Santiago II

BST Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Santiago II

  • Rank
    Way too many!
  1. If there's no higher authority, then there's no objective reference to define evil, immoral , heinous, good, or bad.
  3. There are so many more guns than people that use them (for any purpose). That includes the super buyers that have many guns, most of which just go into the gun safe. The demographic trends on homicides are independent of gun purchases.
  4. Nonsense because you're unwilling to accept that mass murderers think more creatively than you do, and have proven it. You want precision and selectivity, you're right, in those circumstances a gun is a great choice, but of all the weapons, typically associated with murder, it's the least convenient to obtain. If a person is just looking for a body count, you get way more convenience, and kinetic energy with a motorized vehicle. This isn't distortion, this is a counterpoint to your argument. You're perfectly capable of responding without the name calling, imagining motives, and self righteousness.
  5. Based on your conditional response, you're acknowledging I'm far from "very mistaken" to my point that responsible adults with firearms aren't a serious threat. In addition, the value of having firearms as a symbol of individual liberty, as a means of self protection, and as a check against a tyrannical government weighs on the side of firearms ownership as well. Our founders knew that. That being said, if you only want to talk about the OP statement, every episode of mass firearms violence is a society where most firearms are banned, is an argument against banning firearms. Is it a conclusive event that resolves the argument, no. Does it go against the narrative, yes.
  6. Since you like data, take the mentally ill out of mass shootings and gang violence out murders and see where that leaves you. There's not much to support taking firearms away from the average gun owner.
  7. Every episode of mass shooting diminshes the argument, the case was stronger before it happened.
  8. Cars are much more accessible and you don't even have to stand up to use them. Can't beat them for convenience.
  9. Then don't expect more from Trump than you do from the media. Don't criticize one and make excuses for the other.
  10. Someone has to be the grown up. The media is perfectly capable of filling that role. They choose not to.
  11. Last I heard we still had a "free" press. The media is more than capable of selecting stories that matter to the average American, regardless of what the pres tweets. They choose not to. George Bush was a nice guy and they ripped on him with name calling on a daily basis. They would do the same to Pence.
  12. As per typical partisanship, we emphasize the parts we want to see and ignore those we don't. Sounds like it also acknowledges the right to free speech, even for speech informed by religious values. Which only makes sense. The reason for countries existence requires a"religious" rationalization.
  13. You know the subject way better than I do. If you plead to lying to the FBI, isn't that a crime that only occurred because there was an investigation? I.E. the investigation itself created the crime and conviction.
  14. Someone with a legal mind needs to clear this up for me. Most investigations are directed at a specific crime, but an independent counsel can investigate any tangent that comes up and can use the force of the government to compel confessions. So if you can get specious convictions when you go down any rabbit hole you find, with none of those having any direct relationship to the primary investigation, do you still get to claim a successful investigation?
  15. No, it should be your right.