TheVat

I think in these chats "illegal" is often used loosely/broadly. While it is true that per FOPA 1986, you can (with a great deal of paperwork and being fingerprinted at your nearest FBI office, and then a LOT of waiting) purchase an older machine gun, manufactured before May 1986, you cannot legally own or transfer any machine gun manufactured after that date or be involved in the import or sale of foreign-made weapons. I think this is why some refer to such weapons as illegal, when they mean that you cannot go out and buy a new one as you might an ordinary rifle or handgun. I really don't mind if someone uses terms like illegal or banned in that way, when you do have laws that effectively block all but collectors. I suppose it's just barely conceivable that some incredibly coldblooded and longterm planning mass shooter could go through the enormous trouble to obtain a pre- 1986 machine gun, if they had no prior criminal offenses or other red flags. (and you would also need to live in one of the 30-some states that do not have outright bans that would override the FOPA 1986 bill)

This mischaracterizes the ban proposals out there, which generally are category bans and not just the AR-15. Four of the five worst mass shootings were done with assault style weapons. Not really an ocean "drop." Even reducing such weapons and the high capacity magazines that are popular with mass shooters would save lives and would not cramp the style of any hunter I've met (and I live deep in Red State country, with many hunters). Australia took this approach, and also removed many already purchased weapons through buyback programs. Its mass shootings dropped to zero for many years (the zero broken only by a family murder/suicide that technically qualified). And yet, somehow, Australia still has a well-regulated military and has not been overrun by radical commies. As the oft-reprinted Onion headline put it: ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens As for longterm solutions, sure, maybe we can fix youthful alienation, isolation, paranoia, violent acting out, impulsivity, and the entire dark side of human nature. While we're waiting, we could pass those long centuries having reasonable restrictions of citizen ownership of killing machines. And perhaps do so based on reason and evidence, not on what seemed applicable in 1787. Amendments can be rescinded, as the 18th was, they are not holy writ. And they are constantly being interpreted for the express purpose of applying them to the RW of the 21st century. That's why the Framers set up the possibilities of doing so. Also worth noting that mental health solutions tend to hinge on troubled persons seeking help. It appears, from the hundreds of cases now available to us for study, that rage-filled loners don't seek out help of that type. Seems likely we'd have to drill down to deeper socioeconomic causes that generate neglectful and/or abusive parents and resulting rage-filled loners in the first place. And I'm guessing that might be expensive. And usually we reserve high-budget expenditures for keeping Afghanistan safe for the Taliban or rooting out imaginary yellow cake uranium in Iraq or maintaining nuclear arsenals that cannot ever be used because all life on Earth would be annihilated.

Damn. I just went to the wrong high school!

Yes. And it's kind of interesting that these average people never seem to ponder what would happen if citizens (non-military/non-LEOs) lost guns totally. (Never mind that 70% already don't have guns). Our culture has defined the scenario as unthinkable and not to be discussed. The Second Amendment zealots couldn't give a crap about vast tracts of the Constitution and would probably repeal a whole slew of amendments if they thought it would help their narrow ideological goals.

Am mostly here because this is not the transgender athlete thread. Phew. But also wanted to share this.... https://www.dailykos.com/story/2022/5/25/2100317/-Guns-will-be-banned-for-Trump-s-upcoming-speech-at-NRA-convention

If anyone abducts an alpha particle, let me know.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/paul-gosar-texas-shooter_n_628db1f5e4b0edd2d01c8ef7 We don't just let mentally ill people have guns, we also elect them to the United States Congress. More disappointing was the Oscar-winning actor Matthew McConaughey, who is a native of that town (Uvalde, TX), who tweeted some vague philosophizing but never said one word about gun control.

And any Constitutional amendment takes an even larger majority, of two thirds, in both Houses. Might as well wait for a unicorn sighting on the Capitol steps.

Unfortunate that 25-30% of Americans have completely hijacked the machinery of politics and jurisprudence so they can stand vigilant against the imaginary marauders. Charon is right about the paranoia and hyperreactivity. My daughter teaches elementary and middle school and I'm just fed up with this shit. Y'all got plus ones - consider that my group hug.

HELLO! I AM THE SECOND AMENDMENT. I CAN'T HELP NOTICING YOU ARE A DEEPLY SICK AND ANGRY EIGHTEEN YEAR OLD. PLEASE LET ME PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME GUNS AND RIFLES JUST IN CASE YOU GET THE URGE TO JOIN A WELL ORDERED MILITIA AND FEND OFF REDCOATS! FEEL FREE TO PRACTICE ON BLACK GROCERY SHOPPERS OR SCHOOLCHILDREN OR WHATEVER MOVING TARGETS ARE HANDY! BECAUSE I AM ALL ABOUT FREEDOM! https://apnews.com/article/uvalde-texas-school-shooting-b4e4648ed0ae454897d540e787d092b2 Jesus fucking Christ. (the second amendment personified riff is mine, so if you don't like it, blame me)

My billiards comment was in jest. Just a way to express topic fatigue in a light way. LoL the conversion of croquet to crochet, btw. Thanks, @geordief

https://nautil.us/you-eat-a-credits-card-worth-of-plastic-every-week-17950/ Good summary of current and developing knowledge of effects of microplastic pollution. There are sources that many of us don't give much thought, like cleaning out the lint trap in a clothes dryer. You really don't want to inhale laundry lint, if your clothes contain any polyester fibers.

This issue would be much less of a bother if we just made billiards, frisbee golf, and croquet the primary sports of our nations. And think of the medical resources that would be freed up.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/24/perspectives/solar-panels-tariffs-clean-energy/index.html This is incredibly important to our energy future. Why a nation with our manufacturing capacity and resources would be dragging its feet on this is....oh wait, yes, no mystery at all, politics as usual.

Crazier than a sack of tomcats. Bet Roger Penrose would have a good laugh at the guy's microtubule "airbag" theory.

Thanks, I have no idea if this could ever work. And not sure I understand how cooling ground could really produce enough IR to be economically feasible. I was amused to find that Vice magazine ran a story based on that paper, and the writer somehow interpreted mW as "megawatts," instead of milliwatts, and described the power output as megawatts per square meter.

In systems where a corporate sector grows and buys up power bases, wealth tends to concentrate at the top, the bottom half tends towards impoverishment, and crime and violence results. Then people want law and order, and the dictatorial "strongman" arises, promises law and order, and delivers on that (often in brutal fashion). Authoritarian government almost seems like the most natural evolution of late-stage capitalism. Often accompanied by theocracy, as the high priests promise that stern imposition of their moral code will also bring safe streets. (and they will have dogmas that exalt wealth, and make predatory capitalism okay with Gee-Hovah or Whoever)

Possible nighttime counterpart to solar PV power generation. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsphotonics.2c00223# Looks like it's got a ways to go in term of milliwatts per sq meter, but a cool idea (npi). Maybe would work better in deserts where the surface is losing a lot of heat to space.

I see where Geordie is going. Perhaps one could look at conflicts of applying scientific knowledge and bioethics, a branch of modern philosophy. Science is neutral on the matter of cloning a person. An ethicist can zoom back a bit and try to see if doing so might have unintended consequences, and draw upon other science fields than genetics, to consider the social and psychological effects of cloning. The biotech person might have a "let's do it because we can," and chafe at the philosopher weighing in. BTW, I also would recommend Adam Becker's, What is Real? as @Eise did. Gives a clear look at how a philosophical position can constrict an area of research.

I have expressed optimism about thorium reactors elsewhere on the web. Glad you posted this. It would be wonderful to move away from uranium in reactors. I hope we can add more to this thread as countries explore this option and make progress towards a much safer nuclear power. The huge reduction in waste (with shorter-lived radionuclides) should be reason enough to go this direction.

A nice breakdown on what "systemic racism" means. I don't think progressives can do other than continue to recognize it exists and patiently show how. Idiot side note: I used to have a couple pairs of rather conservative black socks. When I tugged them on, I'd say to my partner, I am putting my Anglo socks on.

You can duck the whole issue, if you take your first bite in the right spot.

Plain text from someone who beat a ten-term incumbent on small donations. “We open doors so others can walk through them.” – Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez "When we talk about the word 'socialism,' I think what it really means is just democratic participation in our economic dignity and our economic, social, and racial dignity. It is about direct representation and people actually having power and stake over their economic and social wellness, at the end of the day." -- AOC We have to stick to the message: What are we proposing to the American people? Not, ‘What are we fighting against?’” - AOC “We don’t have time to sit on our hands as our planet burns. For young people, climate change is bigger than election or re-election. It’s life or death.” - AOC "Solving an unprecedented crisis will require unprecedented ambition.” - AOC

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/21/1099912475/states-courts-debate-18-year-olds-buy-long-guns (About restricting gun purchases by people under 21) Historically, the courts have limited such rights. "The threshold test is what's called 'strict scrutiny,' " says Jeffrey Fagan, a law professor at Columbia University who specializes in gun laws. "It's got to be a compelling governmental interest to limit the right." For that, advocates of a higher minimum age point to brain science. "We know from lots of studies around motor vehicles and drinking and other common types of injuries that this age group is still developing its frontal lobe, impulse control, judgment," says Megan Ranney, an emergency physician and academic dean at the School of Public Health at Brown University. Gun rights advocates, on the other hand, say brain science arguments don't justify taking away the right to armed self-defense from a whole age group. Matt Larosiere is with the Firearms Policy Coalition, which led the challenge to California's law. He says it's bad enough that federal law bans adults under age 21 from buying handguns from licensed dealers; he says it's worse when states bar that same age group from buying rifles and other long guns. "States pass these 18-to-21 rifle bans, and it eliminates completely the ability of young adults of the mechanism of defending themselves," he says. And, he argues that young adults may actually rely on that right more than older people. "There are plenty of young adults in America who are quite often lower-income, or otherwise disadvantaged, not just financially," Larosiere says. "And those are the same people who are the most likely to be violently victimized, and the people most likely in need of an effective mechanism to protect themselves," This legal tension has yet to be resolved. Just last year, a federal judge upheld Florida's new, age-based law limiting gun sales — but he also called this age question "a constitutional no man's land."

My guess is that progs could focus strongly on economic and eco reforms, without so much energy expended on waging culture wars or spreading shallow memes. IOW stay positive. Don't attack, but also don't pretend Trumpism has any merits or that it can be wooed into some "bipartisan" efforts. No sense wasting time on Faux News zombies. Just tell people what progress can be achieved and put your backs into getting everyone to the polls. Make sure every obstacle to voting can be vaulted over by those the GOP wants to disenfranchise. Bring back the Kennedy maxim of "ask not what your country can do for you, but rather what you can do for your country."