Kamala Harris says "Let's have an assault weapons ban" in her extremely delayed response to the recent Texas school shooting.
Does the same idiot who writes scripts for TV shows writing the script
for the Biden administration?
"Hello, I haven't shown my face in nearly a year, I still haven't fixed the border, but I'd like to take this opportunity to take guns away from Americans."
Beto O'Rourke isn't much better:
"Hi I'm running for governor and the shooting is the fault of the incumbent."
Bad news, bro: The border will never be "fixed" to your satisfaction, no matter who is president.Fixing the border helps to limit fentanyul smuggling and gun smuggling.
Bad news, bro: The border will never be "fixed" to your satisfaction, matter who is president.Fixing the border helps to limit fentanyul smuggling and gun smuggling.
Bad news, bro: The border will never be "fixed" to your satisfaction, no matter who is president.
Greg Abbott has done nothing to make guns less accessible to those who want to harm others, and in fact has worked to make them more
accessible. The idea that more guns prevent crime is a farce; Texas has some of the most lax gun laws in the country.
Kamala Harris says "Let's have an assault weapons ban" in her extremely delayed response to the recent Texas school shooting.
Bad news, bro: The border will never be "fixed" to your satisfaction, matter who is president.It was fixed to my satisfaction when Trump was president, but you're right, because now it's destroyed beyond repair.
We no longer have that
layer of protection (called a border) to protect us from foreign
threats
and you are right when you say "it will never be fixed" because
we've screwed ourselves over for the last time, by voting Democrat.
Greg Abbott has done nothing to make guns less accessible to those wh want to harm others, and in fact has worked to make them more accessible. The idea that more guns prevent crime is a farce; Texas h some of the most lax gun laws in the country.No governor in any state has done anything to make guns less accessible.
Beto should try blaming his own party for today's historic crime levels.
We need guns now more than ever because of the horrible things Democrats are doing.
Kamala Harris says "Let's have an assault weapons ban" in her extremely delayed response to the recent Texas school shooting.It would be nice if the people who keep calling for *more* gun laws (that only affect law abiding citizens) would explain exactly how those new
laws will fix the problem.
With many instances of gun violence, existing laws were not enforced.
We currently have more gun laws on the books than several years ago and, several years ago, we were not experiencing the seemingly constant mass shootings that are often (but not always) comitted by someone who is
known to police/the feds and is either being watched (but not close enough) or that was determined not to be enough of a threat.
Meanwhile we have felons, convicted of gun-related violent crimes, who
get out of prison, get arrested and charged with "possession of a gun by
a felon" multiple times, and still manage to be back out on the street, and armed.
They can brag about this on social media, along with bragging about "rolling up" on someone and "putting them to sleep permanently," and posting violent videos of driveby shootings. Meanwhile, Donald Trump hurts people like Jeff's feelings so he gets social media banned.
And it is not because they are fooling any filters... some (but not all) of the videos they post do get flagged as "violent content" but are still there, posted publically, to be watched if you click "OK" on the disclaimer.
Something needs doing, but whatever the dumbass left-leaning politicians are doing and want doing is not fixing anything.
Aaron Thomas wrote to All <=-
"Hello, I haven't shown my face in nearly a year, I still haven't fixed the border, but I'd like to take this opportunity to take guns away
from Americans."
Beto O'Rourke isn't much better:
"Hi I'm running for governor and the shooting is the fault of the incumbent."
guns than we know what to do with as it is, and I'm not sure the gun smuggling is going the direction that you think it's going.Making Mexico more danegrous.
Beto O'Rourke isn't much better:The Lefties never let a tragedy go unexploited.
"Hi I'm running for governor and the shooting is the fault of the incumbent."
The problem is that their ignorant sycophants (That's you, Jeff) are the only ones listening to this drivel.
guns than we know what to do with as it is, and I'm not sure the gun smuggling is going the direction that you think it's going.Making Mexico more danegrous.
Kamala Harris says "Let's have an assault weapons ban" in her extremely delayed response to the recent Texas school shooting.
It would be nice if the people who keep calling for *more* gun laws (that only affect law abiding citizens) would explain exactly how those new
laws will fix the problem.
We currently have more gun laws on the books than several years ago and, several years ago, we were not experiencing the seemingly constant mass shootings that are often (but not always) comitted by someone who is
known to police/the feds and is either being watched (but not close enough) or that was determined not to be enough of a threat.
They can brag about this on social media, along with bragging about "rolling up" on someone and "putting them to sleep permanently," and posting violent videos of driveby shootings. Meanwhile, Donald Trump hurts people like Jeff's feelings so he gets social media banned.
And it is not because they are fooling any filters... some (but not all) of the videos they post do get flagged as "violent content" but are still there, posted publically, to be watched if you click "OK" on the disclaimer.
Was it? Because we still had migrants, drug smugglers, and others
crossing the border under Trump. We were still granting refugees asylum under Trump. The only thing Trump did was build little bits of a wall
and crank up the cruelty. I guess that's the part you liked?
and you are right when you say "it will never be fixed" because
we've screwed ourselves over for the last time, by voting Democrat.
It will never be fixed to your satisfaction, no.
Democrats are not responsible for crime levels. If anything, Republicans are. By continuing to drive income and wealth disparity, they ensure
that a certain portion of the population remains locked in poverty. And poverty drives crime, especially violent crime. Financially secure
people don't generally commit that much violent crime.
We need guns now more than ever because of the horrible things Democr are doing.
BS. We've tried that. It doesn't work.
The Lefties never let a tragedy go unexploited.
Trump reduced legal immigration, but not illegal immigration. You're tryingWas it? Because we still had migrants, drug smugglers, and others crossing the border under Trump. We were still granting refugees asyl under Trump. The only thing Trump did was build little bits of a wall and crank up the cruelty. I guess that's the part you liked?That's nonsense. We didn't have 4 million+ illegal migrants in a single year under Trump's administration.
We should pause it now, and get backWe don't really have an option to "pause" illegal immigration. We deport them as we catch them. But I suspect you're referring to legal immigration instead.
to taking asylum seekers in the future, after we get covid, baby
formula, and FOOD under better control.
We need to change the asylumYep, here we go. If the current laws allow asylum seekers to enter our
laws and only take refugees who are coming from countries with current violence by government.
Otherwise it's a waste of our resources toBS. In some cases its war, which we do not have in the US. In other cases
"help" people who say they're "escaping" the "<same bs we deal with in
the usa>"
Mexico is a more humane choice for migrant enslavement anyway;No one has suggested enslavement but you.
theyWe don't have baby food or food shortages here. We have a temporary baby formula shortage.
don't have the baby food or food shortages that we have here.
They canSo can we, and we always seem to have the money to buy from them.
grow crops year round, and they will always have excess to sell to us.
Refugees are legal immigrants and they are not hurting you.All I want is a restriction on refugees. Things are tough all all over, Pedro.and you are right when you say "it will never be fixed" because we've screwed ourselves over for the last time, by voting DemocrIt will never be fixed to your satisfaction, no.
Democrats are not responsible for crime levels. If anything, Republic are. By continuing to drive income and wealth disparity, they ensure that a certain portion of the population remains locked in poverty. A poverty drives crime, especially violent crime. Financially secure people don't generally commit that much violent crime.That's a terrible brainwashing scheme; there are way too many holes in everything you're saying. Wealth disparity is a choice. Everything you said is a generalization. Generalizations don't work in court, so they work here instead? Financial hardship isn't a reason to commit a crime, unless someone's stealing food from the grocery store. Is America crying about "rising grocery store thefts?" Nope! Because it's Joe's violent crime crisis that bothers us more than some stolen food.
Tried stocking up on guns and failed? Try again! Get em before they're gone for good!We need guns now more than ever because of the horrible things D are doing.BS. We've tried that. It doesn't work.
The Lefties never let a tragedy go unexploited.Unless it's a tragedy that presents itself with an unhelpful narrative, like "Unarmed native american man killed by police."
Nope! Because it's Joe's violent
crime crisis that bothers us more than some stolen food.
Take it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve the problem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely solve the problem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem intent on continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.
With many instances of gun violence, existing laws were not enforced.
That is a problem that needs to be addressed. Perhaps there need to be increased penalties for not enforcing existing laws.
We may have more laws by count than the era before near-daily mass shootings, but we have less regulation in general. Two things happened right about when the whole thing started: the 1994 federal assault weapons ban was allowed to expire, and the 2008 Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller. Those two things drastically changed the firearm landscape and we are still dealing with the after-effects with no end in sight.
Meanwhile we have felons, convicted of gun-related violent crimes, who get out of prison, get arrested and charged with "possession of a gun by a felon" multiple times, and still manage to be back out on the street, and armed.
You're clearly advocating for increased penalties for felons caught in possession of a firearm. That's gonna require either new laws or a change to existing ones. As for how they manage to get their hands on a firearm, that's a function of just how many there are in circulation.
It would be nice if the people who keep calling for *more* gun laws (that
only affect law abiding citizens) would explain exactly how those new laws will fix the problem.
Yes, I don't understand how Kamala's proposal would fix anything. If a lunatic
learns that Kamala has banned AK-47s, will that make him want to be less of a killer and more of a hugger?
Parents need to make demands of better security measures in the schools,
but instead, they are demanding whatever Democrats & the media tell them to demand.
Less internet would be helpful. People think they can find the answer to anything and everything on the internet. Search queries like "what can I get
Selfish people are incapable of seeing the harm in anything as long as it's "legal." It's legal to cheat on spouses in most states; so leftists probably think of it as "ok to do." Just like coming to the USA with a weak story about
"I need asylum because there's mean people threatening me back home." Dishonest and selfish, but legal.
guns than we know what to do with as it is, and I'm not sure the gun smuggling is going the direction that you think it's going.
Making Mexico more danegrous.
The problem is that their ignorant sycophants (That's you, Jeff) are the only ones listening to this drivel.
Not true. 80-some-odd percent of Americans support stronger gun safety laws.
Take it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve the problem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely solve the problem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem intent continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.Zero guns would not solve the problem at all. No guns for felons doesn't solve the problem of felons having guns now because, you know, felons
have a difficult time following laws.
Unlimited guns would also not work because, you know, felons.
On a somewhat related note, last I checked, it was not conservatives or Republicans who want to restore some/all rights to felons.
Agreed. There should also be increased penalties for people who continue to break existing laws. Supposedly there are but, in reality, these are also not always enforced.With many instances of gun violence, existing laws were not enforceThat is a problem that needs to be addressed. Perhaps there need to be increased penalties for not enforcing existing laws.
Mass shootings exploded after Columbine. The Heller decision, in particular, did away with a lot of existing gun laws.We may have more laws by count than the era before near-daily mass shoot but we have less regulation in general. Two things happened right about the whole thing started: the 1994 federal assault weapons ban was allowe expire, and the 2008 Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v. Hel Those two things drastically changed the firearm landscape and we are st dealing with the after-effects with no end in sight.I believe numbers were starting to go up before the 1994 law expired.
Actually, it does not seem like they are enforcing what they have tooMeanwhile we have felons, convicted of gun-related violent crimes, get out of prison, get arrested and charged with "possession of a g a felon" multiple times, and still manage to be back out on the str and armed.You're clearly advocating for increased penalties for felons caught in possession of a firearm. That's gonna require either new laws or a chang existing ones. As for how they manage to get their hands on a firearm, t a function of just how many there are in circulation.
much but, yes, if they would increase the penalties for repeat offenders by changing/enforcing existing laws, that would not be a bad idea.
But I bet their definitions are different.The problem is that their ignorant sycophants (That's you, Jeff) ar only ones listening to this drivel.Not true. 80-some-odd percent of Americans support stronger gun safety l
For me, "gun safety" means teaching younger people about the safe way to handle a firearm, and the harm that they can do. Also, it means
enforcing existing laws and penalties for gun related crimes, especially those that involve repeat offenders.
For others, "gun safety" means "I don't like or want guns in my home, so no one else should have one, either."
So if you just ask people in either group if they are for stronger gun safety laws, they might both say "yes."
Trump reduced legal immigration, but not illegal immigration. You're trying to characterize some legal immigrants as illegal, but your mischaracterization doesn't mean squat to anyone.
Yep, here we go. If the current laws allow asylum seekers to enter our country, then they are legal immigrants. That your solution would involve changing laws means that you are definitely trying to mischaracterize legal immigrants as illegal.
Limiting refugees to only those where the violence is from the
government is a strange distinction to make, as it would make anyone
from an invaded country (such as Ukraine) ineligible.
Otherwise it's a waste of our resources toBS. In some cases its war, which we do not have in the US. In other cases it's gang violence ignored by corrupt ofiicials, to a degree that we do not yet have here in the US.
"help" people who say they're "escaping" the "<same bs we deal with i the usa>"
Mexico is a more humane choice for migrant enslavement anyway;No one has suggested enslavement but you.
We don't have baby food or food shortages here. We have a temporary baby formula shortage.
Nope! Because it's Joe's violent
crime crisis that bothers us more than some stolen food.
You're not trying to blame our violent crime crisis on Biden's refugee policy, are you?
I know of several parents, and teachers, who are demanding better
security vs. the sound-byte alternatives.
A bigger problem is that there seem to be more who don't see the harm in doing things that are not legal.
Trump reduced legal immigration, but not illegal immigration. You're trying to characterize some legal immigrants as illegal, but your mischaracterization doesn't mean squat to anyone.Don't try to BS the legal migrants by saying that Trump was their enemy.
Without Trump, legal migrants didn't have a good country to come to,
just like they don't now either.
A country that doesn't track everyone
who comes in is a security risk,
and stack that up with record high
inflation,
record high crime,
and record high distrust of a white house
regime.
Yep, here we go. If the current laws allow asylum seekers to enter ou country, then they are legal immigrants. That your solution would inv changing laws means that you are definitely trying to mischaracterize legal immigrants as illegal.Yes.
Limiting refugees to only those where the violence is from the government is a strange distinction to make, as it would make anyone from an invaded country (such as Ukraine) ineligible.* Violence from their own government, or violence from war. How bout
that?
It's not our duty to correct the wrongs of other governments until they invade our space.Otherwise it's a waste of our resources toBS. In some cases its war, which we do not have in the US. In other c it's gang violence ignored by corrupt ofiicials, to a degree that we not yet have here in the US.
"help" people who say they're "escaping" the "<same bs we deal w the usa>"
Refugee immigration is not human smuggling.Biden has suggested it sumbliminally with his grand re-opening of the human smuggling railroad.Mexico is a more humane choice for migrant enslavement anyway;No one has suggested enslavement but you.
Notice how he doesn't call on congress to
write a bill to update our policies? He doesn't call on them to do anything, because he's fine with ruling authoritarian style. I ain't
fine with it though.
We don't have baby food or food shortages here. We have a temporary b formula shortage.Great job. You should give Biden your card..
extremelyKamala Harris says "Let's have an assault weapons ban" in her
delayed response to the recent Texas school shooting.
It would be nice if the people who keep calling for *more* gun laws(that
only affect law abiding citizens) would explain exactly how those new
laws will fix the problem.
Take it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve the problem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely solve the problem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem intent on continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.
With many instances of gun violence, existing laws were not enforced.
That is a problem that needs to be addressed. Perhaps there need to be increased penalties for not enforcing existing laws.
Take it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve th problem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely solve problem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem inte continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.Japan did away with all guns in the 19th century. Then was invaded
by Western powers. Trying to gain their ancient lands back using only swords proved to be too demanding, so the shoguns brought back guns.
Then came Pearl Harbor ...
Oh, come now. Assault rifles (such as AR-15s) and ammo should notWith many instances of gun violence, existing laws were not enforcedThat is a problem that needs to be addressed. Perhaps there need to b increased penalties for not enforcing existing laws.
be sold to civilians, but only to qualified military or ex-military.
How many more mass shootings (4 or more people) have to happen? How
many more innocent men, women and children have to die due to easy
access to guns? There is something seriously wrong with this country.
And it needs to be fixed, NOW!
Don't try to BS the legal migrants by saying that Trump was their ene
`He certainly wasn't their friend.
await their immigration court dates, and many others were separated from their families. Some families have not been reunited to this day.
A country that doesn't track everyone
who comes in is a security risk,
Legal migrants are tracked.
Inflation is not at a record high, and is still better than the
conditions they are fleeing.
Trump and his administration were highly distrusted, especially by migrants.
* Violence from their own government, or violence from war. How bout that?
How about violence, period? Why don't you tell us specifically what violence you're looking to exclude?
It's not our duty to correct the wrongs of other governments until th invade our space.
It is our moral duty to help those who ask us for it.
Refugee immigration is not human smuggling.
Trump;s Remain in Mexico policy did not go through Congress, nor did his policy to separate families, nor did his wall. And you were fine with it.
To a normal person, "legal migrants" are people who apply for visas. To you, "legal migrants" are people who are taking advantage of a flawed refugee system *because it's legal*Don't try to BS the legal migrants by saying that Trump was thei`He certainly wasn't their friend.
await their immigration court dates, and many others were separated f their families. Some families have not been reunited to this day.You're as useful as Joy Behar when you still talk about "separated from familes." Thousands of unaccompanied minors are flocking to the southern border, parentless, and you're complaining about Trump's treatment of migrants years ago. That was then, this is now. Has Kamala found out
what the childrens' root causes were yet? She would make a terrible CYS employee.
That's not enough. We need to start tracking illegal migrants.A country that doesn't track everyoneLegal migrants are tracked.
who comes in is a security risk,
Inflation is not at a record high, and is still better than the conditions they are fleeing.It's the highest it's been in 40 years according to NBCNews. You don't know what the people of the world are fleeing from, you're just generalizing and assuming, racistly.
Trump and his administration were highly distrusted, especially by migrants.Highly distrusted by fake refugee migrants, but highly respected by migrants who came here through the visa program.
Violence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling people to come here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang members where they come from are more hostile than American gang members, based on gay statistics."* Violence from their own government, or violence from war. How that?How about violence, period? Why don't you tell us specifically what violence you're looking to exclude?
Did the human smuggling industry ask for our help?It's not our duty to correct the wrongs of other governments unt invade our space.It is our moral duty to help those who ask us for it.
Refugee immigration is not human smuggling.Not when they are real refugees coming from war zones. But your friends are at the Mexico/US border, they're humans that have been smuggled.
Trump;s Remain in Mexico policy did not go through Congress, nor did policy to separate families, nor did his wall. And you were fine withBecause it worked. People would have been fine with Biden's orders too, had they worked. They're not working for Americans, they're only working for the human smuggling industry.
On 31 May 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
Take it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve the problem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely solve thZero guns would not solve the problem at all. No guns for felons doesn't
problem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem intent
continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.
solve the problem of felons having guns now because, you know, felons have a difficult time following laws.
Zero guns for anyone means zero guns for felons. It's an extreme, remember?
On a somewhat related note, last I checked, it was not conservatives or Republicans who want to restore some/all rights to felons.
That would be voting rights.
Agreed. There should also be increased penalties for people who continue
to break existing laws. Supposedly there are but, in reality, these are also not always enforced.
Then that needs to be addressed. The reason(s) they're not enforced needs to be identified and addressed. But again, it's not just felons who shoot people.
For me, it means making the country more safe from people with guns. I'm pretty sure that's the generic definition.
For others, "gun safety" means "I don't like or want guns in my home, so no one else should have one, either."
Nope.
So if you just ask people in either group if they are for stronger gun safety laws, they might both say "yes."
People generally know what the term means.
immigration court dates, and many others were separated from their families. Some families have not been reunited to this day.
Zero guns for anyone means zero guns for felons. It's an extreme, remembThere are Zero for felons now but they get them. There are not zero guns in existence now, so that cat is out of the bag. It is an extreme that
is not likely to be a success.
In the case of "some" rights, that is usually the case.On a somewhat related note, last I checked, it was not conservative Republicans who want to restore some/all rights to felons.That would be voting rights.
For me, it means making the country more safe from people with guns. I'm pretty sure that's the generic definition.Um, yes, there are those who believe that. They believe they cannot have what gun safety means to you without having a world where no one has a gun.
For others, "gun safety" means "I don't like or want guns in my hom no one else should have one, either."Nope.
It means what it means to them.So if you just ask people in either group if they are for stronger safety laws, they might both say "yes."People generally know what the term means.
immigration court dates, and many others were separated from their famil Some families have not been reunited to this day.That never happened under previous administrations.
To a normal person, "legal migrants" are people who migrate legally. If it's legal, it's legal. If it's illegal, it's illegal. Calling something that's legal "illegal" because you disagree with it doesn't actually
make it legal. Any normal person knows that.
And how do you propose we track actual illegal migrants? If they're truly here illegally, they get deported when caught. Refugees go through the legal immigration process.
I trust the immigration officials whose job it is to screen them, and the immigration judges whose job it is to hear their cases. That's not
racist.
Highly distrusted by fake refugee migrants, but highly respected by migrants who came here through the visa program.
Refugees aren't "fake migrants." And Trump got voted out, did you forget?
Violence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling people t come here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang members wh they come from are more hostile than American gang members, based on statistics."
Violence is violence. And "gay statistics," really? Are you homophobic as well as racist?
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought experiment.
It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
To a normal person, "legal migrants" are people who migrate legally. it's legal, it's legal. If it's illegal, it's illegal. Calling someth that's legal "illegal" because you disagree with it doesn't actually make it legal. Any normal person knows that.Any honest person knows that it's not right to take things just because they're "eligible." If I were "eligible" to waste taxypayer money I would disregard the opportunity.
And how do you propose we track actual illegal migrants? If they're t here illegally, they get deported when caught. Refugees go through th legal immigration process.That's because you live in Texas. It's not like that everywhere. You
tend to only look at things from your mom's concrete slab foundation. ;) Migrants are protected from deportation by liberal judges; shielded from immigration officers.
Tracking real illegal immigrants won't be possible until Joe's refugee tsunami is resolved. It's a diversion.
I trust the immigration officials whose job it is to screen them, and immigration judges whose job it is to hear their cases. That's not racist.That's fine, it's all of your generalizing and assuming that's racist.
No, but they're "fake refugees." And Trump didn't get voted out by visa holders because they aren't allowed to vote.Highly distrusted by fake refugee migrants, but highly respected migrants who came here through the visa program.Refugees aren't "fake migrants." And Trump got voted out, did you for
If I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me.Violence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling peo come here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang membe they come from are more hostile than American gang members, base statistics."Violence is violence. And "gay statistics," really? Are you homophobi well as racist?
If I were
homophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a bunch of dudes from under my mom's trailer.
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought experiment.How come nobody asks the most important question, why does this happen *only* in the USA, to this extreme extent?
It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
I mean, just look at the US mass shootings statistics for 2022, five months in. Nowhere else in the entire world is it even remotely this extreme.
On 31 May 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
theTake it to the two extremes. Unlimited guns for all will not solve
solve theproblem of gun violence. Zero guns for anyone would definitely
intentproblem. We don't need to take it to either extreme, but we seem
continuing to move toward the former instead of the latter.
Zero guns would not solve the problem at all. No guns for felonsdoesn't
solve the problem of felons having guns now because, you know, felons
have a difficult time following laws.
Zero guns for anyone means zero guns for felons. It's an extreme, remember?
Unlimited guns would also not work because, you know, felons.
True. But not just felons. Sometimes people with no criminal history whatsoever snap and shoot people.
On a somewhat related note, last I checked, it was not MP>conservativesor Republicans who want to restore some/all rights to felons.
That would be voting rights.
I believe numbers were starting to go up before the 1994 law expired.
Mass shootings exploded after Columbine. The Heller decision, in particular,
did away with a lot of existing gun laws.
True. But again, it's not just felons and repeat offenders that shoot people.
Jeff) arThe problem is that their ignorant sycophants (That's you,
only ones listening to this drivel.
safety lNot true. 80-some-odd percent of Americans support stronger gun
But I bet their definitions are different.to
For me, "gun safety" means teaching younger people about the safe way
handle a firearm, and the harm that they can do. Also, it meansespecially
enforcing existing laws and penalties for gun related crimes,
those that involve repeat offenders.
For me, it means making the country more safe from people with guns. I'm pretty sure that's the generic definition.
Zero guns for anyone means zero guns for felons. It's an extreme, remember?With the result being no crime.
True. But again, it's not just felons and repeat offenders that shoot people.Most guns are bought legally. By folks with no criminal record,
and no history of mental illness. Like that 18-year-old shooter
in Texas.
For me, it means making the country more safe from people with guns. pretty sure that's the generic definition.Identifying crazy people and sending them to mental institutions
is not the answer. The problem is easy access to guns, especially
guns such as assault-style weapons like AR-15s (and ammo), which
were designed with only one purpose - to kill people. Weapons such
as those should only be allowed for military/ex-military to have.
On 06-02-22 01:53, Lee Lofaso <=-
spoke to Jeff Thiele about She's Back <=-
is not the answer. The problem is easy access to guns, especially
guns such as assault-style weapons like AR-15s (and ammo), which
were designed with only one purpose - to kill people. Weapons such
as those should only be allowed for military/ex-military to have.
Mike Powell wrote to JEFF THIELE <=-
Unlimited guns would also not work because, you know, felons.
Agreed. There should also be increased penalties for people who
continue to break existing laws. Supposedly there are but, in reality, these are also not always enforced.
Zero guns for anyone means zero guns for felons. It's an extreme,
remember?
With the result being no crime.
Well, no gun-related crime, at least.
shootTrue. But again, it's not just felons and repeat offenders that
people.
Most guns are bought legally. By folks with no criminal record,
and no history of mental illness. Like that 18-year-old shooter
in Texas.
Nobody is born a felon. There's a first time for everyting.
For me, it means making the country more safe from people with JT>guns.
pretty sure that's the generic definition.
Identifying crazy people and sending them to mental institutions
is not the answer. The problem is easy access to guns, especially
guns such as assault-style weapons like AR-15s (and ammo), which
were designed with only one purpose - to kill people. Weapons such
as those should only be allowed for military/ex-military to have.
Yep. And ex-military is debatable. PTSD is a horrible thing.
Let's not forget about large capacity magazines. Those assault
style weapons ain't no fun unless one can shoot multiple rounds
with each blast.
But hey. Let's cut the governor of Texas some slack.
Why make the distinction between actual nutcases and those who
might be nutcases? Just lock 'em all up to be sure so nobody gets
hurt. That is the solution, according to the governor of Texas.
I mean, guns don't kill people. Nutcases do.
is not the answer. The problem is easy access to guns, especially
guns such as assault-style weapons like AR-15s (and ammo), which
were designed with only one purpose - to kill people. Weapons such
as those should only be allowed for military/ex-military to have.
Why should ex-military be allowed to own such weapons? I was in the military more than 50 years ago. Are you saying that I should be
allowed to have an AR-15, but that non-vetrans should not?
My edit of your statement would be "only be allowed for military and law enforcement officers for use in their official duties".
There are Zero for felons now but they get them. There are not zero guns
in existence now, so that cat is out of the bag. It is an extreme that is not likely to be a success.
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought experiment. It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
On 01 Jun 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
immigration court dates, and many others were separated from their famiThat never happened under previous administrations.
Some families have not been reunited to this day.
True. That was all Trump. What's your point?
Unlimited guns would also not work because, you know, felons.
Ya, but in this case, the felons would be limited in their actions because som
people might shoot back.
Agreed. There should also be increased penalties for people who continue to break existing laws. Supposedly there are but, in reality, these are also not always enforced.
There is already a federal law on the books that basically says that if a person who was convicted of a felony even touches a gun, it's automatic prison
time.
A while back, some states started turning such cases over to the feds and many
felons had a fast track back to prison - and had great success in reducing gun
crime. But then a Democrat got installed and his AG (i.e. Janet Reno) refused
to prosecute and that ended.
And how do you propose we track actual illegal migrants? If they're truly here illegally, they get deported when caught. Refugees go through the legal immigration process.
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought experime It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.Not more crime, just different crimes. I am one that does not believe that the availability of a gun is what determines whether or not a criminal will commit a crime. It would cut down on accidents, and possibly a few crimes of passion, but the complete absence of firearms only causes a criminal to change their MO.
That was sarcasm, and it did.True. That was all Trump. What's your point?Some families have not been reunited to this day.That never happened under previous administrations.
Agreed. There are plenty of examples of where this happens. Armed criminals feel much safer in places like Chicago, where they don't expect it's as likely that someone will be armed and fire back.Unlimited guns would also not work because, you know, felons.Ya, but in this case, the felons would be limited in their actions becau som
people might shoot back.
And how do you propose we track actual illegal migrants? If they're tr here illegally, they get deported when caught. Refugees go through the legal immigration process.If a person enters illegally (not at a marked border crossing), they can claim "asylum," which suddenly makes them "legal" and increases the
chance that they might get to stay and not get deported.
Only the dumb ones get immediately deported when caught.
Let's not forget about large capacity magazines. Those assault
style weapons ain't no fun unless one can shoot multiple rounds
with each blast.
Indeed. The 1994 assault weapons ban was also a ban on magazines with a capacity greater than 10 rounds.
But hey. Let's cut the governor of Texas some slack.
Why make the distinction between actual nutcases and those who
might be nutcases? Just lock 'em all up to be sure so nobody gets
hurt. That is the solution, according to the governor of Texas.
I mean, guns don't kill people. Nutcases do.
That, as Mike would say, is a job for the thought police.
Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-
Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
A while back, some states started turning such cases over to the feds anmany
felons had a fast track back to prison - and had great success in reducigun
crime. But then a Democrat got installed and his AG (i.e. Janet Reno)refused
to prosecute and that ended.Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
bout* Violence from their own government, or violence from war. How
that?
How about violence, period? Why don't you tell us specifically what
violence you're looking to exclude?
Violence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling people to come
here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang members where they come
from are more hostile than American gang members, based on gay statistics."
until thIt's not our duty to correct the wrongs of other governments
invade our space.
It is our moral duty to help those who ask us for it.
Did the human smuggling industry ask for our help?
Refugee immigration is not human smuggling.
Not when they are real refugees coming from war zones.
But your friends are at the Mexico/US border, they're humans that have been
smuggled.
Trump;s Remain in Mexico policy did not go through Congress, nor didhis
policy to separate families, nor did his wall. And you were fine withit.
Because it worked.
People would have been fine with Biden's orders too, had they worked.
They're not working for Americans, they're only working for the
human smuggling industry.
How* Violence from their own government, or violence from war.
that?
whatHow about violence, period? Why don't you tell us specifically
violence you're looking to exclude?
Violence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling peopleto
come here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang memberswhere
they come from are more hostile than American gang members, based ongay
statistics."
Violence is violence. And "gay statistics," really? Are you homophobic as well as racist?
governments untIt's not our duty to correct the wrongs of other
invade our space.
It is our moral duty to help those who ask us for it.
Did the human smuggling industry ask for our help?
No, and they have not received our help. You are mischaracterizing the refugee situation, just like you're mischaracterizing legal immigrants as illegal. Your entire argument is based on obvious lies.
Refugee immigration is not human smuggling.
Not when they are real refugees coming from war zones. But your friends
are at the Mexico/US border, they're humans that have been smuggled.
No, they're not.
didTrump;s Remain in Mexico policy did not go through Congress, nor
withpolicy to separate families, nor did his wall. And you were fine
Because it worked. People would have been fine with Biden's orderstoo,
had they worked. They're not working for Americans, they're onlyworking
for the human smuggling industry.
You previously said that you were not ok with Biden's "authoritarian" approach. Now you would be, provided it agreed with your agenda? Nice.
people tViolence that is not known to exist in the USA. Stop telling
members whcome here to escape from "gang violence" even if "the gang
based onthey come from are more hostile than American gang members,
statistics."
Violence is violence. And "gay statistics," really? Are youhomophobic as
well as racist?
If I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If I were homophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a bunch of dudes
from under my mom's trailer.
zero gunsThere are Zero for felons now but they get them. There are not
in existence now, so that cat is out of the bag. It is an extreme
that
is not likely to be a success.
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought
experiment.
It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
Not more crime, just different crimes. I am one that does not believe that
the availability of a gun is what determines whether or not a criminal will
commit a crime.
It would cut down on accidents, and possibly a few crimes of passion, but the complete absence of firearms only causes a criminal to change their MO.
experimeI already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought
It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
Not more crime, just different crimes. I am one that does notbelieve
that the availability of a gun is what determines whether or not afirearms
criminal will commit a crime. It would cut down on accidents, and
possibly a few crimes of passion, but the complete absence of
only causes a criminal to change their MO.
Less deadly crimes.
they're trAnd how do you propose we track actual illegal migrants? If
through thehere illegally, they get deported when caught. Refugees go
legal immigration process.
If a person enters illegally (not at a marked border crossing), theycan
claim "asylum," which suddenly makes them "legal" and increases the
chance that they might get to stay and not get deported.
If they claim asylum, they ar not simply let go. They are detained and screened, where they have to make a case that they are eligible for asylum.
These are fairly in-depth screenings and just claiming to have experienced violence is not enough. If they make it through the screening, then they are
"legal." Otherwise, they're deported.
People who enter seeking asylum also tend to turn themselves in to the first
Border Patrol agent they can find, whereas people who enter seeking illegal
residency tend to avoid the Border Patrol at all cost. There are behavioral
differences that can be observed, and they are two distinctly different groups of people.
For some reason, certain people seem to think that as soon as they say the word "asylum," they're handed a plane ticket to New York, and that's simply
not how it works.
Only the dumb ones get immediately deported when caught.
Being dumb increases their chances of getting caught, but that's true of most criminals.
Guns don't kill people. Crazy people do.
Take away access of certain types of guns (and large capacity
magazines), crazy people cannot get hold of them.
Superman was not deported. As an infant, he was found in a cornfield
by an elderly man. He and his wife then adopted him as their son,
naming him Clark Kent. It has never been revealed if he was formally adopted, as no birth certificate could be found.
As you know, Superman has one rule. And one rule only. Superman
never kills. Until recently, which makes many people believe the
new Superman is a fake.
Superman never sought asylum. Even as his nom de plume, Clark Kent.
As far as he was concerned, the son of Jar-El was the adopted son of
the Kents and had no other real home to return to.
For some reason, certain people seem to think that as soon as they sa word "asylum," they're handed a plane ticket to New York, and that's simplyClark Kent had a great job at the Daily Planet, a gal named Lois Lane
not how it works.
who adored him, and some kid who always gave both of them a hard time.
Lex Luthor could never out-smart Superman. But he sure knew whereOnly the dumb ones get immediately deported when caught.Being dumb increases their chances of getting caught, but that's true most criminals.
to find kryptonite ...
If I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If I wer homophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a bunch of dudesA racist gay boy hiding out under his mom's trailer. With other gay
from under my mom's trailer.
boys to play with. So what do y'all chat about if not about politics?
feds anA while back, some states started turning such cases over to the
many
reducifelons had a fast track back to prison - and had great success in
gun
Reno)crime. But then a Democrat got installed and his AG (i.e. Janet
refused
to prosecute and that ended.
Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime
problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
If this were true, wouldn't we expect to see increases in prosecution by the
intervening Republican administrations? Also, didn't Janet Reno have a couple
of pretty high-profile firearm-related cases involving a certain family in Idaho and a certain cult in Texas?
On 02 Jun 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
I already said that the extreme is not the goal. It's a thought experimNot more crime, just different crimes. I am one that does not believe that the availability of a gun is what determines whether or not a criminal will commit a crime. It would cut down on accidents, and possibly a few crimes of passion, but the complete absence of firearms only causes a criminal to change their MO.
It's a spectrum along which more guns result in more crime.
Less deadly crimes.
If a person enters illegally (not at a marked border crossing), they can claim "asylum," which suddenly makes them "legal" and increases the chance that they might get to stay and not get deported.
If they claim asylum, they ar not simply let go. They are detained and screened, where they have to make a case that they are eligible for asylum.
These are fairly in-depth screenings and just claiming to have experienced violence is not enough. If they make it through the screening, then they are "legal." Otherwise, they're deported.
People who enter seeking asylum also tend to turn themselves in to the first Border Patrol agent they can find, whereas people who enter seeking illegal residency tend to avoid the Border Patrol at all cost. There are behavioral differences that can be observed, and they are two distinctly different groups of people.
For some reason, certain people seem to think that as soon as they say the word "asylum," they're handed a plane ticket to New York, and that's simply not how it works.
Only the dumb ones get immediately deported when caught.
Being dumb increases their chances of getting caught, but that's true of most criminals.
Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-
Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
"Ironic" is not the word that I'd use.
Lefties have a long track record of doing the opposite of what they say.
On 02 Jun 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
A while back, some states started turning such cases over to the feds amany
felons had a fast track back to prison - and had great success in reducgun
crime. But then a Democrat got installed and his AG (i.e. Janet Reno)refused
to prosecute and that ended.Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
If this were true, wouldn't we expect to see increases in prosecution by the intervening Republican administrations? Also, didn't Janet Reno have a couple of pretty high-profile firearm-related cases involving a certain family in Idaho and a certain cult in Texas?
Less deadly crimes.Not necessarily. The ones that kill more people are usually
premeditated. If they don't have a gun, they will figure out another plan... explosion, fire, something.
If they claim asylum, they ar not simply let go. They are detained and screened, where they have to make a case that they are eligible for asylI didn't say they were let go, I said they were suddenly treated as "legal."
These are fairly in-depth screenings and just claiming to have experienc violence is not enough. If they make it through the screening, then they "legal." Otherwise, they're deported.Crossing illegally makes it more likely they will get to stay. If they are not caught, they can stay until they are. If/when they are, they
can claim "asylum" and take their chances that they might pass the screening.
People who enter seeking asylum also tend to turn themselves in to the f Border Patrol agent they can find, whereas people who enter seeking ille residency tend to avoid the Border Patrol at all cost. There are behavio differences that can be observed, and they are two distinctly different groups of people.The best place to find a border patrol agent is at a recognized, legal border crossing. If they are crossing elsewhere, they are trying to
avoid Border Patrol, but can still use that "asylum" card to try to make their illegal crossing legal and not be "immediately deported."
Sounds like they had a decent success rate procecuting repeat gun-crime felons until the 1990's. And I would be careful calling Waco a "case"... many of those folks died under suspicious circumstances without trial, including several that may not have been armed and whose only crime was following a wack-job, or being too afraid of him to leave.
I don't remember a trial for several of the Idaho folks, either, although my memory is more fuzzy on that one.
I werIf I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If
bunch ofhomophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a
dudes
from under my mom's trailer.
A racist gay boy hiding out under his mom's trailer. With other gay
boys to play with. So what do y'all chat about if not about politics?
Oh... so it's Aaron that's under his mom's trailer. His statement was somewhat ambiguous as to who exactly was under the trailer.
[...]I werIf I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If
bunch ofhomophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a
dudes
from under my mom's trailer.
He did mention "dudes" ...
He did mention "dudes" ...I werIf I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If
bunch ofhomophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a
dudes
from under my mom's trailer.
On 03 Jun 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
Sounds like they had a decent success rate procecuting repeat gun-crime felons until the 1990's. And I would be careful calling Waco a "case"...
many of those folks died under suspicious circumstances without trial, including several that may not have been armed and whose only crime was following a wack-job, or being too afraid of him to leave.
Suicides don't typically get a trial.
Mike Powell wrote to Dr. What <=-
Yep. Ironic, they are supposedly the ones who can fix our gun crime problems but yet didn't want to prosecute gun-crime felons.
"Ironic" is not the word that I'd use.
Lefties have a long track record of doing the opposite of what they say.
"Rules for thee, not for me." I am surprised you passed up the opportunity to use that one. :D
Neither do people burned up in a fire.Sounds like they had a decent success rate procecuting repeat gun-c felons until the 1990's. And I would be careful calling Waco a "case"...Suicides don't typically get a trial.
many of those folks died under suspicious circumstances without tri including several that may not have been armed and whose only crime following a wack-job, or being too afraid of him to leave.
State-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not only at
Then why are we allowing so few numbers of real refugees from
war zones into our country? Other countries are doing their part.
But we choose to renege on our promises to those who yearn to be
free of their oppressors.
But your friends are at the Mexico/US border, they're humans that hav been
smuggled.
Where is your evidence to support your claim? Oh, you don't have
any. Just random thoughts that make no sense.
No, they're not.
Most are not smuggled in. Those who are usually get caught within
a short period of time, and then deported.
I'm personally inclined to believe that Aaron's mom is running a gay bar under her trailer. Who knows, maybe they're gay reptilians?
Aaron sucks at math. Aaron sucks at logic.
Aaron is a homophobic racist.
State-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not only atSomeone should tell Jeff's friends that "murder is illegal in the USA."
It's because we're busy dealing with fake refugees; people trying to escape low wages and/or punishment for stuff they did back home.
Walking through international borders without a passport requires smuggling.
There's no such thing as "usually" and why would people get deportedNo, they're not.Most are not smuggled in. Those who are usually get caught within
a short period of time, and then deported.
just for being smuggled-in? It's not their fault, well actually it is,
but that's not the preferred narrative.
I'm personally inclined to believe that Aaron's mom is running a gay under her trailer. Who knows, maybe they're gay reptilians?You're not good at reptilianism; you're supposed to be the first to make the accusation, that way the secondary person (usually a conservative) will sound crazy when he/she accurately makes the same accusation about the other person.
Aaron sucks at math. Aaron sucks at logic.It's not as bad as sucking on the stuff that liberals suck at.
Aaron is a homophobic racist.Well I guess I'm gonna lose the election then.
State-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not only at
Someone should tell Jeff's friends that "murder is illegal in the USA."
Then why are we allowing so few numbers of real refugees from
war zones into our country? Other countries are doing their part.
But we choose to renege on our promises to those who yearn to be
free of their oppressors.
It's because we're busy dealing with fake refugees;
people trying to escape low wages
and/or punishment for stuff they did back home.
that havBut your friends are at the Mexico/US border, they're humans
been
smuggled.
Where is your evidence to support your claim? Oh, you don't have
any. Just random thoughts that make no sense.
Walking through international borders without a passport requires smuggling.
No, they're not.
Most are not smuggled in. Those who are usually get caught within
a short period of time, and then deported.
There's no such thing as "usually" and why would people get deported just for
being smuggled-in? It's not their fault, well actually it is, but that's not
the preferred narrative.
"Rules for thee, not for me." I am surprised you passed up the opportunity to use that one. :D
I usually use that one in instances where Lefties says that we shouldn't be able to do something, and then those same Lefties do that same something.
@MSGID: <629B8844.17544.politicf@capitolcityonline.net>
I'm personally inclined to believe that Aaron's mom is running a gay bar under her trailer. Who knows, maybe they're gay reptilians?
You're not good at reptilianism; you're supposed to be the first to make the accusation, that way the secondary person (usually a conservative) will sound crazy when he/she accurately makes the same accusation about the other person.
Aaron is a homophobic racist.
Well I guess I'm gonna lose the election then.
State-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not only atSomeone should tell Jeff's friends that "murder is illegal in the USA."
I think the reptilian thing has run its course.
We should not kick Jeff-T too much while he is down.
I am sure the Truth
Ministry getting shot down before it ever got off the ground is weighing pretty heavy on him lately.
Refresh my memory... didn't you tell us once that your wife is non-white? For a bad conservative racist, that sure would be unusual. :)Aaron is a homophobic racist.Well I guess I'm gonna lose the election then.
Indeed. Even the Obama administration used drones to kill personsState-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not only aSomeone should tell Jeff's friends that "murder is illegal in the USA.
outside of a war zone on foreign soil, so it is not just a Republican thing.
State-sanctioned murder is legal by the federal government, as well
as in most states in the USA. Murder in my name. Truly the most sick
and disgusting form of justice there is or can ever be.
People who sneak in illegally are usually caught, and deported
Which is why the POTUS should grant them all a general amnesty.
Just like Ronald Reagan did back in the day ...
I'm personally inclined to believe that Aaron's mom is running a ga under her trailer. Who knows, maybe they're gay reptilians?
You're not good at reptilianism; you're supposed to be the first to make accusation, that way the secondary person (usually a conservative) will crazy when he/she accurately makes the same accusation about the other person.
I think the reptilian thing has run its course.
We should not kick Jeff-T too much while he is down. I am sure the Truth Ministry getting shot down before it ever got off the ground is weighing pretty heavy on him lately.
Aaron is a homophobic racist.
Well I guess I'm gonna lose the election then.
Refresh my memory... didn't you tell us once that your wife is non-white? For a bad conservative racist, that sure would be unusual. :)
I think the reptilian thing has run its course.I'm trying to leave it behind, but he brought it back up.
Refresh my memory... didn't you tell us once that your wife is non-wh For a bad conservative racist, that sure would be unusual. :)Yes, it's true, but I don't expect him to remember details like that. He wants me to be a white supremacist because that would be perfect for his talking points against me.
In Jeff's defense, I'm "statistically racist" because I'm a white male. He's all about statistics.
On 05 Jun 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
Indeed. Even the Obama administration used drones to kill persons outside of a war zone on foreign soil, so it is not just a Republican thing.State-sanctioned murder exists in the USA. Admnistered not onlySomeone should tell Jeff's friends that "murder is illegal in the USA
I don't agree with drone strikes outside of a war zone, but have to point out that "on foreign soil" is not "in the USA."
I am sure the Truth
Ministry getting shot down before it ever got off the ground is weighing pretty heavy on him lately.
I never actually commented on that, you may have noticed. I don't think that the government is the best entity to what's true and not in all cases. In some cases, like the CDC speaking to disease-related issues, they clearly are. But not in all cases.
In Jeff's defense, I'm "statistically racist" because I'm a white male. He's all about statistics.
I heard that Carolina pervert, who was upset that he was being left outI am sure the TruthI never actually commented on that, you may have noticed. I don't think the government is the best entity to what's true and not in all cases. I some cases, like the CDC speaking to disease-related issues, they clearl are. But not in all cases.
Ministry getting shot down before it ever got off the ground is wei pretty heavy on him lately.
of all the GOP orgies, lost his primary. When I heard that I thought
you were probably disappointed as he seemed like he would probably be a good source of material for a while.
In Jeff's defense, I'm "statistically racist" because I'm a white male. all about statistics.I'd hazard a wild guess that just about all of us here would fall under that stat, if "white male" is the only qualifier.
State-sanctioned murder is legal by the federal government, as well
as in most states in the USA. Murder in my name. Truly the most sick
and disgusting form of justice there is or can ever be.
If that is what you really think, then you should tell Democrats to invest more in incarceration and law enforcement. Unless you like anarchy, because
surely whoever's happy with Joe's shenanigans loves anarchy.
People who sneak in illegally are usually caught, and deported
Generalizations are opinions that the media teaches you to hold.
Which is why the POTUS should grant them all a general amnesty.
Just like Ronald Reagan did back in the day ...
Or better.
Why not support a Constitutional amendment banning the death penalty?
Not just at the federal level, but everywhere in the USA? Certainly
all pro-life individuals would support that, regardless of political affiliation ...
In Jeff's defense, I'm "statistically racist" because I'm a white male.I'd hazard a wild guess that just about all of us here would fall under that stat, if "white male" is the only qualifier.
all about statistics.
Yep, and that's how you know Aaron is lying.
Or "bearing false witness," as
the Christians like to say.
Why not support a Constitutional amendment banning the death penalty?
Not just at the federal level, but everywhere in the USA? Certainly
all pro-life individuals would support that, regardless of political
affiliation ...
Because I want more death penalty for adults and less for babies.
Well, that goes back to the discussion that Dale and I were having the other day. It is not lying if you don't know it is not true.Yep, and that's how you know Aaron is lying.In Jeff's defense, I'm "statistically racist" because I'm a white male.I'd hazard a wild guess that just about all of us here would fall u that stat, if "white male" is the only qualifier.
all about statistics.
And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal punishment,
but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
Who are they? What makes them pro-death advocates?
And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal punishme
but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
Who are they? What makes them pro-death advocates?
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy when it hurts crime victims.And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal punWho are they? What makes them pro-death advocates?
but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrowly
dodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressors.
punishmeAnd then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal
but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
Who are they? What makes them pro-death advocates?
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy
when it hurts crime victims.
Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrowly dodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressors.
punishmeAnd then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal
but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal life.
Who are they? What makes them pro-death advocates?
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy
when it hurts crime victims.
Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrowly dodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressors.
And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal
punishme but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal
life.
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy when it hurts crime victims.
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy when it hurts crime victims.
How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the alternative is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The victim's family likely pays taxes, which pay for the feeding and upkeep of their loved-one's murderer who, although he is in jail theI'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey th policy when it hurts crime victims.How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the altern is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
rest of his life at least has a rest of his life, unlike their loved-one.
OTOH, strapping them in a chair and throwing the switch does have a one-time tax money cost, but then it is over, and there is 0% chance of there ever being any kind of soft-minded law change or amnesty that results in the killer being turned loose, or of him ever escaping.
If a victim's family does not want them to be executed, that should be taken into consideration during sentencing.
And then these (Pro-Death Advocates) will go off to eternal
punishme but the righteous (Whole Life Advocates) to eternal
life.
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to kill
convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that
policy when it hurts crime victims.
Catholics officially don't believe in the death penalty. Pretty much every
time one gets carried out, there will be Catholic protesters there .. in the same way they are at the abortion clinics.
policy toI'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian
obey thconvicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't
policy when it hurts crime victims.
alternHow does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the
is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The victim's family likely pays taxes, which pay for the feeding andloved-one.
upkeep of their loved-one's murderer who, although he is in jail the
rest of his life at least has a rest of his life, unlike their
That's quite a stretch.
OTOH, strapping them in a chair and throwing the switch does have aof
one-time tax money cost, but then it is over, and there is 0% chance
there ever being any kind of soft-minded law change or amnesty that
results in the killer being turned loose, or of him ever escaping.
Again, a stretch. Murderers often spend decades on Death Row. And, as far as
I know (except for the commutations to life sentences that occurred when the
death penalty moratorium began), no one has escaped or been granted amnesty
from Death Row.
If a victim's family does not want them to be executed, that should be
taken into consideration during sentencing.
Indeed it should.
How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the alternative is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrowly dodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressor
How does life in prison without the possibility of parole reward their
Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrowly do Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressors.
Take away their guns. And take away their easy access to guns.
That'll be a start. But you're no more serious than than any of
I'll take your word for it that it goes against Christian policy to k convicts, and I like to appease God when I can, but I can't obey that policy when it hurts crime victims.
Catholics officially don't believe in the death penalty. Pretty much every time one gets carried out, there will be Catholic protesters there
How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the alternative is life in prison without the possibility of parole."Life in prison without the possibility of parole" isn't a universal replacement for death sentences. Some states don't even permit life without parole as a sentence.
Taking away the death penalty rewards them. It send a message to psychos that "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you in return."Crime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we narrow dodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggrHow does life in prison without the possibility of parole reward thei
How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the alterThe victim's family likely pays taxes, which pay for the feeding and upkeep of their loved-one's murderer who, although he is in jail the rest of his life at least has a rest of his life, unlike their loved-one.
is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
That's quite a stretch.
So you don't think they pay taxes, or you don't think that it is taxThat's quite a stretch.How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the alterThe victim's family likely pays taxes, which pay for the feeding an upkeep of their loved-one's murderer who, although he is in jail th rest of his life at least has a rest of his life, unlike their loved-one.
is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
money that pays for the murderer's upkeep for the rest of his life?
Where do *you* think the money comes from?
How does abolishing the death penalty hurt crime victims when the
alternative is life in prison without the possibility of parole.
"Life in prison without the possibility of parole" isn't a universal replacement for death sentences. Some states don't even permit life without
parole as a sentence.
narrowlyCrime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we
aggressordodged. Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their
How does life in prison without the possibility of parole rewardtheir
Taking away the death penalty rewards them.
It send a message to psychos that "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you in return."
narrowly doCrime victims are heroes, because they endured BS that we
Let's not turn our backs on them by rewarding their aggressors.
Take away their guns. And take away their easy access to guns.
That'll be a start. But you're no more serious than than any of
We just need a commitment to school safety. Metal detectors, security, plans
in place for what to do and how to handle it, security cams to make sure stuff gets handled correctly.
Taking away the death penalty rewards them. It send a message to psyc that "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you in return."
"Nothing will happen to you?" Life in prison is "nothing?"
So you don't think they pay taxes, or you don't think that it is tax money that pays for the murderer's upkeep for the rest of his life? Where do *you* think the money comes from?The victim's family likely pays taxes, which pay for the feeding aThat's quite a stretch.
upkeep of their loved-one's murderer who, although he is in jail t
rest of his life at least has a rest of his life, unlike their loved-one.
We all pay taxes. No one's tax money goes for any particular purpose.
The local cops in Uvalde did absolutely nothing to confront the
shooter that killed 19 children and 2 adults.
The shooter had walked right into the school, did his thing, and
for over an hour the local cops did absolutely nothing.
Talk about "school safety". Those kids were sitting ducks. So were
the teachers. And with easy access to guns, including AR-15 assault weapons and large capacity magazines, these type of events will
continue. Not only in Texas, but everywhere.
"Nothing violent." After murdering dozens of people, a suspect who turns himself in will have no fear of being electrocuted or shot at.Taking away the death penalty rewards them. It send a message to that "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you return.""Nothing will happen to you?" Life in prison is "nothing?"
I've been mad at people before, but not mad enough to do something to
them that will get me electrocuted.
So we all pay for it, which means they are paying for some of it, and others who don't want to be are also. No stretch there at all.So you don't think they pay taxes, or you don't think that it is ta money that pays for the murderer's upkeep for the rest of his life? Where do *you* think the money comes from?We all pay taxes. No one's tax money goes for any particular purpose.
psycTaking away the death penalty rewards them. It send a message to
inthat "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you
return."
"Nothing will happen to you?" Life in prison is "nothing?"
"Nothing violent." After murdering dozens of people, a suspect who turns himself in will have no fear of being electrocuted or shot at.
I've been mad at people before, but not mad enough to do something to them that will get me electrocuted.
On 06-10-22 18:40, Aaron Thomas <=-
spoke to Jeff Thiele about Re: She's Back <=-
Taking away the death penalty rewards them. It
send a message to psyc
that "you can kill people and nothing violent will happen to you in return."
"Nothing will happen to you?" Life in prison is "nothing?"
"Nothing violent." After murdering dozens of people, a suspect who
turns himself in will have no fear of being electrocuted or shot at.
The local cops in Uvalde did absolutely nothing to confront the
shooter that killed 19 children and 2 adults.
Who paid them to not intervene? Trump maybe?
The shooter had walked right into the school, did his thing, and
for over an hour the local cops did absolutely nothing.
Excellent talking point for the Defund The Police movement.
Talk about "school safety". Those kids were sitting ducks. So were
the teachers. And with easy access to guns, including AR-15 assault
weapons and large capacity magazines, these type of events will
continue. Not only in Texas, but everywhere.
Who's fault is it then? The police or the young age requirement?
Definitely not the fault of the teacher who left the door open for the gunman?
I've been mad at people before, but not mad enough to do something to them that will get me electrocuted.
That's the only thing that keeps your temper in check? If you were reasonably certain that you wouldn't get the death penalty, would you
kill people that you're mad at?
I wouldn't, but other people would.I've been mad at people before, but not mad enough to do somethi them that will get me electrocuted.That's the only thing that keeps your temper in check? If you were reasonably certain that you wouldn't get the death penalty, would you kill people that you're mad at?
"Nothing violent." After murdering dozens of people, a suspect who turns himself in will have no fear of being electrocuted or shot at.
If you think that a life in prison for most is not violent, you have not been paying attention.
th LL> AT> gunman?Definitely not the fault of the teacher who left the door open for
The teacher was alone, and was a she. She closed the door, thinking
it would self-lock behind her. The gunman walked right in and shot her dead.
If I were racist then congress would be taking a vote on me. If I were homophobic then I wouldn't be chatting about politics with a bunch of dudes from under my mom's trailer.
On 06-12-22 15:49, Aaron Thomas <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: She's Back <=-
"Nothing violent." After murdering dozens of people, a suspect who turns himself in will have no fear of being electrocuted or shot at.
If you think that a life in prison for most is not violent, you have not been paying attention.
I don't think life in prison would be the greatest, but I'm sure it's
more fun than electrocution or being penetrated by bullets. Maybe the psychos who are considering a mass-shooting will see/hear about other mass-shooters getting electrocuted, and they will reconsider their
options before heading out for the
school.
forDefinitely not the fault of the teacher who left the door open
th LL> AT> gunman?
The teacher was alone, and was a she. She closed the door, thinkingher
it would self-lock behind her. The gunman walked right in and shot
dead.
"Thinking it would self-lock" is stupid. When you're responsible for the safety of children, you have to do more than "think the door was locked."
I have kids. I don't go to sleep saying "I think I locked the door."
"Thinking it would self-lock" is stupid. When you're responsible for safety of children, you have to do more than "think the door was lock
She did her best she could to protect herself. Where was school
security? Non-existent. Where were the local cops? Non-existent.
Assuming and thinking amount to the same thing. She was most likely
in a state of panic at the time. And who can blame her? A madman armed with a loaded assault rifle was chasing after her ...
Many of the mass-shooters actually do not expect to survive the day.
They want suicide by cop and martyrdom.
Which probably means they don't believe they have anything to lookI was think 10 years in solitary confinement and possible firing quad.
forward to in life.
for"Thinking it would self-lock" is stupid. When you're responsible
locksafety of children, you have to do more than "think the door was
She did her best she could to protect herself. Where was school
security? Non-existent. Where were the local cops? Non-existent.
Someone else said that the story about the teacher leaving the door propped
open was not true. None of us know because we weren't there.
Assuming and thinking amount to the same thing. She was most likely
in a state of panic at the time. And who can blame her? A madman armed
with a loaded assault rifle was chasing after her ...
I get it; teachers' unions help support the Democrat party, so the least we
can do is defend everything they do/did.
She thought the door was self-locking. That is not the same thing
as "deliberately leaving the door propped open". But you know that.
She thought the door was self-locking. That is not the same thingHow do you know what she thought? I didn't hear that part of the report, and your cousin Jeff said that the whole "teacher left the door open" thing was bogus news.
as "deliberately leaving the door propped open". But you know that.
Which probably means they don't believe they have anything to look forward to in life.I was think 10 years in solitary confinement and possible firing quad.
| Sysop: | Xerxes |
|---|---|
| Location: | Azle, Texas |
| Users: | 119 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 117:16:59 |
| Calls: | 3,023 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 156 |
| U/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| D/L today: |
0 files (0K bytes) |
| Messages: | 293,898 |
| Posted today: | 0 |