Anyone start an RNC discussion thread yet?

[Ultralight]

About guns and violence (and Bae, your graphs).......Perhaps one might feel different when they live near constant homicides (whose numbers don't show people who survived them). How many gun homicides do you have on your island, Bae? I would bet maybe none. In the city next to use, last year there were 134. I believe that city had one of the highest homicide rates in 2015. When one hears of so much violence from guns, on a daily basis, one might feel different about the number of guns out there.
Then again, your answer might be "All the more reason to have one."
There has to be some compromise somewhere along the way..........

New gun rights video:

[Ultralight]

White privilege is a set of advantages and/or immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people's conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country.
The biggest problem with white privilege is the invisibility it maintains to those who benefit from it most. The inability to recognize that many of the advantages whites hold are a direct result of the disadvantages of other people, contributes to the unwillingness of white people, even those who are not overtly racist, to recognize their part in maintaining and benefiting from white supremacy.
White privilege is about not having to worry about being followed in a department store while shopping. It's about thinking that your clothes, manner of speech, and behavior in general, are racially neutral, when, in fact, they are white. It's seeing your image on television daily and knowing that you're being represented. It's people assuming that you lead a constructive life free from crime and off welfare. It's about not having to assume your daily interactions with people have racial overtones.
White privilege is having the freedom and luxury to fight racism one day and ignore it the next. White privilege exists on an individual, cultural, and institutional level.

[iris lilies]

About guns and violence (and Bae, your graphs).......Perhaps one might feel different when they live near constant homicides (whose numbers don't show people who survived them). How many gun homicides do you have on your island, Bae? I would bet maybe none. In the city next to us, last year there were 134. I believe that city had one of the highest homicide rates in 2015. When one hears of so much violence from guns, on a daily basis, one might feel different about the number of guns out there.
Then again, your answer might be "All the more reason to have one."
There has to be some compromise somewhere along the way..........

Oh please. I live in the midst of Murder City with multiple homicides in my zip code annually. Have you even had a murder within 3 miles of you within the past year?

I know without a doubt that gun control laws are flagrently ignored by the crimnal element. Why you think more laws will cause the unlawful to behave properly is beyond me. It is wrong to hamper law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

If you have a specific regulation that you thnk will make a big difference to the death-by-gun problem, describe it. Otherwise, you are speaking in generalities that are not very useful.

[Alan]

White privilege is a set of advantages and/or immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people's conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country.
The biggest problem with white privilege is the invisibility it maintains to those who benefit from it most. The inability to recognize that many of the advantages whites hold are a direct result of the disadvantages of other people, contributes to the unwillingness of white people, even those who are not overtly racist, to recognize their part in maintaining and benefiting from white supremacy.
White privilege is about not having to worry about being followed in a department store while shopping. It's about thinking that your clothes, manner of speech, and behavior in general, are racially neutral, when, in fact, they are white. It's seeing your image on television daily and knowing that you're being represented. It's people assuming that you lead a constructive life free from crime and off welfare. It's about not having to assume your daily interactions with people have racial overtones.
White privilege is having the freedom and luxury to fight racism one day and ignore it the next. White privilege exists on an individual, cultural, and institutional level.

Is white privilege universal? Does it exist in Canada, England or France?
Also, is the privilege implied really based upon skin color or might it simply be a reaction to local norms? I ask because I have a Caucasian niece who is a crackhead and affects ghetto speech patterns. Based upon your criteria, does she maintain a level of privilege simply by being white? I don't think so.
On the flip side, I work with a black Canadian. I can't refer to him as an African American because he is not American. According to your criteria, he walks, talks and presents himself as a typical Canadian adult and I would imagine he benefits from white privilege based upon your description. Would you agree?
Speaking of that, another co-worker is white and from South Africa. She recently became an American citizen and correctly refers to herself as an African American, which for some reason causes some of our more liberal co-workers no end of distress. This leads me to believe you guys stack the rules of race to benefit your twisted version of what you think racial division should be. I choose to disregard such nonsense so I guess you'd call me a white privilege denier. Now, if you'd like to change your outlook to one of economic or educational or class privilege I think we could easily agree, but your inability to look beyond race makes it difficult.

[creaker]

Is white privilege universal? Does it exist in Canada, England or France?
Also, is the privilege implied really based upon skin color or might it simply be a reaction to local norms? I ask because I have a Caucasian niece who is a crackhead who affects ghetto speech patterns. Based upon your criteria, does she maintain a level of privilege simply by being white? I don't think so.
On the flip side, I work with a black Canadian. I can't refer to him as an African American because he is not American. According to your criteria, he walks, talks and presents himself as a typical Canadian adult and I would imagine he benefits from white privilege based upon your description. Would you agree?
Speaking of that, another co-worker is white and from South Africa. She recently became an American citizen and refers to herself as an African American, which for some reason causes some of our more liberal co-workers no end of distress. This leads me to believe you guys stack the rules of race to benefit your twisted version of what you think racial division should be. I choose to disregard such nonsense so I guess you'd call me a white privilege denier.

It always falls apart when one tries to apply a group demographic to every individual. I suppose the concept of "responsible gun owner" should be chucked as something ludicrous since it doesn't always apply? "You guys" (who is "you guys"?) is the same thing as "white privilege" - they are a convenient way to tag a trait on anyone you decide to place in a group.

It's interesting you brought up someone from South Africa - I remember when her (depending on her age) "white privilege" was codified in law.

Of course if one paints it all in absolutes (from either side) it's going to sound stupid. But I expect my chances of having to interact with someone who would behave toward me in negatively racist fashion are much lower than someone of a different color or race. You can label that whatever you like but I think it's the truth.

[Ultralight]

It always falls apart when one tries to apply a group demographic to every individual. I suppose the concept of "responsible gun owner" should be chucked as something ludicrous since it doesn't always apply? "You guys" (who is "you guys"?) is the same thing as "white privilege" - they are a convenient way to tag a trait on anyone you decide to place in a group.

It's interesting you brought up someone from South Africa - I remember when her (depending on her age) "white privilege" was codified in law.

Of course if one paints it all in absolutes (from either side) it's going to sound stupid. But I expect my chances of having to interact with someone who would behave toward me in negatively racist fashion are much lower than someone of a different color or race. You can label that whatever you like but I think it's the truth.

This is a smart response.

[Lainey]

Now that Melania-gate has started to fade, I've been wishing in my political fantasy world that she would have started her speech by saying that given the events of recent weeks, it's more important to emphasize our commonalities as Americans instead of our differences as Republicans and Democrats. And that the values as expressed by Mrs. Obama including "that you treat people with dignity and respect even if you don't know them and even if you don't agree with them" are ones she also shares.
I believe, maybe naively, that by saying that it would have helped, even a little, in healing our fractured nation. I certainly would have had a lot of respect for her.

[Lainey]

[QUOTE=UltraliteAngler;248082]White privilege is a set of advantages and/or immunities that white people benefit from on a daily basis beyond those common to all others. White privilege can exist without white people's conscious knowledge of its presence and it helps to maintain the racial hierarchy in this country.
The biggest problem with white privilege is the invisibility it maintains to those who benefit from it most.

Made me think of 2 recent quotes: - "I was an African-American before I was a police officer." meaning he brought that experience into his profession, and he will remain an African-American officer, instead of just an officer, to most of the people he interacts with. The "default" in this country is Caucasian, even though a state like Calif. now has the minorities as the new majority.

- also watching the issues with AirBnB and complaints of discrimination there were enough to get the attention of their leadership.

[jp1]

Now that Melania-gate has started to fade, I've been wishing in my political fantasy world that she would have started her speech by saying that given the events of recent weeks, it's more important to emphasize our commonalities as Americans instead of our differences as Republicans and Democrats. And that the values as expressed by Mrs. Obama including "that you treat people with dignity and respect even if you don't know them and even if you don't agree with them" are ones she also shares.
I believe, maybe naively, that by saying that it would have helped, even a little, in healing our fractured nation. I certainly would have had a lot of respect for her.

We'll never know since she didn't but considering that someone with a banner that said "No Racism. No Hate" was considered worthy of trying to be blocked and have the banner ripped out of her hands, I suspect that Melania would have gotten booed for expressing such sentiments.

[jp1]

It's interesting - it looks like the only thing you are allowed to bring into the area that could possibly be used to arm and defend yourself is a gun - and a gun is about the only thing that cannot be defined as a safety issue or danger to others:

http://www.ohio.com/polopoly_fs/1.68...strictions.pdf

) Within all Public Access Areas, the following items are prohibited
during the Convention Period:
(1) Lumber larger than 2” in width and ¼” thick, including supports
for signs;
(2) Metal, plastic, or other hard material larger than ¾” thick and
1/8” in wall thickness including pipe and tubing;
(3) Any air rifle, air pistol, paintball gun, blasting caps, switchblade
or automatic knife, knife having a blade two and one-half (2-1/2) inches in
length or longer, cestus, billy, blackjack, sword, saber, hatchet, axe, slingshot,
BB gun, pellet gun, wrist shot, blackjack, metal knuckles, nun chucks, mace,
iron buckle, axe handle, shovel, or other instrumentality used to cause
property or personal damage;
(4) Any dangerous ordinance, weapon, or firearm that is prohibited
by the laws of the State of Ohio;
(5) Any explosives, explosive device, or incendiary device;
(6) Fireworks and rockets;
(7) Sound Amplification Equipment;
(8) Drones and other unmanned aircraft systems;
(9) Containers of bodily fluids;
(10) Aerosol cans;
(11) Mace, Pepper Spray or other chemical irritant;
(12) Umbrellas with metal tips;
(13) Any projectile launchers, such as water guns and water cannons;
(14) Rope, chain, cable, strapping, wire, string, line, tape, or any
similar material, in lengths greater than 6’;
(15) Glass bottles, ornaments, light bulbs, ceramic vessels, and any
other frangible container, regardless of whether the container holds any
substance;
(16) Locks including, without limitation, padlocks, bicycle locking
devices, chain locks or similar devices, but not including: (i) an integral
component of a conveyance or structure; (ii) locks when utilized by the owner
of private real property to secure permanent or temporary fencing; or (iii)
locks attached to a bicycle;
(17) Any gas mask or similar device designed to filter all air breathed
by the wearer in an attempt to protect the respiratory tract and/or face
against irritating or noxious gasses or other materials. This prohibition on
gas masks shall not apply to any person wearing a medical oxygen mask that
fits over the nose and mouth of the person and provides oxygen from an
oxygen tank to the person;
(18) Tents and other shelters, sleeping bags, sleeping pads,
mattresses, cots, hammocks, bivy sacks, or stoves;
(19) Coolers or ice chests;
(20) Backpacks and bags exceeding the size of 18” x 13” x 7”;
(21) Lasers;
(22) Non-plastic containers, bottles, cans, or thermoses;
(23) Ladders;
(24) Grappling hooks, sledgehammers, hammers, and crowbars;
(25) Canned goods;
(26) Tennis balls; and
(27) Any other item determined by the Chief or Director to be a clear
and present danger to the safety of others.

In case anyone was wondering I heard on NPR today why tennis balls are prohibited. Apparently it's a fear that they will have been turned into tennis bombs.