The New York Times published it's first Cover Editorial in 95 years today

PJ_Soul

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

ldent42

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

I don't think that lady is a real judge.

PJ_Soul

ldent42 said:

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

I don't think that lady is a real judge.

If she's not, do you think a single person watching Fox would know that? But she calls herself a judge.... I really would assume that means she's an actual judge. Of the judge Judy variety (but worse), but a judge nonetheless.

dignin

ldent42 said:

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

I don't think that lady is a real judge.

Apparently she was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanine_Pirro

What a scary, terrible person.

ldent42

dignin said:

ldent42 said:

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

I don't think that lady is a real judge.

Apparently she was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanine_Pirro

What a scary, terrible person.

Jeanine Ferris Pirro (born June 2, 1951) is a former prosecutor,[2][3] judge, and elected official from the state of New York, who is currently a legal analyst and television personality.

dudeman

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

Does the source change the behavior or the fact that that behavior is hypocritical?

TL170678

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

mcgruff10

TL170678 said:

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

damn that actually makes sense. nice work! and don't forget nearly 10,000 people die a year due to drunk driving; are we going to bring back the 18th amendment?

pjhawks

mcgruff10 said:

TL170678 said:

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

damn that actually makes sense. nice work! and don't forget nearly 10,000 people die a year due to drunk driving; are we going to bring back the 18th amendment?

not the same. there is a reason people can't own tanks to drive down the streets. a tank is the equivalent to an assault weapon when talking cars and guns. yet the NRA and the gun nuts insist assault weapons are fine.

mcgruff10

pjhawks said:

mcgruff10 said:

TL170678 said:

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

damn that actually makes sense. nice work! and don't forget nearly 10,000 people die a year due to drunk driving; are we going to bring back the 18th amendment?

not the same. there is a reason people can't own tanks to drive down the streets. a tank is the equivalent to an assault weapon when talking cars and guns. yet the NRA and the gun nuts insist assault weapons are fine.

dude that is one weak correlation. an assault weapon is a tank? come on.

tempo_n_groove

pjhawks said:

mcgruff10 said:

TL170678 said:

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

damn that actually makes sense. nice work! and don't forget nearly 10,000 people die a year due to drunk driving; are we going to bring back the 18th amendment?

not the same. there is a reason people can't own tanks to drive down the streets. a tank is the equivalent to an assault weapon when talking cars and guns. yet the NRA and the gun nuts insist assault weapons are fine.

You can own a tank and make it street legal. People do it.
The gun turret is rendered inoperable though.

Did I hear that an assault weapons ban was on the table again?

oftenreading

TL170678 said:

Why call us gun nuts? The Law abiding citizens with guns are not the ones out hurting people, the inner city gun use is from illegal guns, and that is a majority of gun violence and why us law abiding citizens feel we need to be armed. Look at Mexico, guns are illegal there and cartels get guns easily and take towns and city`s over. If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture which is over half of the USA`s 30,000 gun deaths per year it really is not that terrible. Europe has 7,000 gun deaths per year, USA would be less than 15,000. 30,000 die in car accidents annually should we ban cars too. The fact is the 3 main problems we are not dealing with is Gang Violence, Mental Health, and Suicides. If we work on those 3 things, it would save lives.

"If you take the African American gun-gang violence out of the picture" - and how can you possibly justify taking this "out of the picture" just to make the numbers look better? It's part and parcel of America's gun violence, that run of the mill, daily gun violence that kills a whole bunch of people every year yet gets so much less press than the occasional muslim terrorist act.

ldent42

the argument is that those people dont count cuz theyre not responsible, law abiding gun owners.

ldent42

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

That is fear mongering for sure.

I do agree with what she said about the tendency to denigrate all Muslims based on the actions of the few versus denigrating all gun owners based on the actions of the few.

I really don't find the two things comparable, for a few reasons, but namely because calling for stricter regulations isn't denigrating at all. No one is on TV absolutely trash talking gun owners and saying that all gun owners need to be kept out of the country and should be treated like criminals when they're aren't doing anything wrong. Come on. People are against the current gun regulations (or lack thereof), not all gun owners. It's not like gun nuts are being stalked and threatened by intimidating people who support better gun regulations. And they aren't being told to get out of the country and being attacked on the streets because they like guns. But Muslims are being stalked by intimidating armed men as they go in and out of their mosque. They are being attacked on the streets. They are being made to feel like they have no right to LIVE in American society. If you really think these two things are in any way similar you have developed a victim mentality. I am actually kind of stunned that you think the two things are reasonably comparable!

gun nuts would be stalked and threatened by people carrying what, scissors? lol.
But it is the same, a few idiotic muslims ruin it for the entire religion (all though entire sects of them have broken off and declared war against the us and many western countries) just like a vast minority have ruined it for the 100 million law abiding gun owners in america. like i said before, 750,000 pennsylvania hunters went deer hunting last week. think about it, 3/4 of a million weapons and literally millions of bullets out there all at the same time and not one mass shooting or even murder.
no one is telling gun owners to leave the country because we are all american citizens and people on tv or maybe the editors of the new york times are absolutely trash talking gun owners here in the us.
by the way, where are muslim being attacked on the street here in the usa?

Ditmars, apparently. http://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2015/12/8/muslim-store-owner-says-he-was-attacked-by-man-who-made-anti-muslim-threats-in-queens.html

A Muslim store owner in Queens says he was attacked by a man who made anti-Muslim threats.

On Saturday, Sarker Haque, the owner of the Fatima Food Mart on 21st Avenue in Astoria, says he was attacked by a customer inside his store.

Haque says the man walked around the store several times, asking if things were free. That's when Haque says the man started beating him.
"He punch my head. He punch me. Then, I'm falling down over there, then he said, 'I Kill Muslim.' Then, he wants to punch me, like, he prepare to again," Haque said. "He punched me like 20 times, in my neck, in my head and my face."
Hauqe was treated for bleeding, bruising and a dislocated hand.

A longtime customer showed up and helped subdue the suspect.

Piro Kolvani, 55, of Jacksonville, Florida is charged with assault and criminal mischief in the attack. He is next due in court on January 12.
The NYPD hate crime unit has been notified of the incident, but no additional charges have been filed so far.

mcgruff10

Well there ya go. Nice research ident42!

ldent42

mcgruff10 said:

Well there ya go. Nice research ident42!

Thanks. But honestly I just leave NY1 on in the background while I'm doing stuff.

mcgruff10

ldent42 said:

mcgruff10 said:

Well there ya go. Nice research ident42!

Thanks. But honestly I just leave NY1 on in the background while I'm doing stuff.

Ok so we have one instance since the massacre where a Muslim was attacked for being Muslim.

ldent42

mcgruff10 said:

ldent42 said:

mcgruff10 said:

Well there ya go. Nice research ident42!

Thanks. But honestly I just leave NY1 on in the background while I'm doing stuff.

Ok so we have one instance since the massacre where a Muslim was attacked for being Muslim.

One reported instance. That someone on here noticed. I think it's safe to say most of the time these type of crimes won't go reported at all much less make local news. I know Trump hasn't made a physical attack, but I kind of think his words should count.

PJ_Soul

dudeman said:

PJ_Soul said:

dudeman said:

It's not the calling for stricter gun laws that I take exception to. In fact, I think more should be done to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies. What I find objectionable are phrases like "Guns don't kill people, older white responsible gun owners do." or the insinuation that all gun owners are responsible until they're not. The blanket judgment of all gun owners as illiterate, inbred rednecks is popular here too.

Of course there are differences between the actions taken against Muslims and gun owners. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. However, the public perception of law abiding gun owners is under attack, especially here on AMT. The fact that some of those people who pass judgement against gun owners based on the actions of a few are some of the same people defending Muslims despite the actions of a few, is pretty hypocritical, IMO.

Fine, but you're talking about tongue in cheek comments on this board, not about a JUDGE sprewing hate on a massive international news network.

Does the source change the behavior or the fact that that behavior is hypocritical?

I don't really give a shit of that nasty woman is a hypocritical asshole as an individual. It matters because her position strongly affects the perceptions of the audience. The Fox audience is much more likely to take what she says to heart if she supposedly has the "wisdom" and "knowledge" of a judge.

PJ_Soul

ldent42 said:

mcgruff10 said:

ldent42 said:

mcgruff10 said:

Well there ya go. Nice research ident42!

Thanks. But honestly I just leave NY1 on in the background while I'm doing stuff.

Ok so we have one instance since the massacre where a Muslim was attacked for being Muslim.

One reported instance. That someone on here noticed. I think it's safe to say most of the time these type of crimes won't go reported at all much less make local news. I know Trump hasn't made a physical attack, but I kind of think his words should count.

I agree. The attacks aren't just physical. Verbal attacks are beyond common at this point as far as I can tell - hell, people are screaming them out at football games. Suggesting that Muslims be treated like Jews in Nazi Germany seems like a profound attack to me as well!