Massive Casualty Response - Minnesota Church shooting

[Toggle Almendro]

but every year revenues go UP and spending goes up even more
we could bring in 10 Trillion in revenue and the Fed Govt would spend 11 trillion
you don't understand that ?

If the government spends 11 trillion, that should be the revenue.

 

[RF667799]

My proposal off your premise. Your premise is that gun and car purchasing "should" have the same requirements.

No, I just spoke of background checks- which currently apply to guns, not cars. You wanted to extend car regulations to guns.

Great. So in your state, no inspections for guns.

In four-fifths of the rest of the nation, inspections for guns.

I don't believe you.

Why? Vehicle registration, inspection (in four-fifths of the nation) and the test to operate a vehicle are certainly not a minimal cost. They are what the state determines they are.

For a state privilege. Not for exercising a Constitutional right.

Oh, that reminds me of something. Given the danger factor, gun operation must also have the restriction that the operator carries current gun insurance. This would be against similar things to cars. Damage, personal injury, injury to someone else's property, etc.

That seems reasonable for concealed carry. I think the cost is quite minimal, gun accidents being so rare.

Well, that's good!



Well, of course.

Unless you move to a state where they require that you take the test again. So for example, I had to take a test when I moved to California from New Jersey.

Otherwise, sure, you could conceivably take the test once in your entire lifetime of shooting your gun.



Great. So you're good to go.



Great.

 

[hecatmoggie]

If the government spends 11 trillion, that should be the revenue.

but then they'll spend $12 trillion

look back in the last 20 years - revenues have went up up and up and the Govt spending goes upper every year, what you are asking for isn't a reality and never will be the way our Fed Govt works

we could tax the working people 90% of their incomes ... and it wouldn't be enough

 

[JMB1911A1]

I wasn't reading when the portable shotgun conversation went down. Probably was busy with real life or something.

But the sense that I always got from comments talking about it, is that he was saying that shotguns are not portable compared to a handgun.

Although why he thinks that criminals will not saw the barrels off on their shotguns is a mystery.

And there is also the downside that shotguns (even sawed off) are massively more lethal than a handgun.

Gun control often makes crime much deadlier.

Oh, it was even better than that. He said that a “no guns” sign made it physically impossible to carry a shotgun.

 

[RF667799]

Oh, it was even better than that. He said that a “no guns” sign made it physically impossible to carry a shotgun.

He relied on equivocation to make that claim. He used two different definitions of "can". Can carry=able to carry, and can carry=have permission to carry. "Portable" is only relevant to the first.

On a side note, I recall when it wasn't considered proper English to use the second definition. Teachers would correct you if you asked, "Can I go to the restroom?"

 

[The Brad Dad]

but then they'll spend $12 trillion

look back in the last 20 years - revenues have went up up and up and the Govt spending goes upper every year, what you are asking for isn't a reality and never will be the way our Fed Govt works

we could tax the working people 90% of their incomes ... and it wouldn't be enough

Probably because Republicans keep transferring our wealth to the Jared Kushners of the world

 

[hecatmoggie]

Probably because Republicans keep transferring our wealth to the Jared Kushners of the world

compare Obama years, Trump 1.0, Biden years and right now Trump 2.0

who added more trillions to the national debt ?

we both know the answer - Democrat administrations did

now, has the Fed Govt brought in more revenues each year for the last 20 years ? yes, they have

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2008, the U.S. federal government collected approximately $2.7 trillion
In Fiscal Year 2024, U.S. federal government revenues totaled approximately $4.92 trillion


the facts don't lie - our Fed Govt will ALWAYS outspend the revenue - they have decades of doing it and no evidence they'll stop

 

[The Brad Dad]

compare Obama years, Trump 1.0, Biden years and right now Trump 2.0

who added more trillions to the national debt ?

we both know the answer - Democrat administrations did

now, has the Fed Govt brought in more revenues each year for the last 20 years ? yes, they have

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2008, the U.S. federal government collected approximately $2.7 trillion
In Fiscal Year 2024, U.S. federal government revenues totaled approximately $4.92 trillion


the facts don't lie - our Fed Govt will ALWAYS outspend the revenue - they have decades of doing it and no evidence they'll stop

The facts are the GOP spends more than Dems whenever they're in power. Trump's 2017 tax cut is a perfect illustration: the economy was fine, no need for a tax cut. But TAX CUTS. It was a disaster.

 

[hecatmoggie]

The facts are the GOP spends more than Dems whenever they're in power. Trump's 2017 tax cut is a perfect illustration: the economy was fine, no need for a tax cut. But TAX CUTS. It was a disaster.

show me, prove it

 

[The Brad Dad]

show me, prove it

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/67016/307052-The-Big-Spending-Presidents.PDF

On mandatory spending, Republicans have long been big spenders, enacting the Medicare drug entitlement under President Bush, large stimulus renewals under President Obama, and bloated farm bills under the past three presidents. In 2017, the GOP Senate voted down a push to trim back health-care costs, and the pandemic has led to trillions in new spending, mostly mandatory.

Large tax cuts in the first year of the Reagan, George W. Bush, and Trump administrations drove each GOP reversal on spending restraint. Even many deficit-fearing Republicans consider tax relief affordable on the assumption that they will also pare back the runaway spending that drives long-term deficits. Conveniently, the large spending cuts never come. In contrast to “starve the beast” — the idea that tax cuts worsen deficits and in turn lead to spending cuts — tax cuts have historically led to large spending increases because they shift lawmakers from a culture of deficit-reduction to one of spreading new benefits around. It would be political suicide for Congress to cut taxes and then turn around and claim that deficits require painful Medicare cuts. Instead, tax-cutting Republicans shift to buying votes with new spending.

Are Republicans Hypocrites on Deficits? Yes, but There Is More to the Story

The GOP’s emphasis on fiscal responsibility didn’t disappear during the Trump years. The election of Joe Biden is already renewing congressional Republicans’ commitment to addressing escalating deficits and debt. Senator Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) has pledged to use his (likely) role as chair of...

manhattan.institute

The list of examples of economic policies where Republican presidents

have traded places with Democrats over the last quarter century extends well

beyond the budget. Republicans are supposed to place more emphasis on fighting

inflation. But, in practice, Presidents Reagan and the first Bush pressured the Fed

to ease up on monetary policy – sufficiently so that Paul Volcker decided the

chairmanship was no longer worth having in 1987, according to Bob Woodward.

In contrast, Clinton deliberately and unprecedentedly let Alan Greenspan do his

job, without backseat driving.** Republicans are supposed to support small

government, but federal employment rose under Presidents Reagan and Bush, and

shrank under Clinton. Republican presidents have been big on free trade

rhetoric. But their actions have in fact been protectionist, judged not just by some

politics-free ideal, but as compared to the record of Clinton. Highlights include

George W. Bush’s tariffs on steel and lumber and Ronald Reagan’s voluntary

export restraints on autos. And the trend toward deregulation that most imagine

began in the Reagan Administration? It actually began in the Carter

Administration – in airlines, trucking, natural gas, and banking. Reagan at best

continued the trend.

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/frankel/files/repubdemoswitchmir-rss.pdf

 

[hecatmoggie]

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/67016/307052-The-Big-Spending-Presidents.PDF

Are Republicans Hypocrites on Deficits? Yes, but There Is More to the Story

The GOP’s emphasis on fiscal responsibility didn’t disappear during the Trump years. The election of Joe Biden is already renewing congressional Republicans’ commitment to addressing escalating deficits and debt. Senator Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) has pledged to use his (likely) role as chair of...

manhattan.institute

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/frankel/files/repubdemoswitchmir-rss.pdf

that's not the spending - that's percentages
what was the true spending - the dollars spent ?

are you scared to look and post those numbers? do you know what they are ?

 

[The Brad Dad]

that's not the spending - that's percentages
what was the true spending - the dollars spent ?

are you scared to look and post those numbers? do you know what they are ?

I just gave you 3 very thorough, researched links. And cited specific portions. If you are under the impression *you* get to validate whether or not your request has been met, try harder. I don't require your agreement that I just crushed your argument like the tiny little bug that it is.

 

[hecatmoggie]

I just gave you 3 very thorough, researched links. And cited specific portions. If you are under the impression *you* get to validate whether or not your request has been met, try harder. I don't require your agreement that I just crushed your argument like the tiny little bug that it is.

you want to show percentages of GDP

you don't want to show real spending, the real additions to the National Debt .... why ?

U.S. Debt by President: Dollar and Percentage

The national debt has increased under most U.S. presidents. Here is how much each president's time in office added to the U.S. debt by percentage and dollar amounts.

www.investopedia.com

$7,663,615,710,425.00

[th width="4em"]

Barack Obama​

[/th]​

$8,454,697,079,160.38

[th width="4em"]

Joe Biden​

[/th]​

that's what .... a little over $16 trillion ?

$7,804,591,681,202.28

[th width="4em"]

Donald Trump (first term)​

[/th]​

$1,207,189,695,334.34

[th width="4em"]

George H. W. Bush​

[/th]​

combined $9 trillion



which Party's administrations spend more? contribute more to national debt ?

 

[The Brad Dad]

which Party's administrations spend more? contribute more to national debt ?

As I demonstrated, the GOP. Better luck next time with your "trust me bro" argument

 

[hecatmoggie]

As I demonstrated, the GOP. Better luck next time with your "trust me bro" argument

you don't know how to add numbers - gotcha

Obama and Biden poured more debt onto our country than GW and Trump

fact

 

[dairyair]

More info here. $500 per year is not that much for a Class 3 SOT. There is no such thing as a Class 3 license.

SOT License Guide [2025] - Everything You Need to Know

An SOT License is required to make or sell NFA Firearms like suppressors, SBRs, and more. We cover everything about being a Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT)

rocketffl.com

Thx.
I only stated what another stated to me. I was told by another poster that walmart doesn't sell auto rifles because they don't get a class 3 license.
My only point being, it's more infringements to get/purchase an auto rifle over a semi auto rifle.

That is a fact.

 

[dairyair]

Have any of them? I'm not sure strict matters to a criminal. Murder law is pretty strict, and yet it still happens. Criminals are going to do the things they do. We have laws in place for those people, when we catch them.

You are talking about trying to regulate ( to law abiding citizens because criminals don't care about your regulations) an inanimate object for an action that the law abiding folks don't do.

Murder is illegal.
Robbery/Rape/Assault etc etc are all illegal.

Now, I do agree that we let violent criminals back into society entirely too easily. If you want to get harder on crime, we certainly can but be prepared for more cries of 'racism' when more POC are over-represented there, and we would need to build a lot more jails in order to house the criminals.

And yes violent crime has been dropping for a long while.

It worked to lessen drunk drivers, why wouldn't something work to lessen gun shootings of people?

Are you claiming there's nothing that can be done to lessen shooting of people? Just accept it?

Thoughts and prayers is the only option to shootings?

 

[dairyair]

Irrelevant.

Because Walmart isn’t a class 3 dealer.

lol, no

It goes away in January for everything but full autos. The NFA itself is having cases working through the courts currently. It will be struck down in the next 2 years.

Because there aren’t any, as you’ve been shown.

Not in the least irrelevant.
Auto weapons have more infringement to ownership. Period. You seem to be fine with the additional infringements.

 

[dairyair]

No, it doesn't mean that.


No, it doesn't mean that either.

You're really not doing well in this post.


aaaannnd you are still off in your supposed 'logic' here.


OK, there was a larger and more complete thought in that post, one which you've selectively cut off.
Not a fan of larger and more complete thoughts?


I was very specific which programs had credibility, specifically identifying one by name.
You don't like Fox News, you are biased against them, so you prattle on about a single case thinking that it makes your false binary choice argument.
Sorry to say, it doesn't.


So not a fan of things which aren't binary?
Who would have thought? </sarcasm>


Seems that you've got something to admit to yourself, to start withn.

I've done well enough that you can't dispute anything. You just ignored.

 

[Cope]

It worked to lessen drunk drivers, why wouldn't something work to lessen gun shootings of people?

Because we already have the law that is supposed to curtail the violent crime , and it's working. Violent crime, murder especially has declined since the 70's.

Are you claiming there's nothing that can be done to lessen shooting of people? Just accept it?

I'm saying you are uninterested in examining the actual causes for why people get shot, and what can be done about it beyond 'them evil guns'

Thoughts and prayers is the only option to shootings?

I much prefer the shoot back model is self defense. But beyond that, yes, there are things to be done and many are discussed in threads just like this one where the gun grabbers make fun of, or skip gleefully past those arguments because they aren't interested.

Better mental health, both identification, and treatment (not ignorance and appeasement)
Tougher/better (maybe FIRMER is a better word) on HOLDING violent criminals in prison, because a whole lot of them just get out and continue the violent lifestyle. You don't like addressing this one because it results in an even more disproportionate black population in prison.

 

[eohrnberger]

I've done well enough that you can't dispute anything. You just ignored.

Sure, run away if you must.

 

[dairyair]

Because we already have the law that is supposed to curtail the violent crime , and it's working. Violent crime, murder especially has declined since the 70's.

I'm saying you are uninterested in examining the actual causes for why people get shot, and what can be done about it beyond 'them evil guns'

I much prefer the shoot back model is self defense. But beyond that, yes, there are things to be done and many are discussed in threads just like this one where the gun grabbers make fun of, or skip gleefully past those arguments because they aren't interested.

Better mental health, both identification, and treatment (not ignorance and appeasement)
Tougher/better (maybe FIRMER is a better word) on HOLDING violent criminals in prison, because a whole lot of them just get out and continue the violent lifestyle. You don't like addressing this one because it results in an even more disproportionate black population in prison.

Are we at the level that is acceptable to society?
Kids go to school and risk being killed. We should fund schools security to the levels of airports if we can't reduce gun shootings.

Why are you saying that? I have stated many times mental health issues is something we need to get a handle on. So, what you think is wrong

Kids don't take guns to school for good reasons. They can't shoot back.
Why do you think I don't want to address holding violent lifestyles. You certainly make a lot of wrong assumptions.

Blacks have been disproportionately imprisoned in the past. Many times excessive sentences for drug possessions.
Lack of education, lack of job opportunities, lack of funding has also contributed for excessive black imprisonments. Redlining, Jim Crowe laws, etc have put the black population at a large disadvantage. But this is a whole other topic.

Do you want to punish black people for simply being black? Are you really interested in dealing with the reasons blacks are disproportionately imprisoned?
I could play your game and just say you prefer black people get prison. But I won't.
But you did play the race card. Didn't you.

 

[dairyair]

Sure, run away if you must.

Not much to run away from.
All you do is ignore and blame LW media for the same things RW media does.

 

[dairyair]

you don't know how to add numbers - gotcha

Obama and Biden poured more debt onto our country than GW and Trump

fact

Fact according to what?

The best way to measure a president's debt is to add up their budget deficits and compare that total to the debt level when they took office. A president's budget reveals their administration's priorities.

Note​

Though they sound similar, deficit and debt are two different things. A deficit is a budget shortfall, whereas debt is the running total of all deficits and surpluses. Deficits add to the debt, while surpluses reduce it.

President Roosevelt added the largest percentage increase to the national debt. Although he only added $236 billion, this was an increase of about 1,048% from the $22.5 billion debt level left by President Herbert Hoover before him. The Great Depression and the New Deal contributed to FDR's yearly deficits, but the biggest cost was World War II—it added $186.3 billion to the debt between 1942 and 1945.2

President Wilson was the second-largest contributor to the debt, percentage-wise. He added about $21 billion, which was a 723% increase over the $2.9 billion debt of his predecessor. World War I contributed to the deficits that raised the national debt.2

President Reagan increased the debt by $1.86 trillion, or by 186%. Reagan's supply-side economics didn't grow the economy enough to offset the lost revenue from its tax cuts. Reagan also increased the defense budget by 35%.2


President Bush added $5.85 trillion to the national debt. That's a 101% increase, putting him in fourth. Bush launched the War on Terror in response to the 9/11 attacks, which led to multi-trillion-dollar spending on the War in Afghanistan and the War in Iraq. Bush also dealt with the 2001 recession and the 2008 financial crisis.2


Under President Obama, the national debt grew the most in dollar terms ($8.6 trillion) and was fifth by percentage at 74%. Obama fought the Great Recession with an $831 billion economic stimulus package and added $858 billion through tax cuts. Even though the fiscal year 2009 budget was set by President Bush, Obama added to it with the Economic Stimulus Act in 2009.23

U.S. National Debt by President

Check out how the national debt has increased by year and president. Depending on how you measure it, the answers may differ.

www.thebalancemoney.com

 

[hecatmoggie]

Fact according to what?

U.S. National Debt by President

Check out how the national debt has increased by year and president. Depending on how you measure it, the answers may differ.

www.thebalancemoney.com

$7,663,615,710,425.00

Barack Obama​

$8,454,697,079,160.38

Joe Biden​

that's what .... a little over $16 trillion ?

$7,804,591,681,202.28

Donald Trump (first term)

$1,207,189,695,334.34

George H. W. Bush

combined $9 trillion



FACTS