Anyone can make an homemade open bolt smg or change 3 pieces of a Glock 9mm to have an fully auto gun... Anyway, did the strict gun control on France prevented the Charlie Hebdo shooting with AK-47? No, anyone can look on internet how to make homemade firearms. I already posted a lot of sources about it. There are a case of a "mass destruction" with a homemade armored vehicle
The way the terrorists from the 2015 terror attacks in France got their weapons is actually pretty complicated. The reason they could get the guns was in fact because the gun control was not strict when it came to the illicit arms trafficking of for example deactivated guns from the old Balkan conflicts that are later reactivated. European authorities just didn't know about this way of procuring weapons until recently, or didn't know how to stop it. Things have changed since then, even though there is still a problem within the EU, especially since there are several member states that have weaker gun laws.
And while you can create a lot of havoc with things like trucks, it will always be easier to kill a lot of people with bombs or firearms. The truck attack in Nice is really the only exception I can think of.
In nutshell, they can "deactivate" then reactivate or obtain the weapon in another country.
"Gun control din't worked on country A = is because they can obtain guns on country B" - This applies to everywhere. Din't worked on Mexico? Blame guns coming from USA Din't worked on Brazil? Blame guns coming from Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, etc Din't worked on most Western European countries? Blame Balkan and Eastern European countries Din't worked on a USA state? Blame a neighbor state?
Note that in all cases mentioned, the "B" is having decrease on his criminality but the "A" is having an increase... To solve the problem of people in country A obtaining weapon in B country, you need an world government(and i don't need to explain why it will be awful) and it will not solve the problem with homemade guns. Not mention, impose the same failed gun laws in all EU states will make Europe much more violent.
This is a gun shop on Czech Republic(note that even Czech is too restrict for my taste)
How many terrorists attacks did Czech Republic suffered? Talking about guns and invasions, what the Nazis usually do after conquer a new territory? Exactly disarm and enslave the population "On the very first day, Chief Commander of German forces ordered surrender of all firearms present within the occupied territory."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Czech_Republic#Nazi_gun_ban
And the communists banned guns on occupied countries too. This is why far-left authoritarianism and far-right authoritarianism are the same; people should be free, not cattle/slaves.
I'm not blaming anyone. I just stated how the terrorists got their weapons. Fact remains that if you want to murder a lot of people in Europe, it's easier to buy old guns from the 1970s illegally from countries that have been ravaged by armed conflict in recent history. Terrorists planning a coordinated attack, for who knows how long, and using smuggling and the black market to get their weapons is quite different from the kind of mass shooting you usually see in the US. And again, I don't think anyone in this thread have proposed a total gun ban.
I guess my point is that it's hard to compare gun laws from country to country. It's not just the laws that matter, there are also things like the history, culture, surrounding countries and so on.
In Pakistan, Asa Bibi has been acquitted of "blasphemy". Here's hoping she gets out of the country alive. As far as I know, no one has survived a blasphemy accusation in Pakistan.
In the 21st Century, the fact that "blasphemy" is a crime at all is disheartening. The fact that you can be convicted of it based on the heresay testimony of a couple of witnesses actually defies logic.
If a couple witnesses are all that it takes to result in a death sentence, that seems even more open to abuse. You could team up with a friend and get one of your enemies killed just by making a false accusation. Maybe this happens all the time.
The very concept of blasphemy laws is itself absurd. Using violent force against those you disagree with is essentially admitting that you're wrong and that you can't win an argument in a free discussion.
Reading up on the various blasphemy cases, it's pretty clear that "She insulted Mohammad!" is just the Pakistani equivalent of "He whistled at a white woman!"
The thing about the Asa Bibi case is that it's widely suspected that the judge sentenced her to death to save her life. It's very likely she would have been lynched if he had acquitted her. There's been at least two cases where someone acquitted of blasphemy has been beaten to death on the courthouse steps.
This "statistics" comparing USA """gun violence""" with other countries not valide because : - Consider self defense as "gun violence" - Consider suicide as "gun violence" - Compare only violence from guns and ignores for eg the guy who killed dozens of people with a truck.
An woman who lives alone and someone breaks into his tome to rape her and she fires 2 shots as a advice and the invasor flee is considered "gun violence", but if she is disarmed and get victim, since no gun fired, is no "gun violence"... The fact is on Europe, Switzerland and Czech(high gun ownership) republic are much safer than UK or France(strict gun control), on Latin America, Uruguay(highest gun ownership) is much safer than Brazil(champion in murder rate) and Mexico(Narco State thanks to gun control)
I don't know what is worst. The left who keep trying gun control(failed in municipal level every time that was tried and failed on another countries) or the right who keep trying war on drugs and interventionism on middle east(both never worked and are a waste of tax money)
Didn't fail in Australia. Really, I have a heard time understanding why anyone could possibly believe that it is a superb idea to arm civilians suffering from paranoid delusions or something similar with military grade semi automatic weapons.
Din't fail in Australia? Murders committed with guns increased by 19%. Home invasions increased by 21%. Assaults committed with guns increased by 28%. Armed robberies skyrocketed with an increase of 69%.
source : This chart is from Australia criminal statistics
What is your source for the above figures? Not the chart, but the *figures*.
Anyway, gun control was attempted in many cities and in many states and failed every time. Even if it worked on Australia, is a EXCEPTION, not the rule and an exception in a completely different reality than USA.
Yes, it is easier to restrict guns in Australia due to their geography. But saying it never worked is wrong.
1 - An woman who is threatened by her ex boyfriend, tried to call the police but police do nothing, she purchase an illegal 9mm to defend himself and when his ex tries to rape her, she defends. Are you in favor of punishing her? Gun control is a tyranny rule who will destroy innocents lives who defend themselves and will overload the prison system.
2 - Do you expect that the average redneck will give up his guns? That people will give up 300.000.000+ guns? How much blood and money will cost to enforce an federal gun ban?. Note that USA already tried an federal assault ban on 1994 and spoiler : Din't worked.
Also there is a huge controversy on gun control in Argentina, because there is 6 times more illegal unregistered weapons (even military grade) than the legal ones. So people don’t want to be disarmed in this times of wide insecurity were the state protects criminals and the people have to live behind bars in their own houses.https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-gun-laws-in-Argentina-like
Womb control and gun control are two awful ideas...
1) Depends on what she did. If her life was in danger and she shot and killed him, I wouldn't charge her with murder, but possession of the illegal gun. What prevented her from getting a legal gun?
2) The average redneck might be able to keep his rifles for hunting (those are still legal in Australia, too.) I am not arguing for banning all guns, but saying that this has never worked is wrong, as we have seen. It worked in Australia. I'd be for putting a fingerprint lock on a gun that will only allow it to be used by the person who bought it. And making it so that if you tried to do away with this lock, it would destroy the gun or make it unable to fire.
I noticed while at the bus station last night after work that the city bus service in my town is offering free rides all day to everyone on Election Day. What a juxtaposition to what is being done all across the country to deliberately prevent people from exercising their most basic right.
Technically, they *will* be counted--presuming they respond to the Census--even if it doesn't track that particular demographic facet. There is no logical reason to exclude such questions from the Census, of course, but I am not the one in charge of compiling the questions it asks.
That article also says
No previous U.S. Census has ever included LGBTQ Americans, which makes it challenging for federal agencies and researchers to accurately track the size, demographics and needs of the community.
Again, they *have* been included if they answered it. The second part of the sentence is true, though--it is impossible to track a demographic when you aren't asking about it.
Yeah, well, their numbers won't be counted, presumably because the current government wants to ignore that they exist and legislate them out of existence...
Reading up on the various blasphemy cases, it's pretty clear that "She insulted Mohammad!" is just the Pakistani equivalent of "He whistled at a white woman!"
The thing about the Asa Bibi case is that it's widely suspected that the judge sentenced her to death to save her life. It's very likely she would have been lynched if he had acquitted her. There's been at least two cases where someone acquitted of blasphemy has been beaten to death on the courthouse steps.
The Pakistani Minister who took up her case and said she should be freed was assassinated by his bodyguard in 2011. The bodyguard was subsequently convicted and executed, but is still something of a hero to the religious extremists.
Thank you for contacting me about the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. I announced my opposition to Judge Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court early on in the confirmation process. I did so because I believed he would become part of a hard right majority on the court that would continue to rule for the wealthy and the powerful and against the interests of women, workers and the environment. During the confirmation process, I grew even more concerned with his nomination, given the credible allegations of sexual assault made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and his lack of veracity during the Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearing. Unfortunately, the Senate confirmed Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination on October 6, 2018 with 50 to 48 votes.
Given Judge Kavanaugh’s history of right-wing rulings, his confirmation creates a far-right majority on the Court. That majority, with Judge Kavanaugh’s support, jeopardizes Roe v. Wade, which Trump has repeatedly promised to overturn. Kavanaugh’s stated views also endanger the Affordable Care Act’s protections for people with pre-existing conditions, prioritize the NRA above the safety of students, and threaten our civil rights. Americans deserve a Supreme Court Justice who will protect the rights of voters, workers, women, people of color, and individuals of the LGBTQ community. I do not believe that Judge Kavanaugh is that person.
In addition to Judge Kavanaugh’s record, it is disgraceful that the Senate confirmed him despite Dr. Ford’s incredibly courageous and convincing testimony. Dr. Ford did not want to come forward, but believed it was her civic duty to provide information relevant to his nomination. Even though she has received death threats and has been unable to stay in her own home, she spent hours publicly answering questions about an experience so painful, it still haunts her thirty-five years later.
Let me be clear: as a nation, especially we here in the Senate, should be ashamed of everything Dr. Ford has been forced to endure. We owe Dr. Ford an enormous amount of gratitude for speaking out. It is reprehensible that other credible accusations of sexual assault by several women against Judge Kavanaugh were not seriously considered in this confirmation process.
Moreover, Judge Kavanaugh’s lack of veracity during his confirmation hearing is a very troubling issue that should not be taken lightly. When questioned about his knowledge of files stolen by staffers from the Judiciary Committee for partisan purposes, Judge Kavanaugh repeatedly denied that he had received and reviewed the stolen files. However, emails released as part of these hearings contradict his answers, showing that files were regularly shared with him while he was on the White House staff. Furthermore, his evasiveness – and often outright arrogance – when questioned about Dr. Ford’s testimony and his history of excessive drinking were very troubling. Americans deserve a Supreme Court judge who is an impartial arbiter that provides a fair hearing. Judge Kavanaugh’s lack of veracity and temperament undermine the standards we should adhere to for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.
The American people must be able to rely on the Court to protect our democratic values, treat workers fairly, safeguard the hard-earned rights that women and minorities have achieved, protect religious freedom, and shield the privacy rights of citizens. I fear very much that Judge Kavanaugh will not prioritize the interests of the people over the interests of the wealthy and large corporations.
Thank you again for contacting me, and please feel free to stay in touch about this or any other subject of interest to you. For up-to-date information on what I am working on, please sign-up for my e-newsletter, the Bernie Buzz, at http://sanders.senate.gov/buzz/.
Honest question - do you think he signs things "Bernard Sanders"?
No, but his Admin does!
That was probably written by him, edited by his staff and sent out by some lackey who monitors the email. I bet everyone who mentioned Kavanaugh in an email got this response.
I got an e-mail from Donald Trump wanting money from me. I won't post it here because I pretty much auto-delete political e-mail. Just pointing out that I doubt many of these e-mails are legitimately written by who they claim...
Say what you will about Bernie, but he has always been fairly accessible for a Senator. He used to take calls from listeners for a full hour each week on Thom Hartman's radio program.
Say what you will about Bernie, but he has always been fairly accessible for a Senator. He used to take calls from listeners for a full hour each week on Thom Hartman's radio program.
That may be so, but that still doesn't mean those e-mails are from him. I'm too worried about scams to believe any random e-mail I receive. I certainly wouldn't send any money...
Edit: I just got an e-mail from Trump stating that he'd match my contributions 4 to 1! Not sure why he needs my one when he can just toss in his four regardless...
Say what you will about Bernie, but he has always been fairly accessible for a Senator. He used to take calls from listeners for a full hour each week on Thom Hartman's radio program.
That may be so, but that still doesn't mean those e-mails are from him. I'm too worried about scams to believe any random e-mail I receive. I certainly wouldn't send any money...
Edit: I just got an e-mail from Trump stating that he'd match my contributions 4 to 1! Not sure why he needs my one when he can just toss in his four regardless...
Because he's cheap. I doubt he'll be throwing in, regardless.
I mean, I suppose it's possible to tolerate alot of BS from politicians, but listening to the entire GOP do a 180 on Obamacare and pre-existing conditions starting roughly 2 weeks before the mid-terms is just too much to handle. They have been running against this law full-bore 100% since it was passed. Everyone knows this is the case. Many Republican voters support them specifically because of this position. The fact they are absurdly trying to pretend like 1.) They didn't try to repeal it last year MUTIPLE times, and 2.) trying to pretend they have an actual plan in regards to healthcare and 3.) pretending they are the party of pre-existing conditions just shows how deeply, deeply unpopular they know their actual positions are.
You don't have to agree with Democrats on the ACA, but there isn't a soul here who can deny the fact that Democrats have gone to bat for people with pre-existing conditions and Republicans have voted to abolish the law that projects them nearly constantly for the better part of a decade. To deny this is the case is to deny reality itself. Why are Republicans trying to convince people they hold views on the issue it is transparently obvious they do not actually hold??
Heck, they tried to repeal it something like 75 times while Obama was still in the White House! And they still haven't gotten it done. And the more they attack it, the more people like it!
And they are apparently hoping people are stupid enough to believe them. Or don't learn from history...
Assault rifles are already very restricted. An civilian semi auto AR 15 have selective fire? No, so is a sporting rifle.
Assault rifle "An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine. source ": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle
Anyone can make an homemade open bolt smg or change 3 pieces of a Glock 9mm to have an fully auto gun...
That's actually a load of shit. The AR-15 is an assault rifle, or Sturmgevähr, as the Nazi rifle the AR-15 is modeled after is called. The US military do not consider AR-15 assault rifles because they have standards of how they would like a gun to perform to be called this or that category. HOWEVER! The original meaning of Sturmgevähr is any rifle suitable to storm (hence the name Sturm) (or assault) a fortified position. The basic problem with rifles such as the M1 Grand is that running, stopping, and firing will yield inaccurate shots and slow rate of fire. That does not intimidate the entrenched enemy, so they will fire back, and, standing still and all, have a much more decent chance of hitting.
With Sturmgevährs, you have 3 guys or whatever take cover and lay down suppressive fire while 3 guys advance and if need be (the enemy pops up again from under their cover, taking aim) you can fire it while running and be intimidating. Once the tree running guys find good cover, the lay down suppressive fire and the 3 first guys can advance and so on an so forth.
An AR-15 would have been sufficiently intimidating in WWII to fit the bill, hence it is an assault rifle. And like you yourself point out, it takes only the slightest modification to turn into into an assault rifle also by the US military definition.
A homemade open bolt SMG or modified Glock 9 mm would not function as an assault "rifle" because they are way to inaccurate... ESPECIALLY if you plan to spray and pray with them.
But all of that none-with-standing, if the AR-15 did not have the lethal potential it has, the gun fetishists would be drooling over another weapon. But they do not. They all want the AR-15, because they KNOW it is a military grade weapon, and that is why they want it. Basically, if it was not an assault rifle, or near assault rifle by the US military definition, the gun nuts would not obsess over it and therefore could not care less if it was banned. The very fact that you argue that it should not be banned by comparing it to other, inferior, guns is thus evidence that it should be banned precisely because it IS so much deadlier than the other, inferior, guns that you like to pretend are equally good but in reality are not, which, again, you already know, which, again, is why you pretend that they are.
Edit: Ooops correction; I meant to say the PASSION with which it is argued it should not be banned. Like, a person can be principled and might object to any gun being banned, even obscure guns that are already out of production or whatever, but the arguments would never be as livid as is the debate surrounding the AR-15. Let me make a comparison; let's say Emily asks you to prom and you are like "Yeah, ok sure" thinking "well she IS pretty!" but then we load a savefile and Leah asks you out and your smile reaches your ears and you go "YES YES YES!!! I would love to!" and you are thinking "Oh man oh man, I am the luckiest man on earth!" then we can deduce which girl you would prefer if you could chose freely. Likewise, it is quite easy to deduce which gun the gun fetishists want.
How much people died by the government on last century and how much died by civilians armed with legal arms? THE GOVERNMENT IS FAR MORE dangerous than any armed civilian. As for rifles, see the FBI statistics about weapons and murder that i already posted
NOTE : Rifles category not count only AR 15. An single shot homemade .22 LR count as "rifle", at the same way that an Barrett M107 count as "rifle".
The number of homicides with """"assault rifles"""" are minimum. Even knifes are far more deadly according to own FBI statistics. I believe that FBI is a neutral "organization". Anyway, the idea that the population should be cattle is awful.
1) Depends on what she did. If her life was in danger and she shot and killed him, I wouldn't charge her with murder, but possession of the illegal gun. What prevented her from getting a legal gun?
So you are in favor of using the police force who can be occupied dealing with rapists and terrorists to put someone who committed a "crime without victim" into a failed and expensive prison system? As for this accessory, this accessory can easily be removed if the weapon is stolen.
---------------
Anyway, i an in favor of just 2 gun control laws 1 - No guns for "anti gun politicians" 2 - No armed security to "anti gun politicians"
Is very common on my country to see politicians who promoted our draconian gun law walking with an squad of armed security. In other worlds, the population should be a cattle and die for the sake of their monopoly on force and they should be protected by an private small army.
Anyway, i an in favor of just 2 gun control laws 1 - No guns for "anti gun politicians" 2 - No armed security to "anti gun politicians"
Why? Because you think it will increase the odds of your political opponents being assassinated? If you're truly opposed to gun control, you wouldn't support taking them away from your political opponents.
Comments
"Gun control din't worked on country A = is because they can obtain guns on country B" - This applies to everywhere.
Din't worked on Mexico? Blame guns coming from USA
Din't worked on Brazil? Blame guns coming from Paraguay, Uruguay, Argentina, etc
Din't worked on most Western European countries? Blame Balkan and Eastern European countries
Din't worked on a USA state? Blame a neighbor state?
Note that in all cases mentioned, the "B" is having decrease on his criminality but the "A" is having an increase... To solve the problem of people in country A obtaining weapon in B country, you need an world government(and i don't need to explain why it will be awful) and it will not solve the problem with homemade guns. Not mention, impose the same failed gun laws in all EU states will make Europe much more violent.
This is a gun shop on Czech Republic(note that even Czech is too restrict for my taste)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Czech_Republic
How many terrorists attacks did Czech Republic suffered? Talking about guns and invasions, what the Nazis usually do after conquer a new territory? Exactly disarm and enslave the population "On the very first day, Chief Commander of German forces ordered surrender of all firearms present within the occupied territory." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_Czech_Republic#Nazi_gun_ban
And the communists banned guns on occupied countries too. This is why far-left authoritarianism and far-right authoritarianism are the same; people should be free, not cattle/slaves.
I guess my point is that it's hard to compare gun laws from country to country. It's not just the laws that matter, there are also things like the history, culture, surrounding countries and so on.
Nevertheless blasphemy bans are still enforced under a 2009 Defamation Act.
The very concept of blasphemy laws is itself absurd. Using violent force against those you disagree with is essentially admitting that you're wrong and that you can't win an argument in a free discussion.
The thing about the Asa Bibi case is that it's widely suspected that the judge sentenced her to death to save her life. It's very likely she would have been lynched if he had acquitted her. There's been at least two cases where someone acquitted of blasphemy has been beaten to death on the courthouse steps.
1) Depends on what she did. If her life was in danger and she shot and killed him, I wouldn't charge her with murder, but possession of the illegal gun. What prevented her from getting a legal gun?
2) The average redneck might be able to keep his rifles for hunting (those are still legal in Australia, too.) I am not arguing for banning all guns, but saying that this has never worked is wrong, as we have seen. It worked in Australia. I'd be for putting a fingerprint lock on a gun that will only allow it to be used by the person who bought it. And making it so that if you tried to do away with this lock, it would destroy the gun or make it unable to fire.
https://getidentilock.com
Something like this.
FOX NEWS HAS DONE MORE TO INCITE DOMESTIC POLITICAL VIOLENCE THAN DONALD TRUMP
https://theintercept.com/2018/10/30/fox-news-has-done-more-to-incite-domestic-political-violence-than-donald-trump/Facebook removes pages belonging to far-right group 'Proud Boys'
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/facebook-removes-pages-belonging-far-right-group-proud-boys-n926506?fbclid=IwAR15isaQFqL8n9pH_C91eeuo5UL_UEIZQjPXXCg4KS-VA5MajxTAx4kcQuYRepublicans used to have a health care plan. Now all they have are lies.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/10/31/18044692/republicans-health-care-preexisting-conditions-lies-trump?fbclid=IwAR3ucmBfUmSYFwZC4tleSK9zVIGBTW0nFtoSpfJvxxe7vFte1pEuM-H4A7kTheir plan is "Don't get sick", apparently.
Ministers interrupt Sessions, are removed from religious freedom conference
The attorney general was speaking at a conference on the future of religious liberty when two ministers challenged his fealty to the Bible.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/ministers-interrupt-sessions-are-removed-religious-freedom-conference-n925981?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR2tYfpAMd_VAmKi1jzWIQqJf8mDyRtAG7hHLZkAhB8mAlf9Yxwv5wo87cM
Gab’s CEO Says Pittsburgh Suspect Doesn’t Represent The Site. But He Spent Years Recruiting Racists Like Him.
Andrew Torba has promoted white nationalists and looked the other way as Gab users posted racist death threats on his platform.https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/andrew-torba-gab-robert-bowers_us_5bd8ed0be4b019a7ab582762?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067&fbclid=IwAR05_VgLWexwV3GVIydv0J0I-BW6fJwoo5hErHJ2orhkL6oyNrfuoUDauKQ
Acosta vs. Huckabee Sanders: Shouldn't You Have The Guts To Name Which Journalists Are The Enemy of The People?
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/10/29/cnn_acosta_vs_huckabee_sanders_shouldnt_you_have_the_guts_to_name_which_journalists_are_the_enemy_of_the_people.html?fbclid=IwAR2Q6TNcAJ4DJ1wg7SeGRauqpqHrM1nWvaW6du3U66FHKyuLCm1_vFJuOoIPittsburgh Penguins will host blood drive, collection to help synagogue victims
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/413550-pittsburgh-penguins-will-host-blood-drive-collection-to-help?fbclid=IwAR3tMMz363efCCPeM7q3E_9Nhea_kmJ4pZbl9jkT1HkWeEXRMnztrtC3ZmERemembering The 2 Victims Killed In The Kroger Shooting In Kentucky
http://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2018/10/30/remembering-kroger-shooting-victims?fbclid=IwAR3wj947RzbSkDkxf9XJzB2Qq_DZ8IKKfeiYk0ESDy9G827FLLIiG2y-jhgJews assail 'Christian rabbi' who appeared with Pence, and so does his own movement
Loren Jacobs, who spoke at a rally with the vice-president, was stripped of his ordination by the Messianic movement in 2003.https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jews-assail-so-called-christian-rabbi-who-appeared-pence-so-n926406?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma&fbclid=IwAR3JPkBNfjFxpK640SM4rsRIwdRD0YesCrYYNJhrtQnTD6eidG2QDPhPm-8
Facebook is banning the far-right militia Proud Boys after a violent attack in New York
https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-bans-proud-boys-accounts-groups-2018-10?fbclid=IwAR3euL_ZqSem-rNsC0ZTRjfYJQGVI2HjeZZ1EQLiDnCBRIzzGpOA-xJlvxULGBTQ Americans Won't Be Counted in 2020 U.S. Census After All
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/lgbtq-americans-won-t-be-counted-2020-u-s-census-n739911?fbclid=IwAR3u3X8068RX1g7cV5UQWS3UcVYS9r-A_Zm4G7hZJ5jyYcqx8Up_ds9riEoFerguson Activist Melissa McKinnies' Son Found Dead From Alleged Lynching
https://www.okayplayer.com/news/melissa-mckinnies-son-danye-jones-ferguson-lynching.html?fbclid=IwAR2AzC_7abTBXcwNJTS7BahDmJRyw8Umnn1xKgwy4KUlH4Ut9v4jRpJscjIThat article also says
Again, they *have* been included if they answered it. The second part of the sentence is true, though--it is impossible to track a demographic when you aren't asking about it.
But he doesn't have a birth certificate so it could be anything.
Edit: I just got an e-mail from Trump stating that he'd match my contributions 4 to 1! Not sure why he needs my one when he can just toss in his four regardless...
Watch Republicans back away from their former positions on Obamacare.
You don't have to agree with Democrats on the ACA, but there isn't a soul here who can deny the fact that Democrats have gone to bat for people with pre-existing conditions and Republicans have voted to abolish the law that projects them nearly constantly for the better part of a decade. To deny this is the case is to deny reality itself. Why are Republicans trying to convince people they hold views on the issue it is transparently obvious they do not actually hold??
And they are apparently hoping people are stupid enough to believe them. Or don't learn from history...
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls
NOTE : Rifles category not count only AR 15. An single shot homemade .22 LR count as "rifle", at the same way that an Barrett M107 count as "rifle".
The number of homicides with """"assault rifles"""" are minimum. Even knifes are far more deadly according to own FBI statistics. I believe that FBI is a neutral "organization". Anyway, the idea that the population should be cattle is awful. So you are in favor of using the police force who can be occupied dealing with rapists and terrorists to put someone who committed a "crime without victim" into a failed and expensive prison system? As for this accessory, this accessory can easily be removed if the weapon is stolen.
---------------
Anyway, i an in favor of just 2 gun control laws
1 - No guns for "anti gun politicians"
2 - No armed security to "anti gun politicians"
Is very common on my country to see politicians who promoted our draconian gun law walking with an squad of armed security. In other worlds, the population should be a cattle and die for the sake of their monopoly on force and they should be protected by an private small army.
The Tone-Deaf Israeli Reactions to the Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooting
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-tone-deaf-israeli-reactions-to-the-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting?fbclid=IwAR1P5VvC9gAcBDC_woMjrLEojSUd6zoS295X_XSabH_w8VVxGLUOc09NKMoWater Crisis comes to Newark in echo of Flint, Michigan
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/nyregion/newark-lead-water-pipes.html?fbclid=IwAR0RjjiXdqTMZrMjHegTFGT2SXiw-FyOUiuIEpYA16uNu4rTbKrcxLTNM4kVeterans slam Trump for border 'stunt'
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/veterans-slam-trump-for-border-stunt/ar-BBP8fwO?ocid=sfTrump attacks Paul Ryan, says he 'knows nothing' about birthright citizenship
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/31/politics/trump-paul-ryan-birthright-citizenship-midterms/index.html?utm_content=2018-10-31T20:33:06&utm_medium=social&utm_term=link&utm_source=fbCNNMidterms 2018: Steve Bannon attracts crowd of 'about 25 people' to election rally in Kansas
https://www.yahoo.com/news/midterms-2018-steve-bannon-attracts-115712383.htmlCOLIN POWELL, MADELEINE ALBRIGHT DENOUNCE TRUMP: U.S. NOW A ‘SOCIETY BASED ON INSULTS, ON LIES’
https://www.newsweek.com/secretaries-state-powell-albright-denounce-trump-1195675We Snuck into Seattle's Super Secret White Nationalist Convention
https://www.thestranger.com/news/2017/10/04/25451102/we-snuck-into-seattles-super-secret-white-nationalist-convention?fbclid=IwAR1AZtIFTIaIbLYGuHdO0nY3Vz7GQn01VNKYECn_mABkxPHOvY5AubwSErYMIGRANT CARAVAN TROOP DEPLOYMENT COULD COST U.S. $50 MILLION DESPITE NO EVIDENCE OF TERRORISTS, MAJOR CRIMINAL GANG PRESENCE
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-administration-migrant-caravan-border-troops-1194215?fbclid=IwAR1Mzuq4eNtxFeA121O4FTKwY2tk4TnFYgYSw1TftBk1IMk4dfCR4rnmlFkTreasury Sees 2018 Borrowing Needs Surging to $1.34 Trillion
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-29/treasury-sees-2018-borrowing-needs-surging-to-1-34-trillion?utm_content=business&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&fbclid=IwAR1gr5okNMB6iwDmCUHWOzahrQWt3bV0h1ZrCO4rOFK_u4sUhoDCmfWN6KUTrump admin may change strategy on domestic terrorism
https://www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/watch/trump-admin-may-change-strategy-on-domestic-terrorism-1358404675818?v=railb&fbclid=IwAR3Yqjh9ErSagX2s_fa173Y-RLXoUafQwzC-6d8BRVe8uexuqaY_E1ZfnwsOnce sure of a red wave, Trump WH braces for midterms
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/once-sure-of-a-red-wave-trump-wh-braces-for-midterms-1358072899640?v=railb&Attorney dismisses Trump's birthright challenge
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/attorney-dismisses-trump-s-birthright-challenge-1357997635720?v=railb&And now for something completely different...
BBC AMERICA GREENLIGHTS ORIGINAL SCRIPTED SERIES THE WATCH
New Punk Rock Thriller is Based on Sir Terry Pratchett’s “Discworld” NovelsHappy Halloween from Doctor Who!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06qbwnr?fbclid=IwAR22QbuGhYOJuIuLJL845mMHF53KG_pDqB4LjV6_bWdtaqYB0gCaWpntRZ0