Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


PTWB's Journal
PTWB's Journal
July 20, 2022

Exception was your word.

When I'm engaging with someone I try to use the words they're using, in the context I think they're using them, so that we can have a meaningful discussion.

What I've written is that people's life experiences and physical attributes impact the statistical odds of a successful defensive encounter. You initially had difficulty accepting that statistics don't predict an individual's odds of success, but you did accept that in post #56 where you wrote:

but under most circumstances you have arguably a better possibility of success than the hypothetical 95 year old woman

Now, given that we've accepted that different people, with different levels of experience, training, life skills, athleticism, etc, will have different odds of successfully defending themselves, why would you then regress to your previous position in post #58?

You're trying to make your argument while avoiding hypothetical scenarios but given the rarity of gun violence and even rarer defensive gun uses, hypotheticals are a necessary evil. I've only personally been involved in one defensive gun use and I am unlikely to ever be in that same situation, or even a remotely similar situation, ever again.

We talk about hypothetical situations we can envision but they're based off real scenarios that can and do happen, like the ATM robbery, or the active shooter at the mall, or the home invasion. Despite the extremely low chance I will ever encounter something like one of those scenarios, they're still far more likely than encountering a similar scenario to what I faced in the previously mentioned defensive gun use and yet that actually happened.

All that is to say this: I would have been murdered or would have been gravely wounded if not for a firearm used defensively. I must already be an exception to your statistics.
July 4, 2022

It's vile.

Our society inevitably comes together every few weeks when some madman uses an AR to shoot up a crowd but we nearly completely ignore the carnage that the gun violence epidemic causes amongst the most marginalized members of our society.

The gun violence epidemic is, by and large, from handguns. Just 3% of gun murders are committed with all rifles combined, including ARs and their variants.

Impoverished and disadvantaged minorities and children are being slaughtered by handguns in the streets every day and yet our outrage seems to be almost entirely directed at high profile mass shooters using AR style rifles.

We need to come together to address the root causes of crime and violence: poverty and wealth disparity, systemic racism and oppression, chronic addiction, the war on drugs, lack of mental health care, and an underfunded education system.

And if we want to talk about gun control, for gods sake talk about handguns before we talk about anything else.

July 2, 2022

Ramifications and constitutionality of the new New York law?

I wouldn't be surprised if the SCOTUS overturns the law within the next two years. It seems guaranteed to be overturned and could yield even more sweeping backlash against common sense gun control and regulation.

Like it or not, we've got to work within the confines of the current 2nd Amendment interpretation if we want to pass meaningful gun control. And the new New York Law, with it's subjective standards despite the recent SCOTUS ruling, is outside of those confines.

Legislation that flagrantly disregards the ruling, such as this, is sure to be overturned nearly immediately. That will result in an even more rigid ruling being put in place. I would not be at all surprised if the opinion overturning this new New York legislation results in all states being required to adopt a shall-issue regimen for concealed carry licensing.

We've got to focus on passing the laws that matter, and that are popular, and that can actually be passed in this political climate:

1. Universal Background Checks
2. Mandatory Safe Storage Laws
3. Minimum Standards for Concealed Carry Licenses

This law feels a bit like cutting off our nose to spite our face.

June 30, 2022

Roberts, Kavanaugh join liberal justices to hand Biden Administration a big win on immigration!

In a 5 - 4 vote in BIDEN ET AL. v. TEXAS ET AL., with Roberts and Kavanaugh joining Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor, the SCOTUS gives the Biden Administration a big win.


This case stemmed from Biden’s decision to end the Trump era program to send asylum seekers back to Mexico to await proceedings.

June 29, 2022


Huxley's exploration of hypnosis and mind control in politics appears prescient. It's the only thing that explains Trump's Svengali-like hold on his followers…

It seems to me that hold can be explained by the ignorance, racism, and hate in the hearts and minds of the MAGAs. They were just waiting on some strongman blow hard to stoke the flames that were smoldering inside them all along.

We should never let the MAGAs escape responsibility for what they’ve done by suggesting they were somehow hypnotized by Trump. That lets them off the hook.
June 25, 2022

It's time to start pushing for a constitutional amendment...

…that changes how Supreme Court justices are seated and how long they serve. Justices should be elected directly by the people in non-partisan contests and should serve one twenty year term, and not be eligible for subsequent terms.

Profile Information

Member since: Sat Feb 2, 2019, 01:19 PM
Number of posts: 4,131
Latest Discussions»PTWB's Journal