Why do those concerned over gun violence have no concern about the military?

Discussion in 'Gun Control' started by kazenatsu, Feb 23, 2019.

  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,639
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Many gun control supporters are paranoid about feeling safe, and have called for more police on the streets.
    My question is why do these same people call for big cuts in military defense spending?
    Why would someone who's paranoid about gun crime and domestic safety not be paranoid about the possibility of being invaded?

    You're paranoid about your safety, right? Even though you have a greater likelihood of ending up dying from colon cancer than being the victim of a gun homicide.
    Why are you specifically so worried about someone shooting you with a gun but not the slightest bit concerned about some other country attacking?

    Those who would want to ban guns have been asked how they would plan to deal with criminals running amok and citizens in society being defenseless, and their answer has been having a lot more police.

    So you want to add lots more police but cut the number of people in the military? How does that make any sense? Why are you so focused on one type of potential violence and not another?

    I think the chance of being invaded (though small) is at least as high as you being murdered by a gun.

    I just have a difficult time understanding where some people's priorities lay.
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2019
  2. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To support the united states military would be an admission that firearms and other weapons can easily be smuggled into the united states, from countries where they are supposed to be restricted to the point of their access being illegal and theoretically impossible. If those who support firearm-related restrictions chose to support the united states military, they would have to admit that their beliefs relating to the united states are factually incorrect but they will still support them regardless. The necessity of the united states military runs counter to their established positions, and they must present the notion that no firearms are freely available in various foreign countries.
     
  3. Bondo

    Bondo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,768
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ayuh,..... The pattern suggests a Anti-Constitutional bias,.....
     
  4. Vegas giants

    Vegas giants Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2016
    Messages:
    49,909
    Likes Received:
    5,343
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why is someone who is paranoid that someone will take away all their guns not be paranoid about everything in life?


    Oh wait.....they are
     
  5. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,839
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Happy to play Devil’s Advocate to give you a straight answer;

    For a start, someone wanting more police on the streets isn’t necessarily paranoid. There could be perfectly legitimate arguments for greater resources or a refocusing of existing resources in local policing that has nothing to do with actual paranoia.

    There’s no reason to directly bind the question of police and military spending given that they play entirely different roles. It seems perfectly viable that someone could believe there isn’t enough spent on policing or that it isn’t being spent correctly or effectively while at the same time believing there is too much spending on the military being used to do the wrong things. They could be wrong on either or both points but there’s no reason to bind the two together.
     
  6. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's because the anti's hate the military almost as much as they hate firearms.
     
    Bondo likes this.
  7. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,639
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    bumping this thread, because it's all the more relevant these days (July 2020) with the many calls from activists on the Left affiliated with BLM who are calling for major cuts to police, and local politicians in many cities taking up their rallying call and giving lip-service to the crowds that they will do it.

    "Mayor proposes $20M cut to Seattle Police budget amid COVID shortfall
    The 5% decrease is a step toward closing the city's $378 million budget gap, but it's also less than the 50% cut protesters are demanding."
    https://crosscut.com/2020/06/mayor-proposes-20m-cut-seattle-police-budget-amid-covid-shortfall

    "Seattle Police Chief Responds To 50 Percent Defunding Proposal
    Seattle Police Chief Carmen Best sent a letter to the mayor Friday, mapping out the potential impacts of cutting the police budget in half."
    https://patch.com/washington/seattle/seattle-police-chief-responds-50-percent-defunding-proposal

    Apparently there was some legitimate fear that they might actually do it.

    So it appears the plan of gun control proponents is not in favor of more police to keep us safe.

    Ergo, it begs the question if they're genuinely so concerned about safety; or whether there might be ulterior motives.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2020
  8. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because we have more military than we need.
     
  9. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Explain how such has been determined. Explain the precise amount of military, both personnel and equipment, that the united states has an actual need for.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2020
  10. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,839
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why are you assuming the people calling to "defund the police" are also "gun control proponents"? Also, why do you assume that shifting some funding from the police to other areas can't at least have the intention of making people overall safer?

    I will point out that I don't like the "defund the police" call (not least because, like all slogans, it's unclear and not specific enough) but I do support the idea of addressing crime and disorder with more than just law enforcement and judicial punishment after the fact.
     
  11. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Because without professional armed enforcement, all else is just icing on a cardboard cake.
     
  12. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,839
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sure, but I'm not talking about getting rid of that aspect entirely, just shifting the focus so that it isn't the be-all and end-all of dealing with crime and disorder.
     
  13. Well Bonded

    Well Bonded Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2018
    Messages:
    9,049
    Likes Received:
    4,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem is most departments are all ready under budgeted and have been given too much social work by the powers to be, it's time for the so called leaders to analyze where they are already wasting money before cutting essential services.
     
  14. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Messages:
    14,839
    Likes Received:
    4,815
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I totally agree. As I said, I don't support the slogan or "campaign(s)" behind it but I do understand and agree with the underlying principle. It needs to be implemented better but it currently isn't being implemented at all.
     
  15. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well there's this.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/army-says-no-to-more-tanks-but-congress-insists

    Yet in the case of the Abrams tank, there's a bipartisan push to spend an extra $436 million on a weapon the experts explicitly say is not needed.

    "If we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way," Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army's chief of staff, told The Associated Press this past week.
     
  16. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which is not relevant to the claim the united states has far more military than it needs. The above citation relates only to one particular type of equipment the military utilizes.

    Again. Explain the precise amount of military, both personnel and equipment, that the united states has an actual need for.
     
  17. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yep its completely relevant, you just don't accept it.
     
  18. Rucker61

    Rucker61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2016
    Messages:
    9,774
    Likes Received:
    4,103
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "This" is a five year old story.
     
  19. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If one is going to claim the united states has far more military than it needs, then they should be prepared to give a detailed answer in response to being questioned about the exact details relating to their position.

    Again. Explain the precise amount of military, both personnel and equipment, that the united states has an actual need for.
     
  20. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's a really good bet.
    Pro-gun people are usually pro-law enforcement.
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2020
  21. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    No they shouldn't.
     
  22. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You make a claim, you should be ready to back it up.
    In Adult World, anyway.
     
  23. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Except I did. Xenamnes seems to think I'm a member of the joint chiefs.
     
  24. Xenamnes

    Xenamnes Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    Messages:
    23,895
    Likes Received:
    7,537
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then do not make claims that cannot actually be backed up on the part of yourself through citations and explanations.
     
  25. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,144
    Likes Received:
    7,342
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    I did.
     

Share This Page