I wonder if you said the same thing in 2015? http://www.ibtimes.com/first-lady-m...akeover-white-house-state-dining-room-2002843 For the record, I think spending $30,000 on a dining room is an egregious use of taxpayer money.
Trump filed his re-election documents hours after giving his inauguration speech, a 2020 campaign was a given. Promoting his FB disinfo chief is new. I wonder what it means that he's been essentially running for re-election since day one? I mean in terms of campaign contributions and all them rallies he keeps having.
Didn't take long: http://www.businessinsider.com/brad-parscale-trump-campaign-penny-stock-controversial-2018-2
Well researched article. Not to clear why this guy selling a company to a penny stock company should raise any eyebrows? Is this supposed to point to Russian collusion? Trump money laundering schemes for casino financing? What is the real angle here?
I'd be less concerned if it was a straight sale, but he serves on the board of a company that, according to the report, continues to solicit and follow the advice of a former exec convicted of securities fraud, and then lies about it. Hiring Eric Trump's wife also feels like another way in which Trump treats campaign funds like his family's personal piggy bank. Maybe I'd be more willing to give the benefit of the doubt if Trump's last campaign manager wasn't presently facing indictment and his other children weren't also flagrantly flouting nepotism laws.
That article says the money for Michelle Obama’s update to the White House came from the Whitehouse Endowment Trust which is a private fund.
Nepotism is the only reason you ever even heard of Donald Trump in the first place. This stunt should come as a surprise to zero.
Trump: "Take the guns first, due process second..." Fucking hilarious. https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/28/politics/due-process-donald-trump-second-amendment/index.html
Dicks sporting goods will no longer carry AR-style rifles. As someone who has always voted Dem or Libertarian (I'm fiscally republican and socially heavily liberal), this ongoing "debate" about the 2nd Ammendment has now turned me into a single-issue voter. There is no debate. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Hell before posting this I just killed a hog (2nd in 3 days) that was eating my yard with my 5.56 AR. I needed that second shot, because, invasive species. Don't stop shooting until you know they're dead. I'm not what you would call politically active. But maybe now it's time to be? And I imagine I'm on the far fringes. I'd hate to see what the hard-core proponents have to say about the recent activities. Something tells me the militia movement is getting a lot of new members.
The "guns don't kill people, people kill people" line works a whole lot better when you don't follow it up with an anecdote about how you need a specific type of gun because that type of gun is better at killing things. The complaint people have with AR-style rifles is that they are exceptionally good at killing. If you want to use the logic that the weapon doesn't matter at all, we might as well sell m240s, c4, hand grenades, and claymore mines to the general public. I mean those pieces of equipment don't kill people either right? It sure doesn't seem like a good idea, but that's where your logic goes. To say there is nothing debatable about gun violence/control/rights is just silly. You can think people having broad access to guns of whatever sort provides a benefit that is worth the cost that requires be paid by society, but there is a cost. I think you do your side a disservice by ignoring it in favor of facile lines like "guns don't kill people, people kill people."
More dum-dum shit from the POTUS. Stupid shit that shouldn't have left his head but, alas, there it is. I don't agree one bit. At the same time, though, just words. Actions matter; words are just that, words. Trump's words don't make me happy but until he actual does something, it doesn't matter. Just as I liked much of what Obama had to say but it largely produced nothing. Bullshit. We have gun control. We have no control over crazy. Let's debate crazy control for a change. Reagan dumped the crazy on the street and left us with this problem........matter of fact, go back and look at the mass casualty events before we stopped stockpiling all the crazy in one place compared to now. Notice a change?
Well the gun control proponents do it a disservice with emotional reactions and platitudes driving policy like the asinine ban they tried to pass the other day. There was nothing serious about it. Just a blanket ban on an arbitrary list of semi-automatics with random other items thrown in like barrel shrouds. If gun control advocates want to be serious about it, maybe they should learn about what they are arguing for and make a half-way serious proposal instead of greasing their boners for November. There are some hardcore gun nuts, but most gun owners are fine with reasonable gun control measures. We’re just waiting for a reasonable proposal that isn’t a pre-fab news headline like “ban all assault weapons.”
There is a huge gap in NICS reporting and enforcement. As evidenced by this last shooter falling through 87 cracks. How do you restrict access without trampling on various constitutional rights? Deinstitutionalization started well before Reagan, it’s very disengenous to lay it all on him, but as the FBI and local authorities claim in this case their hands were tied by the letter of the law. That leads to the kind of retard statement the president made and which the left is oddly silent about. Having a rational discussion about filling in the gaps could really help. Strengthening laws about reporting and enforcement, if that means a national universal background check, it has to come with some compromise. National reciprocity and passing the HPA (removing silencers from the NFA). If the left was actually serious about compromise those wouldn’t be poison pills.
What you need is a device that detects where a gun is pointed, if it's at a human then the taser attached to the firearm holder's testicles or appropriate females girly bits goes off automatically until the firearm is pointed somewhere else. This way anyone can own as many guns of as many types as they like. They just get tasered if they ever get pointed at a human. simples And for pain junkies like ROTN the taser is permanently on whenever they think of a firearm.
And they're changing their minimum age for gun purchases to 21, and Walmart is doing the same as Dick's. I don't have any issue with that. They are retailers in a competitive market and they are responding to what they think is market activity or pressure that impacts their revenue. And the government didn't force them to do it.
Except Trump thinks a federal law is going to change a damn thing. We have about ~ 350 people killed each year with all rifles. How many death does this really translate to in that demographic? Stripping young people of rights for feel good nonsense. You want to save 10s of thousands of lives a year? Raise the driving age to 21. Ban texting and driving federally. I hope the NRA opposes this to the hilt.
Maybe it's because I try really hard not to watch the news, but I don't hear anyone in the media, other than a few faint voices on the right, talk about what an abject failure law enforcement was in the Parkland case. How no one in that community is calling for the head of the sheriff and for an investigation into the FBI is beyond me. Something is clearly off. The FBI has dropped the ball on nearly every single one of these cases. I'm embarrassed as an American they have allowed it to have happened, maybe not at, all but at least not as damn much. As pro second amendment as I am, I see no problem with talking about some tighter controls, but once left wing organizations blatantly start using the murder of children to further their political cause I instantly tune out. I will not engage in any discussion on banning or controlling anything related to guns until some real questions about causality are had. Pre Columbine there were approximately 11 "school shootings" from 1764 to 1999. That's 235 years. https://www.ranker.com/.../scary-school.../natalie-hazen Post Columbine there have been approximately 170. https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.e3fd6b51a9f6 What has changed? Certainly guns have gotten better and more effective at killing, and maybe there should be some tighter regulations, but I just don't see guns as the problem when I look at it like this. I firmly believe it's a societal and cultural problem. Maybe instead of slowly giving up our freedom on the opinion of scared children, grieving parents, incompetent policing agencies, and bad or incomplete information, we should examine the policies that have caused the breakdown of our society. We are on a very dangerous trajectory overall and it leads to nowhere good.
I was only half joking in the other thread about curtailing major news networks from reporting these events with such vigor. The instant world stopping infamy these shooters enjoy has to play into their decisions. It’s at least a pointed suggestion towards the “cultural” issue but its a nonstarter. How you sway the culture back to unidentifiable historical norm is futile. Shifting the culture to where 300 million guns are eventually taken out of circulation is a legitimate possibility is just as futile. I don’t know how you create a 9/11 high jacking shift in how to react during an actual shooting occurs but fighting back in the moment could help end them sooner. With lower body counts and lower media exposure maybe it we’ll shift away from them culturally. Why I in general support armed teachers and eliminating gun free zones. Police nationally did this as well after Columbine where as active shooter tactics changed to confront the shooter immediately. Apparently this broke down entirely at Parkland.
What if we do this, and raise the age to purchase guns to 21? Would that make you happy? I see no issue with any of these things.
You do realize the reason people want tighter gun control is so that kids don't get murdered, right? The two things go hand in hand.