57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 May, 2023 04:48 pm
@izzythepush,
Either or. Irresponsible budgeting then.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Tue 9 May, 2023 05:14 pm
@vikorr,
The last time the budget was balance was under Pres Clinton for multiple years. Before him, 1970 was the previous year the budget was balanced. If you don't balance the budget, you just keep adding to the debt.

When the Republicans get into office, the 1st thing they do is give massive tax cuts to the riches people. That is the way Clinton balanced the budget - he got taxes in raised on the rich and others.
Wilso
 
  2  
Reply Tue 9 May, 2023 10:25 pm
There's some videos doing the social media rounds, apparently not new, describing what to do in active shooter situations. If that's the price Americans are paying for "freedom", the price is too high. Once again questioning, how the fvck do you live like that?
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 May, 2023 05:19 am
@BillW,
Yep, you just seem to be missing the part where every party has been doing the same thing you are complaining about for the last 2 decades.

Of course no country can maintain endless borrowing. My view is that the populace's sense of entitlement leads them to think that everything should be sorted out by the government for them (ie. both the populace and the government have a part to play in the constant borrowing).

Of course the problem with the government sorting out too many problems, is:
- the problem solving skills of the populace (who no longer have to solve so many of their own problems) diminishes....
- leading them to want the government to sort out more minor problems (that had they better skills wouldn't be an issue)...
- diminishing problem solving skills even further...

Presumably everyone understands how increasing anxiety and neediness are linked to the loss of problem solving skills. The more problems they have to solve, the more it costs.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 May, 2023 10:53 am
@Wilso,
The problem is that by and large you're preaching to the converted.

Most Americans on this thread aren't happy with the state of gun regulation in America.

Creepy 2nd ammendment weirdos like Oralloy seem to have done a bunk.
Region Philbis
 
  2  
Reply Wed 10 May, 2023 11:57 am
@izzythepush,

Most Americans on this thread aren't happy with the state of gun regulation in America...
0 Replies
 
thack45
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2023 08:52 am
https://preview.redd.it/ig2jt7bpd7za1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=abdb376185d6353e297b4d1a487a53d39d854781
Wilso
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2023 04:19 pm
@thack45,
thack45 wrote:

https://preview.redd.it/ig2jt7bpd7za1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=abdb376185d6353e297b4d1a487a53d39d854781


The land of the free? The centre of democracy?


0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2023 07:37 pm
@thack45,
Obviously the clown who wrote that didn't think about the fact the airline company wouldn't let him on the plane. And that's only the start of the problems with his infantile 'logic'.
vikorr
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 May, 2023 08:00 pm
@vikorr,
to clarify, if he thinks he's hijacking a plane:
- if his sick son is dying, the dumbass needs life support on the plane, which he's not getting by hijacking it
- he has to get past airport security (so he'd need to kill people there)
- they seal of the cabin so he can't tell them what he wants

So yeah, even if the government bans him...for a ridiculously unfathomable reason...he's still not getting what he wants.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2023 12:14 am
@vikorr,
Why should Italy treat an American citizen?

I'd be pretty pissed off if taxpayers money was being used to treat Americans on the NHS.
vikorr
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2023 01:37 pm
@izzythepush,
I know that some countries have reciprocal health care arrangements for tourists, but I don't think any country gives free health care to others citizens go there specifically for health care. Ie. He'd have to pay.

In any event, I also left out that our wouldbe hijacker would get arrested as soon as he stepped off the plane in Italy, and if he somehow managed to slip through the whole airport carrying his Ar15 (remember, in his head this is 'obviously' possible)...

Probably he thinks 'but I'd pay for the Uber to the hospital!'
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 May, 2023 02:23 pm
@vikorr,
Has anybody on Facebook or wherever he is pointed our ro him the 6tter stupidity of his plan and why gun nuts like him are not convincing the world.
0 Replies
 
Region Philbis
 
  3  
Reply Mon 15 May, 2023 04:52 am

https://iili.io/HUNR7Hu.jpg
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Wed 17 May, 2023 12:13 pm
Back-to-back attacks in Serbia prompt a gun amnesty and fears among some that the country is becoming more like the US.

Serbians hand in guns and question culture of violence after two shootings

https://i.imgur.com/jEFTSsXl.jpg
(Small Arm survey 2018)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Thu 18 May, 2023 01:04 pm
A quarter of Americans now believe guns are the number one public health threat, according to new polling.

Quote:
https://i.imgur.com/a9G1Ue7l.jpg

Source: Axios/Ipsos American Health Index
BillW
 
  2  
Reply Thu 18 May, 2023 03:26 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

A quarter of Americans now believe guns are the number one public health threat, according to new polling.

It is ironic to me that if this question was asked in Ukraine, the answer would be "War"; and guns are just one tool of war. Then again, there are a number of ironic things inherent with guns and America!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Tue 6 Jun, 2023 01:32 pm
U.S. Can’t Bar Man Convicted of Nonviolent Crime From Owning Gun, Court Rules
Quote:
The decision, which national groups had been closely watching, was a potential setback to gun regulations spurred by a Supreme Court ruling last year that vastly expanded the right to bear arms.

A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that a man who committed a nonviolent crime cannot be legally prevented from owning a firearm — a potential setback to gun regulations spurred by a Supreme Court ruling last year that vastly expanded the right to bear arms.

In an 11-to-4 ruling, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals overturned decisions by lower courts that had prevented Bryan Range, a Pennsylvania resident who had sued the state after being blocked from buying a shotgun for hunting and self-protection over a conviction for lying on a benefits application in the 1990s.

In a majority opinion, Judge Thomas M. Hardiman repeatedly cited the Supreme Court ruling last June, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, in which the majority established a new standard that dictated that gun laws conform to “historical traditions” dating to the 18th and 19th centuries.

“In sum, we reject the government’s contention that only ‘law-abiding, responsible citizens’ are counted among ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment,” wrote Judge Hardiman, a George W. Bush appointee who was on former President Donald J. Trump’s short list to serve on the Supreme Court after the death of Antonin Scalia in 2016.

It is unclear whether the ruling applies to similar cases: Mr. Range’s lawyer, Michael P. Gottlieb, said he brought the case for the “benefit of my client only” and believes it will make its way to the Supreme Court if the Justice Department appeals.

A spokeswoman for the department did not immediately return a request for comment.

Three judges, concurring with the majority, wrote that the decision “does not spell doom” for a section of federal law that strips gun ownership from anyone “convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.”

Judge Hardiman wrote that his opinion was “narrow.” But in a sharply worded dissent, Judge Patty Shwartz, an Obama appointee, said that the majority opinion would set a broad and dangerous precedent.

“While my colleagues state that their opinion is narrow, the analytical framework they have applied to reach their conclusion renders most, if not all, felon bans unconstitutional,” she wrote.

Judge Hardiman argued that punishing Mr. Range by revoking his gun rights for an offense that did not involve violence gave lawmakers too much power “to manipulate the Second Amendment” by labeling as a criminal someone, like Mr. Range, who has led an otherwise law-abiding life.

Editors’ Picks
Where Do You Draw the Line on P.D.A.?
A First Try of Apple’s $3,500 Vision Pro Headset
But Would You Wear It?
Continue reading the main story
Federal laws bar people convicted of state or federal crimes that are punishable by more than a year in prison from buying weapons. In some states, including Pennsylvania, the federal ban takes effect after conviction on a misdemeanor that has a potential sentence of at least a year.

The decision, which was closely watched by national groups on both sides of the firearms debate, is the latest in a succession of federal court rulings that roll back existing gun regulations.

But most of those cases have been heard in the lower courts and only one other, over a decision that restored gun ownership rights to a man who was under a restraining order in a domestic violence, reached a federal appeals court, in New Orleans.
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2023 05:12 am
Norwalk police: Pregnant mother dies after being shot in back by 2-year-old child
Mame
 
  3  
Reply Thu 22 Jun, 2023 12:28 pm
@hightor,
So tragic. How many more children will kill a family member because of guns lying around?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.35 seconds on 12/05/2024 at 04:37:17