(03-24-2021, 06:36 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Kamala Harris's niece, who is attempting to make a buck from auntie's position (cue the Willie Brown chuckle) stated that white people were the greatest terror threat in the U.S. Which brings up a good point Mark Kaye made today: What is going to happen when democrats show up to take the guns away from gays, minorities and transgenders who legally own? Where's the line for a party who are simultaneously for and against everything?
Don't you know that all gays, minorities, and transgenders think exactly like the extreme left on all matters?
Geritol Joe put Willie Browns mistress in charge of the border crisis. This should be entertaining watching her sink.
(03-23-2021, 07:07 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (03-23-2021, 06:17 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]I'm far from a MSN supporter, but I have to place a significant portion of the blame for this shift on Trump himself. He was, by far, the least "Presidential" figure to ever hold the office and brought much of the disrespect upon himself. His arrogance and rudeness were a constant embarrassment and he made EVERYTHING political.
Athletes and sports teams haven't refused to visit the White House, they've refused to meet the individual who was President. Yes, this sets an undesirable example for the youth, but is it any worse than an unending stream of insulting comments and tweets? There's plenty of guilt to go around here.
You just pissy because he didn't take no [BLEEP] from people who were used to weak Republicans. When they get back what they've always given they gotta go cry in the streets, just like bullies always do when someone finally stands up to them.
No, I'm pissy because he gave away the election through his own arrogance and stupidity and now we're stuck with the zombie for 4 years (or even worse, less than 4 years).
Biden took Arizona by 0.3%, how smart does the attack on John McCain look now?
(03-24-2021, 08:19 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ] (03-24-2021, 05:36 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Wrong. It's the mental health of the shooter. Banning certain firearms because they "look scary" or "look like military grade" weapons is not the problem. The problem is mental health.
hmmmm. I think you'll find every mass shooting involves a gun and not every mass shooting involves someone with a mental health disorder. I think you'll mind very few shooters found guilty due to insanity. Most are fully aware of what they are doing and the action is deliberate.
I think it is far easier to ban a gun than require every gun owner to undertake a monthly mental health assessment to assess their mental health status. Or should it be a daily health assessment?
Just because a person is OK when they buy a gun, they might not be OK tomorrow, or the next day, or the day after that.
There are plenty of people who live with mental illness and are not insane and not every mental illness qualifies for the insanity defense. The majority, if not all of the suspects of mass shootings absolutely had/have a mental disorder. Diagnosed or not they had/have a serious mental illness. Most go undiagnosed because treatment is expensive as hell and not a priority in this country. So when they finally "cook off," their issues are years in the making, untreated and unknown which makes them very dangerous.
And why the heck aren't people this outraged by the genocide happening in Chicago evey weekend?
How many decades, laws, agencies and money has been thrown at gun control to no effect? The LGBTQ movement has more support in DC than actual and effectual gun control that keeps weapons out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable while allowing law abiding citizens of sound mind to exercise constitutional 2nd amendment rights.
How many people in the U.S. were involved in the mass shootings this year? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions? Nope. Two people out of the millions of people in this country. And we should punish millions for the crimes of two people? I don't think so.
(03-24-2021, 08:19 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ] (03-24-2021, 05:36 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]Wrong. It's the mental health of the shooter. Banning certain firearms because they "look scary" or "look like military grade" weapons is not the problem. The problem is mental health.
hmmmm. I think you'll find every mass shooting involves a gun and not every mass shooting involves someone with a mental health disorder. I think you'll mind very few shooters found guilty due to insanity. Most are fully aware of what they are doing and the action is deliberate.
I think it is far easier to ban a gun than require every gun owner to undertake a monthly mental health assessment to assess their mental health status. Or should it be a daily health assessment?
Just because a person is OK when they buy a gun, they might not be OK tomorrow, or the next day, or the day after that.
(03-24-2021, 06:20 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's why he thinks we should ban all guns, then no one but the completely trustworthy government will conduct mass shootings.
Your paranoia is a mental illness meaning you should not be permitted to own a gun.
Diagnosing without a license is a felony and you're more than welcome to come and attempt to violate my rights.
(03-24-2021, 09:49 PM)given the prevalenceamericus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]There are plenty of people who live with mental illness and are not insane and not every mental illness qualifies for the insanity defense. The majority, if not all of the suspects of mass shootings absolutely had/have a mental disorder. Diagnosed or not they had/have a serious mental illness. Most go undiagnosed because treatment is expensive as hell and not a priority in this country. So when they finally "cook off," their issues are years in the making, untreated and unknown which makes them very dangerous.
And why the heck aren't people this outraged by the genocide happening in Chicago evey weekend?
How many decades, laws, agencies and money has been thrown at gun control to no effect? The LGBTQ movement has more support in DC than actual and effectual gun control that keeps weapons out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable while allowing law abiding citizens of sound mind to exercise constitutional 2nd amendment rights.
How many people in the U.S. were involved in the mass shootings this year? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions? Nope. Two people out of the millions of people in this country. And we should punish millions for the crimes of two people? I don't think so.
Given the prevalence of mental illness (most of it undiagnosed as you say), doesn't it makes sense to have tighter gun control? Isn't prevention always better? Do we keep guns because of someone with undiagnosed paranoia thinks the big bad Government is going to take control and wants to keep guns to fight back? #muhrights
And 2 mass shootings? How are you defining mass shooting?
(03-24-2021, 11:12 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ] (03-24-2021, 09:49 PM)given the prevalenceamericus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]There are plenty of people who live with mental illness and are not insane and not every mental illness qualifies for the insanity defense. The majority, if not all of the suspects of mass shootings absolutely had/have a mental disorder. Diagnosed or not they had/have a serious mental illness. Most go undiagnosed because treatment is expensive as hell and not a priority in this country. So when they finally "cook off," their issues are years in the making, untreated and unknown which makes them very dangerous.
And why the heck aren't people this outraged by the genocide happening in Chicago evey weekend?
How many decades, laws, agencies and money has been thrown at gun control to no effect? The LGBTQ movement has more support in DC than actual and effectual gun control that keeps weapons out of the hands of criminals and the mentally unstable while allowing law abiding citizens of sound mind to exercise constitutional 2nd amendment rights.
How many people in the U.S. were involved in the mass shootings this year? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? Millions? Nope. Two people out of the millions of people in this country. And we should punish millions for the crimes of two people? I don't think so.
Given the prevalence of mental illness (most of it undiagnosed as you say), doesn't it makes sense to have tighter gun control? Isn't prevention always better? Do we keep guns because of someone with undiagnosed paranoia thinks the big bad Government is going to take control and wants to keep guns to fight back? #muhrights
And 2 mass shootings? How are you defining mass shooting?
It's odd that you call history "paranoia", it's almost like you've never read a book.
Joe is pumped with so many horse steroids for this presser today, I am not sure if he survives.
(03-25-2021, 11:48 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Joe is pumped with so many horse steroids for this presser today, I am not sure if he survives.
Joe will get the enchanted treatment from the fawning press.
Or leading questions, such as, 'How difficult did the previous administration's policies make it for you to deal with the border/Covid/North Korea/gun control/race/stimulus...issue?
https://youtu.be/0nyaNOA6FWI
So Biden blamed earthquakes, poverty, hunger, gang violence and poor street lighting for the illegal aliens trying to enter the country through Mexico..
So basically they're trying to escape 3rd world socialist countries, to come to another country where they're trying to instill socialism..
And basically we'll have total transparency with these migrant detention centers when they're ready to show the public what it looks like..
Red Flags.. Everywhere...
This brain dead idiot needs to keep looking down at his list of media members so he knows who to call on.. This guy needs put out to pasture..
The media isn't even playing softball with this piece of [BLEEP]..
It's turned to T Ball..
He got a question regarding gun control and babbles something about infrastructure. What a train wreck.
Looks like Geritol Joe had a cheat sheet with reporters faces to call on.
This got me thinking. Are we headed towards a president-less country?
(03-25-2021, 09:14 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]If, as you say, everyone is going to suffer from mental illness, why not take away one of the key mechanisms that "mentally ill" people use to kill others or make it very difficult to obtain and keep a gun.
What happens when you get depression. Do you surrender your guns until you are no longer have a mental illness?
Why stop at guns? Why not knives, tools, cars, trucks, or any of the various other "key mechanisms" that people use to kill? Or does the fact that there were only about 9,600 murders in the whole country in 2019 that used a gun of any kind mean that, in a country of 330 million people any bluster about gun violence is so much immaterial nonsense used for the sole purpose of suppressing the rights and liberty of the population?
We both know the answer to that.
(03-26-2021, 08:55 AM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Looks like Geritol Joe had a cheat sheet with reporters faces to call on.
This got me thinking. Are we headed towards a president-less country?
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/Q802P2hVynigDtkXzN/giphy.gif)
The failed mayor turned transportation secretary wants to tax you by the mile.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg says taxing drivers by the mile “shows a lot of promise” and could be a way to fund a big infrastructure overhaul.
https://t.co/fkI5nWt7sr
(03-26-2021, 11:55 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ] (03-26-2021, 08:30 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]The failed mayor turned transportation secretary wants to tax you by the mile.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg says taxing drivers by the mile “shows a lot of promise” and could be a way to fund a big infrastructure overhaul. https://t.co/fkI5nWt7sr
It's the ultimate user pay system isn't it and one that makes the most sense. The more you use something, the more you pay.....that's how it works for pretty much everything else.
No, it doesn't make any sense, because it isn't enforceable. How do you measure and collect such a tax? Do people have to report their mileage? You'd have widespread cheating. Or, to avoid cheating, does the government track us when we are driving?
It's unworkable.
And why establish a new tax, with a new bureaucracy to enforce it, new forms to fill out? What a waste of time. Why not just raise the gas tax if you must raise new taxes?
(03-27-2021, 06:10 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ] (03-26-2021, 11:55 PM)captivating Wrote: [ -> ]It's the ultimate user pay system isn't it and one that makes the most sense. The more you use something, the more you pay.....that's how it works for pretty much everything else.
No, it doesn't make any sense, because it isn't enforceable. How do you measure and collect such a tax? Do people have to report their mileage? You'd have widespread cheating. Or, to avoid cheating, does the government track us when we are driving?
It's unworkable.
And why establish a new tax, with a new bureaucracy to enforce it, new forms to fill out? What a waste of time. Why not just raise the gas tax if you must raise new taxes?
Not to mention WE have already paid for the roads they want us to pay to drive on.
This is the wrong way to implement a "consumption" tax, but I would expect nothing more from a 5'8" failed mayor, presidential candidate who used his sexuality to secure a cabinet position he has zero qualifications for.
The vast majority of roads are not federal, so any federal taxes collected will not be used to fix the roads you usually drive on.
(03-27-2021, 09:28 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]The vast majority of roads are not federal, so any federal taxes collected will not be used to fix the roads you usually drive on.
Failed policy I think was tried in Germany in the 80s. Just more red meat for the uninformed voter base.