America is a crazy place with more guns than people and killing becomes mundane, often barely making the news due to its frequency. Mass shootings are less common and so are the stand outs, but even they are becoming all too regular and unhinged types are inclined to repeat what they see is the new norm. With that in mind, and 400 million guns on the streets, it doesn't bode well.

I think trump is better positioned that almost any past President to possibly remove some of the assault rifle type guns from US streets, because he's not seen as having an adversarial relationship with gun owners. I wouldn't say any action would be a popular move as such, but there might be a little wiggle room to do something.

Yes, I do think we may enter a time where the stars align so to speak. Nature has a way of reclaiming and humbling and it may be that having this take, or that take all becomes an irrelevance due to pressing realities that supersede all of that in the moment.

I think the pace and urgency of environmental issues may surprise, and so it could be something we find ourselves in the middle of before we've made many and indeed any preparations.. so somewhat along the lines that you're said. Then we'll find ourselves in a new reality and will be bringing up generations with likely far more essential concerns.

It's a fallacy that capitalism requires weakened nation states in fact and globalism is ultimately antithetical to capitalism - it's just a shortcut to profit by moving work to cheaper locations or importing cheap labor. Globalism is just a short term fix - a resource race to the bottom.

Trump has a way to go (particularly with the national debt) but is starting to prove this. Globalism has actually hurt the US in the long term e.g. losing manufacturing jobs whilst having the huge hidden cost of immigration.

Where did I say, in this mini thread, that people "were twisting the truth"? They do, but it's not what I said. My comment was about the difference between addressing the post and not the poster. In simple terms, just for you, that you pay attention to the message and not the messenger.

I suspect I both get up earlier and go to bed later than most people. That's what having guests and an active dog who needs regular exercise does for you.

Alongside the several miles I walk with the dog every day I also play bowls, often more than game each day. As a game generally lasts 3 hours and involves a lot of walking I am pretty fit. Not just my fingers! It's just as well I can both think and type quickly or there wouldn't be time to fit it all in. Now, where's the lead!

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

More than 4 dead in a single episode is a mass shooting.
Irrelevant if its gangs or not.

I realise the "official" definition is that but........

If you define it that way you produce a distortion of the causes of the events which hit the headlines and are of the most concern to the majority of people.

It's the large scale events which attract the attention. Ones where automatic weapons are used in schools, churches, malls or nightclubs to mow people down indiscriminately.

Smaller events involving inter gang rivalries and domestic violence, whilst of great concern, cannot be considered in the same category. They have different causes and are committed by different people.

So we need to separate them to try to produce any meaningful solutions.

Large scale mass shootings in the USA are committed almost exclusively by white men.

By the way you will recall what Mark Twain said about "Lies, damn lies and statistics".

It seems quite appropriate given another comment!

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (08 Aug 2019 6.05pm)

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.