by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Search

Search

Sorry! Search is currently disabled. Returning soon.

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .1,0881,0891,0901,0911,0921,0931,094. . .2,5662,567»

Old fakeland wrote:I've seen several studies that show that people who "like" or #hashtag a charity, are less likely to donate of volunteer.
Although, I don't know which is cause, and which is effect, i.e. either;
- people who may otherwise give to charity, decide not to after #liketagging something
- people who #liketag thing are the sort who wouldn't give to charity in the first place
There are also two other important issues, reactionism, and mental health.
For example, if you start a huge anti-gun campaing, then all the gun-nuts are going to come out of the woodwork, having a victim mentality, because you're trying to "take away them freedums". You will end up polarising the issue, and getting as many for, as against.
The ideal, would be to try and engage, and convince moderate-pro-gun people, and convince them of them facts, rather than just tell them they're wrong, and have them go full gun-nut as a reaction.
As for mental health, there are many studies linking social-media over-activity (/addiction) with a negative mental status (mainly depression and narcissism),.
It can also be argued that mental illness is a big factor in violent crimes.
So a campaign against violent crime, may inadvertently and indirectly, increase it.
-
tl;dr - I feel that social-media campaigns are bad, because;
- They contribute nothing to a cause.
- They may decrease the amount of charity donations/volunteering.
- They can cause reactionism against they cause they proport to support.
- They can contribute to negative mental health issues.

Good points. I know too little about the cause and effect of these things, but yes, maybe some of those who would have done something feel like they're done after "liking".

You may also be right that a more subtle approach to engagement (at least in some questions) gives less polarised results. On some other topics it might however be desireable to mass-communicate/educate to get the message across.

Barkargardet wrote:I think the main argument for having tighter gun laws is to minimalise acts of violence based on sudden rage or passion, and to remove the accident risk. We have had this discussion before on the RMB, so this will be my only comment on this subject this time.
The evidence is ridiculously overwhelming: over 50 times a year in the US, a small child gets their hands on a gun and accidentally kills themselves or a sibling.
Yes, people who want a gun can get a gun, but a mentally instable person, not a hardened criminal, who can easily get a gun is more likely to do something drastic than if there were no guns around.
The country in Europe with the most relaxed gun laws is Switzerland. They also have the highest numer of gun related deaths in Europe. Both criminal and accident.
You are more likely to be killed during a burglary if you have a gun than if you don't. The burlar is more likely to have killed before than the one being robbed, and might feel more threatened and compelled to shoot if you come out with a gun.
Also, Australia had relaxed gun laws, and mass shootings, and a large part of the population was concerned that restrictions would infringe on their rights and that socialist dictatorship was bound to follow.
Restrictions were in place in 3 months, gun violence is way down and there have been no more mass shootings.
This is what legislation changes can do, even if a criminal can get a gun if they want to anyway.

I agree that gun control needs to be tightened to a point where only weapons which fire one bullet per trigger action, have stock magazines(or max 10-15 rounds depending on the weapon/ammunition used), training in proper use and safety of the weapon and strict background checks are required(Not an expert in what is required in the US but I think these are reasonable). Another restriction could be to implement license renewals as we have in Ireland. A lot of gun owners/sellers will protest that it is already a hard process to purchase weapons and that automatic(class 3) weapons are out of reach of most civillians and even more difficult to obtain. The problem is not the availability of guns itself, it is the culture surrounding them.
Ireland for example have what I'd call reasonable laws and our gun culture is languishing at best. Small arms and sports hunting rifles compared with the US' love of the AR-15, a semi-auto rifle which can hold up to 100 rounds(mainly 20-30). We have a gun death rate of about 1 in 86500 per year based on the most recent data I could find (2009-2012) and it's decreassing and I'd stake that most are gang on gang related deaths, however illegal firearms are becoming more prominant. Of those caught with illegal firearms only 1 in 15 are charged in court(our judicial system is a joke a times).

TL:DR
Tighter gun control alone won't fix the problem, it's American culture that also needs to change.
Ireland - High level of gun control, guns not ingrained into our culture, very low gun crime.
US - Low-High level of gun control depending on who you ask, guns ingrained into American culture, high rate of gun crime.
Correlation may not equal causation but focusing solely on guns hasn't worked in the past, why would it work now? The definition of insanity is the keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Letonatvia

Alvalero wrote:I agree that gun control needs to be tightened to a point where only weapons which fire one bullet per trigger action, have stock magazines(or max 10-15 rounds depending on the weapon/ammunition used), training in proper use and safety of the weapon and strict background checks are required(Not an expert in what is required in the US but I think these are reasonable). Another restriction could be to implement license renewals as we have in Ireland. A lot of gun owners/sellers will protest that it is already a hard process to purchase weapons and that automatic(class 3) weapons are out of reach of most civillians and even more difficult to obtain. The problem is not the availability of guns itself, it is the culture surrounding them.
Ireland for example have what I'd call reasonable laws and our gun culture is languishing at best. Small arms and sports hunting rifles compared with the US' love of the AR-15, a semi-auto rifle which can hold up to 100 rounds(mainly 20-30). We have a gun death rate of about 1 in 86500 per year based on the most recent data I could find (2009-2012) and it's decreassing and I'd stake that most are gang on gang related deaths, however illegal firearms are becoming more prominant. Of those caught with illegal firearms only 1 in 15 are charged in court(our judicial system is a joke a times).
TL:DR
Tighter gun control alone won't fix the problem, it's American culture that also needs to change.
Ireland - High level of gun control, guns not ingrained into our culture, very low gun crime.
US - Low-High level of gun control depending on who you ask, guns ingrained into American culture, high rate of gun crime.
Correlation may not equal causation but focusing solely on guns hasn't worked in the past, why would it work now? The definition of insanity is the keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result.

Agreed, but change in laws can also over time change the culture, which has been the case in many other instances.

Dragon empire u

What's up

Dragon empire u wrote:What's up

LOL

I am back.

Need some endorsements.

I am back y'all ^^....wait who are u all??

Xylogirl wrote:I am back y'all ^^....wait who are u all??

This is the region of Baldur.
When nations die, they come here (or to one of the other 2 respawn-regions).
You can still return to your original region, via the usual method.

Old fakeland wrote:This is the region of Baldur.
When nations die, they come here (or to one of the other 2 respawn-regions).
You can still return to your original region, via the usual method.

Yeah thankie

If anyone wants to know some of Balders monarchies dirty secrets, telegram me.

Annie ze lil fox

The Iron Rebel wrote:If anyone wants to know some of Balders monarchies dirty secrets, telegram me.

I want to know!

The Iron Rebel wrote:If anyone wants to know some of Balders monarchies dirty secrets, telegram me.

How dirty are we talking? If it's evidence of corruption, then I'd like to know, as it would be useful in regards to an earlier debate. If it's personal stuff, then I'll pass.

TIR is the true identity of Gossip Girl :P

Colorado oklahoma and kansas

Greetings to the denizens of Balder! The Holy Council is a new region looking for young nations that are interested in being part of growing a region that supports peace and prosperity. Check it out! Let us know if you have any questions.

Solorni wrote:TIR is the true identity of Gossip Girl :P

I have no idea what/who either of the things are

But seeing as you haven't banned The Iro... ah, I just got who TIR is. Seeing as you haven't deleted the post, I'm guessing that your "dirty secrets" aren't that bad, so now I want to know.

The wings of morelia

Solorni is actually a guy

Ah, so that means that Solorni is the Queen of Baldur in the musical sense?
And so the Prince of Baldur is also in the musical sense? Maybe it should be changed to "the artist formaly known as the prince of Baldur" (well, that's a bit of a mouthful, maybe shortening it to TAFKATPOB would be better).

The wings of morelia

New poll... will Balder choose Brexit?

Didn't we already have this poll, Freddie?

The wings of morelia

How's your stocks Sol?

back

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=381743#p29128979

Anyone want to join this party for NSG Senate?

Hello

The wings of morelia

Welcome back. How are things?

«12. . .1,0881,0891,0901,0911,0921,0931,094. . .2,5662,567»

Advertisement