Bruh
- Locked due to inactivity on Jan 5, '21 3:54am
Thread Topic: Bruh
-
I’m more concerned with gun rights and freedom of speech because I don’t trust the government and don’t want them to have that kind of power over us. We should all be able to say whatever we want, even if it does offend someone, and we should all have the right to protect ourselves.
We honestly probably won’t know who really won till about another week or so because there’s gonna be a bunch of recounts.
No, yeah, Nevada’s being a little b---- right now -
tbh biden isn't going to take away your guns. worst he'll do is implement stronger gun control and a gun tax. personally i feel that gun control and more thorough background checks ARE needed. I'm not for a national gun registry for regular firearms but I do think stricter regulation is necessary. I'd recommend reading through before drawing conclusions.
I don't see him achieving all of those goals, especially certain ones.
For example, "ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines." I don't think this is feasible and I have mixed emotions about this. I think THESE should require a registry, but I don't think they should be banned entirely. (Although this does only say ban the MANUFACTURE of them.)
And I also don't see how gun control is more important than human rights. -
I do agree, congress should not pass a law controlling free speech. HOWEVER, this does not pertain to work places. The discrimination acts are extremely important. I also wouldn't mind gender orientation being added to that list. In fact, I think it should be. Your workplace should have to use your preferred pronouns and name, and should not be able to fire you based on such grounds.
See, that's one of my biggest issues with Trump. Not the military ruling because I understand that, but his ruling on access to healthcare. Hospitals can turn away dying trans people and that is NOT okay. -
There's alot of stuff in biden's gun safety thing that I really disagree with. For one thing "assault weapons" are not a functional classification. They function the same as most hunting rifles. They're just made to look the same as military rifles. Also I find red flag laws terrifying. I would not want my family to have that kind of power over me. Not allowing guns for people with mental health issues makes sense on one hand but it has a few problems on the other hand. Firstly people with mental health issues are statistically more likely to be murdered. Secondly if people know they'll lose rights because of a diagnosis they'll be less likely to seek help.
I think a workplace should be required to use preferred pronouns on documents but whether individual employees have to use them should be a personal choice or company policy. I think they're a--holes if they don't use them but I would avoid anything that might and up as precedent for limiting the first amendment -
I think flag laws should be able to be appealed with a mental health screening done by a professional. You do bring up a good point with that. Things like depression and anxiety shouldn't lead to being unable to own a gun, but more serious and high risk disorders should. Sadly I don't think Biden shares these beliefs.
People with mental health issues are also more likely to commit gun violence or suicide.
Personally I disagree. Coworkers aren't allowed to openly be racist. What difference would protecting LGBTQ+ individuals make? However those issues would obviously be handled by HR departments. It just gets tricky with small businesses.
Nothing will ever be 100% perfect but that isn't a reason not to try to be better. -
I don't think there should be laws against co-workers saying racist things. I believe the first amendment shouldn't be limited at all. I do think the companies should 100% fire them if for saying those things but I don't think it should be a legal requirement. Racist actions such as denying a promotion or refusing to hire them bc of race should def be illegal tho.
I think the appeal screening would have to be available same day or possibly the next day at the latest. And it should ofc be free.
Yeah, Ik id definitely avoid getting diagnosed with depression if meant I couldn't get a gun lol. More serious conditions should disqualify ppl. there needs to be some kind of a measurement on how much of a risk the person is instead of just going by what they're diagnosed with since alot of things are on a spectrum. -
The first amendment and discrimination acts are different things, though. Making sure a workplace is safe for others absolutely is necessary. No you shouldn't be able to sue someone for making racist comments, but you should be able to rely on them being handled accordingly (depending on the severity of the situation).
I don't know that it's plausible for it to be that fast. I don't think the government should be able to bust in and take your guns at any given moment based on what your family says- But I do think a red flag should (temporarily) prevent the purchase of more firearms, and the immediate start to a mental health screening process.
Yeah depression really shouldn't be a contributing factor unless there are other underlying issues. Case by case, you know. It isn't a cookie cutter issue by any means.
Personally i also think some mental health diagnoses should not eliminate you from military service. It really bothers me that a MEDICATED individual with ANY sort of mental disorder, no matter the severity, can not join the military. Depression isn't cookie cutter. Bipolar disorder isn't cookie cutter. OCD isn't cookie cutter. Maybe a similar situation with gun control- Screenings to clear the person for service. -
And "handled accordingly" wouldn't always mean fired- Warnings, training, tough discussions with HR. If a person can't be civil with their coworkers, and makes the workplace unpleasant, they shouldn't be allowed in that workplace. That isn't fair to poc who are just existing.
Being racist is a choice. Skin color is not. -
I agree with that idea of red flag laws
Even medicated adhd means you can't get into the military lol
I agree with all that but I think it should be company requirements not government ones. I just feel like letting the government anywhere near speech will end badly -
Yeah, I do think there should be punishments for people who are being racist or homophobic or anything else because I see that as being unprofessional. It’s the same as why you don’t curse when you’re at work. But it should be up to the company to decide that, not the government. And I do think a warning should be given first to the individual saying those things because it is possible that they don’t know the harm to what they’re saying (such as saying “that’s gay” or something which used to be a very common saying a decade ago. Or I’ve met people at work who are white and yet will say the n word, but they say it in replacement of “dude/bro/bruh” and have told me that they have black friends and they let them use that word, so they’re not using it with any bad intent, but they don’t know that it’s fine to say that stuff in your personal life because do whatever you want, but when you’re at work, you’re representing the company)
-
Okay 1) Discrimination acts are already a thing. That's why WE, women, are able to have jobs. But it is already usually handled by the company unless the company fails to respond.
2) Having black friends does not give you an n word pass xD -
Let’s see if Nevada actually gets their s--- together and start releasing their vote count today
-
There’s a lawsuit with Nevada too, right?
-
Lawsuots will take months, so I wouldn't worry about those. The recounts will hopefully happen quickly.
-
Oh, dude, I know lol I don’t know how people can think that just because they have black friends, they’re allowed to freely use the n word. Like it’s fine if you use that word with those black friends that you have when y’all are together, but don’t be using it around me or around other people who aren’t your friends
This thread is locked, therefore no new posts can be made.
