Tipping Point to Consider

[homeuser6]

"operations research analyst"

 

[Knobgoblin]

This continued talk of raising the age for different rights is beginning to create a deep rift between myself and those who want/ or would accept it.

Citizens have the right to vote, citizens have the right to arm themselves .

Consider this seriously.
If your citizenship has a minimum age, then logically it should have a MAXIMUM age.

I'm with all my kids this weekend. So I'll do my due diligence and openly consider that I'm one who's wrong about how responsible they are.

 

[AK0perator47]

This continued talk of raising the age for different rights is beginning to create a deep rift between myself and those who want/ or would accept it.

Citizens have the right to vote, citizens have the right to arm themselves .

Consider this seriously.
If your citizenship has a minimum age, then logically it should have a MAXIMUM age.

I'm with all my kids this weekend. So I'll do my due diligence and openly consider that I'm one who's wrong about how responsible they are.

Oh yeah if that's the case we can also implement that for every dollar you make about $250,000 it should restrict them. Oh yeah if that's happening can we make implications for people under a certain dollar amount they are restricted too?

Oh yeah that's kind of what they are already doing! I was thinking of over a certain amount kind of like age we limit them but they are doing it differently. Dang you jerks that win at everything because you keep moving the goal posts/ changing the rules so you don't get called out on CHEATING

 

[nwslopoke]

Mass shootings, depending how they are classified (normally excluding gang or domestic violence shootings), in my opinion are a result of artificially creating soft targets as well creating artificial heroes.

Granted, most are done by males from their mid teens to early 20s, but the majority of those could have been prevented by 1994 American culture over the current culture. We accept and promote "weird" behavior that previously was unacceptable. I didn't grow with a father as a teen, but my best friend did. He had no reservations calling out his son or myself for being stupid. RIP Mr Harrell. And we are better for it.

So what is the real tipping point? A permissive culture that cultivates these events allowing law makers to ignore our rights or are these a natural occurrence unpreventable due to the NRA?

I'm under the belief the changes in culture has manufactured the majority of our problems from school shootings to obesity to deaths due to homelessness.

 

[bradsteen]

This continued talk of raising the age for different rights is beginning to create a deep rift between myself and those who want/ or would accept it.

Citizens have the right to vote, citizens have the right to arm themselves .

Consider this seriously.
If your citizenship has a minimum age, then logically it should have a MAXIMUM age.

I'm with all my kids this weekend. So I'll do my due diligence and openly consider that I'm one who's wrong about how responsible they are.

I think the issue is less about citizenship and more about the legal definition of adulthood. In my opinion it's a poorly defined hodgepodge of ages. Why is it that you can drive, get a job, and pay taxes at 16, buy a long gun, vote, and enlist in the military at 18, but not drink or carry a pistol until you're 21? If you're responsible enough in the eyes of the law to work, pay taxes, and operate a motor vehicle, shouldn't you also be responsible enough to do all those other things?

I am certainly concerned about the lack of maturity I see in many 18-25 year olds, but the correct answer isn't raising the age at which we define a person as an adult - it's establishing mechanism to reinforce responsibile behavior in teens before they legally become adults.

 

[Knobgoblin]

I think the issue is less about citizenship and more about the legal definition of adulthood. In my opinion it's a poorly defined hodgepodge of ages. Why is it that you can drive, get a job, and pay taxes at 16, buy a long gun, vote, and enlist in the military at 18, but not drink or carry a pistol until you're 21? If you're responsible enough in the eyes of the law to work, pay taxes, and operate a motor vehicle, shouldn't you also be responsible enough to do all those other things?

I am certainly concerned about the lack of maturity I see in many 18-25 year olds, but the correct answer isn't raising the age at which we define a person as an adult - it's establishing mechanism to reinforce responsibile behavior in teens before they legally become adults.

This is great material to dive into. I definitely see that lack of maturity all around me. To be blunt , I regularly interact with adults of all ages who refuse to take responsibility for themselves. Their actions and even their daily survival and sustenance needs are somehow NOT their personal responsibility. Age is not the only measure of maturity.

 

[Idaho44]

I propose a maximum age of 65 for any politician in any political position or related position, paid or unpaid!

 

[Knobgoblin]

 

[AK0perator47]

I propose a maximum age of 65 for any politician in any political position or related position, paid or unpaid!

I think they should also have limitations on years they can serve. Family members that get money for business ventures from any foreign state or even NGO should be unacceptable.

 

[Knobgoblin]

I think they should also have limitations on years they can serve. Family members that get money for business ventures from any foreign state or even NGO should be unacceptable.

Lol.

All the reasons people get into politics basically. Greed , nepotism, dynastic aspirations.

 

[Glizzy Goblin]

 

[mrblond]

View attachment 1270821

 

[AK0perator47]

Lol.

All the reasons people get into politics basically. Greed , nepotism, dynastic aspirations.

Are you sure it's political and not some web service owners that also happen to own massive land? Or other ones that happen to sell products and delivery in their own vehicles? Then have known sex offenders "accidentally " die?

 

[Olderguy]

Congratulations on your educational and vocational achievements but i think the analysis may be flawed. Your analysis seems to be based on how you or a reasonable person might react to compromise HOWEVER the anti-gun faction has not demonstrated any degree of reason in the past. If they gain a little they want more and more restrictive legislation. Your idea of restricting purchases to age 25 on the surface seems like a possible aid to preventing young men from mass shootings, but I think this is obviously based on recent events. If we constantly pass restrictive laws based on one or two incidents, we lose sight of any reasonable legislative approach to insure and protect our freedom.

I think the problems we are having with mass shootings, drive-byes, etc goes much deeper-FAMILY, PARENTING, RELIGIOUS BASE. ETC!

 

[Reperio]

I think the issue is less about citizenship and more about the legal definition of adulthood. In my opinion it's a poorly defined hodgepodge of ages. Why is it that you can drive, get a job, and pay taxes at 16, buy a long gun, vote, and enlist in the military at 18, but not drink or carry a pistol until you're 21? If you're responsible enough in the eyes of the law to work, pay taxes, and operate a motor vehicle, shouldn't you also be responsible enough to do all those other things?

I am certainly concerned about the lack of maturity I see in many 18-25 year olds, but the correct answer isn't raising the age at which we define a person as an adult - it's establishing mechanism to reinforce responsibile behavior in teens before they legally become adults.

I actually wouldn't have a problem raising the age of gun ownership to 25 IF we raised the age of voting to 25. As for working at 18 and drinking at 21, sure, why not raise those too.

We were never meant to be a society of two earner parents chasing consumerism while someone else spends more waking hours with our kids than family does. And we wonder how things have gotten so disjointed and fractured?

In the past, certain elements necessitated working at a younger age, and likewise, our life expectancies were lower. Even our forefathers recognized wisdom didn't come until our 30s and didn't want just any adult running for Congress or the Presidency.

Society would be much better off in so many ways if we didn't boot kids out at 18 and allow them to be suckered into student loans so they can continue to grow up for another 8 years.

And who do you think comprises a MAJOR portion of the voter block in favor of the worst legislation? Is it any wonder we have the saying, "In your 20's and 30's, if you have a heart at all, you vote democrat. In your 40's and beyond, if you have any brains at all, you vote republican." Is it a coincidence that democrats are emotional, and emotions are used to manipulate them, while republicans are typically results based? Do not confuse the "two party system" of politicians with the two groups of constituents that clearly have ideological differences in their approach to life.

"Everybody is a conservative in hard times" - because when forced to deal with reality, the childish democrat must either sink, or put away childish notions and swim.

 

[AK0perator47]

 

[monkeybutler]

I'm old so please bear with me. I think that you might find this
interesting and informative.

For 50 plus years I worked as an operations research analyst.
(This is someone who looks at what is going on and what might
happen in the future if things continue and then makes recommendations
of what changes might be beneficial to reach a more desirable future.)
...
As an analyst, I can tell that Oregon is at a tipping point. All that has happened
over the last few years has created a place and time when groups are grasping
at anything as a solution.

I'm sure you are good at matrix algebra, but would you be able to explain how a background in OR brings some special qualification to comment on complex social phenomena? Or is that something it takes a whiz kid to understand?

 

[American123]

I'm old so please bear with me. I think that you might find this
interesting and informative.

For 50 plus years I worked as an operations research analyst.
(This is someone who looks at what is going on and what might
happen in the future if things continue and then makes recommendations
of what changes might be beneficial to reach a more desirable future.)

Ok. There is my "bonified." Now let me tell you about the past.

When I was a young man, my Grandfather talked to me about the Prohibition Era.
Most of us still living never lived thru the time when alcohol was banned in the USA,
but it did happen. I asked Granddad how this came about. He said that he didn't know.
Everyone drank and no one really thought that alcohol would be banned.

When working on my Masters degree, I wrote a paper on how alcohol came to be
banned in the USA. I won't bore you with the details. The bottom-line is that
the society at that instant in time reached a "tipping point."

Here is the definition of a tipping point:
"The point at which a series of small changes or incidents becomes significant
enough to cause a larger, more insignificant change."

In the case of Probibition, people were reacting to a series of small events.
Alcoholism had reached a height where families were being torn apart, children
were going hungry, employees were unable to function, crime was rampant, drunks
staggered along streets accosting people for money and so on.

Many small segments of society had, had enough. It was proposed that banning
alcohol would solve all of these problems. And, people jumped on it.

Got the picture now? It was a tipping point. Enough incidents had occurred that
people would grasp at anything that promised a solution. Hence Prohibition passed.

Does this sound familiar? It should. Think about events such as nightly shootings,
mall shootings, auto to auto shootings and so on. An ongoing series of events that people
want to stop.

As an analyst, I can tell that Oregon is at a tipping point. All that has happened
over the last few years has created a place and time when groups are grasping
at anything as a solution.

Bottomline is that it is highly likely the gun control measure will pass. If the
election were to be held today, the probability of passage is 75% or greater.

Will this bill stop all those incidents which have brought us to this point?
The answer is NO. No more than Prohibition stopped the problems associated
with alcohol.

Can anything be done to change this outcome? Perhaps. From my perspective
as an operations analyst I want to present what I think is the only possible solution.

First, stop attaching this bill as "a bad bill". It doesn't do any good to say that
even if it is true. All you are doing is polarizing the population.

Second, agree that something needs to be done, but tell people that this bill
is terribly flawed in what it is trying to accomplish. Point out the flaws and
how this bill will not help (if you interested in how to do this I can tell you).

Third, commit to working on a series of compromise bills/laws that would
have the impact that everyone would like to see. For example, restricting
purchase/ownership of semi-automatic weapons to people over the age
of 25. Yes, it is a bitter bill to swallow, but it just might stop a lot of the
school and mall shootings based on the age demographics of who
does these type of shootings. (Your children can still shoot bolt action
rifles and revolvers._ For example, commit to a bill/law that requires
DAs to prosecute any felon who uses a firearm in a crime or is caught
with a firearm. No plea deals. No paroles. No early release.
And so on.

If you don't offer some hope, then I can guarantee the current bill
will pass and it is even worse than you imagine. It is going to take
"give and take" to stop it.

Now comes the sad part. Every hear the saying "lots of smoke but
no fire"? It means the same as lots of talk and no action.
This is true of most gun owners. Lots of talk about how important
it is to protect their rights, but little action. 45% of gun owners admit
that they rarely vote. You do NOT defeat ballot measures by saying
how bad something is and then not voting. Most of you who don't
vote use the excuse that your vote "doesn't matter" or "does not good".
You are wrong.

There are two things you can do. Think about what I have said and
vote. If you really want to defeat this bill, then talk to your friends,
neighbors and anyone who might listen to you. Do what I have
suggested. Agree that something must be done, but point out
that this bill does hot do what needs to be done. Suggest things
that are reasonable and that might really make a difference.

If you want, copy this message off and read it to them. We want
to mitigate this problem as much as you do. Tell them so. Let us
find real solutions that we can all live with.

TJ

Entirely, not surprising. I've noted that the people promoting gun bans are also the people hamstringing police, gutting the penal system, and overall doing almost anything to actually encourage criminal violence, but publicly saying "we must do something about this."

It's all by design and the only real solutions aren't peaceful because two groups that are ideologically incompatible and can not coexist while maintaining each respective ideology are still trying to pretend they are capable of coexisting.

I look at history to explain where the future leads.

 

[American123]

Sad that our poor education has lost for our children the knowledge of how the country got here.
It is politically easier for politicians to blame gun owners for violent crime than to blame criminals and incarcerate them.

You can point out to them that governments that sought to disarm the populace for "their safety" then turned around and slaughtered millions during the 20th century.

Day to day violence is still drops in the bucket compared to government orchestrated slaughter. Freedom is a bit inherently dangerous, but lack of freedom is a whole lot more dangerous.

 

[nwslopoke]

Day to day violence is still drops in the bucket compared to government orchestrated slaughter.

Until it hits close to home. Call it a clue that they put a fence around DC and armed national guardsmen to back it up. Whatever potential violence they were preparing for, we the people are on the outside of that wall of protection.

On top of that, the powers that be can now declare whoever, enemy combatants. MAGA extremist. Whatever that is supposed to be. Not illegal or punishable under any law.