In response to U.S. gun carnage, Canada to enact tough laws

[MU82]

I'm gratified that you like my proposal. But somehow, I don't think you really do.

Prisons do cost money. But millions of taxpayer dollars all across this country are being spent to retro-fit grammar school bathrooms so that 7 year old boys who think that they're 7 year old girls or profess to wanting to be girls, have a new and more soothing place to pee.

If there's any taxpayer money left after those endeavors, I say damn the cost, let's put these school shooters away so they never hurt anyone else.

C'mon, are you onboard with me????

States that enact laws requiring a transgender person to use the bathroom that correspond with with his or her gender at birth are literally forcing transgender men -- who were born female but have grown to identify as male -- to use ladies rooms. In other words, a person who looks like a man and acts like a man MUST BY LAW use the toilet next to the little girls that the people who enact these laws purport to protect.

Yep, this guy would have to make peepee in the ladies room. If not he could be arrested for breaking the law!



Which is actually pretty funny when you think about it.

As for the rest of your post, it's as dopey as those bathroom laws.

Happiness is a warm gun ... bang bang ... shoot shoot!

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I can assure you, there was nothing "make believe" about the points in my post. What I'm confused about is why a serious fellow such as yourself wouldn't agree with me.

Verily, it is unpossible to disagree with you that we liberals want more guns laws and simultaneously want absolutely no penalties for breaking those laws. How could any serious person disagree with you?

And that only occasional mass murders from deer hunters prove that guns aren't the problem? It's unassailable logic.

[MU82]

Liberals always demand "MORE gun laws. We need MORE gun laws."

N.Y. Republican Drops Re-Election Bid After Bucking His Party on Guns

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/03/nyregion/chris-jacobs-congress-guns.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20220603&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=94191&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

In the wake of deadly mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, Representative Chris Jacobs of New York, a congressman serving his first full term in the House, stunned fellow Republicans by embracing a federal assault weapons ban and limits on high-capacity magazines.

Speaking from his suburban Buffalo district a week ago, about 10 miles from the grocery store where 10 Black residents were slaughtered, Mr. Jacobs framed his risky break from bedrock Republican orthodoxy as bigger than politics: “I can’t in good conscience sit back and say I didn’t try to do something,” he said.

It took only seven days for political forces to catch up with him.

On Friday, facing intense backlash from party leaders, a potential primary from the state party chairman and a forceful dressing down from Donald Trump Jr., Mr. Jacobs announced that he would abandon his re-election campaign.

“We have a problem in our country in terms of both our major parties. If you stray from a party position, you are annihilated,” Mr. Jacobs said. “For the Republicans, it became pretty apparent to me over the last week that that issue is gun control. Any gun control.”

Many Republicans want more and better gun laws, too. But they also want to keep their jobs. Even if you're a very conservative Republican on most issues, saying you want fewer guns on the street is a good way to see your political career end.

[tower912]

I'm gratified that you like my proposal. But somehow, I don't think you really do.

Prisons do cost money. But millions of taxpayer dollars all across this country are being spent to retro-fit grammar school bathrooms so that 7 year old boys who think that they're 7 year old girls or profess to wanting to be girls, have a new and more soothing place to pee.

If there's any taxpayer money left after those endeavors, I say damn the cost, let's put these school shooters away so they never hurt anyone else.

C'mon, are you onboard with me????

I am on board with locking up gun-using felons.    I recognize the cost associated with locking them all up.    So we need to do something about non-violent felons.    And we need to be clear and up front about the cost.     

[brewcity77]

  if the dude was CONVICTED of said crimes-no he isn't allowed to legally own and carry guns.  if ACCUSED, unfortunately that doesn't count.  we have felons running around with guns every day.  not accused, but CONVICTED felons

And felons can't legally have guns, which means the guns they have were once legal, which means the problem is legal gun owners who fail to prevent legal guns from becoming illegal ones.

[Dickthedribbler]

I am on board with locking up gun-using felons.    I recognize the cost associated with locking them all up.    So we need to do something about non-violent felons.    And we need to be clear and up front about the cost.   

Isn't "non-violent felony" a non-sequitur. Or let me ask it another way. Identify which "non-violent felony you would be OK with being perpetrated upon your spouse or children??? I imagine the list would be quite short.

[tower912]

Depends on the day.

Possession. Distribution of small amounts.   Shoplifting.   DUI's not involving death or injury. 

[Dickthedribbler]

Depends on the day.

Possession. Distribution of small amounts.   Shoplifting.   DUI's not involving death or injury.

Okay, I'll buy that ( although much of what you describe would be misdemeanors I think, but I understand your point and I don't disagree).

[Pakuni]

Isn't "non-violent felony" a non-sequitur.

The irony here is that your Wisconsin hunting tale was an epic non-sequitur.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

The irony here is that your Wisconsin hunting tale was an epic non-sequitur.

I'd say it was both an epic factual fail and logical fail more than a non-sequitur.

Now the bathroom rant nonsense? That was both a classic non-sequitur and factual fail.

[WarriorFan]

N.Y. Republican Drops Re-Election Bid After Bucking His Party on Guns

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/03/nyregion/chris-jacobs-congress-guns.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20220603&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=headline&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=94191&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

In the wake of deadly mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas, Representative Chris Jacobs of New York, a congressman serving his first full term in the House, stunned fellow Republicans by embracing a federal assault weapons ban and limits on high-capacity magazines.

Speaking from his suburban Buffalo district a week ago, about 10 miles from the grocery store where 10 Black residents were slaughtered, Mr. Jacobs framed his risky break from bedrock Republican orthodoxy as bigger than politics: “I can’t in good conscience sit back and say I didn’t try to do something,” he said.

It took only seven days for political forces to catch up with him.

On Friday, facing intense backlash from party leaders, a potential primary from the state party chairman and a forceful dressing down from Donald Trump Jr., Mr. Jacobs announced that he would abandon his re-election campaign.

“We have a problem in our country in terms of both our major parties. If you stray from a party position, you are annihilated,” Mr. Jacobs said. “For the Republicans, it became pretty apparent to me over the last week that that issue is gun control. Any gun control.”

Many Republicans want more and better gun laws, too. But they also want to keep their jobs. Even if you're a very conservative Republican on most issues, saying you want fewer guns on the street is a good way to see your political career end.

Unfortunately this could lead to the R's losing another seat because one of their "weak as piss" members found it easier to resign than to take a position supported by the vast majority of Americans.  We do need the R's to balance out the D's or they will spend ALL of the money on silly stuff like bathrooms and when they run out - as OAC says - just print more!!!!  Don't get me wrong, both parties at the moment have lost the plot completely so the only thing that preserves our imperfect democracy is not letting either one of them get a super-majority and really destroy the place. 

[NCMUFan]

Desafortunadamente the cows have left the pasture.  Bush Jr. opened the door to insane government spending and it hasn't been closed yet.  The debt is currently over $30.5 trillion with $7.9 held by foreign countries.  It is not a matter of whether the US Government declares bankruptcy it is only a matter when.  Once someone finally has the testicles to say to shut off the printing presses, it is over with.  Gross deficits and over spending occurs whether it is D or R, it is only a matter of what they piss it away on.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

So what are you going to do?  Jack up taxes or make massive spending cuts?  Either one is going to be politically unpopular and likely to slide the economy into a depression.

Deficit financing is absolutely fine on a macroeconomic scale when you have a country as large as the United States.  The problem lately is that the interest payments on the debt are starting to make up too much of a percentage of the federal budget.  I expect that will decrease with the COVID relief easing.  BTW, if there was ever a time to deficit spend, THAT was it.  Smart move by both Trump and Biden.

[NCMUFan]

Correct, no testicles.  No one wants to face the music.

Current US total interest paid on debt: $3.4 trillion.

[MU82]

Unfortunately this could lead to the R's losing another seat because one of their "weak as piss" members found it easier to resign than to take a position supported by the vast majority of Americans.  We do need the R's to balance out the D's or they will spend ALL of the money on silly stuff like bathrooms and when they run out - as OAC says - just print more!!!!  Don't get me wrong, both parties at the moment have lost the plot completely so the only thing that preserves our imperfect democracy is not letting either one of them get a super-majority and really destroy the place.

Again with the bathrooms? That's quite a take you have. Something there for everybody, including a shot at "OAC" (but not her twin sister AOC).

Look, we need more guns. Everybody who attends a funeral, who goes to church, who visits a park, who goes to school, who goes to the movies, who goes to a bar, who gets on an airplane, who goes to court, who goes to a political rally -- everybody, everywhere -- needs to be packing.

That's the only new gun law Gunmerica needs: Every man, woman and child must own and carry at least one gun. Just as it says in the bible.

[Uncle Rico]

Again with the bathrooms? That's quite a take you have. Something there for everybody, including a shot at "OAC" (but not her twin sister AOC).

Look, we need more guns. Everybody who attends a funeral, who goes to church, who visits a park, who goes to school, who goes to the movies, who goes to a bar, who gets on an airplane, who goes to court, who goes to a political rally -- everybody, everywhere -- needs to be packing.

That's the only new gun law Gunmerica needs: Every man, woman and child must own and carry at least one gun. Just as it says in the bible.

If Jesus had a gun, I bet the Romans would have been on the crosses instead

[MU82]

Online pro-gun extremism: ‘Cool for active shooter stuff’

https://apnews.com/article/technology-gun-politics-shootings-race-and-ethnicity-2d37c8ede6135eca9f0b2150e7927a92?user_email=6647dfa7189f748384d7389910f7b584c6fcfc35ae990102964c7e826d4175c7&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=June04_MorningWire&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

The young man in the jeans and sunglasses proudly shows off his gun in the YouTube video, then instructs his 1 million subscribers how to fit an extra clip in his gun belt, and offers a chilling observation.

“Pretty cool for active shooter stuff, if you need extra mags.”

It’s a typical video, one of thousands teaching military-style training and tactics to civilian gun owners, offering instructions on silencers and grenade launchers, on shooting from vehicles or into buildings. Other websites sell ghost gun kits, gas masks and body armor.

“You shouldn’t be scared of the NRA. You should be scared of us,” one online ghost gun dealer Tweeted last week.

As Americans reel from repeated mass shootings, law enforcement officials and experts on extremism are taking increasing notice of the sprawling online space devoted to guns and gun rights: gun forums, tactical training videos, websites that sell unregistered gun kits and social media platforms where far-right gun owners swap practical tips with talk of dark plots to take their weapons.

Good guys with guns.

[rocky_warrior]

PSA:  some of you are making this purely political.  stop it.

[Pakuni]

Correct, no testicles.  No one wants to face the music.

Current US total interest paid on debt: $3.4 trillion.

Good news for the deficit hawks, then.

Surging federal tax revenue in April led to the largest monthly budget surplus on record and a dramatically lower deficit through the first seven months of the fiscal year, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates released Monday.

https://rollcall.com/2022/05/09/tax-revenue-boom-fuels-steep-budget-deficit-decline/

[tower912]

All of those new jobs and low unemployment rate.

[Jockey]

Good news for the deficit hawks, then.

Surging federal tax revenue in April led to the largest monthly budget surplus on record and a dramatically lower deficit through the first seven months of the fiscal year, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates released Monday.

https://rollcall.com/2022/05/09/tax-revenue-boom-fuels-steep-budget-deficit-decline/

I think I heard that on Fox News.

 

[muwarrior69]

PSA:  some of you are making this purely political.  stop it.

Canada enacting tough gun laws in response to the Ulvade school shooting is not political? Congress voting on gun control legislation this coming week is not political? Discussing the limits of the 2nd amendment is not political? Please define political so we can stop it.

[Uncle Rico]

https://twitter.com/franceswangtv/status/1533374520966389761?s=21&t=Rt25bgVrJkll4cAHZldbWQ

Sadly, locked doors didn’t help the situation

[MU82]

Gun-control measures that are popular with a vast majority of Americans could have prevented about one-third of mass shootings since 1999, NYT study finds.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/04/upshot/mass-shooting-gun-laws.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220605&instance_id=63260&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=94287&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

If the key gun control proposals now being considered in Congress had been law since 1999, four gunmen younger than 21 would have been blocked from legally buying the rifles they used in mass shootings.

At least four other assailants would have been subject to a required background check, instead of slipping through a loophole. Ten might have been unable to steal their weapons because of efforts to require or encourage safer gun storage. And 20 might not have been allowed to legally purchase the large-capacity magazines that they used to upgrade their guns, helping them kill, on average, 16 people each.

Taken together, those four measures might have changed the course of at least 35 mass shootings — a third of such episodes in the United States since the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, a New York Times analysis has found. Those 35 shootings killed a combined 446 people.

[rocket surgeon]

Gun-control measures that are popular with a vast majority of Americans could have prevented about one-third of mass shootings since 1999, NYT study finds

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/04/upshot/mass-shooting-gun-laws.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220605&instance_id=63260&nl=the-morning&regi_id=108420427&segment_id=94287&te=1&user_id=d36dcf821462fdd16ec3636710a855fa

If the key gun control proposals now being considered in Congress had been law since 1999, four gunmen younger than 21 would have been blocked from legally buying the rifles they used in mass shootings.

At least four other assailants would have been subject to a required background check, instead of slipping through a loophole. Ten might have been unable to steal their weapons because of efforts to require or encourage safer gun storage. And 20 might not have been allowed to legally purchase the large-capacity magazines that they used to upgrade their guns, helping them kill, on average, 16 people each.

Taken together, those four measures might have changed the course of at least 35 mass shootings — a third of such episodes in the United States since the massacre at Columbine High School in Colorado, a New York Times analysis has found. Those 35 shootings killed a combined 446 people.

   oh, so the EXPERTS are back at it again??  this rag has less cred than mad magazine.  this paper leaked like a backwoods tin shed from 2016-2021.  now it's tighter than a frogs ass stretched over a drum on a hot summer day.  who's in epsteins lil black book?  once they leak that, i will consider reading their sports pages