Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy. (Politics General)

@Patachu  

 
The above confirms that you’re the one who, unlike me who pride myself on having a modicum of general knowledge, never heard about him before and didn’t even care to do his homework beyond literally reading the first line of his Wikipedia page. And you still expect people to take you seriously?

Just a general reminder in here to be civil. I’m not gonna judge arguments on either side but if you’re attacking each other that is a problem.

@Kiryu-Chan  
what’s with the misuse of the word “help”?
 
people don’t want to be helped.  
Guy rushes people with a knife: «dude need helps» a pedophile? «this person needs help»
 
do you know help is reserved for the victims?  
I think people should find a better word. Everyone is responsible of their choices and actions. There , be nice, help someone once, another time, they will lie to you, they will use , abuse you. And the hopes you had to see them change by helping them will be ruined.
 
The guy will still carry a knife or weapon and threaten people all the time wherever he goes. another one will still be addicted to kiddie porn or someone else will still miss his drug dealer.
 
You think nothing else have been tried?

@Patachu  
Perhaps ‘reforming’?

@Patachu  
Why should help be “reserved” for anyone? Helping the perp doesn’t preclude helping the victim, you know.
 
That said, it is true that some willing on their part is required - but also a more rehabilitavly-focused corrections system.

@WyrmSpawN  
yeah if that could work, and being optimistic enough that people can get back to a normal life. But for what motivation. Society being more and more encouraging all kind of violations, delerict behavior, imagine a guy wanting to legit stop running after little girls finding Cuties or RuPaul’s drag show on Netflix, trying to quit doing drugs but have plenty available around. Trying to give up an ex but still see her everyday at work, that’s how people become completely mad.  
They’ll dig into methadone and therapies, locked with more pills, more drugs, having crisises and end up pretty much lobotomized.
 
and after one year of not touching anything, Paco’s coming on a Mercedes Benz «yoo my friend you’re alive! Hey, wanna have some good time?»
 
@Latecomer  
Please don’t help people who cause destruction. that’s complicity.

@Patachu  
Even if that were true, it’s not very different from what you call for.

@Patachu  
Not if what you help them do is stop causing destruction.

@Latecomer  
You can’t force someone to do that, they need to want to stop.

@Latecomer  
We’re talking about people causing their own destruction here. As I disagree with libertarians who claims that «drug is a victimless crime» bullshit. So if it’s their choice, it’s not the society’s role to “help” them. nor help anyone.
 
@MagpulPony  
exactly, that reminds me a cartoon. a guy getting crushed under a rock (was that Jack Stauber? Yeah it was.)  
«You, you need help. but do you want help?»
 
 
well, that’s depressing.

@MagpulPony  
Well, if they’ll cooperate you can help them, and if they won’t, you can’t. At least you tried.

@Latecomer  
And if you can’t?

@MagpulPony  
Then they’re beyond help, at least at the moment, and must be dealt with accordingly.

I mean, given the recent events with the Supreme Court, it’s an obvious attempt to keep them from filling the court

@Patachu  
Probably not.

@Patachu
 
Background checks are discriminatory and are pure security theatre, hence why I’m against them. If you twist my arm, I’d agree to waiting periods, as they’re the only thing that both works as intended and doesn’t punish poors or minorities. Otherwise, machine guns, grenade launchers, tanks, artillery, anti-aircraft missiles, and nuclear weapons I’m completely fine with normal people owning. Why? Because if they misuse them, they go to jail. If agents of the state misuse them, then there’ll be faux commiseration before back to business-as-usual and raping children.
 
Also, your government is known to sell weapons to whomever can pay for them, no questions asked, so them criticising gun freedoms is completely hypocritical AFAIC.
 
@lonewolf
 
Locking people in boxes hasn’t worked to resolve that for 50 years now, so a new method is clearly needed. You’re also falling into the same trap as the people who think that legalising gay marriage will lead to polygamy and pedophilia being legalised, or that legalising prostitution would lead to more sex trafficking and child prostitution.
 
The best method to counter the negative effects of things in society is a good and accurate (read:not trying to “scare’em straight) education on said things.
 
@Kiryu-Chan
 
Speaking of which, has anyone else noticed how “stuffing the court to get what you want” is usually considered a bad thing and done by authoritarian countries in order to ‘legitimise’ their authoritarian BS, yet when the democrats suggest it, that’s all forgotten about?

@Ebalosus  

 
I don’t doubt for a second the founders would say much the same if they were alive today. As I recall the citizenry back then owned such things as cannons and warships.

@Ebalosus  
“machine guns, grenade launchers, tanks, artillery, anti-aircraft missiles, and nuclear weapons I’m completely fine with normal people owning. Why? Because if they misuse them, they go to jail.”
 
While mostly true, that does not work for nuclear weapons.

@Background Pony #A2C2  
I doubt a fair bit (not that I care what some 18th century men’s opinions were).
 
 
@Ebalosus  
It’s not that stuffing is being seen as a good thing here - rather, a desperate counter to underhanded Republican cheating.
 
And is it unhypocritical if I don’t sell guns to citizens or dubious foreign governments?

@Latecomer  
Well if the citizens are unarmed, they are 100% reliant on government as the all powerful entity, and that never ends well.

@Latecomer  
With your bald disregard for the rights enshrined in the Constitution of the United States whenever you speak on how you would change it I’m hardly surprised.
 
What matters isn’t that they’re from the 18th century, though, but what weapons they were alright with letting the citizenry wield, potentially against themselves. Cannons and warships were, after all, the heavy artillery of the day.

@MagpulPony
 
Not yet, but given the motive forces needed to make interplanetary or interstellar travel viable, I can very well see a day where personal nukes are a thing.
 
@Latecomer
 
People keep saying how the republicans are supposedly cheating, but have yet to see any evidence of this being the case when it comes to the SC. I feel that people are conflating “cheating” with “nominations I don’t like/think are good for the country.”
 
And yes, if you don’t sell weapons abroad or to your citizens, you aren’t a hypocrite. It’s why it tend to be a bit more tolerant of American arms sales abroad than say Britain or French or German arms sales.