare is, in 2014 Social Security cost $840 billion (3) in comparison TANF cost $17 billion (4) SNAP cost $78 billion (5). Further Social Security is more complicated because of the way that the laws written keeps it from being pulled from the general fund, and since its funding is dependent upon current workers which are going to have difficulties because of the leveling in birth rate after the baby boomer surge.

You should not judge all Muslims due to the actions of a few lunatics, it would be wrong if somebody was telling everybody to judge gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics, unfortunately I don’t think this is what is happening, and for the most part the things that I see people get offended by as gun owners has made me realize the only thing we need to criticize gun owners on is their delicate feelings.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) would be the primary agency to enforce gun trafficking laws, but the gun lobby has essentially neutered them, and made it impossible for them to be effective over political bullshit (6).

1.https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/8tabledatadecpdf/table-8-state-cuts/table_8_offenses_known_to_law_enforcement_by_illinois_by_city_2012.xls
2.https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/8tabledatadecpdf/table-8-state-cuts/table-8-texas
3.https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49795
4.https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49887
5.https://www.cbo.gov/publication/43173
6.http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/atf-obama-gun-reform-control-alcohol-tobacco-firearms

Table 8 - Illinois

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Oct 7 at 2015 10:07 AM

MSgt James Mullis — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:07:30 -0400

Don't you know, It's not nice to try and counter liberal progressive dogma with facts. I've always been interested in the way raw data is presented to the public. We all know that the US homicide rate is high. (I don’t have the exact numbers at hand, but there is no real disagreement with this statement.) However, I wonder what the US homicide ranking would be if we deducted from the total count, the number of homicides committed in "gun free" areas which have been administered by Democrats for a long time, say, more than ten years? I am thinking Chicago, Washington D.C., and Baltimore.

Response by LTC Kevin B. made Oct 7 at 2015 10:33 AM

LTC Kevin B. — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:33:43 -0400

My, what assumptions you've made here.

"Isn't it strange that the fund for people who worked for their money is running dry and the fund for people who don't work for their money is flush?" Many of the people on different forms of welfare have indeed worked and paid taxes. The welfare rolls increase when the economy goes down. That means people lose jobs (where they paid taxes into the system), and then need government assistance (out of the taxes they paid into the system). The cash flows may occur in different years, but that's the same thing as with Social Security payments. Plus, the welfare money isn't "flush". Both parties fight over that every year, unlike Social Security where it has bipartisan support, and it is a much smaller portion of overall government spending.

"The government and the current Washington D.C. culture tells us to not judge ALL Muslims be the actions of a few lunatics, but encourages us to judge ALL Gun Owners by the actions of a few lunatics." The government doesn't encourage us to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few. The government just encourages us to find ways to reduce gun violence (and in many cases, that comes through proposals to reduce the easy availability of guns). That's not the same as characterizing all gun owners as lunatics. That's a debating fallacy known as a "straw man".

"....some people are willing to accept any measure, no matter how little it has done to solve the problem." This statement is immaterial. Many measures have been proposed and immediately shot down. This means society as a whole hasn't accepted them. A small number of individuals may accept those kind of measures, but that minority doesn't influence public policy as a whole. I could easily say that "some people" want all existing gun laws removed. However, our society is not pushing for everyone to easily obtain and own machine guns, grenade launchers, flame throwers, etc.

"If you are in favor of gun bans, explain why they have worked so poorly in the two cities which vie for Murder Capitol of the United States every year, Chicago and Washington D.C.?" I'm not in favor of gun bans, but this one is easy to explain. People just drive to Indiana and Virginia, where it is much easier to obtain guns, and then bring them back into the metropolitan areas. That's why gun control advocates argue for a Federal solution, because the neighboring states provide easy workarounds to many current and proposed state laws. That doesn't mean that the state gun laws, in and of themselves, are flawed. That just means they are ineffective due to differing policies between the states, and the interaction between those differing policies.

Response by SFC Wade W. made Oct 7 at 2015 1:06 PM

SFC Wade W. — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 13:06:58 -0400

Very well stated SGM. Bravo for clear and concise writing.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Oct 7 at 2015 7:20 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 19:20:17 -0400

Sound bites work well for a society that does not take the time to really study the issues and see where the politicians stand on each one. If they did, they would not be re-electing the big majority of Representatives and Senators to office over and over. And Politicians know that most people will not study the issues or have informed views on them. Yet, they will know everything about the Kardashians.

Response by SrA Art Siatkowsky made Oct 10 at 2015 5:23 AM

SrA Art Siatkowsky — Sat, 10 Oct 2015 05:23:30 -0400

I like these numbers because they adhere to my belief that an armed population is one that has less crime. I see all the responses about how its misconstrued and look at 2012 with the same 2 cities and yada yada but I know and everyone should know by now that the numbers can be worked to fit any agenda and quoting numbers anymore just seems ridiculous. I see mnsbc say this and the nra say that and quite honestly I think everyone if full of shit. But….. I do believe the founding fathers where sincere in setting up a government that was for the people and by the people and I am certain the reason why they made it crystal clear that the people should have the rights to own and bear arms is so that any form of corrupt government that was not for the people by the people would be met with by an armed people.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2015 8:35 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:35:03 -0400

I like that conclusion, SGM Private RallyPoint Member. I hadn't thought of the cold weather angle, but that is obviously the main problem here. You make some excellent points.