Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

40% of guns are sold without background checks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
    We have taken prayer out of schools, said that human life is worthless when we legalized abortion, taught moral relativity in the schools as what is necessary to succeed in life, and taught young people there are no core values, no moral absolutes, no right and wrong. There are a lot of Conservatives in this country who would like to reverse all of the above but there seems to be more who don't.
    I don't go that far with it. For all the faults, I actually think things are better than they were. I'm sure liberals can flip that right around, claiming fairly that people hated and beat 'fags' thanks to prayer in school and 'traditional values', cited religion to keep slaves, separate the races, keep women as quasi-chattel of men, run empires as 'white man's burden', etc. Abortion was actually legal for a great percent of the country's history, only becoming largely banned (but never banned everywhere) increasingly so in the Victorian period of the late 1800s and early 1900s and then legalised again a few decades later with Roe whilst many cruel autocratic and/or theocratic systems heavily restricted or banned abortion and still do, e.g., Iran.

    I think we do ourselves a great disservice when we fall into the old conservative/liberal litmus test fallacy that one is nearly always right and the other wrong along those lines, especially since what is actually called 'liberal' or 'conservative' flips around as parties spin these things as they evolve and switch around themselves. The two parties like that crap for sure because it serves them but not us. It's an attempt to get people to follow rather than think and act for themselves independently. Sometimes liberal POVs get it right and other times conservative POVs get it right when put to the test of time and practice and, of course, sometimes the best answers involve a balance of the best arguments of the two.

    I think it's much better to actually just examine the issue and try to see what's the root causes. For example, are we prescribing too many meds or types of meds to people that it's doing more harm than good?
    Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 01-29-2013, 06:30 PM.

    ?


    • #47
      Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

      Originally posted by O'Sullivan Bere View Post
      I don't go that far with it. For all the faults, I actually think things are better than they were. I'm sure liberals can flip that right around, claiming fairly that people hated and beat 'fags' thanks to prayer in school, cited religion to keep slaves, separate the races, keep women as quasi-chattel of men, run empires as 'white man's burden', etc. Abortion was actually legal for a great percent of the country's history, only becoming largely banned (but never banned everywhere) increasingly so in the Victorian Period and then legalised again a few decades later with Roe whilst many cruel autocratic and/or theocratic systems heavily restricted or banned abortion and still do, e.g., Iran.

      I think we do ourselves a great disservice when we fall into the old conservative/liberal litmus test fallacy that one is nearly always right and the other wrong. The two parties like that crap for sure because it serves them but not us. It's an attempt to get people to follow rather than think and act for themselves independently. Sometimes liberal POVs gets it right and other times conservative POV gets it right when put to the test of time and practice and, of course, very often the best answers involve a balance of the best arguments of the two.

      I think it's much better to actually just examine the issue and see what's the root causes. For example, are we prescribing too many meds or types of meds to people that it's doing more harm than good?
      I believe it is a moral issue.

      ?


      • #48
        Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

        Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
        I believe it is a moral issue.
        Morals certainly probably play a role here. But as to what aspects? For example, just thinking as a gun owner myself, do we have too many jerks on the 'conservative' side teaching and acting irresponsibly about guns and whipping up fears and frenzies in rhetoric? But how about also breakdowns of family units where we have way too many latchkey kids, or parents in denial about kids and their issues and interests and emotions and just doping them on med calling them 'ADD' or 'depressed' as a cop out? I'm just throwing spontaneous stuff out there, but it's likely a complex thing. How about the things we eat plus a more sedentary lifestyle and its mental effects? As we go along, we often find that our diets have stuff in them that aren't good as well as lifestyle. How about the changes in our working environments and their pressures? We aren't a rural agricultural society anymore for the most part. The introduction of illicit drugs that seemingly always increase with variety and potency certainly play a role. And that often doesn't mean people in the past were more moral about it (hell, opium was legal for a long time)...societal advances just make them more easy to globally and internationally distribute plus come up with new and more powerful things to get stoned. We also have to consider that as population continuously grows that it also means more people means more criminals and nuts. It's likely a huge variety of things involved.

        ?


        • #49
          Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

          Originally posted by O'Sullivan Bere View Post
          Morals certainly probably play a role here. But as to what aspects? For example, just thinking as a gun owner myself, do we have too many jerks on the 'conservative' side teaching and acting irresponsibly about guns and whipping up fears and frenzies in rhetoric? But how about also breakdowns of family units where we have way too many latchkey kids, or parents in denial about kids and their issues and interests and emotions and just doping them on med calling them 'ADD' or 'depressed' as a cop out? I'm just throwing spontaneous stuff out there, but it's likely a complex thing. How about the things we eat plus a more sedentary lifestyle and its mental effects? As we go along, we often find that our diets have stuff in them that aren't good as well as lifestyle. How about the changes in our working environments and their pressures? We aren't a rural agricultural society anymore for the most part. The introduction of illicit drugs that seemingly always increase with variety and potency certainly play a role. And that often doesn't mean people in the past were more moral about it (hell, opium was legal for a long time)...societal advances just make them more easy to globally and internationally distribute plus come up with new and more powerful things to get stoned. We also have to consider that as population continuously grows that it also means more people means more criminals and nuts. It's likely a huge variety of things involved.
          While I agree with much of what you said, why are we addressing only guns?

          ?


          • #50
            Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

            Originally posted by O'Sullivan Bere View Post
            There's no way to prevent all crime just by passing laws. Anyone who thinks so is simply being unrealistic. However, anyone who thinks we should just throw up our hands because it can't all be prevented is also defaults on an obligation to have a more orderly and safer society. If we took that approach, we might as well abolish all crimes codes, vehicle codes, health codes, etc. They can only deter and reduce offences, not eliminate them.

            The ultimate question is what can be done given the 2A and all the other facts and circumstances to help legally deter and reduce these kinds of instances. Tightening up regulations and databases for weapons transference can IMO help do so. It won't prevent all crime, but it can and will help IMO. That's why we already have laws prohibiting criminals and nuts from just walking into licensed gun shops and stocking up as they please to make it so much easier for them.

            It would serve us if we better enforced those laws such as actually enforcing people who fill out forms with misrepresentations, get regulations and procedures in order for private transference of weapons so all people--not just licensed dealers--know and are held responsible for making a legal transfer of a weapon, get a database for nuts that medical staff will be mandated to report that rightly affect fitness for firearms ownership (like they already do with mandatory reporting to driver licensing agencies of things affecting fitness to drive, mandatory reporting to health departments of certain deadly and/or contagious diseases, mandatory reporting of medical detection of child abuse to child services and law enforcement, etc), get the terrorist watch list up to scratch and use it, etc.
            No, I agree that laws are needed. I disagree that hampering law abiding citizens from owning and carrying firearms is going to accomplish anything productive, and argue instead that it makes us all less safe, as the absurdity of "gun free zone" massacres point out all too vividly.

            Yes, I agree, the question certainly should be "what can be done to legally deter and reduce these kinds of instances"? From a practical standpoint, I see no benefit from more laws and regulations that restrict law abiding citizens from acquiring, owning, and bearing firearms. Adam Lanza would not have been stopped by anything short of a total gun confiscation. Instead, who knows how many of the teachers, administrators, and staff at Sandy Hook were stopped from carrying a firearm by counter productive laws? For every criminal who couldn't walk into a gun store and buy a firearm, how many law abiding people have been discouraged from doing so? How many law abiding people have been brow beaten by government and media into not owning, or carrying, a firearm?

            I'm not interested in prosecuting someone who misread a question on a government form and checked the wrong box, or creating a government form that I have to comply with before I sell a gun to my brother, a friend, or my neighbor. Nor am I interested in being held liable if my brother, friend, or neighbor later loses his mind and uses a gun that I used to own to do anything wrong. I'm actually also not interested in turning the entirety of the healthcare field into an arm of the government.

            In short, I believe that current gun laws have done little to stop criminals and psychopaths, while they have done much to discourage firearm ownership and carry by law abiding citizens, and I see no reason to continue down a dead end street.
            Last edited by smurf; 01-29-2013, 07:55 PM. Reason: typo

            ?


            • #51
              Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

              Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
              While I agree with much of what you said, why are we addressing only guns?
              That seems obvious to me. Guns are the low hanging fruit, but the really good fruit, the fruit that matters is much higher up and we do not want to even attempt to go to the root of the problem. It took us 40 years to get here. The slide of society into something more unhealthy than what preceded it. Spend a little time on TCM and look at the difference in the violent old films and the films of today. Compare a typical tv program from the late 50s into the 60s with what you see on the tube today. The change is startling. These things condition the young, and you cannot get around that.

              But it goes deeper than just entertainment, as it involves the break down of the family, high divorce rates, drugging our kids, and a general loss of morality, that is glorified.

              ?


              • #52
                Re: 40% of guns are sold without background checks

                Originally posted by O'Sullivan Bere View Post
                It's a good subject for additional debate, namely what's also changed about society. There were mass killings beforehand, but it has spiked. But do we want to make it all the more easy if there is greater risk today than then for whatever reasons? Should we just allow people to hand over weapons to all the Sureos gangsters and Jared Loughners because the whole thing is futile anyway? Not IMO. All that's going to do is aggravate the situation.
                I'm too tired to discuss it fully right now but what we are seeing is, in my opinion, a mass psychological change in American society. People are becoming more and more isolated which leads to internalization of personal ideologies, an inflated sense of self importance and outward hostility toward those who we perceive as "different". In short, being "different" is perceived as being a threat and that threat is being reinforced strongly by institutionalized systems of division which have been constructed to "help" society.

                ?

                Working...
                X