• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is suggesting policy to address tragedy directly after tragedies happen inappropriate?

?

  • Total voters
    41
Winston

Winston

Give me convenience or give me death
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
24,693
Reaction score
24,052
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.
 
Yes. Knee-jerk reaction to serious situation is usually a bad idea ("inappropriate")

There is a natural human instinct to react hastily to a threat or danger. In the jungle, this is essential to survival.

However in Law, we must take a deep breath and use critical thinking to determine the best course of action on important matters.
 
Credence said:
I also voted no. When exactly is a good time? We have been talking about this since Sandy Hook in 2012

The GOP has put the NRA above the lives of our children :mad:
Click to expand...

Waiting for the GOP to discover the talking point that Biden was both in office for Sandy Hook and Uvalde and failed to stop either
 
You can bet that in 1 or 2 days, they'll be some story that will try to side-step what happened in Texas.
Kinda' like, "Oh look over there..something shiny!"
 
Winston said:
Waiting for the GOP to discover the talking point that Biden was both in office for Sandy Hook and Uvalde and failed to stop either
Click to expand...
Ypu are kidding right? The Dems led by the CT Rep Chris Murphy as well as Obama tried to get common sense gun laws passed but the GOP blocked every single bill and continues to do so

There was also an activist group led by the Sandy Hook parents who actually took their case to Congress ............ Just the facts .
 
Winston said:
How and why?
Click to expand...

Timing it while it's all fresh is an appeal to emotion.

It's not illegitimate, but you're going to get a lot of unreasonable emotional demands mixed in with your more realistic policy talk.
 
Winston said:
Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.
Click to expand...
As long as you're not trying to blame the other side for it I have no problem discussing solutions.
 
SkyChief said:
Yes. Knee-jerk reaction to serious situation is usually a bad idea ("inappropriate")

There is a natural human instinct to react hastily to a threat or danger. In the jungle, this is essential to survival.

However in Law, we must take a deep breath and use critical thinking to determine the best course of action on important matters.
Click to expand...
tell us you didn't read the question without telling us you didn't read the question LMAO
nobody said anything about kneejerk so your made up strawman is useless to the actual question
 
Winston said:
Well..?

My thoughts are no. Absolutely not.

Should we wait 6-8 weeks after hurricanes to think about weather proofing cities?

No.
Click to expand...

in general NO, of course not
 
WillyPete said:
Timing it while it's all fresh is an appeal to emotion.

It's not illegitimate, but you're going to get a lot of unreasonable emotional demands mixed in with your more realistic policy talk.
Click to expand...

It could be depending on the content of the argument.

I think calmly searching for solutions in times of crisis is actually the most emotionally mature thing to do.
 
It depends. If its policy about mental health or the set up of school doors, its fine. If its about guns, its a non-no.
 
Overitall said:
As long as you're not trying to blame the other side for it I have no problem discussing solutions.
Click to expand...
What if the other side is to blame?

For example, if a resident of California thinks taxes are too high, then one side is definitely more to blame for that than the other.
 
ALiberalModerate said:
What if the other side is to blame?

For example, if a resident of California thinks taxes are too high, then one side is definitely more to blame for that than the other.
Click to expand...
Then have that conversation. Is there a specific bill under consideration that would have stopped this incident? If there is then let’s start with that and build from it.
 
ALiberalModerate said:
What if the other side is to blame?
Click to expand...
There's plenty of time and opportunity to attack the other side for what happened to these children. If you're doing it before they are laid to rest I'll call that what it is -- some ****ing insensitive bullshit!
ALiberalModerate said:
For example, if a resident of California thinks taxes are too high, then one side is definitely more to blame for that than the other.
Click to expand...
 
Columbine was 23 years ago and Charles Whitman was 46 years ago………… 1653584623251.jpeg
 
Suggesting stupid, ineffective, agenda driven policy that has nothing to do with the tragedy is always wrong.
 
VanceMack said:
Suggesting stupid, ineffective, agenda driven policy that has nothing to do with the tragedy is always wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I'm still waiting for my trickle down prosperity. Guess it's gonna kick in any minute now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom