Start by not supporting a side that has actively tried to destroy the nuclear family and religion in people's lives.
how do republicans continue
- Thread starter baddog25
- Start date
You are wrong, the person that hit a 17 year old volleyball player in St. Louis resulting in her losing both of her legs was the recipient of the left's modern crime strategy. The man who allegedly caused the crash, 21-year-old Daniel Riley, was on house arrest at the time for a 2020 robbery and had violated his GPS monitoring dozens of times. Yet he was still on the street. Lock the thugs up and stop worrying about the 75 year guy who keeps a gun to protect himself.
WOB??
Also, punishments are not always a deterrent. I am very pro death penalty but admit it really isn't a very good deterrent for violent crime.
It's sad that you believe this. Assault rifles were designed to kill mass quantities of humans. Denying that makes it impossible to even start a conversation with you.
Depends on the liberal. It also depends on the conservative whether they want NO guns banned.
Some conservatives believe even a single restriction on guns is just a slippery slope to a full ban. Other conservatives believe there's no reason a civilian should possess a gun that's made specifically to kill a lot of humans quickly. And there's a whole spectrum of opinions between those.
It sounds like you want an authoritarian government, a growing trend of the woke war where MAGA sides with ruthless dictators over American principles. Sorry but that’s what this country has fought for since inception.
The thing is, we need the conservatives who want something done about all this to speak up because we libs can't get anywhere with it.
If you haven’t seen an attempt from the GOP/Trumpists to shift to authoritarian rule and or normalization of authoritarianism , I can’t help you.
Maybe instead of a border/Ukraine deal there should be a border/guns deal.
I think the biggest problem is that neither party can do anything without the wings because the wings are too powerful, and the wings are terrible at compromise.
Do liberals even acknowledge the daily mass shootings and thousands of shootings that occur in black communities or that are due to gang violence? They don’t want to address that as that would offend future votes. Only time it ever gets brought up is when a mass shooting makes national headlines.
It's kind of hard when the right keeps jailing people for non-violent possession
Chicago!!! Of COURSE! There's a reason for those. Multiple, actually, and none excuses the violence.
APRIL 6, 2023
Gun deaths among U.S. children and teens rose 50% in two years
BY JOHN GRAMLICHThe number of children and teens killed by gunfire in the United States increased 50% between 2019 and 2021, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest annual mortality statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic, there were 1,732 gun deaths among U.S. children and teens under the age of 18. By 2021, that figure had increased to 2,590.
The gun death rate among children and teens – a measure that adjusts for changes in the nation’s population – rose from 2.4 fatalities per 100,000 minor residents in 2019 to 3.5 per 100,000 two years later, a 46% increase.
Both the number and rate of children and teens killed by gunfire in 2021 were higher than at any point since at least 1999, the earliest year for which information about those younger than 18 is available in the CDC’s mortality database.
How we did this
The rise in gun deaths among children and teens is part of a broader recent increase in firearm deaths among Americans overall. In 2021, there were 48,830 gun deaths among Americans of all ages – by far the highest yearly total on record and up 23% from the 39,707 recorded in 2019, before the pandemic.
The total number of gun deaths among children and teens in 2021 includes homicides, suicides, accidents and all other categories where firearms are listed on death certificates as the underlying cause of death. It does not include deaths where firearms are listed as a contributing, but not underlying, cause of death.
Homicide was the largest single category of gun deaths among children and teens in 2021, accounting for 60% of the total that year. It was followed by suicide at 32% and accidents at 5%. Among U.S. adults, by contrast, suicides accounted for a 55% majority of gun deaths in 2021.
In addition to data on gun fatalities, the CDC publishes estimates on nonfatal gun-related injuries sustained by children and teens. In 2020 – the most recent year with available data – there were more than 11,000 emergency-room visits for gunshot injuries among children and teens under the age of 18 – far higher than in other recent years. An exact count is not possible, however, because the CDC’s estimate is based on a sample of U.S. hospitals, not all U.S. hospitals, and is subject to a large margin of error.
Gun deaths are much more common among some groups of children and teens
In the U.S., some groups of children and teens are far more likely than others to die by gunfire. Boys, for example, accounted for 83% of all gun deaths among children and teens in 2021. Girls accounted for 17%.Older children and teens are much more likely than younger kids to be killed in gun-related incidents. Those ages 12 to 17 accounted for 86% of all gun deaths among children and teens in 2021, while those 6 to 11 accounted for 7% of the total, as did those 5 and under. Still, there were 179 gun deaths among children ages 6 to 11 and 184 among those 5 and under in 2021.
For all three age groups, homicide was the leading type of gun death in 2021. But suicides accounted for a significant share (36%) of gun deaths among those ages 12 to 17, while accidents accounted for a sizable share (34%) of gun deaths among those 5 and under.
Racial and ethnic differences in gun deaths among kids are stark. In 2021, 46% of all gun deaths among children and teens involved Black victims, even though only 14% of the U.S. under-18 population that year was Black. Much smaller shares of gun deaths among children and teens in 2021 involved White (32%), Hispanic (17%) and Asian (1%) victims.
Looked at another way, Black children and teens were roughly five times as likely as their White counterparts to die from gunfire in 2021. There were 11.8 gun deaths per 100,000 Black children and teens that year, compared with 2.3 gun deaths per 100,000 White children and teens. The gun death rate among Hispanic children and teens was also 2.3 deaths per 100,000 in 2021, while it was lower among Asian children and teens (0.9 per 100,000).
There are also major racial and ethnic differences in the types of gun deaths involving children and teens. In 2021, a large majority of gun deaths involving Black children and teens (84%) were homicides, while 9% were suicides. Among White children and teens, by contrast, the majority of gun deaths (66%) were suicides, while a much smaller share (24%) were homicides.
In this analysis, Black, White and Asian children and teens include only those who are single-race and not Hispanic, while Hispanic children and teens are of any race.
Nearly half of U.S. parents worry about their children getting shot
A sizable share of American parents are worried about their kids getting shot. In a fall 2022 Pew Research Center survey, 22% of parents with children under 18 said they were extremely or very worried about any of their children getting shot at some point, while another 23% said they were somewhat worried. Still, more than half said they were not worried about this.
The survey found demographic differences in these concerns. Around four-in-ten Hispanic parents (42%) and about a third of Black parents (32%) said they were extremely or very worried about their children getting shot, compared with smaller shares of Asian (23%) and White (12%) parents.
Parents in self-described urban communities (35%) were considerably more likely than those in rural (19%) or suburban (17%) areas to be extremely or very worried about any of their children being shot. And lower-income parents (40%) were far more likely than middle-income (16%) and upper-income (10%) parents to be extremely or very worried.
Partisan differences were evident, too. Democratic and Democratic-leaning parents were roughly twice as likely as Republican and Republican-leaning parents to say they were extremely or very worried about their children getting shot at some point (27% vs. 14%).
Note: Here are the questions asked in this survey, as well as its methodology.
I disagree, after getting the death penalty that person is no longer a threat to any one.
Brown people are why gun laws won't work here?
Isn't that a little on the nose for a republican response?
No, my comment was in direct response to this from you...
"Right sure, america is different from every other first world country. Because...things".
America is different because of diversity,.. not brown people.
We were discussing why gun laws wouldn't work in America.
You said it's due to diversity. Please explain why diversity would prevent gun laws from working here.
I said that diversity is what makes America different from every other comparable first world country,.. You can use that information anyway you wish...
So you weren't addressing the issue, you were just letting us know how America was unique.
Like geysers.
Why is America different from the rest of first world countries concerning gun control?
You: It has geysers?
Great, thanks for participating.
I haven't looked at the numbers and I doubt you have either. I know there are mass shootings all over the country and the common theme is all of them happen with guns no matter what color they are. It would be disingenuous to say otherwise. I'm not exactly sure why you bring up race here anyway. Do you believe white people don't shoot people?
Last edited:
Absolutely white people shoot people. However, what I am saying is that the daily violence that occurs with guns is not covered, especially in black communities. Look at the stats regarding black communities and gun violence. Do you ever hear Democrats complain about mass shootings or large numbers of shootings over a weekend in places like Chicago, Baltimore, Memphis, New Orleans, etc? There is never a peep! It isn't until a mass shooting that gains national headlines occurs that the call for stricter gun laws comes into effect. I am all for severe punishments for those who have gun offenses, but a HUGE problem is our DA's and judges don't prosecute these to the full extent of the law. People are allowed to plea bargain down or they serve a fraction of their sentence and are on the streets again. Start having mandatory stiff sentences and start actually prosecuting people for gun offenses.
Can you provide a link to Democrats and Liberals venting their frustrations and desires to address the gun and gang violence in black communities? I am seriously asking. How many guns used in those shootings are by registered gun owners I can tell you the number is most likely zero. How many involve repeat gun violence offenders, and lifelong criminals? Even Al Sharpton dare not speak of the gun violence in black communities. This is only an issue apparently when an event that involves gun violence makes national headlines.
He's not the dumbest person on this board, but he better hope Here4aday doesn't croak.
Illicit Fentanyl and Drug Smuggling at the U.S.-Mexico Border: An Overview
The United States faces a growing challenge related to illicit fentanyl. As the challenge grows, the conversation often turns to drug smuggling into the U.S. and how the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border enhances the problem. Illicit fentanyl has devastating impacts across all corners of the...
immigrationforum.org
Fentanyl trafficking is mostly done by U.S. citizens.
Your race-baiting, fear-mongering propaganda from Fox News shows your incompetence once again.
you made a claim. i am asking you to back up your assertion, the bolded part specifically.
Last edited:
We need to give thanks to those children. Their sacrifice ensured that the 2A can remain pure.
Considering about 90% of black voters vote Democrat, and the complete absence and unwillingness for Democrats to address or bring attention to violence in those communities, I think common sense prevails over your need to see a link to prove it. 🙄
I just want criminals behind bars. It appears you would prefer they run wild to kill and maim others.
Ben Crump says ending crime in US as easy as changing ‘definition of crime’; Dr Swain says that’s ‘ludicrous’
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump saying U.S. laws target Black culture, and to end crime you must redefine what are considered crimes is "ludicrous," said Dr. Carol Swain.
There is no concerted effort to dismantle the nuclear family. The origins of such beliefs can be traced to a misinterpretation of information, often fueled by right-wing media, which tends to sensationalize and instill a sense of panic. It's crucial to recognize that not all liberal perspectives are against fundamental values. Let's strive for a more nuanced understanding and open dialogue to bridge gaps in perception.
The federal government actually subsidizes fatherless homes. A women gets more federal aid if there isn't a man in the house. If that won't destroy the nuclear family, I don't know what else would.
Welfare and the Decline of Marriage
It is no accident that the collapse of marriage in America largely began with the War on Poverty and the proliferation of means-tested welfare programs that it fostered. When the War on Poverty began, only a single welfare program—Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)—assisted single parents. Today, dozens of programs provide benefits to families with children, including the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) food program, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), food stamps, child nutrition programs, public housing and Section 8 housing, and Medicaid. Although married couples with children can also receive aid through these programs, the overwhelming majority of assistance to families with children goes to single-parent households.
The burgeoning welfare state has promoted single parenthood in two ways. First, means-tested welfare programs such as those described above financially enable single parenthood. It is difficult for single mothers with a high school degree or less to support children without the aid of another parent. Means-tested welfare programs substantially reduce this difficulty by providing extensive support to single parents. Welfare thereby reduces the financial need for marriage. Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, less-educated mothers have increasingly become married to the welfare state and to the U.S. taxpayer rather than to the fathers of their children.
As means-tested benefits expanded, welfare began to serve as a substitute for a husband in the home, and low-income marriage began to disappear. As husbands left the home, the need for more welfare to support single mothers increased. The War on Poverty created a destructive feedback loop: Welfare promoted the decline of marriage, which generated a need for more welfare.
Penalizing Marriage
A second major problem is that the means-tested welfare system actively penalizes low-income parents who do marry. All means-tested welfare programs are designed so that a family’s benefits are reduced as earnings rise. In practice, this means that, if a low-income single mother marries an employed father, her welfare benefits will generally be substantially reduced. The mother can maximize welfare by remaining unmarried and keeping the father’s income “off the books.”
For example, a single mother with two children who earns $15,000 per year would generally receive around $5,200 per year of food stamp benefits. However, if she marries a father with the same earnings level, her food stamps would be cut to zero. A single mother receiving benefits from Section 8 or public housing would receive a subsidy worth on average around $11,000 per year if she was not employed, but if she marries a man earning $20,000 per year, these benefits would be cut nearly in half. Both food stamps and housing programs provide very real financial incentives for couples to remain separate and unmarried.
Overall, the federal government operates over 80 means-tested welfare programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income individuals. Each program contains marriage penalties similar to those described above. Low-income families generally receive benefits from several programs at the same time. The marriage penalties from multiple programs when added together can provide substantial financial disincentives to marriage. For example, if a single mother who earns $20,000 per year marries a man who earns the same amount, the couple will typically lose about $12,000 a year in welfare benefits. In effect, the welfare system makes it economically irrational for most low-income couples to marry.
The anti-marriage aspect of the welfare state can be illustrated by comparing means-tested welfare with the federal income tax code. For example, under a progressive income tax system with only a single schedule of tax rates indiscriminately covering both single persons and married couples, nearly all individuals would experience an increase in taxes owed when they married and lower taxes if they remain separate or divorce. The current federal income tax system mitigates this anti-marriage effect by having separate tax schedules for singles and married couples.
By contrast, the means-tested welfare system, in most cases, does not have a separate schedule for married couples. When a low-income mother and father marry, they will generally experience a sharp drop in benefits, and their joint income will fall. The anti-marriage penalty is often most severe among married couples where both parents are employed.
So, would you or most Dems be FOR incentivizing couples with children to stay married and live together through tax credits? I started a thread about that and didn't get any responses. I'll have to go bump it. Maybe you can respond.
Should we incentivize two parent households within the tax code?
Tax credit for households with two parents with children in the household, over and above the already given child tax credits. I think this is a good idea. It's not punishing single moms or those non-dual parent households as their status will not be affected at all. It should apply to civil...
iowa.forums.rivals.com
That's a weird idea. Why would you want to reward couples who don't want to be together to keep living with each other? That doesn't make sense. What you are proposing is just a giveaway for couples that stay together. I don't think a tax credit would incentivize couples to stay together. It sounds like you just want welfare.So, would you or most Dems be FOR incentivizing couples with children to stay married and live together through tax credits? I started a thread about that and didn't get any responses. I'll have to go bump it. Maybe you can respond.
Should we incentivize two parent households within the tax code?
Tax credit for households with two parents with children in the household, over and above the already given child tax credits. I think this is a good idea. It's not punishing single moms or those non-dual parent households as their status will not be affected at all. It should apply to civil...
Last edited:
