Political & Elections

hope · Guru

RE: Gun Control

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Hope, please read what I actually wrote. I didn't express the belief that everyone who was banned posted in a combative fashion, only that those who did, eventually disappeared, for whatever reason. Most of them probably were banned. I do know that posters were banned whose only sin was probably the fact that they were disliked by one or another moderator. Beruruh, for instance, seemed to me to be a perfectly lovely member of the forum. But, she was targeted for expulsion, and eventually banned. I never could figure out why, other than the fact that certain moderators disliked her and wanted her gone.

hope · Guru

Oh please. I was never a " combative or Antagonistic " poster. Got banned. Snooze didn't like my "homophobic" views. Period.

busdriver11 · Guru

Figurative weenie, mental masturbation room? Oh, you are full of great things for me to use in verbal combat against my know-it-all family of men. That will either shut them up promptly, or more likely get them laughing.

There really were some obnoxious people that I remember. And for some reason, many of them seemed to be women whose names started with a D. I started thinking that there was no way there was a real person represented by them, but just someone who was playing a game as an internet personality.

Poetsheart · Senior Member

I believe Dallice had her figurative weenie whacked a number of times before being given the 'ole heave-ho. There were others as well whose names I can't recall at the moment. Members frequently posting in a antagonistic or combative fashion, whatever their political persuasion, sooner or later disappeared.

Poetsheart · Senior Member

In all my years of reading CC (sigh), I swear I can't see how someone could say with a straight face that it sometimes tilted right.

Well then hope, you must not have spent much time in the forums discussing Affirmative Action, or the ones in which people posited with impunity (ie., virtually no pushback) the idea that inherent genetic inferiority accounts for test score disparities between blacks and whites. It has also been my observation that threads on gun control suffered no shortage of posters whose views most closely represent those of the NRA. And prior to the closing of CC's political forum, I seem to remember robust debate over the Affordable Care Act which in no way could be characterized as a liberal echo chamber (mental masturbation room).

I can't tell you the number of pm's I received from people thanking me for speaking up when they would not, for fear of these very tactics.

Strange how that PM thing works, isn't it? I received quite a few of those myself comprising the exact same sentiment from a number of "liberal/moderate" posters. confuse

hope · Guru

In all my years of reading CC (sigh), I swear I can't see how someone could say with a straight face that it sometimes tilted right. You may think it "hosted a variety of disparite viewpoints," poetsheart, but it was always obvious to most that there were a different set of rules for conservative and liberal posters.

I learned a lot about the liberal way of thinking on CC--their urge to shun, mock, gang up on, ban or in any other way attempt to eliminate the voice of people who tended to be conservative. I can't tell you the number of pm's I received from people thanking me for speaking up when they would not, for fear of these very tactics. I was gratified to learn that my "perception" of CC was not perception at all, but reality-- supported by the recent Pew research study.

hope · Guru

Actually I do remember posting on an aa thread way, way back .It was pretty brutal. I remember there was an african-americsn gentleman --dosselmeier--who was also against aa--that helped somewhat. This was a long long time ago now...I was banned by smoozie way back for inquiring why adults like me should be treated like children for expressing our opinions. I really have to wonder how many doctrinaire liberals have ever been banned over there. I think gun control and know obamacare threads were after my time. I happened not to read those either. Anyway,whatever...in no mood to argue of late!

-- Edited by hope on Tuesday 27th of March 2012 07:25:45 PM

Poetsheart · Senior Member

I am just going to let it go and pretend that it means the gigantic mental masturbation room that was veered hard left at CC.

In my view, CC's political forum sometimes veered left, and sometimes right, but it most of the time, it hosted a variety of disparate viewspoints such that I mostly felt inclined to stick around (though I sometimes took a time out, even from CC). Most of the moderate to left leaners have left this forum, unfortunately. Hindoo, are you even bothering to check in anymore?

longprime · Guru

IF, I. was Zimmerman, I'd leave town, while the gitting is still available.

He's a wimp, and a coward.

busdriver11 · Guru

That's a wondrous insult, poetsheart. I'm going to have to save that in my memory for an appropriate time.

Gee, I'd go check out that thread but either my computer is messing up or cc has crashed for awhile (decision day at many schools).

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Well, I, for one, am looking for a thoughtful political forum that respectfully discusses a variety of intelligent viewpoints. If I wanted an echo chamber, I'd hang out at Salon.com (which I do not!). Have fun while it lasts. But, discussion forums that serve as mental masturbation rooms for the totally like-minded often eventually bore even the most enthusiastic among their posters. wink

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Mental masturbation rooms...

I just wanted to say that again because it was so awesome the first time.

I am not sure how to take that, but as it's happy hour and Friday, I am just going to let it go and pretend that it means the gigantic mental masturbation room that was veered hard left at CC. Somehow I suspect it wasn't about that.

Oh, Dallice, where are you now?

Perhaps it was meant differently. It's lovely how each of our realities skews our perceptions, isn't it?

-- Edited by SamuraiLandshark on Friday 23rd of March 2012 06:05:54 PM

longprime · Guru

CC07, "Wait! What I'd do to incur the wrath of lonprime?? confuse "

I'm thinking. evileye

winchester · Guru

I like the way this is going. Especially the comment about "liberal, gun-phobic, lawyer."

I most definitely did NOT mean to start another long rehash. The article caught my eye because I am familiar with The People's Republic of Boulder. The school's position on this was no surprise.

There's a book store on Pearl Street in Boulder called Left Hand Books that sells only books favorable to the political left.

I haven't looked at CC in a couple of years. You can't argue with crazy people.

CelticClan07 · Senior Member

longprime wrote:
I am done with CC.

Wait! What I'd do to incur the wrath of lonprime?? confuse

longprime · Guru

I am done with CC.

biggrin

SamuraiLandshark · Guru

Anyone up for a rehash of the very long gun thread from CC? I am in.

winchester · Guru

To those with an emotional bias against guns, it goes without saying that more guns in private hands invariably mean more crime and violence. If the number of people carrying firearms on campus rises, then of course that campus is less safe. What could be more obvious?

But it isn’t obvious at all.

While the University of Colorado spent much of the past decade resisting the state’s concealed-carry law, Colorado State University complied with it. If the gun controllers are right, Colorado State should have seen a surge in crime, while its gun-banning sister institution should have been an Eden of security and lawfulness. That’s not what happened. As Clayton E. Cramer and David Burnett write in a new monograph for the Cato Institute, “crime at the University of Colorado has risen 35 percent since 2004, while crime at Colorado State University has dropped 60 percent in the same time frame.’’

Something similar happened after the US Supreme Court’s 2008 Heller decision striking down a gun ban in Washington, DC. The city’s mayor predicted in dismay that “more handguns in the District of Columbia will only lead to more handgun violence,’’ yet crime in the nation’s capital plunged. Murder nose-dived to its lowest rate in half a century, falling from 186 in 2008 to 144 in 2009 to 132 in 2010 to 108 in 2011.

To be sure, correlation doesn’t prove causation. But the experience of Colorado State and DC should come as no surprise. By now there’s so much evidence that higher rates of gun ownership lead to lower rates of crime that it isn’t hard to fathom why fewer and fewer Americans want to ban handguns. According to Gallup, just 26 percent of the public now thinks the private possession of handguns should be illegal — that’s down from 60 percent half a century ago. Roughly 1 of every 4 Americans reports keeping a gun to protect themselves or their homes. Having a gun makes many people — for good reason — feel safer.

Boston Globe
http://articles.boston.com/2012-03-21/opinion/31215570_1_gun-ban-ban-handguns-heller-decision

catahoula · Guru

Won't be any fun if someone doesn't play the part of the liberal, gun-phobic, lawyer.

How about we take turns?

edited to add:

For a thoughtful and polite discussion of the issue, I'm in.

-- Edited by catahoula on Wednesday 21st of March 2012 04:51:27 PM