BuckSwope

Sums up the race to the bottom 100%. I am sure each of us teaches each of our children the great "but they did it too..." line of thinking. You post as though the only possible reaction to crap being done to you that you (supoosedly) don't like is to act the same way.

It's freakin' stupid, and both parties have shown and inclination to go this route. We should all be 100% against this. What are we doing here if major politicians can't get on a stage, debate issues, and field questions?

I misread your post a tad, and get what you are saying - more that it's not in our best interest to do so, but we choose to do it. I agree with that, I took it more that you were saying it's not natural for us to put politics in everything, and that's what I was disagreeing with because it's 100% natural to put things in groups/tribes/categories like we do and thrive on drama and friction.

I laughed, but now I think you are serious here. We as whole sure don't act like this is the case.

Right? This has to be the fear - they are so convinced that it's a social contagion that they think all this "grooming" is going work on them and their kids. If not, why do they care - let the evil libs all turn lgbtb, their kind will die out from lack of procreation, and then the mighty conservatives will rule in a couple generations.

Even this when you start going down the path of refusing any store that does this you open a big can of worms. Not as big of a display as what Target did, but I've seen LGBTQ products for/marketed to kids in stores like Barnes and Noble, Target, Kohl's, grocery store, all over. Whether it's books openly displayed, clothes, toys. It's all over, and I can't imagine trying to boycott every store or company who does this. The easier option for me is to just not by those products.

Great post. It's not hard to draw lines - boycotting, cancel subscriptions, stop shopping at a place? Great, that's how this is supposed to work. Most of the time I think people are silly for getting worked up about this stuff, but go for it. If you are destoying property, threatening workers, getting people fired - then you are in the wrong. Most of the time I DGAF and the only time I do any of those first things is because of poor service and bad products, not because of some perceived political stance or position on an issue.

I was also thinking about 10-12 years ago when the right was (correctly) complaining about largely being dismissed, flown over, called racists, ignorant, etc.. Now they are acting exactly same - Groomer! Pedo! No, You're the Racist!. Social Media really amplifies our dumbest impulses.

That's the funny thing. So much back and forth these days boils down to a "they started it!" race to the ignorant bottom. The two sides hate each other while acting like each other in so many ways. We are a nation of children and our politics 100% reflects this.

You realize Mexico has a southern border too, right? Here is the solution: we take over the whole of South America after Mexico, then have our divorce as a country - one half gets US and Mexico, the other gets South America!!

Gotcha. Really disagree here, but was curious your take.

Do you believe if we had the same amount of gun control as the countries you reference we would have similar murder rates per capita?

Good luck with what? I guess good luck to you framing gun owners as gun fondling wackos.

Too simplistic here. 100 people owning 30 guns each is different than 3000 people each having a gun. The # guns isn't the end all be all piece of info. At the end of the day, as a country our solution to someone about to enter a building with guns is to have more people inside with guns. That's where we are messed up, imo. I don't care if it's an AR or a bag of handguns, I want steps in place to stop that person before they get there, not just planning for a shootout when they do.

I usually use my words specifically. "Ban", not restrictions is what I find irrational and ineffective. Total gun ban, maybe, but it's also never happening for a variety of reasons, so not a realistic solution. Just banning ARs isn't going to do much either. I don't know a category of gun death where that platform is used the majority of time, so again- an irrational solution IMO. I said in an above post I was for limiting access to said guns, not banning them.