To stop mass killing we have to end Freedoms of Speech and Press

[Mr Mannn]

Freedom is such a burden upon the liberal agenda...
This little exchange with a liberal at DI is why you can never trust a liberal to defend the people.
http://www.discussionist.com/?com=view_post&forum=1015&pid=585994

maxrobes3 (1,972 posts)

Bold ideas to ease the threat of mass shootings and far too many individual gun deaths.

We need ideas that match the scope of the problem. Such ideas are in short supply in part because liberal Dems have been making a lot of mistakes. Here is a list of those mistakes and what needs to be done instead.

1. It was a huge mistake to abandon efforts to ban the possession of handguns and instead try to regulate the sale of all guns. Regulating prospective gun sales has led to a huge increase in actual gun sales which has led to more gun deaths. Liberals pushing assault weapons bans and universal background checks have blood on their hands up to their elbows.

Instead we should acknowledge that handguns account for over 80% of all guns deaths, all concealed guns in large urban areas, and are unnecessary for hunting or protection from a tyrannical government. Thus they can be banned and confiscated. Approximately 80% of handgun owners would comply with such a ban reducing gun deaths by roughly 60+%.
Me: The USSC declared handguns protected under the second amendment.

2. It was a huge mistake to close all mental health institutions and dump those people on the general populace where far too many never receive any treatment, many commit crimes and many now reside in our prisons. Bleeding heart liberals made it far too difficult to commit anyone for mental problems and have made it nearly impossible to identify people with such issues, thus making background checks virtually meaningless.

It is time to admit this was all wrong and and start over from scratch in how we deal with mental health. Part of that rethinking needs to include new mental health institutions, and part of reducing the stigma of mental health needs to include making these records available to the background check systems.
Me: Jimmy Carter emptied the mental asylums.

3. It has been a huge mistake to give Hollywood liberals a free pass to shove graphic gun violence down the throats of our children for decades, numbing them to the real life implications. It is self evident that there is a direct connection between seeing tens of thousands of gun deaths in movies, television and video games and the obvious fact that far too many young killers have been desensitized to the real meaning of life and death. People who refuse to see this connection are deaf dumb and blind to reality. That needs to end.

It is high time liberals admitted the error of their ways and get behind proposals to tax the hell out of acts of graphic violence in the media. We need one more sin tax just like the tax on tobacco and booze and gambling that discourages what is harmful and makes the perpetrators pay for the damage they do to the general society. I'd start with a thousand dollar tax per gun death per showing.

What say you?

Da Mannn (3,787 posts)
4. Free Speech, Freedom of the press, and the 2nd amendment are all in your way

There is no way you can censor Hollywood and game companies when they are protected by the constitution,
Further the USSC has ruled that handguns are protected under the 2nd Amendment and cannot be banned.

Nice try, but it won't work in a free country.

Crazy D (5,288 posts)
7. You assume a liberal wants a free country

Given how many things they want to ban anymore for all the hype and anti right propaganda like "The Purge" movies I'd say what the left wants for this country should scare everyone

Da Mannn (3,787 posts)
38. So you would sacrifice the Freedoms of Speech and Press

to achieve your goals.

Is it really worth trading freedom for security?

maxrobes3 (1,972 posts)
43. I am not suggesting we ban movies or censor tv shows and video games that are so graphically violent

I am merely suggesting that when these show, etc run we tax the hell out of their profits to pay for the damage they are doing. What could be more all American than that?

Da Mannn (3,787 posts)
61. That is govt CENSORSHIP. Same as a ban on free speech

How is it that some liberals cannot solve any problem without banning Constitutional freedoms?

Those who would trade freedom for security deserve neither.

[SVPete]

2. It was a huge mistake to close all mental health institutions and dump those people on the general populace where far too many never receive any treatment, many commit crimes and many now reside in our prisons. Bleeding heart liberals made it far too difficult to commit anyone for mental problems and have made it nearly impossible to identify people with such issues, thus making background checks virtually meaningless.

It is time to admit this was all wrong and and start over from scratch in how we deal with mental health. Part of that rethinking needs to include new mental health institutions, and part of reducing the stigma of mental health needs to include making these records available to the background check systems.

This DU-member probably buys into the false narrative that, "Reagan emptied and shut down the mental hospitals." It's an allusion to Reagan's terms as Governor of California, which obviously does not include the other 49 states. But there are indeed fewer mental hospitals, in all 50 states. What actually took place?

Way back in the 1950s (1940s?) the narrative took hold that the vast majority of mental patients could control their conditions through newly created drugs, administered by community-based clinics. Books (and other media) such as One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest supported this narrative by creating the public image that ALL mental hospitals were cruel place run and staffed by sadists. Congress passed and Eisenhower signed into law laws mandating this. I'm not blaming Eisenhower or Congress, just emphasizing the source and time-frame in which this was begun. So governors of various states started mainstreaming mental patients into society and setting up the community-based clinics.

I think we know now, several decades later, how well that idea - that mental patients with little experience in living in society would be self-supporting and take their meds regularly as prescribed - turned out.

In California, it was Governor Edmund "Pat" Brown - Reagan's predecessor - who set this process in motion. Reagan continued this process, including laying of many mental hospital staff and shutting some down, but the D-controlled legislature who had been carrying out the process for nearly a decade suddenly got compassion-religion and made a big stink about it. That is how the, "Reagan emptied and shut down the mental hospitals," narrative began. Contrary to the narrative, not all CA mental hospitals were clossed during Reagan's governorship. Per this list CA has 9 mental hospitals.

Not that facts matter in LibLand or neighboring ProgLand.

[BattleHymn]

H5 for that gif.   

[98ZJUSMC]

H5 for that gif.   

Yeah, ...... I stole it!    

maxrobes3 (1,972 posts)
43. I am not suggesting we ban movies or censor tv shows and video games that are so graphically violent

I am merely suggesting that when these show, etc run we tax the hell out of their profits to pay for the damage they are doing. What could be more all American than that?

It just never ends with these miscreants.  Never.

[Ptarmigan]

This DU-member probably buys into the false narrative that, "Reagan emptied and shut down the mental hospitals." It's an allusion to Reagan's terms as Governor of California, which obviously does not include the other 49 states. But there are indeed fewer mental hospitals, in all 50 states. What actually took place?

Way back in the 1950s (1940s?) the narrative took hold that the vast majority of mental patients could control their conditions through newly created drugs, administered by community-based clinics. Books (and other media) such as One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest supported this narrative by creating the public image that ALL mental hospitals were cruel place run and staffed by sadists. Congress passed and Eisenhower signed into law laws mandating this. I'm not blaming Eisenhower or Congress, just emphasizing the source and time-frame in which this was begun. So governors of various states started mainstreaming mental patients into society and setting up the community-based clinics.

I think we know now, several decades later, how well that idea - that mental patients with little experience in living in society would be self-supporting and take their meds regularly as prescribed - turned out.

In California, it was Governor Edmund "Pat" Brown - Reagan's predecessor - who set this process in motion. Reagan continued this process, including laying of many mental hospital staff and shutting some down, but the D-controlled legislature who had been carrying out the process for nearly a decade suddenly got compassion-religion and made a big stink about it. That is how the, "Reagan emptied and shut down the mental hospitals," narrative began. Contrary to the narrative, not all CA mental hospitals were clossed during Reagan's governorship. Per this list CA has 9 mental hospitals.

Not that facts matter in LibLand or neighboring ProgLand.

You can also blame it on Judge David Bazelon.

David Bazelon Dies at 83; Jurist Had Wide Influence
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/02/21/us/david-bazelon-dies-at-83-jurist-had-wide-influence.html?pagewanted=all

Among his other opinions were these:

 *A 1963 reversal of the conviction of the Communist Party for failing to register under the Internal Security Act. He wrote that under the Fifth Amendment, no one can be forced to declare an association with a party that has been labeled criminal.

 *A 1966 ruling that patients in public mental institutions were entitled to treatment. He wrote that "indefinite confinement without treatment may be so inhumane as to be 'cruel and unusual punishment.' "

 *A 1971 order directing the Environmental Protection Agency to cancel all uses of DDT.

 *A 1977 ruling barring newspapers from owning radio or television stations in the same city.

 *A 1979 finding in which he overturned a year-old order that prevented an anti-war group from making public information about spying by the Central Intelligence Agency.

 Judge Bazelon watched America become a litigious society and he welcomed it.

[DumbAss Tanker]

maxrobes3 (1,972 posts)
43. I am not suggesting we ban movies or censor tv shows and video games that are so graphically violent

I am merely suggesting that when these show, etc run we tax the hell out of their profits to pay for the damage they are doing. What could be more all American than that?

The principle that "The power to tax is the power to destroy" is a well-worn axiom in Supreme Court jurisprudence, as anyone who ever went to law school, or even had a thorough undergrad Con Law course would know, therefore the proposition is tantamount to prohibiting the undesirable speech, a clear Constitutional violation.

[obumazombie]

The principle that "The power to tax is the power to destroy" is a well-worn axiom in Supreme Court jurisprudence, as anyone who ever went to law school, or even had a thorough undergrad Con Law course would know, therefore the proposition is tantamount to prohibiting the undesirable speech, a clear Constitutional violation.

It was ruled in owebumacare that the mandate was a tax.
Therefore was the decision tantamount to destroying the existing healthcare system ?

[USA4ME]

maxrobes3

Instead we should acknowledge that handguns account for over 80% of all guns deaths, all concealed guns in large urban areas, and are unnecessary for... protection from a tyrannical government.

As soon as someone says that handguns are unnecessary to protect you from a tyrannical gov't, they're automatically telling me they either desire, or are willing to accept, a tyrannical gov't.

.

[98ZJUSMC]

As soon as someone says that handguns are unnecessary to protect you from a tyrannical gov't, they're automatically telling me they either desire, or are willing to accept, a tyrannical gov't.

.

   Yes, sir.  as long as they say they are going to provide free shit.

[DumbAss Tanker]

It was ruled in owebumacare that the mandate was a tax.
Therefore was the decision tantamount to destroying the existing healthcare system ?

I assume you're just snarking, the situations aren't comparable since there is no Amendment forbidding Congress from passing any law interfering the 'Freedom of health care,' while there is one relating to freedom of speech and religion.

[Maverick1987]

As soon as someone says that handguns are unnecessary to protect you from a tyrannical gov't, they're automatically telling me they either desire, or are willing to accept, a tyrannical gov't

 

[txradioguy]

It was ruled in owebumacare that the mandate was a tax.
Therefore was the decision tantamount to destroying the existing healthcare system ?

Yes.  Because the goal of the Left is single payer health insurance.  And to do that...you have to tear down the current system in order to rebuild it how you want it to be.

Same philosophy the radical left has about the entire country.

[txradioguy]

I assume you're just snarking, the situations aren't comparable since there is no Amendment forbidding Congress from passing any law interfering the 'Freedom of health care,' while there is one relating to freedom of speech and religion.

Couldn't you argue that the Commerce Clause...especially in the case of Obama care has been used to destroy a certain business sector?  That's interference with the free flow of trade is it not?

[obumazombie]

I assume you're just snarking, the situations aren't comparable since there is no Amendment forbidding Congress from passing any law interfering the 'Freedom of health care,' while there is one relating to freedom of speech and religion.

No. Not snarking that I am aware of.
I was expecting a reply more like txradioguy's.
I hadn't seen that quote about taxes destroying the object of the tax and wanted to see if the same principle applied to owebuma and his health care mandate.
I agree with txradioguy, I think owebuma certainly wanted to destroy the then existing healthcare system which was the best in the world.
I just don't know if he accidentally stumbled into a good scheme for destroying it, or knew full well what the consequences of his strategy would be.


edit+d

[BlueStateSaint]

No. Not snarking that I am aware of.
I was expecting a reply more like txradioguy's.
I hadn't seen that quote about taxes destroying the object of the tax and wanted to see if the same principle applied to owebuma and his health care mandate.
I agree with txradioguy, I think owebuma certainly wanted to destroy the then existing healthcare system which was the best in the world.
I just don't know if he accidentally stumbled into a goo scheme for destroying it, or knew full well what the consequences of his strategy would be.

I firmly believe that he knew exactly what he was doing.