The Wages of Divisive Political Rhetoric

 

Joe Biden continues to vituperate Republicans.  Republicans are the most extreme party in American History according to “centrist” Biden, who claims to be intent on healing the nation. Of course this categorization of Republicans is calumny. Biden’s statements in reaction to the Uvalde shooting are about as vile politically as it is possible to be. Vintage Biden.

In the aftermath of the Uvalde shooting, even Charles C.W Cooke, a great defender of the Second Amendment, is willing to countenance “red flag” laws that allow police and the FBI to investigate (briefly and with many safeguards to avoid the violation of civil liberties, of course) those whose behavior or on-line postings suggest that they may be prone to violent behavior.

It seems to me that, in the setting of the FBI targeting parents who disagree with the indoctrination of their children in LBGTQ+ ideology, and repeated claims that “white supremacists” (apparently all Republicans) are the greatest existential threat to the nation, and with all of the evidence coming out in the Sussman trial that the FBI is a dirty tricks wing of the Democrat Party, it would be foolhardy for Republicans in Congress to give the time of day to Democrats who are so stridently vicious in their rhetorical attacks on Conservatives. Who in their right mind would ever believe that any Democrat politician, or the FBI, or law enforcement in blue states, and elsewhere, could ever be trusted to apply such “red flag” provisions appropriately and even-handedly. Such red flag laws would simply be another method of attacking, silencing, side-lining, canceling, arresting, depriving of livelihood, anyone the Left doesn’t like. That includes, but is not limited to,  pretty much everyone that is not them.

Given that the Biden Administration and Congress are, according to what they say, hostile to the existence and civil liberties of all of us conservatives, why would we ever want to give the Federal government more power to abuse us?

But it looks like McConnell may be inclined to do exactly that.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 32 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Quite simply, is being a domestic terrorist sufficient to bar one from getting guns or ammunition?

    Secondly, the CDC says that guns are a public health issue.  Epidemic, I believe.  Do they have the ability to shape gun laws by executive decree?

    If I’m in prolonged close contact with someone who owns a gun, will I become a carrier?

    • #1
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    If I’m in prolonged close contact with someone who owns a gun, will I become a carrier?

    Maybe owning a gun is just a symptom, but you’re at risk of contracting conservatism, which could lead to symptoms such as owning a gun, or voting “wrong.”

    • #2
  3. Retail Lawyer Member
    Retail Lawyer
    @RetailLawyer

    When do you need a gun?

    Old:       When seconds matter and the police are minutes away. 

    Newer:    When seconds matter and the police have been defunded.

    Newest:   When seconds matter and the police are minutes away but hang around upon arrival contemplating their options for 40 minutes before acting.

     

    • #3
  4. MarciN Member
    MarciN
    @MarciN

    Nanocelt TheContrarian: Who in their right mind would ever believe that any Democrat politician, or the FBI, or law enforcement in Blue States, and elsewhere, could ever be trusted to apply such “red flag” provisions appropriately and even-handedly. Such red flag laws would simply be another method of attacking, silencing, side-lining, cancelling, arresting, depriving of livelihood, anyone the Left doesn’t like. That includes, but is not limited to,  pretty much everyone that is not them.

    This is the truth of the matter. I wish this well-worded paragraph could be adopted by the Republican Party and widely published. It’s a hard concept to articulate, and this accomplishes that.

     

    • #4
  5. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    So they think a person with anger issues doesn’t have at least one gun the government doesn’t know about?

    • #5
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Nanocelt TheContrarian: In the aftermath of the Uvalde shooting, even Charles C.W Cooke, a great defender of the Second Amendment, is willing to countenance “red flag” laws that allow police and the FBI to investigate (briefly and with many safeguards to avoid the violation of civil liberties, of course) those whose behavior or on-line postings suggest that they may be prone to violent behavior.

    Not such a great defender, then.

    I mean, given what we know about FBI malfeasance, who would trust them to be fair? I trust them to be the Democrats’ personal police force. I trust them to ignore actual domestic terrorists in order to abuse law-abiding citizens. I trust them to plot crimes against our government and then frame the innocent.

    I trust them to be untrustworthy.

    The politician who vows to disband them will have my vote. 

    • #6
  7. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):
    Newest:   When seconds matter and the police are minutes away but hang around upon arrival contemplating their options for 40 minutes before acting.

    The greatest reason of all, particularly when you realize they can hear the sound of bullets flying into the bodies of little children as they stand around waiting for someone to tell them what to do. It’s easy to see why those parents outside the school were so hysterical: they knew exactly what needed to be done.

    • #7
  8. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    It seems pretty clear that people are already being red-flagged for things as simple as speaking up at a school board meeting, in disagreement over the curricula.

    Since the FBI is spending its critical resource time on non-threatening activities, the argument can pretty easily be made that had the FBI been doing its primary job, instead of letting itself be managed by politicians looking to buy (or even suppress) votes, maybe there would be fewer children dead today.

    Big maybe.  But it’s pretty clear what their priorities are, based on their actions.  The rest is just talk.  

    • #8
  9. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    • #9
  10. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    Why is today’s society any different than all past generations? That is what must be addressed. Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    • #10
  11. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    Why is today’s society any different than all past generations? That is what must be addressed. Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    Okay. Address family breakdown, changing moral atmosphere, anomie, hatred, bigotry, mental illness, and acceptance of evil. Get back to me when you’ve done all this and we can see what effect it has.

    In the meantime, how can we lower the number of these horrifying events? Could red-flag laws be abused? Sure. That’s why I said “carefully crafted.” There should be due process steps in there, for sure. 

    Do what you can or worse will be imposed on you. Telling families to just suck it up when they send their precious children to school is not going to fly. Remember, politics is the art of the possible. 

    • #11
  12. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    You fundamentally misunderstand the whole purpose of this country, and the danger we are all in. 

    • #12
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Suspira (View Comment):
    In the meantime, how can we lower the number of these horrifying events? Could red-flag laws be abused? Sure. That’s why I said “carefully crafted.” There should be due process steps in there, for sure. 

    “Due process” still doesn’t mean peoples’ rights are protected, because “due process” is pretty much the same as “whatever the Democrats in control of cities or states decide it is.”

    • #13
  14. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Suspira (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    Why is today’s society any different than all past generations? That is what must be addressed. Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    Okay. Address family breakdown, changing moral atmosphere, anomie, hatred, bigotry, mental illness, and acceptance of evil. Get back to me when you’ve done all this and we can see what effect it has.

    In the meantime, how can we lower the number of these horrifying events? Could red-flag laws be abused? Sure. That’s why I said “carefully crafted.” There should be due process steps in there, for sure.

    Do what you can or worse will be imposed on you. Telling families to just suck it up when they send their precious children to school is not going to fly. Remember, politics is the art of the possible.

    I agree all in you first paragraph are causes. There is little expectation that those problems can be fixed. That is why gun sales keep setting records. Some people will defend themselves.

    Red flag laws won’t be a net benefit. The goal of the left is to follow the slippery slope until all guns are banned. We don’t need another bill where we have to pass it to see what is in it. Non violent gun owners will avoid seeking mental illness or aging assistance out of fear they will be flagged. Criminals bypass the system for legal purchases . Obama era guidance discourages flagging troubled kids,

    The gun banners are the ones telling us to suck it up. They oppose allowing teachers with concealed carry licenses to carry. Social justice warriors oppose flagging and disciplining troubled black kids. Then there is the guidance I mentioned above that allowed the parkland shooter to avoid a criminal record so he could buy a gun.

    • #14
  15. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    Why is today’s society any different than all past generations? That is what must be addressed. Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    Exactly. When I was growing up, it was not unusual for kids to bring rifles to school if they’d been out hunting in the morning or were headed out hunting after school. Or they were cleaning and caring for them in shop class. Heck, our school had a gun safety course, so there were obviously guns on the premises.

    What changed?

    It wasn’t the guns. There were arguably more of them in the hands of kids back then. What changed was the culture. Want to stop mass shootings? Fix the culture. Stop telling young men that they’re responsible for all the ills of the world. Give them dignity and purpose again. Give them fathers.

    • #15
  16. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Suspira (View Comment):

    Do what you can or worse will be imposed on you.

    We’re talking about politicians here.

    “Worse” is the minimal that they’d impose.

    • #16
  17. Nanocelt TheContrarian Member
    Nanocelt TheContrarian
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    Suspira (View Comment):

    A carefully crafted red flag law is a necessity in today’s society. To categorically oppose such measures is to invite much more onerous ones.

    You make sense. Charles makes sense. In a reasonable world, such a thing could work. Unfortunately, at least in my pessimistic view, the rhetoric of Democrats, coupled with their behavior, make such a law a guarantee of political suppression and oppression of law abiding citizens who are of different opinions. My hunch is that even China would be less draconian in enforcing such a law for political oppression as the Democrats would likely  be. 

    • #17
  18. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    And to make laws.  If they didn’t make new laws they’d be out of a job.

    • #18
  19. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Suspira (View Comment):
    In the meantime, how can we lower the number of these horrifying events? Could red-flag laws be abused? Sure. That’s why I said “carefully crafted.” There should be due process steps in there, for sure. 

    There are ways of hardening schools, it’s just that many school districts either think it will never happen to them, or they just refuse to deal with the substance of preventative protection.

    But as for red flag laws, we are already a lawless society.  Joe Beiden already said: I’m going to order this unconstitutional edict (iirc, it was vaccine related) and let it be over ruled by the courts, but in the meantime we’ll still be doing it.

    We’ve already seen well-intended red flag laws used, or interpreted, unreasonably or outside their untended purposes.

    We already have laws upon laws to deal with disturbed people, and disturbed people who own guns and who may want to own guns.  We already have, “See something, hear something, say something” programs.  We don’t need any more laws.

    • #19
  20. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Exactly. When I was growing up, it was not unusual for kids to bring rifles to school if they’d been out hunting in the morning or were headed out hunting after school. Or they were cleaning and caring for them in shop class. Heck, our school had a gun safety course, so there were obviously guns on the premises.

    What changed?

    It wasn’t the guns. There were arguably more of them in the hands of kids back then. What changed was the culture. Want to stop mass shootings? Fix the culture. Stop telling young men that they’re responsible for all the ills of the world. Give them dignity and purpose again. Give them fathers.

    Yes.  There is so much we can do.

    We can stop kids from hunting before school,
    stop kids from bringing their rifles to school,
    stop kids from learning about guns and being competent and confident with guns,
    stop kids from possessing guns,
    stop kids from owning guns, and
    stop adults from owning guns.

    Slippery slopes exist, especially when the Left plays to role of gravity.

    • #20
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Exactly. When I was growing up, it was not unusual for kids to bring rifles to school if they’d been out hunting in the morning or were headed out hunting after school. Or they were cleaning and caring for them in shop class. Heck, our school had a gun safety course, so there were obviously guns on the premises.

    What changed?

    It wasn’t the guns. There were arguably more of them in the hands of kids back then. What changed was the culture. Want to stop mass shootings? Fix the culture. Stop telling young men that they’re responsible for all the ills of the world. Give them dignity and purpose again. Give them fathers.

    Yes. There is so much we can do.

    We can stop kids from hunting before school,
    stop kids from bringing their rifles to school,
    stop kids from learning about guns and being competent and confident with guns,
    stop kids from possessing guns,
    stop kids from owning guns, and
    stop adults from owning guns.

    Slippery slopes exist, especially when the Left plays to role of gravity.

    Or gravity can still be independent and even non-malevolent, when the Left is the one who pushes.

    • #21
  22. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    And to make laws. If they didn’t make new laws they’d be out of a job.

    Seems to me they could make fine, long careers rescinding laws and regulations. How many volumes does the Federal Register run to these days? 

    • #22
  23. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Suspira (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    And to make laws. If they didn’t make new laws they’d be out of a job.

    Seems to me they could make fine, long careers rescinding laws and regulations. How many volumes does the Federal Register run to these days?

    So where is it?  Your fantastical notions of what could be are not grounded in any reality that confronts us.

    • #23
  24. Suspira Member
    Suspira
    @Suspira

    BDB (View Comment):

    Suspira (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    And to make laws. If they didn’t make new laws they’d be out of a job.

    Seems to me they could make fine, long careers rescinding laws and regulations. How many volumes does the Federal Register run to these days?

    So where is it? Your fantastical notions of what could be are not grounded in any reality that confronts us.

    You seem to have forgotten your manners.

    • #24
  25. BDB Coolidge
    BDB
    @BDB

    Suspira (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Suspira (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Politicians suffer from a sickness, too, the desire to control us.

    And to make laws. If they didn’t make new laws they’d be out of a job.

    Seems to me they could make fine, long careers rescinding laws and regulations. How many volumes does the Federal Register run to these days?

    So where is it? Your fantastical notions of what could be are not grounded in any reality that confronts us.

    You seem to have forgotten your manners.

    You seem not to have a point.

    • #25
  26. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Exactly. When I was growing up, it was not unusual for kids to bring rifles to school if they’d been out hunting in the morning or were headed out hunting after school. Or they were cleaning and caring for them in shop class. Heck, our school had a gun safety course, so there were obviously guns on the premises.

    What changed?

    It wasn’t the guns. There were arguably more of them in the hands of kids back then. What changed was the culture. Want to stop mass shootings? Fix the culture. Stop telling young men that they’re responsible for all the ills of the world. Give them dignity and purpose again. Give them fathers.

    Yes. There is so much we can do.

    We can stop kids from hunting before school,
    stop kids from bringing their rifles to school,
    stop kids from learning about guns and being competent and confident with guns,
    stop kids from possessing guns,
    stop kids from owning guns, and
    stop adults from owning guns.

    Slippery slopes exist, especially when the Left plays to role of gravity.

    Or gravity can still be independent and even non-malevolent, when the Left is the one who pushes.

    The Left is the downward force.

    • #26
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic … (View Comment):

    Exactly. When I was growing up, it was not unusual for kids to bring rifles to school if they’d been out hunting in the morning or were headed out hunting after school. Or they were cleaning and caring for them in shop class. Heck, our school had a gun safety course, so there were obviously guns on the premises.

    What changed?

    It wasn’t the guns. There were arguably more of them in the hands of kids back then. What changed was the culture. Want to stop mass shootings? Fix the culture. Stop telling young men that they’re responsible for all the ills of the world. Give them dignity and purpose again. Give them fathers.

    Yes. There is so much we can do.

    We can stop kids from hunting before school,
    stop kids from bringing their rifles to school,
    stop kids from learning about guns and being competent and confident with guns,
    stop kids from possessing guns,
    stop kids from owning guns, and
    stop adults from owning guns.

    Slippery slopes exist, especially when the Left plays to role of gravity.

    Or gravity can still be independent and even non-malevolent, when the Left is the one who pushes.

    The Left is the downward force.

    Oh, right!  There is no gravity!  The Left suck!

    • #27
  28. Joker Member
    Joker
    @Joker

    What measure could have identified the school shooter?

    It looks like on average about 7 kids per year die at the hands of school shooters. Obviously one is way too many. There are fewer than 7 shooters per year, probably fewer than 2 on average. But there are 330 million people in this country, conservatively 75% of them either own a gun or could pass the background check. 

    So whatever is proposed should have some rational chance of finding that one psycho who’s about to go off out of almost 250 million people, each year. If we’re going to limit the number to white males between the ages of say, 16  and 30, its still a pretty big number. Practically all members of that cohort will tend to say and do things that are crazy according to the rest of us, it’s testosterone and youth. 

    So aside from near constant mental evaluation of millions of young men, what law could have prevented the school shooter? (I know dead cats in the bag, I understand it’s treated as a mental health issue would be shielded from the background check by HIPAA. Same for guys who take prescription drugs that can affect personality characteristics.) 

    Sad to say, but unless there are reported brushes with the law, the background check won’t reveal potential psychos. Whatever red flag gets passed will have to be very intrusive and very unlikely to work.

    • #28
  29. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Joker (View Comment):

    What measure could have identified the school shooter?

    It looks like on average about 7 kids per year die at the hands of school shooters. Obviously one is way too many. There are fewer than 7 shooters per year, probably fewer than 2 on average. But there are 330 million people in this country, conservatively 75% of them either own a gun or could pass the background check.

    So whatever is proposed should have some rational chance of finding that one psycho who’s about to go off out of almost 250 million people, each year. If we’re going to limit the number to white males between the ages of say, 16 and 30, its still a pretty big number. Practically all members of that cohort will tend to say and do things that are crazy according to the rest of us, it’s testosterone and youth.

    So aside from near constant mental evaluation of millions of young men, what law could have prevented the school shooter? (I know dead cats in the bag, I understand it’s treated as a mental health issue would be shielded from the background check by HIPAA. Same for guys who take prescription drugs that can affect personality characteristics.)

    Sad to say, but unless there are reported brushes with the law, the background check won’t reveal potential psychos. Whatever red flag gets passed will have to be very intrusive and very unlikely to work.

    What might have worked, regardless of all the mistakes and wrong decisions that were made with unlocked doors, and locked doors, and parents wanting to go in, is if the teachers were armed, it could have ended quickly.  Even if the first teacher was shot the one in the adjoining room could have had time to prepare.

    I’m not saying that this would have been guaranteed, but it is possible, and not nearly as sketchy as scouring the internet looking for psychological profiles, or waiting for happenstance acquaintances to inform on someone, or training a volunteer citizen guard group to watch the parking lot and the doors (not that there’s anything wrong with that).

    Once a killer is in the room, or the hallway, arming willing teachers to shoot rampaging killers gives those in danger the last, and perhaps best, chance of survival.

    • #29
  30. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Joker (View Comment):

    What measure could have identified the school shooter?

    It looks like on average about 7 kids per year die at the hands of school shooters. Obviously one is way too many. There are fewer than 7 shooters per year, probably fewer than 2 on average. But there are 330 million people in this country, conservatively 75% of them either own a gun or could pass the background check.

    So whatever is proposed should have some rational chance of finding that one psycho who’s about to go off out of almost 250 million people, each year. If we’re going to limit the number to white males between the ages of say, 16 and 30, its still a pretty big number. Practically all members of that cohort will tend to say and do things that are crazy according to the rest of us, it’s testosterone and youth.

    So aside from near constant mental evaluation of millions of young men, what law could have prevented the school shooter? (I know dead cats in the bag, I understand it’s treated as a mental health issue would be shielded from the background check by HIPAA. Same for guys who take prescription drugs that can affect personality characteristics.)

    Sad to say, but unless there are reported brushes with the law, the background check won’t reveal potential psychos. Whatever red flag gets passed will have to be very intrusive and very unlikely to work.

    Reported brushes with the law before 18 are likely invisible too.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.