Jump to content
MunoRN

MunoRN

Critical Care
advertisement

Activity Wall

  • MunoRN last visited:
  • 3,663

    Content

  • 0

    Articles

  • 63,211

    Visitors

  • 0

    Followers

  • 0

    Points

  1. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Chicago used to have some of the toughest gun laws, handguns used to be illegal in Chicago, that ended in 2010. A registry and CC ban ended in 2013. The state of Illinois requires a license to purchase, but with 2 states with more lax laws a short drive from Chicago that doesn't mean much, which is a patchwork of laws don't really work.
  2. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Between New York and Chicago, Chicago certainly has the higher gun homicide rate, although New York has in impressively low gun homicide rate for a dense urban area. Per the CDC, the Chicago metropolitan area had a gun homicide rate of 8.1 per 100,000 for the last reported period of 2015-2016, New Orleans was at 16.6, Birmingham was at 12.6, Memphis at 15.0, etc. The general point is well taken, our overall gun homicide rates are far higher than they should be, we'll never get it to zero, but it would make sense to take reasonable steps to reduce these numbers. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/pdfs/mm6744a3-H.pdf
  3. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    What do you think their rate of "shootings each week" is then? I don't think liberals "don't care" about the amount of shootings in Chicago or anywhere else in the US, it would seem that's a big driver of their push for better gun policy. I think they don't buy into the false representation of statistics that says Chicago has the highest rate of shootings in the US.
  4. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    What do you think Chicago's homicide rate is?
  5. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    Buying from a private seller through an internet site does not require a background check with the exception states with universal background check laws. In states without universal background check laws there is little difficulty obtaining a firearm without a background check because it's not illegal, which is the point, those who legally are not allowed to own firearms shouldn't be legally allowed to easily purchase them.
  6. MunoRN

    Domestic Terrorism

    The requirement of background checks only applies to sales through an FFL which does not account for all gun sales, purchasing guns without using an FFL is readily available on the internet. I own guns and have no complaints of having a background check when purchasing a gun, and I can't imagine selling someone a gun without utilizing an FFL to transfer the firearm. There are ways around universal background checks but by definition the only people who would sell guns illegally are people who shouldn't have them in the first place, so it would make sense to stop willingly supplying the black market with guns.
  7. MunoRN

    The President Donald Trump Thread

    They offered him the full $25 billion in wall funding he's been seeking on two separate occasions. Offers he accepted only to then change his mind.
  8. MunoRN

    The President Donald Trump Thread

    I'm assuming "defense funds" was meant to be a pun; De Fence Funds.
  9. MunoRN

    Mueller Hearing

    Corrupt autocracies like leaders and governments that are friendly to other corrupt autocracies, which Trump certainly is. They also like that non-autocracies such as democratic republics, give up at least some degree of those values and embrace the characteristics of corrupt autocracies: opposition to a free press, opposition to check-and-balance mechanisms, etc. They also favor a divided America, we're currently more polarized than in recent history, which partly follows an ongoing trend, but is certainly exacerbated by one of the most enthusiastically divisive administrations in recent history. Obama has previously stated that it would be nearly impossible to directly rig physical votes to alter an election, but he's never stated that a propaganda campaign can't affect an election.
  10. MunoRN

    Mueller Hearing

    The themes promoted by the Russian propaganda campaigns have often been referenced by Trump supporters as why they support Trump, so it's unlikely they didn't play a role in how anyone voted. In terms of the threat that they pose, directly rigging votes poses much less of a threat than successful pro-Russia and pro-autocracy propaganda. Changing votes at the voting booth only gives them control of which anti-Russia candidate wins, propaganda that successfully shifts views has the potential to be much more beneficial to Russia. We've gotten to the point where not only does a significant portion of the US population have little problem with us surrendering some degree of American core beliefs to Russian core beliefs, the act of investigating and preventing this from happening has been referred to by the President as "treason", that's a win for Russia they can't get just by changing votes at the voting booth.
  11. MunoRN

    Mueller Hearing

    As an example; defining all criticism of Trump as a "derangement syndrome".
  12. MunoRN

    Mueller Hearing

    I don't think impeachment really gets us anywhere, what would be more effective is if conservatives would defend conservative values rather than engage in the extreme partisanship that keeps them from saying anything at all constructive about Trump's behavior. You've lamented how some liberals just reflexively oppose everything Trump does, which is a fair point, but on the other side it's no better to reflexively support everything Trump does. I don't think conservatives need to fear suddenly becoming a commie-hippie just because they say to Trump "we agree with you on this and that, but you gotta tone down the autocratic stuff". You're not agreeing that there was a complex conspiracy between Trump and Russia just because you point out that the Trump campaign shouldn't have enthusiastically attempted to arrange for Russian support, or that the system of checks and balances on the President isn't "treasonous", or as we found out from Mueller's testimony, you shouldn't lie under oath. Those are all pretty obvious lines to draw, I'm not sure why conservatives are having such a hard time sticking to the values they've always seen as non-negotiable. I think if they can't do that, then at some point impeachment becomes the only option that keeps congress from being simply negligent in their sworn duties.
  13. MunoRN

    Mueller Hearing

    Except Mueller provided not only evidence of multiple instances of obstruction, but provided extensive reviews of applicable precedent and case law related to these instances, do you have any substantive rebuttals to his examples of obstruction or is that you would rather pretend the report didn't point these out?
  14. MunoRN

    Too many Dem candidates

    As candidate Trump frequently pointed out, the unemployment rate by itself is fairly meaningless. You have to look at it in the context of job creation and the labor force participation rate, since the unemployment rate also goes down when people give up looking for work. If the unemployment rate goes down, but job creation and the labor force participation rate remain unchanged, it's because people stopped looking for work. As a fiscal conservative what concerns me most is that people have stopped looking for work not necessarily due to lack of jobs, but because under Trump we haven't moved towards making jobs that free people from independence on public assistance, if anything we've been moving towards jobs that only supplement government assistance. The only thing that's changed significantly is Trump's characterization of the job market, which despite the market not really changing his description of it has turned 180 degrees.
  15. MunoRN

    The President Donald Trump Thread

    Aside from the fact that this statement is itself fundamentally un-American when used to refer to someone who has a differing view on how to make America better and to meet it's core principles, and should be well out-of-bounds for Presidential comments, you're missing a key difference between that and Trump's various statements on the subject. For instance, disagreeing with someone else about how to best protect a core American principle like freedom-of-the-press is not un-American, trying to suppress and undermine the core American principle is. The 4 members of Congress Trump is referring to disagree with Trump on how to best achieve core American goals, he has responded to that by stating that because they disagree with him, they don't belong here, the White House has stated that the reason they don't belong here is because of their "heritage" and "ethnicity". Applying a different standard to someone than you do to yourself or stating that you have more rights than they do due to their "heritage" or "ethnicity" is a pretty straightforward definition of racism, how do you see that differently?
×