Comments by "No Fate But What We Make" (@SonoftheAllfather) on "Rep. Dan Crenshaw Gets Honest About Mass Shootings | Joe Rogan" video.

Leftists deliberately overlook sociocultural trends as a possible reason for why there are more of these events occurring. This is because leftism is the prevalent sociocultural trend, so they refuse that their own ideology causes more mental illness. Their denial is causing a lot of death and pain.
19
@joshuawright9852 You can't require a license for a right that is deemed unalienable by our Constitution. That's like having a license to speak.
6
@jakefromstatefarm142 What is there to explain? The current lexicon, the current mainstream culture, the current zeitgeist is thoroughly dominated by liberalism and leftism. And more people are mentally ill now than ever before. I'm pointing to that correlation and how liberals and leftists defend against the notion that their ideological dominance is to blame for the increase in mental illness, especially among young men.
5
@joshuawright9852 Licensing would only marginally prevent irresponsible behavior. If licensing was totally effective, there would be no irresponsible drivers, and we both know there are plenty of people who should have that privilege revoked. But that's the thing, we can revoke that privilege, because it's a privilege, not an unalienable right guaranteed by the Constitution. Any legislation which effects a citizen's right to keep and bear arms is technically unconstitutional, so we must be very, very careful about continuing to layer on legislation. Most gun legislation simply doesn't work, so eventually, the gun grabbers will go after the 2A itself because all their legislation will fail to deliver the outcomes they want. That is why I don't support any legislation. It sets the precedent for them to take away a right our Founders considered a right that government couldn't take away...a right given to us by our Creator...if you believe in that sort of thing.
4
@danielosuna4980 Because people that are the most mentally anguished and disgruntled by mainstream culture tend to be on the dissident right.
4
@joshuawright9852 But you actually do need a permit in most places to carry. If you knew anything about guns, you'd already know that.
3
@joshuawright9852 We agree it might help, but it is not failsafe. I don't believe in any legislation on principle alone, and secondly because most of it doesn't really work. Licensing might help, but it's unconstitutional just like all gun legislation. You don't need an alternation of the 2A to pass unconstitutional gun legislation. It happens all the time. Just look at Virginia. Mass shootings you see on the news aren't really the problem, tbh. Rifles only account for 3% of gun deaths in the country and still the VAST majority of "mass shootings" are committed by urban gangs who live in some of the most heavily gun restricted areas in the country. You've fallen for the media hysteria if you think firearms related homicides or mass shootings will decrease if rifles are banned or more legislation is layered on. Firearms related deaths are lower now than they've been in years, you just know everything that's going on now because of that little device you stare at all day. It gives you the sense that there's more gun crime now, but it's an illusion. There's actually less. Gun legislation doesn't really change anything. The existing laws aren't even being enforced and they don't even work when they are. So what's the point? All it does is punish people who already follow the law. We either have a right to keep and bear or we don't. The problem in my opinion is society, not our rights or lack thereof. Therefore the solution is better education, better law enforcement, better mental health services, and more cultural and social institutions that encourage healthy behaviors and lifestyles.
2
@seanocd The entire gun debate hinges on the fact that the 2A is an unalienable right guaranteed by our Constitution. If it weren't, firearms would already be heavily restricted in the U.S (as they are in other developed Western nations). Even though unconstitutional statues are routinely challenged in the courts, yes, I am very concerned with what you referred to as "legislative creep." The reason is because the courts (some courts in particular) are stacked with activist judges who seek to undermine parts of the Constitution based on their own personal moral beliefs. I am not only concerned with statues which infringe on 2A rights, but 1A rights, 4A rights, 5A rights, etc. The only amendment I would be happy to see revised is the 14A, because 1.) it is not an unalienable right and 2.) its clear intention was to naturalize emancipated Black slaves and give equal rights under the law, not give birthright citizenship to anyone who is born on U.S. soil. I think licensing would be marginally effective for basic gun safety. It might prevent accidents, but it almost certainly wouldn't prevent criminality. Most criminals don't undergo background checks and buy weapons and ammo at stores, and they certainly don't register their weapons. They wouldn't obtain licenses either. As it is, the majority of firearms-related homicides occur in urban jurisdictions with the most heavy gun control in the nation. This proves that gun legislation does not work on those who don't abide by the law (imagine that). That said, most gun owners are law abiding citizens, and they would be the ones who are stripped of their rights because left-wing politicians refuse to blame individuals for their actions, and instead blame the nature of our laws and society. Unfortunately, a lot of the reason these same politicians refuse to place the onus on individuals has to do with the race of most of the individuals charged and convicted of firearms-related homicides. About 70% of firearms-related homicides are committed by a demographic that constitutes <7% of the population: Black/Hispanic males age 15-35. The Euro-American majority, which owns about 70% of the firearms in the country, has homicide rates (some of which aren't even firearm-related) of 2.05 per 100,000, which is similar to that of Belgium, a very low-crime country with no right to keep and bear arms. However, there are some infringements on the 2A that are pragmatic (violent felons not being allowed to own firearms, for instance). But in the end, if they aren't even effective, they are not only unconstitutional, they are not pragmatic either. Factor into the equation that many of the laws already on the books are not even methodically enforced. The Sutherland Springs shooter should have failed his background check for being dishonorably discharged from the Air Force. They didn't do the paperwork correctly, he bought a firearm, and he murdered 26 people. So even though they fail to enforce the laws already on the books, they want to just continue layering on legislation in hopes it'll somehow be effective. If the laws already on the books were just enforced methodically, gun violence would decrease. This is what the NRA argues as well. So to me, the ultimate question we must ask ourselves is: will we become a society that makes the majority suffer because of the inequities of a small minority? If we do, this precedent will continue until we become an authoritarian state. Imagine if everyone's free speech was taken away because a small minority say crazy and hateful things. Imagine if everyone's right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures was taken away because a small minority of people possess contraband. And the list goes on... We must accept that the 2A isn't going anywhere unless a precedent to undermine the Constitution is set. Given that we have the 2A, we also must accept that guns in and of themselves do not kill people. We must focus on the human element for preventative action. But even this won't completely thwart all gun violence. The fact is that a society with the right to keep and bear arms will have higher than average firearms-related homicides, especially among certain groups.
2
@seanocd Cute. But regardless of what they're called, it couldn't be more explicit; the Bill of Rights are unalienable. They are given to us by our Creator, not my the government.
2
@jakefromstatefarm142 It's to blame because it destroys societal stability. Morality, norms, culture, etc. are undermined by social liberalism. I know exactly what liberalism is. Don't even bother coming at me with some cliche "classical liberal" argument.
2
@jakefromstatefarm142 I don't know you're right at all. I think you're a bad faith actor who is personally invested in attempting to defend liberalism/leftism.
2
@jakefromstatefarm142 Lol...acting like psychological ailments are the sole result of physical substances, chemicals, etc. is ridiculous. Of course ideology can create mental illnesses and negative socio behavioral outcomes.
2
@jakefromstatefarm142 Thanks for the novel. Try to condense your thoughts. "Halfwits talk much, but say little."
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 "Hormonal imbalances from birth control are to blame for mass shootings and terrorist attacks more than ideology." "You got beat" -silly deluded liberal guy.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Stating that you came at me in bad faith is not name calling. Lol
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 The radical right is filled with young men who are totally disaffected with the society which liberal/leftism has created. They turn to extreme countercultures because the culture surrounding them feels poisonous. I realize that as a liberal, cause and effect might be difficult for you to grasp, but when society and culture degenerates and young men have no structure... nothing to give their life significant meaning... bad things tend to happen.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 I think you have a lot of time on your hands. Four comments to every one I make? Lol bombarding someone with more arguments than is humanely possible to address and then claiming victory when the person cannot answer them all... that's call a Gish Gallop. Or maybe you just drank too much coffee.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 I thought name calling is the true sign of low-IQ and being uneducated? Lol if it weren't for double standards, I doubt you'd have any standards at all.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 And for the record, I thought you made some valid points regarding what contributes to this problem, but your attitude and decorum was so lacking in honor, you really made civilized discourse an impossibility. You began this thread pretending to be someone who was simply curious. Then you did nothing but attack. I do think there are physical, chemical reasons this problem is growing worse. But it's also absolutely cultural and social. But hey... denial isn't just a river in Africa.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Btw, you seem obsessed with argumentation as a form of competition. Maybe someday you'll graduate to sharing ideas and personal growth instead of indulging yourself with self-appointed victories in mindless argumentative battles. But hey, perhaps that's asking too much of a person like you. It takes good faith and humility to engage in constructive discourse.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Obviously. You're personally invested in an ideology which I was crediting with a role in this violence. Republican/Democrat dichotomy lacks nuance. You spoke of liberalism and freedom. Gun rights are one of the highest forms of liberty. But you think no one should have gun rights? Violence is only made easier with guns. I think the problem is far deeper...mainly sociocultural but compounded by contributing factors like the poisons people are willfully and unwillingly putting in their bodies.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 The Founders would disagree and were radically liberal, especially for their time. An armed citizenry was considered totally unthinkable in the 18th century, when the world was largely dominated by absolute monarchies. Nothing has really changed since then; our 2A endows US citizens with an unalienable liberty that few others share. Without a wildly unpopular (and possibly nationally disastrous) political reversal of the 2A, guns aren't going away. So I would say the best option is focusing on what is actually motivating people to kill each other. I would say the atomizing effects of cultural and social liberalism, globalism, and consumerism/materialism that are the result of economic neoliberalism/corporate fascism is playing a significant role in all this.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Go to London. There are no guns allowed but more murders per capita than New York City. People kill people. Guns are just a more effective tool. You might have noticed that the cities with the strictest gun regulations are still the murder capitals of the US. The problem is cultural and I dare say even demographic in nature.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Also...if you're intending on immigrating, just keep in mind that the nations you mentioned have far stricter immigration policies. If you are an American without a in-demand skill, good luck...
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 I never said I was a Republican or I believe in the concept of God-given rights. It's usually the left that's always claiming things like free movement and healthcare are innate human rights. But all in all, it sounds to me like you aren't a liberal at all in any meaningful way. Liberals believe in innate individual rights. Leftists believe in statism and social engineering.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 There are more murders in the U.S. committed with the use of a hammer than there are committed with so-called "assault weapons."
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 No. I said more died from a hammer than died from "assault weapons" which are not all weapons, but are weapons that bureaucrats and their propagandists have subjectively define as such. I am not using a play on words, others are. If you've never heard of a gun doing something great, you're not looking around enough. Sure, they are used to do evil, but evil people can use anything to do evil deeds. Slavery was not an amendment, emancipation was, and yes, I think that was a good thing. The more rights, the better, imo. I don't like government restrictions for the most part. Prohibition would fall under that. Prohibition was an anti-liberty amendment. I believe in the framework laid out by our Founders, for the most part. I believe in liberty, but freedom comes with great personal responsibility. Those who can't possess those liberties without using them to abuse people don't deserve those rights. People are not born criminal. Some have predispositions that are genetic, but they are shaped by their environments into criminals. Prevalent ideologies and sociocultural conditions have a great effect on people's behavior and mental health, to include criminality. We need to accept these things and attack the root cause of the problem instead of sacrificing our liberties and pretending society and culture has nothing to do with it. I recall an interview of an old grandma who was asked why she carried a firearm by some weasely reporter. "What are you scared of?" he asked her. "Nothing," she replied with a smirk, "because I have my .38 special and I know how to use it!"
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 It doesn't put me on edge. It gives me comfort. I'm a military and police veteran though, so it's normal for me.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 They are all in areas that prohibit gun ownership for law abiding citizens. Criminals know they are prey. Convenience stores in decent areas have very few problems. Again...culture and demographics. The areas with stricter legislation have more crime.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 And moreover, I've responded to robberies in cities at convenience stores where the owner saved themselves and their property from abuse (and possibly even death) with their firearm.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 You must meet force with equal force. Without a very strict and noble culture and a homogenous nation(like the Swedes or the Japanese), it's almost impossible to have a totally harmonious society, whether the citizenry is armed or not. In lieu of those cultural conditions, it's either you have an armed citizenry or a police state.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Racist = someone who won an argument against a leftist.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 You sound like one. Only a leftist would call someone a racist who is simply speaking the truth about the demographics of crime.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 The only people who frame homogeneous nation as racist are globalists and civic nationalists, who are basically just lukewarm globalists. By your logic, most nations in the world are racist, because most are much more homogeneous than America. I think you're stuck in an American civic mindset, which is very myopic. What I'm saying is that the more homogeneous a nation is, the more stable the society tends to be. I do think we can work together and be different and even separate. That is the entire argument for ethnic nationalism. You are a person with a different mindset, sure. So am I. And yet my mindset you've framed as evil by calling it racist. That is why you fail.
1
@jakefromstatefarm142 Not even two kids born under the same roof will have equal outcomes. In light of this, the idea that different nations or groups will have equal outcomes is completely moronic and unfeasible. Everything is racist to a lemming like yourself...even reality itself. I have 3 children. Two boys aged 9 and 7 and a little girl aged 4. They are all beautiful and intelligent and kind and gentle and full of life. I will teach them to love and have pride in who they are, but also respect people who are different than them. I am not a member of any organized religion. If you can't figure out what my profile name means, you don't deserve to know. You can attempt to mock me as some right-wing caricature, but at the end of the day, all you're doing is disgracing yourself. Have a good night.
1
@mikefarley5358 I didn't read this psychopath's last comment until just now. Telling someone their children will be future mass murderers...now that's class.
1