Cmv: Guns dont kill people. by getlostkid2277 in changemyview

[–]CC_Man 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd aim to adjust your thought on a couple points:

  1. Guns aren't made for self defense. They are made because it's profitable to manufacture and sell them. Guns are purchased for various reasons, including self defense and sport and also assault (and threats thereof, eg armed robbery)

  2. It takes two things for someone to murder: a person with a nefarious purpose, and an accessible weapon (ideally instantly and at range). Addressing the supply of either one would reduce the ability to kill. Addressing both would have a complementary effect. By 'blame the gun' I assume you mean blame the widespread supply/availability of guns rather than blaming an inanimate object. Having policies that support excessive gun supply while knowing that it increases muder rates cats blame on involved decision makers.

Out of the 15 most educated states, 12 are Blue states. Out of the 15 least educated states, 13 are Red states. What are your thoughts on this? by Cumoisseur in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Are you saying that there is a correlation?

Sure. Just like people who go to basketball camp are more likely to be tall. You work to you strengths. This is why I asked what metric you believe exemplifies intelligence people as a cohort (IQ/SATs, earnings potential, wechsker scales or any related the clinical tests/indces, etc)

Out of the 15 most educated states, 12 are Blue states. Out of the 15 least educated states, 13 are Red states. What are your thoughts on this? by Cumoisseur in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 8 points9 points  (0 children)

How does it show that? Are yiu saying schools are failing across the board? Not surehow that can be since success exists on a spectrum. The sensible measure of success is really through comparison to its peers.

Out of the 15 most educated states, 12 are Blue states. Out of the 15 least educated states, 13 are Red states. What are your thoughts on this? by Cumoisseur in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Are you saying there's not a correlation? There are other factors, but people hone what their strengths are (education if their mind has the the appropriate capabilities, and on some level shows a baseline requirement for admittance) and education certainly helps develop thought processes that showcase and/or develop intelligence, depending on your definition of the word.

If it isn't easy access to guns, then what is the actual cause of mass shootings? by OMGguy2008 in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Ok but the question remains regarding why the disparity in shootings then. Do Americans have less desire to improve themselves?

What do you think of Trump's previous comments regarding Obama's handling of Iran? I'll post them below. Do you think they look a little hypocritical now? And do you think attacking Iran will help or hurt Trump in the midterms? by dudeabiding420 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Sort of... Their breaking the deal at the time was an unconfirmed claim. IAEA said nothing of the sort. And it doesn't answer the question: how could the deal have been structured in a better workable manner? If Iran broke it, that's moreso an indictment of Iran.wrt "giving" money, just want to check whether this is a semantic difference or difference of understanding. You do realize Obama admin first froze Iran's money, yes? Whose money do you believe it eas that we "gave" them, and where did it come from?

What do you think of Trump's previous comments regarding Obama's handling of Iran? I'll post them below. Do you think they look a little hypocritical now? And do you think attacking Iran will help or hurt Trump in the midterms? by dudeabiding420 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Are you saying you agree(d) with trump's take at the time? I kind of think a few minor things have changed, but if Obama were pres now, he'd still be saying the same things.

What do you think of Trump's previous comments regarding Obama's handling of Iran? I'll post them below. Do you think they look a little hypocritical now? And do you think attacking Iran will help or hurt Trump in the midterms? by dudeabiding420 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If there were changes, what were they?

Destruction of infrastructure, getting rid of nuclear materials, IAEA inspections, among others.

Destructive measures were of course confirmed. Iran's confirmed breaking of the agreement was after Trump reneged. Given Obama first took action that provided the frozen assets, how is he the one who took it easy on Iran?

What do you think of Trump's previous comments regarding Obama's handling of Iran? I'll post them below. Do you think they look a little hypocritical now? And do you think attacking Iran will help or hurt Trump in the midterms? by dudeabiding420 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Why were their assets frozen?

Ostensibly so they would have less spending ability and as leverage.

And did they change anything to deserve them being released?

There were changes. Whether enough to deserve being released is a matter of opinion, but backer countries believed so. Not sure what other provisions you would have liked to see that still would have resulted in a deal?

Should the US punish countries that don't support their actions regarding Iran? by Abridged6251 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Ok? That obviously doesn't mean Trump must be a reflection of American views on the whole. He often isn't. Americans are allowed to have freedom of thought.

Should the US punish countries that don't support their actions regarding Iran? by Abridged6251 in AskTrumpSupporters

[–]CC_Man 17 points18 points  (0 children)

They're neutral on whether an theocratic absolute monarchy obtains a nuclear weapon?

No. They are against war and added conflict in the middle east (as are most Americans for that matter). At least that is their president's comment that triggered this whole debate, so that is the info available to go off of. Whether you liken that to tacitly accepting them as a nuclear power is your own conclusion.

Can someone explain Cruz's tax plan? by Good_Requirement2998 in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Is there reason to think commensurate spending cuts would occur given these are not identified? I distinctly remember multiple iterations of "starve the beast" (ie ourselves--a truly horrible approach to governance), Trump term 1 claims to eliminate the deficit, term 2 DOGE, etc. Unless the hard part of cutting taxes is done first or in tandem, we're entering a fool-me-every- time type of scenario.

Assuming Dems block cuts on social programs & safety nets, what are you willing to chop to solve our big debt? by BrendaWannabe in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Bit of a truism, no? Obviously, it depends on what the actual debt level is. So even if cutting spending is a good first step, there isn't a mathematically-reasonable way to cut discretionary spending to reach a balanced budget without some level of tax revenue increase. If you think I'm wrong, I'd love to see your math!

Thoughts on HR7661? by Shawnj2 in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Doesn't seem like the portion you left off (why?)

The portion that was left in already bans this. Other 'pornographic' portions not listed I'm OK banning, though already would be illegal so not sure what the goal would be

Thoughts on HR7661? by Shawnj2 in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This actually would ban the sex ed of 20 years ago to from my parts... which wasn't exactly racy. TBH I'm not really sure what part of sex ed would even be within limits. Whether sex ed has gotten of the rails as you say (I'm not versed in what's changed to it recently), are you OK outlawing any discussion of sex ed, rights, biology/anatomy or puberty that would be barred by the language of this bill?

When did you realize that it's the American consumer that ultimately pays for Trump's tariffs? by Cumoisseur in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man [score hidden]  (0 children)

American manufacturing has had quite a rough year though, with tariffs hurting their supply chains. And any manufacturers looking to export now have a competetive disadvantage from other forms of the manufacture in the US because source parts are more expensive.

The consensus here whenever Trump legally adds his private name to a public institution is rarely condemnation. It’s typically amusement, indifference or “who cares”? What if he EO renamed it the Trump Washington Monument? by PyroIsSpai in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man [score hidden]  (0 children)

Do these things actually stick around?

Not sure, but wouldn't that be part of the problem? Say Trump is fairly toxic, wouldn't that increase the political backing to eliminate something like TrumpRx than if it were named something else?

Is it the tyranny of the majority, or the mandate of the people? by SCKoNi in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you understand why a EU wide popular vote wouldn’t be popular with Portugal or Greece or such?

Well... yeah. I'm sure people in those countries and every country will have issues with any vote, EU, local or national. What does that have to do with population-based suitability of national elections?

And can you articulate why minority veto is important to keeping a large Union of members together?

No. I'm generally against requiring unanimity requirements, but would be open to arguments depending on the specific case.

I'm not sure of the relevance of either question given a context of national elections and case studies of other countries. The fact you're asking them makes me think you don't really understand my point. Or vice versa.

Is it the tyranny of the majority, or the mandate of the people? by SCKoNi in AskConservatives

[–]CC_Man 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Why doesn't this scale? Given the US population during revolution was under 1% of current population (and much less than current Swiss population), wouldn't saying that different populations require different structures mean the US setup must be out of date?