Why is the proposed solution always to just pay people more and not just make things cost less? The only reason I can find is that making things cost less doesn’t provide a scapegoat for everybody to rally behind, even though it would be more effective.

You’re the only one stopping you.

You’re charging somebody money to live in a space that you own? You’re an unethical horrible human being. You should have them live there for free and you need to eat all the cost of maintaining the building.

Obviously!

Ok…Damn, nothing happened. But if anybody asks, I’m telling them you gave permission.

You’re overthinking it. You didn’t say anything insensitive or stupid. It will offend some people, but they are usually looking at how to be a victim and that gives them an opportunity. It’s just words, don’t worry about it so much.

But that’s only 364 days. Which month gets the extra day, throwing the while thing off?

You can’t say anything you disagree with is propaganda. The comment you replied to is absolutely correct and needs to be repeated loudly for people like you that don’t like facts.

https://www.axios.com/2018/06/05/income-inequality-blue-red-districts

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/polarization-of-the-rich-the-new-democratic-allegiance-of-affluent-americans-and-the-politics-of-redistribution/E18D7DAE3A1EF35BA5BC54DE799F291B

https://www.cato.org/commentary/how-government-creates-wealth-inequality

You can argue that Republicans increase wealth inequality but democrats cause just as much, if not more. The facts just don’t agree with you.

Oh, I don’t. I’ll protect myself. Where I live the police are about fifteen minutes away. Ain’t nobody got time for that.

You don’t need a gun. Just call the police. They’ll take care of you.

Because that’s a completely normal and rational response. Buddy, you ok? You should probably talk to somebody.

Yeah, hence the point of my comment. Which part are you confused by?

Well sure, if you go by media companies which make money off of sensational headlines rather than factual statistics. Of course you’ll never know.

Capitalism isn’t the problem. It’s corruption. So rather than fix the problem and hold the corrupt individuals accountable, you’d rather stop the symptom. But then the source of the problem is still there and manifests itself elsewhere. But it’s easy just putting bandaids on things, so I can see why that would be the crux of your efforts.

And here’s the mentality that comes with voting for teams. Government isn’t a team sport. Stop being the problem.

I’m curious as to why she’s been in office for four years and only now thinks it’s an issue that needs addressed. I mean, finally, good. But shouldn’t something like that be day one? I guess roads were more important.

Of course. Just waiting for the “No one wants to take your guns” comment. But everything they propose as “common sense” would do just that. But it also very likely that they just have no idea what semi-auto means and just repeat what’s on TV. That’s the extent of ‘critical thinking’.

What a completely dishonest take. Automatic weapons and cannons existed and were owned by citizens at the time the 2nd Amendment was written. To say that they were clueless about the advancement of weaponry but the things you say on Twitter and Facebook were in fact intended to be covered by the 1st Amendment is rather stupid.

You also seem to fall into the trap of semi-auto is somehow this scary weapon when it’s merely just a function of that weapon. Handguns are semi-auto. Some shotguns are semi-auto. And yes, most rifles are semi-auto. Bolt action and revolvers exist, however not nearly as popular. So to call for a ban on semi-auto means just about all firearms.

Currently, passing a criminal background check is required for purchase of firearms, called NICS. If a dealer gets caught selling to someone who doesn’t pass this check will have their license to handle and sell firearms revoked

Yeah, you could have just said you have no idea what you’re talking about. Step one, realize that the rifle the military uses and the rifle you’re so scared of are not the same. They look very similar, so I can see why you would think so. You want to talk disingenuous, why don’t you have any rebuttal to the things I mentioned but instead want to go on to your own diatribe? Come back with something intelligent and then we’ll talk.

In your eyes, what makes the AR-15 more dangerous than a Glock 19 handgun? They are both semi-auto in functionality. In fact, most handguns are semi-auto, along with quite a few shotguns. Both can have a magazine loaded with 30 rounds. The AR is a civilian produced weapon that the military sought to use with multiple modifications. The AR does not have these modifications.

You say no one wants to ban guns but then your very next sentence states banning a model of gun. If you can factually answer what makes it more dangerous, I just might agree with you.