A "common sense" proposal that will piss off both sides

[Jasher]

I would be happy if society could just give people the minimum. A job/wage that provides a single bedroom apartment, adequate food, medical care, a used vehicle to drive to work, maybe a way to retire and afford the basics the last few years of your life.

We're the wealthiest country in the world, and we can't even figure out how to provide that? I don't get it.

I'm not asking for everyone to have a second home in Aspen or a degree from Harvard.

We already do that. It's called welfare. We incentive people to do nothing. Not married 2 kids make next to nothing here take all this stuff. Don't get a better job or get married to someone who works because we will take all that away even if you are worse off. Make good choices get a job get married before you have kids. Sorry got nothing for you. People don't know how to manage money. You can give them 1,000s and will spend it on stupid stuff. It's up to people to make a difference in their lives. If I lived the way everyone says because of what I was born into then I would probably be drunk, living in a trailer park, might have 1 vehicle that runs. I could have easily been there. Dropped out of school because of kids when I was a senior and my parents didn't care. I could have done something to the kids because the school wouldn't do anything. After saying something to the school it just made it worse. I chose to leave the situation. Could have gotten messed up in drugs considering lots of people I knew were doing them but I didn't. I did drink and I got in trouble for it. I shocked the judge and prosecutor when I just pled guilty because I did it. I even said I'm not going to waste anyone's time and money because I am guilty. I didn't want to continue on that road. I put in the effort with lots of hard work and dedication.

With all the "gun control " talk about age and more background checks and all that let's more all of this over to more automobile control. How many are willing to put the minimum driving age to 21? Put a breathalyzer with facial recognition in. Plus a scanner to scan your drivers license to make sure you are the actual driver and your license isn't suspended? Then an app that makes your phone inoperable while driving. Close all drive thru windows. Make all cars be able to pick up speed limits and not let it go any faster (this technology already exists). It would be safer. There would no longer be hi speed chases. More people die in car crashes than by guns.

 

[Randi]

I agree about milking systems, too bad that we don't have the same contempt for corporations, those that wear cowboy hats, and drive tractors doing the same thing. Also too bad we don't have the political will to do anything about it.

Happens in all economic classes of life. Like Buzz said, we just get more offended about it under certain circumstances.

No argument from me, however my post was in response and agreement with Dave about the work habits of some young adults. That was the post Buzz quoted and referred to.

But, if we have decided to expand "milking" the system past young adults

YES---and not just Corporations, but old adults as well.

Plenty of "milking" by a lot of "milkers"----unfortunately !!!

 

[BuzzH]

Happens in all economic classes of life. Like Buzz said, we just get more offended about it under certain circumstances.

Agreed. Its just way easier to vilify those in a lower class than those doing the complaining, and that's what bothers me more than the milking of a system.

How often do we see a 2 farmers complaining about the subsidies they both receive?

How often do we see 2 corporations receiving the same subsides, tax breaks, etc. complaining about corporate welfare?

See plenty of both complaining about those no good single Mothers on welfare though.

 

[elkduds]

We have a habit of spending millions to prevent the "milking" of 20 cents.

A glaring contrast to endorsing competition-defeating subsidies to big oil, ranching, mining, pharma, real estate development and more big oil. Handouts that cost taxpayers billions annually in lost federal revenue.

And yes, this is far from the topic of this thread.

 

[Jasher]

Agreed. Its just way easier to vilify those in a lower class than those doing the complaining, and that's what bothers me more than the milking of a system.

How often do we see a 2 farmers complaining about the subsidies they both receive?

How often do we see 2 corporations receiving the same subsides, tax breaks, etc. complaining about corporate welfare?

See plenty of both complaining about those no good single Mothers on welfare though.

Don't know what you thought was so funny. I didn't say anything about farmers or corporations. Where I grew up the farmers were the ones with the most $$$. All driving brand new trucks. Having new homes built, 100,000's of thousands of dollars in new equipment every year. Yeah poor farmers. Giving corporations tax breaks, bailouts. If they can't make it they need to go away.

I was a single father that got custody of my kids when my son was 3 and my daughter was less than a year old. So to unless you have more first hand experience with that then yes it's a mindset. Just like when people were getting more money to stay at home on unemployment than going to work. Why work for less money to stay at home. Lots of people who are on welfare get huge tax checks. Most of them use the money to buy stuff they don't need.

 

[NECALI]

We already do that. It's called welfare. We incentive people to do nothing. Not married 2 kids make next to nothing here take all this stuff. Don't get a better job or get married to someone who works because we will take all that away even if you are worse off. Make good choices get a job get married before you have kids. Sorry got nothing for you. People don't know how to manage money. You can give them 1,000s and will spend it on stupid stuff. It's up to people to make a difference in their lives. If I lived the way everyone says because of what I was born into then I would probably be drunk, living in a trailer park, might have 1 vehicle that runs. I could have easily been there. Dropped out of school because of kids when I was a senior and my parents didn't care. I could have done something to the kids because the school wouldn't do anything. After saying something to the school it just made it worse. I chose to leave the situation. Could have gotten messed up in drugs considering lots of people I knew were doing them but I didn't. I did drink and I got in trouble for it. I shocked the judge and prosecutor when I just pled guilty because I did it. I even said I'm not going to waste anyone's time and money because I am guilty. I didn't want to continue on that road. I put in the effort with lots of hard work and dedication.

With all the "gun control " talk about age and more background checks and all that let's more all of this over to more automobile control. How many are willing to put the minimum driving age to 21? Put a breathalyzer with facial recognition in. Plus a scanner to scan your drivers license to make sure you are the actual driver and your license isn't suspended? Then an app that makes your phone inoperable while driving. Close all drive thru windows. Make all cars be able to pick up speed limits and not let it go any faster (this technology already exists). It would be safer. There would no longer be hi speed chases. More people die in car crashes than by guns.

Totally agree. As far as the OP, I haven’t read all the posts, so this was probably already said. BUT, do we really think the attacks will stop if we outlaw assault rifles? No way. The mental monsters would just use multiple automatic pistols. Then we would outlaw them. Then they could use self made bombs. There’s no stopping someone who has the mental capabilities to slaughter others? We should be more aggressive with mental health help. And what about getting rid of the horrific video games kid watch not stop? And the main problem is we’ve kicked God out of our country so what do we expect. We made abortion legal, let murderers off easy and we have lost the sanctity of life.

 

[Addicting]

Are we still talking about the shootings?

 

[QuazyQuinton]

A bit of musing that sort of hearkens back to the beginning of this thread. As I said before, I'm not sure how much I know.

Thinking back a century or little more, sportsmen were facing a crisis. Game animals were rapidly disappearing from the American landscape. Both sport and subsistence hunting were facing the imminent loss of several desired quarry. They had pictures of huge mounds of buffalo skulls, but there weren't many buffalo left on the prairie. They managed to wipe out the passenger pigeons. Deer and elk numbers were low.

Sportsmen now look back with pride at how they responded. There were leading voices like Leopold and Roosevelt. There were hunting clubs formed that were actually conservation organizations. Seasons were closed, and bag limits were imposed. National parks and wildlife refuges were formed. Today we tout many success stories from the work of that era, and rightfully so. But how was that accomplished? Two things stand out to me. First, the sportsmen themselves were the impetus for the change. They recognized the problem and took decisive action. The government got on board with it, but that was largely because sportsmen themselves got them started with a kick in the seat of the pants. Second, the sportsmen recognized that success would require effort and sacrifice on their part. If they wanted more animals, they would have to stop shooting so many. Funding the projects came about by a tax on the very products sportsmen used. Essentially, the problem got fixed because sportsmen figured out how to fix it.

Now fast forward to 2022. We don't have a wildlife crisis; we have a gun crisis. The idealist in me thinks back to the wildlife crisis and wonders if sportsmen today could rise up and find solutions in the same way they did a hundred years ago. Reading this thread and seeing how often we revert only to the "out of my cold, dead hands" mentality makes it obvious that we never will. Could this generation have solved the wildlife crisis of last century? I really doubt that, too. Solutions require creative thinking, strong leadership, and buy-in and dedication from a large number of people. On a large scale, I just don't see that we (sportsmen) are the same quality of people they were a hundred years ago.

I know some will cry apples to oranges or complain about the government. I know I'm a pessimist, a devil's advocate, and a Debbie Downer all rolled into one. I don't know...change my mind, I guess.

QQ

 

[Jasher]

Are we still talking about the shootings?

I don't know. You know how a thread starts and ends up in left field. I'm guilty of that.

 

[Jasher]

A bit of musing that sort of hearkens back to the beginning of this thread. As I said before, I'm not sure how much I know.

Thinking back a century or little more, sportsmen were facing a crisis. Game animals were rapidly disappearing from the American landscape. Both sport and subsistence hunting were facing the imminent loss of several desired quarry. They had pictures of huge mounds of buffalo skulls, but there weren't many buffalo left on the prairie. They managed to wipe out the passenger pigeons. Deer and elk numbers were low.

Sportsmen now look back with pride at how they responded. There were leading voices like Leopold and Roosevelt. There were hunting clubs formed that were actually conservation organizations. Seasons were closed, and bag limits were imposed. National parks and wildlife refuges were formed. Today we tout many success stories from the work of that era, and rightfully so. But how was that accomplished? Two things stand out to me. First, the sportsmen themselves were the impetus for the change. They recognized the problem and took decisive action. The government got on board with it, but that was largely because sportsmen themselves got them started with a kick in the seat of the pants. Second, the sportsmen recognized that success would require effort and sacrifice on their part. If they wanted more animals, they would have to stop shooting so many. Funding the projects came about by a tax on the very products sportsmen used. Essentially, the problem got fixed because sportsmen figured out how to fix it.

Now fast forward to 2022. We don't have a wildlife crisis; we have a gun crisis. The idealist in me thinks back to the wildlife crisis and wonders if sportsmen today could rise up and find solutions in the same way they did a hundred years ago. Reading this thread and seeing how often we revert only to the "out of my cold, dead hands" mentality makes it obvious that we never will. Could this generation have solved the wildlife crisis of last century? I really doubt that, too. Solutions require creative thinking, strong leadership, and buy-in and dedication from a large number of people. On a large scale, I just don't see that we (sportsmen) are the same quality of people they were a hundred years ago.

I know some will cry apples to oranges or complain about the government. I know I'm a pessimist, a devil's advocate, and a Debbie Downer all rolled into one. I don't know...change my mind, I guess.

QQ

We still have people breaking the law when it comes to wildlife laws. No matter what the law is people are going to do whatever they want regardless of how many laws you have.

The answer to dropping wildlife numbers was easy. Stop killing the wildlife.

Here's what we really need to figure out is why do people break the law? Any law not just the big ones any all laws.

 

[Cheesehead]

 

[LWC55]

Canada's Trudeau proposes national freeze on handgun ownership

The legislation, expected to be enacted this fall, would make it "illegal to buy, sell, transfer or import handguns anywhere in Canada," the prime minister said.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[Randi]

A glaring contrast to endorsing competition-defeating subsidies to big oil, ranching, mining, pharma, real estate development and more big oil. Handouts that cost taxpayers billions annually in lost federal revenue.

And yes, this is far from the topic of this thread.

maybe not as far ( from the topic of this thread ) as it seems, as you make a good point

If the school is torn down and rebuilt, will the money that could go to the single mom on welfare that Buzz mentioned go toward tearing down and rebuilding the school ?

Is the conversation about banning the 9mm handgun a political opportunity for some or will the banning of that firearm save children's lives in the future

Speaking in a more general term and only within my small world/example, I find the Baby Boomers are more receptive to the thoughts and ideas of Gen Z, than the Millennium generation. The Baby Boomers in my life are more "go for it" when I suggest we attempt to come up with a plan of action on something we see as a problem, as the millenniums in my life are more " it will never happen" i.e. --make sure those who need it the most get it first ( like Buzz,s single mother on welfare ) before an addition hand out to a large corp. Or, as I mentioned earlier, homelessness. With the number of factories and buildings that have been setting empty--convert them to apartments, ad mental health help to those that need help, child care while parents are at work, MANY of these folks are not asking to be taken care of the rest of their life They are more than willing to work, let them/help them, help themselves . And remember approx 40% of them are veterans

View attachment 224192

I respectively disagree. Some things are worth fighting for and many of them have been mentioned on this thread. For sure, as a "Gen Z", I dont have all the answers, but I am not willing to roll over and play dead either.

 

[antelopedundee]

We already do that. It's called welfare. We incentive people to do nothing. Not married 2 kids make next to nothing here take all this stuff. Don't get a better job or get married to someone who works because we will take all that away even if you are worse off. Make good choices get a job get married before you have kids. Sorry got nothing for you. People don't know how to manage money. You can give them 1,000s and will spend it on stupid stuff. It's up to people to make a difference in their lives. If I lived the way everyone says because of what I was born into then I would probably be drunk, living in a trailer park, might have 1 vehicle that runs. I could have easily been there. Dropped out of school because of kids when I was a senior and my parents didn't care. I could have done something to the kids because the school wouldn't do anything. After saying something to the school it just made it worse. I chose to leave the situation. Could have gotten messed up in drugs considering lots of people I knew were doing them but I didn't. I did drink and I got in trouble for it. I shocked the judge and prosecutor when I just pled guilty because I did it. I even said I'm not going to waste anyone's time and money because I am guilty. I didn't want to continue on that road. I put in the effort with lots of hard work and dedication.

With all the "gun control " talk about age and more background checks and all that let's more all of this over to more automobile control. How many are willing to put the minimum driving age to 21? Put a breathalyzer with facial recognition in. Plus a scanner to scan your drivers license to make sure you are the actual driver and your license isn't suspended? Then an app that makes your phone inoperable while driving. Close all drive thru windows. Make all cars be able to pick up speed limits and not let it go any faster (this technology already exists). It would be safer. There would no longer be hi speed chases. More people die in car crashes than by guns.

Spot on about the automobiles. It's one thing that's more common than guns to all crimes. How would any of these mass shooters be able to carry out their evil deeds without access to a motor vehicle? Can't you just picture a shooter getting onto a bus or taking a taxi with 2 AR-15 type rifles and a backpack full of ammo? Lots of folks want to sue gunmakers for the way that their legally made and sold product is used even tho it wasn't defective. Why not the same for the automakers? I realize that there's a degree of absurdity in that, but it's tough for a mass shooter to do his thing without access to a motor vehicle. And that includes all of the actions leading up to the shooting itself.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Leave the problem solving decisions to all the smart people you elect..

 

[Doublecluck]

Leave the problem solving decisions to all the smart people you elect..

That makes sense.

I remember when I had to hand over or register my 50. My friends who didn’t have one said, “what do you need one for for anyway?” Or we should “compromise on this so they don’t come after X”.

Never mind the fact that literally near zero crimes had ever been committed with a 50 and it did absolutely nothing to curb gun violence.

Later I found out that the 50 was actually capable of sucking the brains out of things thru the eye socket and it didn’t even actually have to hit the target, so yea it makes sense to me now.

Uhhh hey joe.. doesn’t a AR shoot a .22 cal bullet?

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

I'm coming into this thread super late, and didn't read all the posts admittedly. I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.

I honestly see no appeal in AR's, or really pistols to some extent. For me rifles/shotguns are tools, and for me there is no problem that an AR can solve that a bolt action can't...

I wouldn't have one ounce of heartache if AR's were no longer legal. Honestly, I'd welcome the change.

Pistols, eh, more on the fence about. I have one but that was for personal protection in the house when I was living with someone thinking of self harm so I couldn't keep a shotgun in a corner. Pistol fits in a quick access lockbox better than my 870.... Now that I live alone, eh, could get rid of the pistol and never think about it again.

My two cents, contrary view to most in the hunting community from what I've seen.

 

[DouglasR]

Leave the problem solving decisions to all the smart people you elect..

Best one since corn pop.
Amazing.

 

[The Hedgehog]

I'm coming into this thread super late, and didn't read all the posts admittedly. I'm just throwing in my 2 cents.

I honestly see no appeal in AR's, or really pistols to some extent. For me rifles/shotguns are tools, and for me there is no problem that an AR can solve that a bolt action can't...

I wouldn't have one ounce of heartache if AR's were no longer legal. Honestly, I'd welcome the change.

Pistols, eh, more on the fence about. I have one but that was for personal protection in the house when I was living with someone thinking of self harm so I couldn't keep a shotgun in a corner. Pistol fits in a quick access lockbox better than my 870.... Now that I live alone, eh, could get rid of the pistol and never think about it again.

My two cents, contrary view to most in the hunting community from what I've seen.

I’d prefer to have and not need, than need and and not have. US constitution provides that for me.

Of course, if I'm taxed, registered, background checked, etc. that will keep the millions and millions of them out there out of the hands of the crazies...”sarcasm font”

 

[schmalts]

Leave the problem solving decisions to all the smart people you elect..

Guess I am going to use a 9mm Luger this fall for my elk hunt. Silly me, been using those non-lung-sucking calibers all these years.