Funny how you think this is a "left vs right" discussion. Shouldn't you be handing out quests and repeating yourself over and over again? LOL

Then explain to me why Chicago's -- which is home to some of the strictest gun laws in the US -- Southside faces mass shootings on a regular basis (the media ignores these)? Regular, law-abiding citizens, especially young African Americans in the city's Southside, have to jump through a series of hoops to get a gun, let alone carry one.  As a result, they are left defenseless...meanwhile, its business-as-usual for all the gangs, which don't seem to have any issues buying illegal firearms at competitive prices. 

As for your "simply common sense" remark: the vast, heavily-statistically significant majority of gun-related deaths and homicides in the US are committed with a handgun. 

And in regards to "get a fucking taser, a damn slingshot" -- not sure I agree with you there, but I also think there's a cultural gap here. The USA is unique in that the right to bare arms is enshrined in our founding documents, in the Constitution. It was no accident that the Founding Fathers made this the 2nd amendment right after the 1st (free speech, free press, etc.). The 2nd Amendment was not created to ensure hunting and sport shooting, and it wasn't primarily focused on a crazy man breaking into your house. The 2nd Amendment was made to ensure that the public has the means to defend its freedom and private property were the Government to ever go usurpatious. 

Now, I'm not some paranoid who thinks the US government will go usurpatious any time soon;  rather,  I just wanted to illustrate why the constitutional right to bare arms is no fundamental and sacrosanct in the American psyche.

> I want to end gun violence by using guns to attack and kill anyone who has a gun and doesn't want to give it up for a marginal change in potential shootings in shit holes like Chicago. Ultimately mass shootings will be unchanged because the perps can plan ahead anyway.

I mean I get it, but the problem with a lot of people who talk like you do is that you cant think two steps ahead. Shit has consequences, if you do something it doesn't just suddenly change everything for the better. Real life doesn't work that way.

I agree 100%, these are just the creators I’m personally familiar with because of my political leanings, but I think we should be THE place where people can come and know they won’t be censored and will have a direct connection to their community.

Posted using [Partiko iOS](https://partiko.app/referral/midlet)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq7h7ZT3Gv0

How is this sensitive content? 

It's a discussion about an interesting and relevant subject which we should actually see a lot more of on social media. It's important to discuss issues rather than blocking or demonetizing them because certain people don't like their views being questioned or people to have a different opinion to the current acceptable narrative.

Like I said, I agree with the problem. But promoting sensitive content, for whichever sake, can have serious image consequences, especially considering serious investors. And we know already that Steem has an image problem. Involving it so blatantly in a political "war" doesn't make it better, it makes it worse.

If Steem wants to communicate that, they should make a post about it here and on medium and maybe a video on youtube to call people from whichever political side to publish their content here. Promoting one sided content certainly does not have the same effect.

is

It is indeed. Hope we can bring back a lot of stake towards manual curation to support demonetized YouTube creators coming over to Steem. The opportunity window is right now, the question is, will more stakeholders choose to put their stake behind supporting growing the platform? Or keep it stuck in bid bots that only demoralizes users?