if you are not actively fostering consensus on practical solutions to our problems, you're just adding to the noise. let's meet in The Big Middle, where most Americans are, and agree on what we're prepared to do together to "keep our Republic"
I've worked on gun control for 20 years or longer. Here is what I think should be done. Something that would satisfy the 2nd amendment folks.
Americans should be able to own all the guns they want. As long as they keep them in the home.
Want to spend 1000s on guns? Go to for it. Want to defend your family? Go for it (even though most gun deaths are suicides by folks with guns in the home).
You got it, Shaun. When I was a kid I hunted with my grandad. Unlock gun from cabinet, put trunk, ammo in back seat, load in the woods, unload outta the woods, back in trunk & back seat, home to locked cabinet, then a burger or ice cream cone. Always thought it was the law.
When they do catch this guy - and I hope they do- I suspect his story will not comply with many narratives already flying about. In particular, he appears to have been an expert marksman, which is not generally in the Leftie skill set. The Republicans, of course, will put forward the most irresponsible narratives they can dream up, but the responsible thing is (was?) to hang tight until we know more.
Charlie Kirk did not debate. He answered people in zingy one liners and then had someone take away the mic. The things he said were mean. He used his enormous talent to appeal to the worst in people. To defeat him would have been to ignore him; unfortunately for all of us he has been martyred instead. It almost makes me think that the Administration arranged it. Then I catch myself to keep from becoming a conspiracy nut.
Joe, a very good piece. The only thing I could add is it should be illegal to carry a gun, any gun, in public. Period. From the gun store to the car, from car to home, practice site or hunting venue is OK. But that's it. Other countries have large gun ownership but strict restrictions on carrying. And tiny firearm issues. We must work hard to push our rampant firearm problem to zero while still honoring the 2nd amendment, leaving the only way to solve disputes being debate and consensus.
I don't want to go deep here, but a major problem in dialogue at the moment is the treatment of Trump as evil incarnate, which he is not, instead of an obnoxiously bad President, which he is. The result is a kind of skewed categorical imperative, in which any tactic that is in opposition to Trump is justified. Few if any of responsible critics believe in lethal force, but the excessive rhetoric they constantly use provides the rationale for the crazies. Something of the same of course can be said for the worst of right-wing critics, but they seem to me less numerous and - more important - less respectable.
I start with Joe's cited commentators, Ingraham and Maddow. Perhaps they spout what they believe, but let's not forget that they make a very handsome living from their spouting. If they were to "moderate" their pitch -- admitting "our" team is sometimes wrong and the "other" team is sometimes right -- that very handsome living disappears in a flash.
As for the army of social media flamethrowers; Arthur Miller would get it. I may be a nobody and know-nothing but attention IS being paid. I have followers! If I stop shrieking at the top of my lungs I'll lose them and shrink back into anonymity.
At 84 I do not pretend to have any solutions to offer. I keep thing about Jake Holman's line at the end of The Sand Pebbles: What the hell happened!
Despite his deplorable views, Charlie did the nation a great favor by shining a light on the intolerance of the Left and especially the elite university administrations that were allowing belligerent students to shut down speech on campuses. And, yes, I met him once and he loved a good debate, would have loved to have had a few hours with man; Joe, you would have been in hog heaven.
Charlie’s legacy should be about free speech which is why the first real crime in the wake of his death was committed by MSNBC (shocked, SHOCKED!). They had Matt Dowd on this morning, he said something a little edgy about the trend toward political violence - and they announced an hour later that they were letting him go. Apparently, he failed to hit QUITE the right note of hand wringing that was the order of the day. Which actually is precisely the intolerance of viewpoints that Charlie’s life was all about.
We can save Trump’s predictably stomach- turning response for another day.
What Dowd said first was speculation about how one of his supporters might have killed Kirk by accident. Then he went on stepping all over his Johnson by talking about how "hateful thoughts lead to hateful words lead to hateful deeds" or words to that effect. In other words, blaming the guy who just got shot to death an hour before. Maybe he shouldn't have been fired but someone should have called him on his idiocy right then and there.
I don’t know, Joe. Doesn’t seem that public is interested in paying for “mental hospitals” — seem to prefer prisons. “… Presumed guilty until proven innocent” can justify a shoot first mentality since that same public seems to scoff at more appropriate interventions.
Those on the Left who called this man a "fascist" and a "Nazi" bear some responsibility for his assassination. Because what should you do with an agent of the incipient fascist state? Or, a Nazi? Overheated rhetoric like that can easily lead to action. Yet even Jacobin says today that Kirk was a fair and honest debater. WSJ now says ammo in the rifle has antifa slogans. We better hope that is merely a rumor.
Fascism is a real thing, an abbreviation for National Socialism, like disbanding the Fed, getting a piece of Intel, etc it's things like the 'brownshirts', aka I.C.E., that is defining this administration, distracting from their push to delete the 'market' and control/plan the economy. That's another experiment, like tax cuts for the rich, that has been run and has failed miserably. We're living in the game of Monopoly, and all the assets are being gobbled up by these folks, leaving a broken democratic system as a memory.
Huh? Not at all. Shooting Kirk is the antithesis of my position. It's thuggery, it's the Trumpian- Putin way of dealing with ideologies. It's just plain wrong.
if you are not actively fostering consensus on practical solutions to our problems, you're just adding to the noise. let's meet in The Big Middle, where most Americans are, and agree on what we're prepared to do together to "keep our Republic"
I've worked on gun control for 20 years or longer. Here is what I think should be done. Something that would satisfy the 2nd amendment folks.
Americans should be able to own all the guns they want. As long as they keep them in the home.
Want to spend 1000s on guns? Go to for it. Want to defend your family? Go for it (even though most gun deaths are suicides by folks with guns in the home).
No guns in supermarkets or Starbucks.
No open carry. No concealed carry.
No guns in public life. That's it.
You got it, Shaun. When I was a kid I hunted with my grandad. Unlock gun from cabinet, put trunk, ammo in back seat, load in the woods, unload outta the woods, back in trunk & back seat, home to locked cabinet, then a burger or ice cream cone. Always thought it was the law.
When they do catch this guy - and I hope they do- I suspect his story will not comply with many narratives already flying about. In particular, he appears to have been an expert marksman, which is not generally in the Leftie skill set. The Republicans, of course, will put forward the most irresponsible narratives they can dream up, but the responsible thing is (was?) to hang tight until we know more.
Charlie Kirk did not debate. He answered people in zingy one liners and then had someone take away the mic. The things he said were mean. He used his enormous talent to appeal to the worst in people. To defeat him would have been to ignore him; unfortunately for all of us he has been martyred instead. It almost makes me think that the Administration arranged it. Then I catch myself to keep from becoming a conspiracy nut.
"Almost makes you think." Not that you're passive aggressive or anything . . .
Jacobin Magazine said today that Kirk was a fair and honest debater.
Joe, a very good piece. The only thing I could add is it should be illegal to carry a gun, any gun, in public. Period. From the gun store to the car, from car to home, practice site or hunting venue is OK. But that's it. Other countries have large gun ownership but strict restrictions on carrying. And tiny firearm issues. We must work hard to push our rampant firearm problem to zero while still honoring the 2nd amendment, leaving the only way to solve disputes being debate and consensus.
Yeap see my note below.
I don't want to go deep here, but a major problem in dialogue at the moment is the treatment of Trump as evil incarnate, which he is not, instead of an obnoxiously bad President, which he is. The result is a kind of skewed categorical imperative, in which any tactic that is in opposition to Trump is justified. Few if any of responsible critics believe in lethal force, but the excessive rhetoric they constantly use provides the rationale for the crazies. Something of the same of course can be said for the worst of right-wing critics, but they seem to me less numerous and - more important - less respectable.
I start with Joe's cited commentators, Ingraham and Maddow. Perhaps they spout what they believe, but let's not forget that they make a very handsome living from their spouting. If they were to "moderate" their pitch -- admitting "our" team is sometimes wrong and the "other" team is sometimes right -- that very handsome living disappears in a flash.
As for the army of social media flamethrowers; Arthur Miller would get it. I may be a nobody and know-nothing but attention IS being paid. I have followers! If I stop shrieking at the top of my lungs I'll lose them and shrink back into anonymity.
At 84 I do not pretend to have any solutions to offer. I keep thing about Jake Holman's line at the end of The Sand Pebbles: What the hell happened!
Another good one, but I think you know why we can't all get along.
Because?
Despite his deplorable views, Charlie did the nation a great favor by shining a light on the intolerance of the Left and especially the elite university administrations that were allowing belligerent students to shut down speech on campuses. And, yes, I met him once and he loved a good debate, would have loved to have had a few hours with man; Joe, you would have been in hog heaven.
Charlie’s legacy should be about free speech which is why the first real crime in the wake of his death was committed by MSNBC (shocked, SHOCKED!). They had Matt Dowd on this morning, he said something a little edgy about the trend toward political violence - and they announced an hour later that they were letting him go. Apparently, he failed to hit QUITE the right note of hand wringing that was the order of the day. Which actually is precisely the intolerance of viewpoints that Charlie’s life was all about.
We can save Trump’s predictably stomach- turning response for another day.
What Dowd said first was speculation about how one of his supporters might have killed Kirk by accident. Then he went on stepping all over his Johnson by talking about how "hateful thoughts lead to hateful words lead to hateful deeds" or words to that effect. In other words, blaming the guy who just got shot to death an hour before. Maybe he shouldn't have been fired but someone should have called him on his idiocy right then and there.
I don’t know, Joe. Doesn’t seem that public is interested in paying for “mental hospitals” — seem to prefer prisons. “… Presumed guilty until proven innocent” can justify a shoot first mentality since that same public seems to scoff at more appropriate interventions.
So much for compromise.
Yep. Including your caveat about existing rap sheets indicating a likelihood of presumption of guilt.
You get huge points for pointing out the media's faults in this, social media also should have been mentioned. A nice article all in all.
It's time for the Charlie Kirk Gun Reform Act. Sign https://resist.bot/petitions/PDRJDG
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind . . . and it’s long gone away from here by now.
Those on the Left who called this man a "fascist" and a "Nazi" bear some responsibility for his assassination. Because what should you do with an agent of the incipient fascist state? Or, a Nazi? Overheated rhetoric like that can easily lead to action. Yet even Jacobin says today that Kirk was a fair and honest debater. WSJ now says ammo in the rifle has antifa slogans. We better hope that is merely a rumor.
Fascism is a real thing, an abbreviation for National Socialism, like disbanding the Fed, getting a piece of Intel, etc it's things like the 'brownshirts', aka I.C.E., that is defining this administration, distracting from their push to delete the 'market' and control/plan the economy. That's another experiment, like tax cuts for the rich, that has been run and has failed miserably. We're living in the game of Monopoly, and all the assets are being gobbled up by these folks, leaving a broken democratic system as a memory.
So, yes, let’s shoot accomplished debater Charlie Kirk. I get it.
Huh? Not at all. Shooting Kirk is the antithesis of my position. It's thuggery, it's the Trumpian- Putin way of dealing with ideologies. It's just plain wrong.