It's not the guns so much as the gun culture that's the issue. Somewhere like Finland for example has very high rates of gun ownership, but far lower gun crime.
Having said that I do think that restricting gun ownership would help in the longer term, though the reason for doing that would be more to do with culture and education rather than actual supply (and therefore I wouldn't suggest trying to confiscate existing weapons). Currently most of the messages about guns appear to be aimed at encouraging their use by everyone (the best way to stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun etc). If use was discouraged culturally instead (including far more limited use by law enforcement) that would help over time.
I'm not suggesting this would be an instant quick-fix, but it is surprising how quickly cultural change can come about when assisted by changes in the law and consistent attitudes within government. Examples of that I've seen in my life-time in the UK include for instance: - reductions in drink-driving - increases in wearing seatbelts - reductions in smoking, particularly in workplaces - far greater acceptance of LGBT
I don't think anywhere else has the number of gun manufacturers, guns being produced for sale, or the stockpile of weapons, supplies, and modifications for those supplies. Now, I like my guns and the given privilege to carry them, so keep that in mind when reading.
So, maybe, and I am being serious here, even though it would be tough and a nasty fight. 1. Immediately shut down all gun manufacturing except for private contracts with the military. 2. Enact a recall of all licensed guns and ammo sold legally to private citizens and enforce harsh penalties and door to door searches for those that do not. 3. Serve search warrants on everyone else, business's, warehouse's, private property, etc., as they may have guns and ammo not reported ,passed down by family without a license, etc. 4. Do not bring this to a public vote in govt, just do it (I know..). 5. Repeal the right for a private citizen to be a licensed gun dealer and open a business as such, same with pawn store sales, gun shows, etc.
6. Remind me what one of my gun dealers from long ago said to me while he was quoting me scripture from the Bible, for a book he was writing on his C64 about Jesus, while at the same time telling another customer about the benefits of a .357 over a 9mm (one always had to hear some bible from him when goin in his store):
Him "I tell my son to keep one gun hidden, wrapped in silicone cloth, boxed and buried. One day you might have to shoot the president for taking away our rights on one issue or another. Now as I was saying, Jesus, right, see he..." A lil weird that guy but he had the best prices around.
Was he off his rocker, was he a seer from 25 years ago, seeing the election of some president taking ALL guns away or having just a rotten to the core president?
I never forgot that, and at the time I thought it a bit 'overboard', and bordering on a threat to a future president because I thought, no way would anyone limit a private citizen's right to personal defense.,. but just making a point.
Yes I know, not all guns, not out of homes, etc At the time though I was in working 3rd shift in a gas station, in a bad part of a big city next to the overpass of an interstate. That was when a .44 special would have to be my constant companion.
Honestly though, and taking into acct. my own belief in 'privilege' to own guns. I think those steps might work to a point. It would cause some bloodshed and bashed heads but it would probably stem the the tide of gun violence a little in this country.
Oh, forgot, 7. scan ALL incoming mail and internet traffic, to the letter.
Im all for it. But the NEXT time I am faced with another gun, held with ill intent, without mine... Mad would not begin to cover my thoughts. Even though, given my experiences of the last few years, death holds little fear over me any longer, as I have already faced it, I still have loved ones that do, and I feel the need to protect. The thought that really gets me though, would be allowing the bad seed hangin in some scumbag's pants, being allowed to propagate itself afterwards, and continue living, is a deal breaker for me.
Again, this is a serious proposition. AND, I wouldn't hide a thing, my hand on a Bible I say it true.
Responses to this serious proposition are welcome, and it is a VERY serious one at that.
Tell me Im not willing to do whatever it takes. Tell me Im not going against my beliefs to try and bring change. Tell me it would never do a darn thing (deaths would still occur but maybe a little less from guns here). Tell me that's crazy (yeah, I know...) and wouldn't do a thing.
Im open to ALL idea's, I really am.
I am for other ideas and I have papers written with the the possibilities of other actions to take but this is one that throws all the cards on the table. Papers, talkin, meetin, votin, lobbyin, more papers, more research, more votin, more hiding bills within bills goin for a vote, etc. etc. Yeah, I'll keep tying, and my skills and insight into some situations are increasing, but it get's mighty tiring sometimes. ------------------- One of my granddaddy's owned a logging co. and sawmill, and later, a building supply. He had a saying. "Sometimes it takes a 2x4 in ya hand and bein madder ina poked hornet's nest afore you can get people ta listen to some sense"
Now, 40 years after his death, even being trained in conflict management, especially in conflict negotiations, I have found this not entirely to be untrue.
Your damn right granddaddy , with Washington DC, your just about damn right. (sorry, these shootin's, machete choppin's, rights march clubbin's, bombin's, etc, really bug me, whether here or anywhere else in the world)
That reminds me of the movie Red Dawn where the Cuban leader sees a pick-up with the bumper sticker 'You'll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead hands' then bends over and pries a handgun out of the dead driver's hand...
A good movie that, and remember that bumper sticker well. That was the 'leading to bloodshed and a few bashed in heads' was referring to, those that never would give up the guns, til they were dead. But like that, Cuban guy, I suspect the govt. would end up having to do bout the same with the method I suggested, at least with many folks.
In a story and development that should surprise no one, NBC News is reporting that Rex Tillerson called Trump a "f***ing moron" at the end of a meeting over the summer. Of course this is true, and of course this is the EXACT type of thing that will send a malignant narcissist into a seething rage. Trump clearly sent Tillerson out to clean this up, but the thing is, Tillerson didn't even deny the report. He talked around it. There is a 99% chance that is in fact what Tillerson called the President.
Strategic genius that he is, Trump is now going to fuel a 48 hour story about whether or not he is a moron. Because that's what you do when you are nothing but a large tub of ego masquerading as a human being.
Yes, they (the Trump clan) will. If Bill could dodge several sexual assault cases and Hillary could dodge all the Whitewater stuff then the Trumps will dodge this. It sounds more like the people who wanted to buy hotel/condos in that building suffered from sour grapes rather than being victims of actual fraud. If I own a clothing store and you ask me "do a lot of people buy this style of shirt?" and I tell you "oh, my, yes--that's the last of my stock so I'll need to reorder soon" I am not committing fraud, only lying, and that is a crime only when I am under oath. (We may substitute any other tangible good in lieu of "shirt" without loss of generality.) This sort of misleading statement *would* be a crime if I were your financial advisor, though, but that isn't what happened in that case.
Meanwhile, Trump suggested that Puerto Rico's debt should be "wiped out". Although on the one hand I despise the very idea of government bailouts--AIG should have been allowed to fail because "too big to fail" means "too big to exist"--but on the other hand giving Puerto Rico a clean slate like an actual State could get will help immensely.
Meanwhile, referendum or not, police crackdown or not, Catalonia may take the route of simply declaring independence early next week. Today there are only protests, strikes, and demonstrations; next week there may be riots and bloodshed if the crackdown continues. If the Czechs can break away from the old USSR without violence then the Catalonians can break from Spain under equally pleasant terms. Questions of whether they can or should declare independence are irrelevant--the movement for independence has arrived and its time there is now.
Much like the stats I provided about the dangers of policing relative to other jobs considered totally mundane, math doesn't have an agenda, though plenty of people will claim it does.
Yup, we are 'special' and a hard nut to crack when it comes to the issue of gun violence. It is just not that easy and has no one or simple fix (not that it is anywhere, so no disrespect intended, but just to use the phrase- I think everyone knows what I mean).
If you're referring purely to the number of guns then no other country in the world is comparable. I was trying to make the point though that the number of guns is not in itself a good indicator of levels of gun violence - the culture around the appropriate uses of those guns is more important.
More food for thought: Intentional homicide, counts and rates per 100,000 population; covers the years 2003 - 2015 (where data is avilable). Be aware that it may take a minute or two before the report opens but once it does you may download it into Excel if you like. 2010 has the most data available; out of the 195 countries which have data that year the United States is about halfway down the list at 4.75 (ranked highest to lowest). We really aren't as violent as we appear to be; it only looks that way when you focus solely on gun-related deaths. That isn't to say that there isn't a problem with violence here...but then there is a problem with violence *everywhere* so we are not unique in that regard.
On a side note...what the heck, Greenland? 31.83 homicides per 100,000 people in 2010? Sure, their rate dropped to 12.46 in 2015 but that is still nearly triple the homicide rate of the United States.
*************
Is the problem with targeted ads on Facebook, which apparently originated in Russia, a problem with Russia or a problem with Facebook? Is Russia not allowed to purchase ads on Facebook? Separate question: are they not allowed to purchase politically motivated ads? Did Facebook properly vet the sources of the ads or did they happily cash the checks without a second thought? Is purchasing a political ad "meddling" or is it political speech? Is creating a "fake" Facebook profile a crime? Why are we so upset about Russia potentially meddling in our election when we have a proven history of meddling in the elections of others? Isn't that simply karmic payback?
Could the problem be the idiots who live in a world of confirmation bias and get their political news and views from Facebook?
Clearly there are ties between Trump and Russia, as investigations into his financial dealings over the years has shown. That being said, the fact remains that *NO* election polling stations were hacked (according to various State election officials) and Russia cannot *force* anyone to vote a certain way; therefore, there was no *direct* meddling or manipulation of the election. Misleading people via paid content or native advertising (opinion pieces designed to look like legitimate news stories) is, to date, not a crime, only an indication that people are still easy to fool and easy to manipulate.
Would we be having *any* hearings into Russian election meddling had Hillary won the election?
*************
In bizarre news, we are sending Cuban diplomats back to Havana in the wake of our diplomats in Havana apparently being the victims of "sonic attacks". I think I mentioned this before, but I *highly* doubt Cuba has infrasonic weaponry given its inherent problems--if you are operating an infrasonic weapon the vibrations will move through the generating apparatus you are using and attack you, as well.
More food for thought: Intentional homicide, counts and rates per 100,000 population; covers the years 2003 - 2015 (where data is avilable). Be aware that it may take a minute or two before the report opens but once it does you may download it into Excel if you like. 2010 has the most data available; out of the 195 countries which have data that year the United States is about halfway down the list at 4.75 (ranked highest to lowest). We really aren't as violent as we appear to be; it only looks that way when you focus solely on gun-related deaths. That isn't to say that there isn't a problem with violence here...but then there is a problem with violence *everywhere* so we are not unique in that regard.
On a side note...what the heck, Greenland? 31.83 homicides per 100,000 people in 2010? Sure, their rate dropped to 12.46 in 2015 but that is still nearly triple the homicide rate of the United States.
*************
Is the problem with targeted ads on Facebook, which apparently originated in Russia, a problem with Russia or a problem with Facebook? Is Russia not allowed to purchase ads on Facebook? Separate question: are they not allowed to purchase politically motivated ads? Did Facebook properly vet the sources of the ads or did they happily cash the checks without a second thought? Is purchasing a political ad "meddling" or is it political speech? Is creating a "fake" Facebook profile a crime? Why are we so upset about Russia potentially meddling in our election when we have a proven history of meddling in the elections of others? Isn't that simply karmic payback?
Could the problem be the idiots who live in a world of confirmation bias and get their political news and views from Facebook?
Clearly there are ties between Trump and Russia, as investigations into his financial dealings over the years has shown. That being said, the fact remains that *NO* election polling stations were hacked (according to various State election officials) and Russia cannot *force* anyone to vote a certain way; therefore, there was no *direct* meddling or manipulation of the election. Misleading people via paid content or native advertising (opinion pieces designed to look like legitimate news stories) is, to date, not a crime, only an indication that people are still easy to fool and easy to manipulate.
Would we be having *any* hearings into Russian election meddling had Hillary won the election?
*************
In bizarre news, we are sending Cuban diplomats back to Havana in the wake of our diplomats in Havana apparently being the victims of "sonic attacks". I think I mentioned this before, but I *highly* doubt Cuba has infrasonic weaponry given its inherent problems--if you are operating an infrasonic weapon the vibrations will move through the generating apparatus you are using and attack you, as well.
Russian hackers don't have constitutional rights. And if a single member of the campaign coordinated with the targeting of these ads (and how else would they have known where to micro-target them), then it is at a minimum a blatant violation of campaign finance laws. And we wouldn't be discussing it if Hillary had been elected because Republicans would have started impeachment hearings before she was even inaugurated.
More food for thought: Intentional homicide, counts and rates per 100,000 population; covers the years 2003 - 2015 (where data is avilable). Be aware that it may take a minute or two before the report opens but once it does you may download it into Excel if you like. 2010 has the most data available; out of the 195 countries which have data that year the United States is about halfway down the list at 4.75 (ranked highest to lowest). We really aren't as violent as we appear to be; it only looks that way when you focus solely on gun-related deaths. That isn't to say that there isn't a problem with violence here...but then there is a problem with violence *everywhere* so we are not unique in that regard.
On a side note...what the heck, Greenland? 31.83 homicides per 100,000 people in 2010? Sure, their rate dropped to 12.46 in 2015 but that is still nearly triple the homicide rate of the United States.
Given your display name I am quite dismayed by this comment. Greenland only has 56 000 people, so each statistic of this nature is basically irrelevant in comparison to the US.
Russian hackers don't have constitutional rights. And if a single member of the campaign coordinated with the targeting of these ads (and how else would they have known where to micro-target them), then it is at a minimum a blatant violation of campaign finance laws. And we wouldn't be discussing it if Hillary had been elected because Republicans would have started impeachment hearings before she was even inaugurated.
That is why we should still be looking into potential collusion--a position I have always maintained--even if I don't think there will be anything of note to be found. I could be wrong, as PIL intones, but I could be right.
I don't know if they would have started impeachment hearings but the hearings they would have had would likely be over "e-mail servers" and/or "Benghazi".
Given your display name I am quite dismayed by this comment. Greenland only has 56 000 people, so each statistic of this nature is basically irrelevant in comparison to the US.
I enjoy poking fun at statistics. Probability is real--p(rolling a 6 or less on 2d6) = .4167, the hypergeometric probability of getting an opening hand of 7 which contains 2 to 4 lands for MtG when I have 21 lands in the deck = .7379--but statistics is not. In fact, 87.4% of all statistics are made up on an as-needed basis; I can cite 3 independent scientific studies which confirm this finding.
Look at it another way. The earlier citation of 29.7 homicides by firearm per million people for the United States clearly indicates that this country is the most violent country in the entire world--its the Wild West wherever you go. That is a statistic which serves to accentuate your side of the discussion, which is why you cited it. However, when I cite a different statistic--the United States is only "average" when *all* homicides per 100,000 people are calculated (about half of the countries have a higher homicide rate, about half have a lower rate)--that is a statistic which does not support your side of the argument, thus your reluctance to accept it.
Either *all* pertinent statistics must be cited or *none* of them may be cited. Yes, the *gun-related* murder rate is significantly higher here but the *overall* murder rate is not all that high. Based on that information, is this country more violent than any other? No, not really. It only seems that way because of the temporal proximity of the Las Vegas event.
The other part of the problem is still one of newsworthiness. In Las Vegas, 59 people were killed by one man shooting a lot of guns. In Chicago, so far this year 530 people have been killed, most by handguns...but no one cares about those deaths because they don't make for gripping, flashy headlines. I don't have the numbers for places like Detroit or Baltimore at the ready but as of July this year their project annual homicide rate per 100,000 people were on track to be 40.7 and 55.5, respectively. (there I go, citing statistics *laugh*)
*************
The Las Vegas shooter bought 33 guns in the last year. Although legal, shouldn't that raise a red flag somewhere? If I go withdraw $10,000 in cash from the bank that is legal--they will give me my money--but they will also alert Federal authorities that I just made a huge cash withdrawal.
In fact, 87.4% of all statistics are made up on an as-needed basis; I can cite 3 independent scientific studies which confirm this finding.
If there are citations behind that figure and you're not just messing with us, please do post them.
That is complete tongue-in-cheek tomfoolery--of course there are no such studies. That's the joke: you always say "x% of statistics are made up" and just put a random number in for x.
The Las Vegas shooter bought 33 guns in the last year. Although legal, shouldn't that raise a red flag somewhere? If I go withdraw $10,000 in cash from the bank that is legal--they will give me my money--but they will also alert Federal authorities that I just made a huge cash withdrawal.
I saw somewhere where there's an agency of the government (I think ATF) that is forbidden by our NRA owned Republican politicians from keeping computer records on Guns so they have to keep paper records only. If they get anything electronic they have to destroy it and convert it to paper. Incredibly inefficient and wasteful on purpose.
The high murder rates in urban centers are the result of gang warfare over drug territory. Not surprisingly, you saw the exact same type of violence in the 1920s during prohibition when it came to territory to sell booze. If you make a substance illegal, there will always be violence to control the market of illegal sales. You'll notice there are no longer any shoot-outs over a case of Budweiser or a carton of Marlboros. You legalize and regulate drugs, the violence will disappear. The issue of inner-city violence is the market for various forms of cocaine and heroin.
Of course, many on the right view this as an exclusive problem of black and Latino gangs, which makes sense as long as you pretend Al Capone, Arnold Rothstein and Lucky Liciano never existed. Of course, the main problem here is that Hollywood has managed to create a mythology around the organized crime of the 1920s-1980s that somehow many people see as noble and respectful. Whenever I go to watch a clip of "Goodfellas" or "The Sopranos", the comment sections are 9/1 of how great and strong the characters are, which not only misses the entire point of the creators of these works, but also serves as a cultural white-wash of past violent crime in this country, as if it was invented in Compton in the mid-80s.
The Las Vegas shooter bought 33 guns in the last year. Although legal, shouldn't that raise a red flag somewhere? If I go withdraw $10,000 in cash from the bank that is legal--they will give me my money--but they will also alert Federal authorities that I just made a huge cash withdrawal.
I saw somewhere where there's an agency of the government (I think ATF) that is forbidden by our NRA owned Republican politicians from keeping computer records on Guns so they have to keep paper records only. If they get anything electronic they have to destroy it and convert it to paper. Incredibly inefficient and wasteful on purpose.
The think I was thinking about is at the 7:00 mark of that video.
It describes how Republicans have crippled gun regulations resulting in the wild west and mass shootings we are seeing today. But they've actually gone further than just stopping common sense regulations such as when they rescinded Obama's executive order aimed at making it slightly harder for the mentally ill to get guns.
More than stopping regulations cold, Republicans have crippled agencies that could possibly be used to do anything about gun violence such as crippling the CDC and ATF. One agency that has been crippled is the ATF's National Tracing center which is supposed to be used by police nationwide to track firearms, solve violent crimes, and catch criminals.
They are handicapped by a 1986 law (Ronnie Reagan) that prevents the government from having a registry of guns in America. So the countries only federal facility that is used to solve and prevent gun crimes is forbidden from using computers to search gun records. (8:35)
Instead of solving murders using basic computers the agencies roughly 50 employees process over 370,000 requests a year using microfilm from the 1970s and boxes and boxes of paper records, receiving 2 million new gun records a month.
God forbid if a gun dealer sends them something like an excel spreadsheet they have to go through a convoluted process to make the data harder to find. Tax dollars are spent making the data unsearchable.
Here, the rest of the world finds out one of the major "scandals" pushed by the right during the Obama Administration was bullshit all along. Of course, many of us knew it was bullshit as it was happening:
“He arrives with a smile on his face, makes fun of the situation, shows no empathy, lies and lies on camera as he does 24-7. And then throws paper towel rolls to people in need as if he was playing Go Fetch with dogs”
“He arrives with a smile on his face, makes fun of the situation, shows no empathy, lies and lies on camera as he does 24-7. And then throws paper towel rolls to people in need as if he was playing Go Fetch with dogs”
I'm no psychiatrist, but I can read symptoms (and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night), and it seems pretty clear that Trump has narcissistic personality disorder:
“He arrives with a smile on his face, makes fun of the situation, shows no empathy, lies and lies on camera as he does 24-7. And then throws paper towel rolls to people in need as if he was playing Go Fetch with dogs”
I'm no psychiatrist, but I can read symptoms (and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night), and it seems pretty clear that Trump has narcissistic personality disorder:
While I agree that Trump is an extreme example of this, I don't think he's alone. I'd be willing to bet that many, if not most, politicians, royalty, Hollywood types, professional athletes and wealthy people in general exhibit a lot of those same qualities to some degree or another. It's only recently been described as a 'disorder'. Years ago they were just called assholes...
Everyone is narcissistic to at least some degree, or rather, everyone exhibits narcissistic traits to some degree. Like any psychological feature (for lack of a better word), it becomes pathological when it hurts you or the people around you.
Comments
Also, some food for thought.
Strategic genius that he is, Trump is now going to fuel a 48 hour story about whether or not he is a moron. Because that's what you do when you are nothing but a large tub of ego masquerading as a human being.
Meanwhile, Trump suggested that Puerto Rico's debt should be "wiped out". Although on the one hand I despise the very idea of government bailouts--AIG should have been allowed to fail because "too big to fail" means "too big to exist"--but on the other hand giving Puerto Rico a clean slate like an actual State could get will help immensely.
Meanwhile, referendum or not, police crackdown or not, Catalonia may take the route of simply declaring independence early next week. Today there are only protests, strikes, and demonstrations; next week there may be riots and bloodshed if the crackdown continues. If the Czechs can break away from the old USSR without violence then the Catalonians can break from Spain under equally pleasant terms. Questions of whether they can or should declare independence are irrelevant--the movement for independence has arrived and its time there is now.
On a side note...what the heck, Greenland? 31.83 homicides per 100,000 people in 2010? Sure, their rate dropped to 12.46 in 2015 but that is still nearly triple the homicide rate of the United States.
*************
Is the problem with targeted ads on Facebook, which apparently originated in Russia, a problem with Russia or a problem with Facebook? Is Russia not allowed to purchase ads on Facebook? Separate question: are they not allowed to purchase politically motivated ads? Did Facebook properly vet the sources of the ads or did they happily cash the checks without a second thought? Is purchasing a political ad "meddling" or is it political speech? Is creating a "fake" Facebook profile a crime? Why are we so upset about Russia potentially meddling in our election when we have a proven history of meddling in the elections of others? Isn't that simply karmic payback?
Could the problem be the idiots who live in a world of confirmation bias and get their political news and views from Facebook?
Clearly there are ties between Trump and Russia, as investigations into his financial dealings over the years has shown. That being said, the fact remains that *NO* election polling stations were hacked (according to various State election officials) and Russia cannot *force* anyone to vote a certain way; therefore, there was no *direct* meddling or manipulation of the election. Misleading people via paid content or native advertising (opinion pieces designed to look like legitimate news stories) is, to date, not a crime, only an indication that people are still easy to fool and easy to manipulate.
Would we be having *any* hearings into Russian election meddling had Hillary won the election?
*************
In bizarre news, we are sending Cuban diplomats back to Havana in the wake of our diplomats in Havana apparently being the victims of "sonic attacks". I think I mentioned this before, but I *highly* doubt Cuba has infrasonic weaponry given its inherent problems--if you are operating an infrasonic weapon the vibrations will move through the generating apparatus you are using and attack you, as well.
I don't know if they would have started impeachment hearings but the hearings they would have had would likely be over "e-mail servers" and/or "Benghazi". I enjoy poking fun at statistics. Probability is real--p(rolling a 6 or less on 2d6) = .4167, the hypergeometric probability of getting an opening hand of 7 which contains 2 to 4 lands for MtG when I have 21 lands in the deck = .7379--but statistics is not. In fact, 87.4% of all statistics are made up on an as-needed basis; I can cite 3 independent scientific studies which confirm this finding.
Look at it another way. The earlier citation of 29.7 homicides by firearm per million people for the United States clearly indicates that this country is the most violent country in the entire world--its the Wild West wherever you go. That is a statistic which serves to accentuate your side of the discussion, which is why you cited it. However, when I cite a different statistic--the United States is only "average" when *all* homicides per 100,000 people are calculated (about half of the countries have a higher homicide rate, about half have a lower rate)--that is a statistic which does not support your side of the argument, thus your reluctance to accept it.
Either *all* pertinent statistics must be cited or *none* of them may be cited. Yes, the *gun-related* murder rate is significantly higher here but the *overall* murder rate is not all that high. Based on that information, is this country more violent than any other? No, not really. It only seems that way because of the temporal proximity of the Las Vegas event.
The other part of the problem is still one of newsworthiness. In Las Vegas, 59 people were killed by one man shooting a lot of guns. In Chicago, so far this year 530 people have been killed, most by handguns...but no one cares about those deaths because they don't make for gripping, flashy headlines. I don't have the numbers for places like Detroit or Baltimore at the ready but as of July this year their project annual homicide rate per 100,000 people were on track to be 40.7 and 55.5, respectively. (there I go, citing statistics *laugh*)
*************
The Las Vegas shooter bought 33 guns in the last year. Although legal, shouldn't that raise a red flag somewhere? If I go withdraw $10,000 in cash from the bank that is legal--they will give me my money--but they will also alert Federal authorities that I just made a huge cash withdrawal.
It was somewhere in this video
JORDAN KLEPPER SOLVES GUNS
http://www.cc.com/episodes/cfhd5u/stand-up-specials-jordan-klepper-solves-guns-season-1-ep-101
Of course, many on the right view this as an exclusive problem of black and Latino gangs, which makes sense as long as you pretend Al Capone, Arnold Rothstein and Lucky Liciano never existed. Of course, the main problem here is that Hollywood has managed to create a mythology around the organized crime of the 1920s-1980s that somehow many people see as noble and respectful. Whenever I go to watch a clip of "Goodfellas" or "The Sopranos", the comment sections are 9/1 of how great and strong the characters are, which not only misses the entire point of the creators of these works, but also serves as a cultural white-wash of past violent crime in this country, as if it was invented in Compton in the mid-80s.
It describes how Republicans have crippled gun regulations resulting in the wild west and mass shootings we are seeing today. But they've actually gone further than just stopping common sense regulations such as when they rescinded Obama's executive order aimed at making it slightly harder for the mentally ill to get guns.
More than stopping regulations cold, Republicans have crippled agencies that could possibly be used to do anything about gun violence such as crippling the CDC and ATF. One agency that has been crippled is the ATF's National Tracing center which is supposed to be used by police nationwide to track firearms, solve violent crimes, and catch criminals.
They are handicapped by a 1986 law (Ronnie Reagan) that prevents the government from having a registry of guns in America. So the countries only federal facility that is used to solve and prevent gun crimes is forbidden from using computers to search gun records. (8:35)
Instead of solving murders using basic computers the agencies roughly 50 employees process over 370,000 requests a year using microfilm from the 1970s and boxes and boxes of paper records, receiving 2 million new gun records a month.
God forbid if a gun dealer sends them something like an excel spreadsheet they have to go through a convoluted process to make the data harder to find. Tax dollars are spent making the data unsearchable.
TRUMP TREATING US LIKE 'DOGS,' SAY PUERTO RICANS
“He arrives with a smile on his face, makes fun of the situation, shows no empathy, lies and lies on camera as he does 24-7. And then throws paper towel rolls to people in need as if he was playing Go Fetch with dogs”
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/weather/hurricane/article176926726.html
@smeagolheart I heard of that in the car, with the towels, what a complete jackwagon he is.
not automatic