Coronavirus: Already In a Neighborhood Near You

[Archie]

49 minutes ago, oblong said:

there's a significant subset of GOP voters who think having to wear masks is about "living in fear" and "denies our freedom" and is "tyranny", yet they are just fine with kids having to do school shooting lockdown drills, metal detectors, etc. because the right to bear arms is "the price of freedom".  So yeah....  people that are ok with that are bad people. People that dismiss things like Sandy Hook as just an unfortunate result of a good policy can suck the big one.  They are bad people.  

Sandy Hook is the precise moment I shifted from the GOP because I learned they are ok with the slaughter of children as long as it means they get to accumulate all the firearms they want whenever they want.  They just fucking brushed it off.  Don't bother trying to engage in a gun control debate with me. I've heard it all before and nothing you say on the subject matters or changes a thing. 

Thats not a true statement. Nobody is ok with school shootings or any illegal shootings.  People who disregard the law are the problem. Laws are only for the law abiding. Guns don't do anything on their own. They are just used as a tool.  If guns aren't available they will use another tool such as bombs, hammer axe, knife etc. Many people depend on firearms for self defense, recreation, and to provide food.

[Archie]

1 minute ago, mtutiger said:

No. But I'm guessing that the subset of people who don't wear masks while sneering, concern trolling and talking shit about people who do wear masks (depicted in the cartoon) is made up of a lot of people who will be perceived as unlikable by a lot of people in America today. 

Put another way, if you spent the better part of last year and the beginning of this year whining about your personal freedom only to turn around and disrespect others for exercising their personal freedom, I don't why it is expected that people respect that POV.

I look at it if you want to wear a mask then wear one. I don't think any different of that person. Same as getting the vaccine its an individual choice. Some people don't want to put an unknown chemical in their body.

[CMRivdogs]

Which explains the proliferation of pot shops in Wall Lake and the lack of masks…😬

[chasfh]

Where are all these vast majority of people who don't wear masks? Where I live, there is an indoor mask mandate at most indoor establishments, and mask compliance is near 100%, same as it was a year ago. There are still a high percentage of people who walk the street in masks, which I think is overkill, but hey, that's their choice, and it's a much safer choice than someone being deliberately unvaccinated and deliberately unmasked around others, because they care only about themselves.

Are people in Michigan actively spurning indoor mask mandates to make a point?

[gehringer_2]

3 minutes ago, Archie said:

Thats not a true statement. Nobody is ok with school shootings or any illegal shootings. 

I beg to differ. Talk is cheap. If you are not willing to DO something to change the availability of guns then by definition are ARE OK with school shootings. You can make all the utopian noises you want about things that can never happen in practice: perfect law enforcement, perfect mental health support -  and it's all garbage because we all know its just a deflection since none of those 'perfects' can or will ever happen. That's reality. The rest is bullshit. Rob is exactly correct. 

[chasfh]

7 minutes ago, Archie said:

Thats not a true statement. Nobody is ok with school shootings or any illegal shootings.  People who disregard the law are the problem. Laws are only for the law abiding. Guns don't do anything on their own. They are just used as a tool.  If guns aren't available they will use another tool such as bombs, hammer axe, knife etc. Many people depend on firearms for self defense, recreation, and to provide food.

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

[mtutiger]

Just now, Archie said:

I look at it if you want to wear a mask then wear one. I don't think any different of that person. 

I'm glad you feel that way. I'm guessing, despite what is portrayed in the media, is that most people at this point of the pandemic (regardless of whether they wear a mask or not) probably don't spend a bunch of time thinking about what others choose to do.

My only point is that there is a subset of people who have been militant in their opposition to masks throughout the pandemic and continue to be, similar to what is depicted in that cartoon. And no, I don't have respect for that view and don't feel the need to defend why I don’t.

[mtutiger]

4 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Where are all these vast majority of people who don't wear masks? Where I live, there is an indoor mask mandate at most indoor establishments, and mask compliance is near 100%, same as it was a year ago. There are still a high percentage of people who walk the street in masks, which I think is overkill, but hey, that's their choice, and it's a much safer choice than someone being deliberately unvaccinated and deliberately unmasked around others, because they care only about themselves.

Are people in Michigan actively spurning indoor mask mandates to make a point?

Even in urban and suburban Texas (ie. Blue/Blue Trending), mask wearing has dropped precipitously. I have worn one sparingly (except grocery stores or Costco) for a while now.

Edited October 19, 2021 by mtutiger

[chasfh]

Just now, mtutiger said:

Even in urban and suburban Texas, mask wearing has dropped precipitously. I have worn one sparingly (except grocery stores or Costco) for a while now.

To be clear, are you saying that people are actively spurning a mask mandate in, for example, a store that has a sign at the door that requires a mask?

[mtutiger]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

To be clear, are you saying that people are actively spurning a mask mandate in, for example, a store that has a sign at the door that requires a mask?

I put mine on when required, but a lot of places aren't requiring them anymore here.

Edited October 19, 2021 by mtutiger

[mtutiger]

14 minutes ago, Archie said:

Thats not a true statement. Nobody is ok with school shootings or any illegal shootings.  People who disregard the law are the problem. Laws are only for the law abiding. Guns don't do anything on their own. They are just used as a tool.  If guns aren't available they will use another tool such as bombs, hammer axe, knife etc. Many people depend on firearms for self defense, recreation, and to provide food.

So if laws don't prevent all crime, why have them?

Why have drunk driving laws, for instance? Clearly they don't prevent people from getting behind the wheel of their car (ie. tool) and driving. Guess they're useless 🤷‍♂️

Edited October 19, 2021 by mtutiger

[Archie]

3 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Where are all these vast majority of people who don't wear masks? Where I live, there is an indoor mask mandate at most indoor establishments, and mask compliance is near 100%, same as it was a year ago. There are still a high percentage of people who walk the street in masks, which I think is overkill, but hey, that's their choice, and it's a much safer choice than someone being deliberately unvaccinated and deliberately unmasked around others, because they care only about themselves.

Are people in Michigan actively spurning indoor mask mandates to make a point?

Where I live in Michigan masked are not used by many people.  Even my doctors and dentist don't require me to wear a mask in the office. My work requires a mask but don't enforce proper usage since most are chin guards.

 

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

So if laws don't work, why have them?

Here's another question: if laws are only for the law-abiding, then why do we prosecute non-law abiding people? After all, Bunker says laws aren't for them.

[chasfh]

5 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I put mine on when required, but a lot of places aren't requiring them anymore here.

OK, that's different from where I am. There is a statewide indoor mask mandate, and compliance is practically 100%.

If my state didn't have the mask mandate and the place I go into is mask-optional for vaccinated people, I wouldn't mask up, either. But then, that would also mean we'd be in a different place re the trajectory of the pandemic.

[Archie]

3 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

So if laws don't prevent all crime, why have them?

Why have drunk driving laws, for instance? Clearly they don't prevent people from getting behind the wheel of their car (ie. tool) and driving. Guess they're useless 🤷‍♂️

The same thought goes to taking guns away.  Only the law abiding citzen will give up their firearms.  Criminals will not and they would have even more power over the law abiding as they would be defenseless.  

[gehringer_2]

4 minutes ago, Archie said:

The same thought goes to taking guns away.  Only the law abiding citzen will give up their firearms.  Criminals will not and they would have even more power over the law abiding as they would be defenseless.  

That arm chair argument simple does not hold up in reality. Australia was very successful at getting illegal guns out of their society. Illegal guns have lots of avenues of removal. The police confiscate millions every year - without the legal trade resupplying the pipeline the illegal supply dries up as well. That is historical fact - not armchair theorizing.

Edited October 19, 2021 by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

5 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

That arm chair argument simple does not hold up in reality. Australia was very successful at getting illegal guns out of their society. Illegal guns have lots of avenues of removal. The police confiscate millions every year - without the legal trade resupplying the pipeline the illegal supply dries up as well. That is historical fact - not armchair theorizing.

I have an armchair theory for you: If the police were charged with confiscating illegal firearms after a handgun ban in America, a high percentage of cops would focus their efforts on people in communities they have no respect for, and would completely look the other way when it came to people they are simpatico with.

Edited October 19, 2021 by chasfh

[mtutiger]

1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said:

That arm chair argument simple does not hold up in reality. Australia was very successful at getting illegal guns out of their society. Illegal guns have lots of avenues of removal. The police confiscate millions every year - without the legal trade resupplying the pipeline the illegal supply dries up as well. That is historical fact - not armchair theorizing.

Similar to how, despite the fear mongering, companies with vax mandates are generally getting compliance in excess of 95%.

At the end of the day, I don't think the theoretical efficacy of gun laws is much of a debate. Setting aside the 2nd Amendment, which makes it impossible to really do much with guns anyway, it basically comes down to what you value more: a society where guns are widely or easily accessible. Or one that where they are more restricted. And whether one is OK with the tradeoffs that come with those positions.

[CMRivdogs]

I say let em have their guns, tax the hell out of ammunition 

[gehringer_2]

Just now, chasfh said:

I have an armchair theory for you: If the police were charged with confiscating illegal firearms after a handgun ban in America, a high percentage of them would focus their efforts on people in communities they have no respect for, and would completely look the other way when it came to people they are simpatico with.

Are we talking house to house searches here? I woudn't think so. But even those guns would eventually roll out of circulation as the next generation got rid of what they found in the attic. I'm not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Even under the worst case you describe the first guns that would be pulled out of circulation would be those used in the commission of crimes, which would then be much harder for criminals to replace. You would be getting results exactly where you want  them.

[1984Echoes]

I've already spoken about how I want annual registration fees structured for gun owners... to pay for annual IRS/ FBI/ and mental health audits.

[chasfh]

10 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

I say let em have their guns, tax the hell out of ammunition 

How do you tax bullets made by 3D printers? (Yeah, remember those things?)

[chasfh]

8 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Are we talking house to house searches here? I woudn't think so. But even those guns would eventually roll out of circulation as the next generation got rid of what they found in the attic. I'm not going to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Even under the worst case you describe the first guns that would be pulled out of circulation would be those used in the commission of crimes, which would then be much harder for criminals to replace. You would be getting results exactly where you want  them.

I don't know about house to house. How did they do it in Australia? However they used the police to do it there, my theory—or hypothesis, I guess—is that if they did the same here, communities of color would certainly be cleaned out of their firearms, and white communities would go largely untouched. Is that a good thing?

Sure, you'd possibly get some reduction in certain crimes, but is uneven application of the law, in which historically-marginalized communities are the most heavily-policed yet again, the only or best way to get there? Seems to me this would be such a very clear and obvious case of othering that it would create an uproar.

[mtutiger]

20 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

I've already spoken about how I want annual registration fees structured for gun owners... to pay for annual IRS/ FBI/ and mental health audits.

This is the thing about the gun debate... there are absolutely ways in which guns could be regulated that could reduce gun crime in this country. Not just in terms of mass shootings at school, but even in terms of violent crime in larger cities. That would not involve things like buybacks or confiscation or anything like that.

But, like the abortion debate, we are congenitally incapable of having a nuanced debate... its either you favor gun rights or you favor confiscation. No middle ground.

I've largely checked out of the gun debate because of it... nothing will be accomplished because, while some middle ground may exist in the population as a whole, the extremes in Washington control the debate

Edited October 19, 2021 by mtutiger

[1984Echoes]

yes.