Left-wing gunman critically wounds Congressman, killed by police.

[The Romulan Republic]

It's funny how the regressives are all too eager to embrace collective guilt when it suits their narrative.

Funny how you say this while painting all progressives (who Alt. Rightists think its clever to call regressives) with the same brush.

But hey, the modern Right has built most of its success over using tragedies to scape goat large groups of people? Why stop now?

Edit: And while I don't think you can generally attribute a crime like this to any single cause, and those who try are generally pushing an agenda, yeah, I'm pretty tired of people on the Right using "blame mental illness" as a way to duck any discussion of any other issues that they find less convenient, be it a culture of masculine violence or gun control or their own leaderships' penchant for inciting violent radicals.

[Admiral X]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

[Karha of Honor]

It's funny how the regressives are all too eager to embrace collective guilt when it suits their narrative.

Funny how you say this while painting all progressives (who Alt. Rightists think its clever to call regressives) with the same brush.

But hey, the modern Right has built most of its success over using tragedies to scape goat large groups of people? Why stop now?

Edit: And while I don't think you can generally attribute a crime like this to any single cause, and those who try are generally pushing an agenda, yeah, I'm pretty tired of people on the Right using "blame mental illness" as a way to duck any discussion of any other issues that they find less convenient, be it a culture of masculine violence or gun control or their own leaderships' penchant for inciting violent radicals.

What would you do about masculine violence that the right won't? We have no problem speaking up against gun control. The question is what forum you wanna use?

[The Romulan Republic]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

"All progressives are actually regressives. How dare they complain about us engaging in collective guilt while they all engage in collective guilt. They're all the same, treating us like we're all the same!"

Man, your post is an Orwellian... well, masterpiece would probably be too strong a word.

[Karha of Honor]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

"All progressives are actually regressives. How dare they complain about us engaging in collective guilt while they all engage in collective guilt. They're all the same, treating us like we're all the same!"

Man, your post is an Orwellian... well, masterpiece would probably be too strong a word.

Do you have me on ignore?

[The Romulan Republic]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

"All progressives are actually regressives. How dare they complain about us engaging in collective guilt while they all engage in collective guilt. They're all the same, treating us like we're all the same!"

Man, your post is an Orwellian... well, masterpiece would probably be too strong a word.

Do you have me on ignore?

No, and I don't see what that question has to do with the post you just quoted.

As to your prior post:

It's funny how the regressives are all too eager to embrace collective guilt when it suits their narrative.

Funny how you say this while painting all progressives (who Alt. Rightists think its clever to call regressives) with the same brush.

But hey, the modern Right has built most of its success over using tragedies to scape goat large groups of people? Why stop now?

Edit: And while I don't think you can generally attribute a crime like this to any single cause, and those who try are generally pushing an agenda, yeah, I'm pretty tired of people on the Right using "blame mental illness" as a way to duck any discussion of any other issues that they find less convenient, be it a culture of masculine violence or gun control or their own leaderships' penchant for inciting violent radicals.

What would you do about masculine violence that the right won't? We have no problem speaking up against gun control. The question is what forum you wanna use?

What exactly is your point?

On the subject of masculine violence, I won't try to speak for every individual, but the Left collectively tends not to actively condone it, while the Right collectively saw fit to elect as President a man who bragged on tape about how he can get away with sexually assaulting women. Do you really want to try to claim the moral high ground on this issue?

And my point reg. gun control is that people on the Right often try to counter the need for gun control by blaming everything on mental illness. I don't know weather you do this personally.

I'm not sure what your last sentence means.

[Karha of Honor]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

"All progressives are actually regressives. How dare they complain about us engaging in collective guilt while they all engage in collective guilt. They're all the same, treating us like we're all the same!"

Man, your post is an Orwellian... well, masterpiece would probably be too strong a word.

Do you have me on ignore?

No, and I don't see what that question has to do with the post you just quoted.

As to your prior post:

It's funny how the regressives are all too eager to embrace collective guilt when it suits their narrative.

Funny how you say this while painting all progressives (who Alt. Rightists think its clever to call regressives) with the same brush.

But hey, the modern Right has built most of its success over using tragedies to scape goat large groups of people? Why stop now?

Edit: And while I don't think you can generally attribute a crime like this to any single cause, and those who try are generally pushing an agenda, yeah, I'm pretty tired of people on the Right using "blame mental illness" as a way to duck any discussion of any other issues that they find less convenient, be it a culture of masculine violence or gun control or their own leaderships' penchant for inciting violent radicals.

What would you do about masculine violence that the right won't? We have no problem speaking up against gun control. The question is what forum you wanna use?

What exactly is your point?

On the subject of masculine violence, I won't try to speak for every individual, but the Left collectively tends not to actively condone it, while the Right collectively saw fit to elect as President a man who bragged on tape about how he can get away with sexually assaulting women. Do you really want to try to claim the moral high ground on this issue?

And my point reg. gun control is that people on the Right often try to counter the need for gun control by blaming everything on mental illness. I don't know weather you do this personally.

I'm not sure what your last sentence means.

A man touching a woman is not sexual assault. He did not say the women would not consent, considering the fact that the world is full of gold diggers... I don't want to be a super moral person, i never wanted to be. We are sinners and some sin is perfectly okay.

Even if some sane people do mass shootings, i don't see why it should result in gun control. Sex was not banned because AIDS was deadly.

[The Romulan Republic]

A man touching a woman is not sexual assault.

If its non-consensual it is. Which Trump's pretty clearly was, if you believe his own words (admittedly a dubious proposition in general).

He did not say the women would not consent,

If you just go up and grab a woman's privates, its pretty clear that she did not consent.

"...the women would not consent..."

How the fuck would he know weather they "would" consent if he didn't stop to ask them? Do you just assume that "she would have said yes"?

Fuck, you probably do.

For that matter, if he was in a position of power over them, would they have been afraid to say no, especially given Trump's reputation for vindictiveness?

And that's even leaving aside, for example, the accounts of him outright forcing himself on an underage girl, which are somewhat less substantiated.

considering the fact that the world is full of gold diggers... I don't want to be a super moral person, i never wanted to be. We are sinners and some sin is perfectly okay.

What the fuck is your point here? Other than "Obviously the women must be lying for money, if they accused a man?" Got any evidence for that, by the way? Or does presumption of innocence only apply when the accused is a man?

And the second part... I'd like to believe that you're not saying "We all sin, so some rape is okay." And suggesting that its okay because the women are "gold diggers". But in this context, I don't know how else to read it. Unless you're just randomly babbling.

If that is what you are saying, then I have nothing more to say to you, except that I hope you have zero contact with any women, ever, for their sakes.

Even if some sane people do mass shootings, i don't see why it should result in gun control. Sex was not banned because AIDS was deadly.

I would argue that their should be some level of training and qualifications and oversight to use any highly dangerous tool. We require training and licences to drive a car, fly a plane... and driving a car is a hell of a lot more necessary for the average person than owning a gun.

So why give guns special treatment, other than the far Right's fetish for armed violence?

Edits: And yes, everyone sins, or whatever other term for doing evil you prefer.

It does not therefore follow that sin is okay, and that doing more of it is excusable.

Oh, and you've got to love the irony, everyone.

-Objects to the idea that the Left is superior to the Right on the subject of violent masculinity.

-Follows it up by actively defending sexual assault of women using stereotypically misogynist/rape apologist arguments.

Lovely. But I always appreciate it when the other guy disproves their own argument.

[Robovski]

Have you ever dated a woman? Have you ever tried to make a first move? Because after reading that I would say not.

That aside guns are tools, they can be used improperly or correctly, legally or illegally. Just like a truck or van, which can be used to move your granny and your basement apartment or drive over people in the street. But hey, it's not like there aren't heavily armed societies full of guns we can point to that hardly have gun deaths. Oh wait! There are! And look, societies that banned guns that kill each other with knives instead! It is almost like people will kill each other if they want to with the means available to them if they want to kill people but states with nationalized health and access to mental health care and a high standard of living seem to not want to kill each other as much as say here in the USA where mental illness is stigmitized and not readily available, especially to the poor who can't afford therapy or perscriptions. Ever since Reagan closed the sanitariums the mentally ill poor are in the streets and essentially untreated until they become emergencies, whence they get cleaned up and sent back on out and then run out of meds again. No long-term care or solutions, just band aids at best but nooo it's about toxic masculinity.

[Admiral X]

I call regressives regressive because that's what they are. The term applies to authoritarian busy-bodies on both the left and the right. The funny part of responses like yours, though, is that you both simultaneously complain about painting people with a broad brush while simultaneously doing the same yourself, which was actually exactly what I was getting at with my post. I really do find it hilarious that while members of the regressive left will stick up for groups because they consider them to be the underdog, and even though they're absolutely right that the concept of collective guilt is wrong, they then engage in it themselves against groups that they consider to be acceptable targets.

"All progressives are actually regressives. How dare they complain about us engaging in collective guilt while they all engage in collective guilt. They're all the same, treating us like we're all the same!"

Man, your post is an Orwellian... well, masterpiece would probably be too strong a word.

How dare I point out that regressives are actually regressive, or that you're doing exactly the same thing you're bitching about someone else allegedly doing.