But seriously, we gotta look at the structural issues at play in things like this. A lot of gun control advocates want to point at things like this, and say, see, this shit doesn’t happen in any other country in the world, obviously the guns are the problem, we need to take the guns! But when you look at other countries, you see that the US is one of the few that has both guns and almost no social safety nets. The proposed solution on the left is never “fix the problems that lead to crime and violence”; rather, it’s “take the tools used to commit crime and violence”
You can use the facile response of saying, no, this is all on Cruz, he made a choice. And it’s true, kind of, except that his choices were significantly constrained by the social conditions that were imposed on him. That’s not saying that what he did was right, nor does it make it the ‘fault’ of the people he victimized. But things like this simply do not happen in a vacuum.
Here’s another way of looking at it.
If you take a dog as a puppy, starve it, leave it outside all the time, ignore it, kick it, never give it any positive interaction, and always punish it for any ‘infraction’ when you’ve never put in any time to teach it better, are you going to be surprised when it mauls someone? Why do you expect any other animal to behave better than a dog just because it walks upright and has no fur?
The proposed solution on the left is never “fix the problems that lead to crime and violence”; rather, it’s “take the tools used to commit crime and violence”
What left are you talking about? Social issues and solving them is generally by definition leftist. If one suggests it they get called socialist/communist in the US even if they’re closer to center if compared to rest of the world.
We also discuss the issue of tons of crime being caused by poverty and lack of social nets, especially when discussing police brutality and the like. Now many of the members of congress people consider/accuse of being leftists are really just centrists, or close to it, or people who want to maintain their power, get votes, not really change the status quo. I’d say they match your definition, but if you’re saying leftists don’t want social solutions then you either haven’t been talking to leftists, or you aren’t fully listening.
As I said in response to someone else: what passes for the left says that they want this, until the rubber meets the road. Criminal justice reform/defund the police? That’s great, until you have a lot of homeless people scaring the Good, Decent, Upstanding citizens. High-density, affordable housing? Oh no, not in my charming, turn-of-the-century neighborhood, that would ruin it’s charm and wreck my property values! MLK Jr. said that the white liberals were the enemy, and–as a white leftist–he was right!
Republicans are honest; they want to fuck everyone over as long as they make a buck, or believe that they’re doing their god’s will.
Personally, I side with the anarchists that are at least trying to work within their communities to make shit better in whatever small ways they can.
Determinism is a helluva drug…
But seriously, we gotta look at the structural issues at play in things like this. A lot of gun control advocates want to point at things like this, and say, see, this shit doesn’t happen in any other country in the world, obviously the guns are the problem, we need to take the guns! But when you look at other countries, you see that the US is one of the few that has both guns and almost no social safety nets. The proposed solution on the left is never “fix the problems that lead to crime and violence”; rather, it’s “take the tools used to commit crime and violence”
You can use the facile response of saying, no, this is all on Cruz, he made a choice. And it’s true, kind of, except that his choices were significantly constrained by the social conditions that were imposed on him. That’s not saying that what he did was right, nor does it make it the ‘fault’ of the people he victimized. But things like this simply do not happen in a vacuum.
Here’s another way of looking at it.
If you take a dog as a puppy, starve it, leave it outside all the time, ignore it, kick it, never give it any positive interaction, and always punish it for any ‘infraction’ when you’ve never put in any time to teach it better, are you going to be surprised when it mauls someone? Why do you expect any other animal to behave better than a dog just because it walks upright and has no fur?
What left are you talking about? Social issues and solving them is generally by definition leftist. If one suggests it they get called socialist/communist in the US even if they’re closer to center if compared to rest of the world.
We also discuss the issue of tons of crime being caused by poverty and lack of social nets, especially when discussing police brutality and the like. Now many of the members of congress people consider/accuse of being leftists are really just centrists, or close to it, or people who want to maintain their power, get votes, not really change the status quo. I’d say they match your definition, but if you’re saying leftists don’t want social solutions then you either haven’t been talking to leftists, or you aren’t fully listening.
As I said in response to someone else: what passes for the left says that they want this, until the rubber meets the road. Criminal justice reform/defund the police? That’s great, until you have a lot of homeless people scaring the Good, Decent, Upstanding citizens. High-density, affordable housing? Oh no, not in my charming, turn-of-the-century neighborhood, that would ruin it’s charm and wreck my property values! MLK Jr. said that the white liberals were the enemy, and–as a white leftist–he was right!
Republicans are honest; they want to fuck everyone over as long as they make a buck, or believe that they’re doing their god’s will.
Personally, I side with the anarchists that are at least trying to work within their communities to make shit better in whatever small ways they can.