I can empathise with the need to protect yourself and to get a gun to do it. But it's a really scary thought that people feel they need to buy guns to protect themselves. Also very scary that the controls are so lax foreign nationals can buy guns
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
I can empathise with the need to protect yourself and to get a gun to do it. But it's a really scary thought that people feel they need to buy guns to protect themselves. Also very scary that the controls are so lax foreign nationals can buy guns
Indymisanthrope
Well-Known Member
It's the natural outgrowth of a nation of sick, murderous cowboys caught up in fantasies about government overthrow and/or racial genocide and codifying a right to deadly weapons in the highest law of the land.
It's gross, senseless, terrifying, and weaponized to fundraise for political causes on the backs of paranoid fools.
Edit: what @nolalady said but with a lot less sympathy.
My grandmother had a gun and a concealed carry license when my grandfather was in Charity Hospital with lung cancer. She got it because the area around Charity was notoriously dangerous and she was a little, old lady. I just feel like this is the same justification we have for keeping nukes, which to @Indymisanthrope's point is gross, senseless and terrifying.
It's ends up like any arms race. If the first instinct is to buy a gun to protect yourself, it will just perpetuate the problem.
IRS will require facial-recognition to access online system - UPI.com
The Internal Revenue Service will require taxpayers to take selfies and verify their identities through ID.me to access online accounts starting this summer.
www.upi.com
Welp, well hello there big brother.
I also wonder how this will play out in states where privacy policies prohibit the collection of biometric data without first notifying you in writing what they want it for and getting your written consent.
ID.me appears to be a private entity the IRS is using. Which adds a little bit of complexity to this.
Six Flags recently just settled a lawsuit with the state of IL over violating their policy by using fingerprints for entry into it's parks.
Max Sterling
Well-Known Member
On guns: Rural Canadian who moved to the rural South and now lives a stones throw from the article in question.
@nolalady said pretty much everything that needs to be said but I wanted to throw in my two cents.
I was given a handgun by my grandfather when I was around 11 or 12, I was given no bullets and didn't have any access to them. It was impressed upon me that it was not a toy, and that I should learn how to take care of it. I took it apart to clean it and couldn't get it back together again, so I gave it to my uncle. I grew up firing guns, shotguns, pistols, rifles, whatever, pretty much my whole life. I was surrounded by people who had grown up the same way. Whether they were hunters, farmers, military, most of the people around me owned multiple guns and it wasn't uncommon to go out in the back yard and shoot cans or the like.
It's difficult to convince people who have a culture of gun ownership and gun related hobbies that something they enjoy should not be allowed them, especially in a country so indoctrinated with the false aura of "freedom" they hold onto. I'm generally a pro "freedom" kinda guy, I've always resisted the idea that "guns shouldn't be allowed to anyone." I was more in the camp that it should be much more difficult to obtain a gun, much like how I believe it should be much more difficult to obtain a drivers license, but those of sound mind and ability should have the opportunity to attempt it.
It first occurred to me that my perception of guns was not ubiquitous when I was out with some family at a park in a VERY rural part of GA. We heard some shots ring out, pretty far away, across the Chattahoochee, and a couple of my family members who have always lived closer to cities were freaked out. In my mind, it was just some hunter, or whoever shooting their gun out on their property. It's a common occurrence, it didn't phase me, but they were scared. If you hear gun shots in the city, there's very few reasons for it and none of them are positive.
I'm still of the opinion that education, in a more reasonable world, is much more favourable than prohibition. HOWEVER, in light of recent trends and my absolute loss of trust in humanity, I'm leaning more towards more laws and consequences that protect those who can't protect themselves.
Changing the collective minds of those from the camp I grew up with is nigh impossible and their ideals and values sadly control most of our governments. It's very much a "I can handle the responsibility, so you can too" situation. Mix the availability of firearms with a growing disparity in wealth in a city like Atlanta where the youth are trying to find a way out and are only offered "support" through less than legal means and you get this terrible fallout. Which of course escalates when Bubba pulls out his sidearm in "self defense."
And a general worry is that if every law abiding person turned in their weapons, the only people left with weapons would be the criminals, and we'd all be robbed and murdered within the week.
Hopefully this gives you a bit of a window into the American gun predicament. Much like it's not enough that people are dying and we could help prevent it by getting vaccinated to persuade a large amount of people to just get vaccinated, the existence of gun violence is not enough to convince gun owners that they should maybe rethink the whole thing.
@nolalady said pretty much everything that needs to be said but I wanted to throw in my two cents.
I was given a handgun by my grandfather when I was around 11 or 12, I was given no bullets and didn't have any access to them. It was impressed upon me that it was not a toy, and that I should learn how to take care of it. I took it apart to clean it and couldn't get it back together again, so I gave it to my uncle. I grew up firing guns, shotguns, pistols, rifles, whatever, pretty much my whole life. I was surrounded by people who had grown up the same way. Whether they were hunters, farmers, military, most of the people around me owned multiple guns and it wasn't uncommon to go out in the back yard and shoot cans or the like.
It's difficult to convince people who have a culture of gun ownership and gun related hobbies that something they enjoy should not be allowed them, especially in a country so indoctrinated with the false aura of "freedom" they hold onto. I'm generally a pro "freedom" kinda guy, I've always resisted the idea that "guns shouldn't be allowed to anyone." I was more in the camp that it should be much more difficult to obtain a gun, much like how I believe it should be much more difficult to obtain a drivers license, but those of sound mind and ability should have the opportunity to attempt it.
It first occurred to me that my perception of guns was not ubiquitous when I was out with some family at a park in a VERY rural part of GA. We heard some shots ring out, pretty far away, across the Chattahoochee, and a couple of my family members who have always lived closer to cities were freaked out. In my mind, it was just some hunter, or whoever shooting their gun out on their property. It's a common occurrence, it didn't phase me, but they were scared. If you hear gun shots in the city, there's very few reasons for it and none of them are positive.
I'm still of the opinion that education, in a more reasonable world, is much more favourable than prohibition. HOWEVER, in light of recent trends and my absolute loss of trust in humanity, I'm leaning more towards more laws and consequences that protect those who can't protect themselves.
Changing the collective minds of those from the camp I grew up with is nigh impossible and their ideals and values sadly control most of our governments. It's very much a "I can handle the responsibility, so you can too" situation. Mix the availability of firearms with a growing disparity in wealth in a city like Atlanta where the youth are trying to find a way out and are only offered "support" through less than legal means and you get this terrible fallout. Which of course escalates when Bubba pulls out his sidearm in "self defense."
And a general worry is that if every law abiding person turned in their weapons, the only people left with weapons would be the criminals, and we'd all be robbed and murdered within the week.
Hopefully this gives you a bit of a window into the American gun predicament. Much like it's not enough that people are dying and we could help prevent it by getting vaccinated to persuade a large amount of people to just get vaccinated, the existence of gun violence is not enough to convince gun owners that they should maybe rethink the whole thing.
So Mitch McConnell is trying a more honest approach
“The concern is misplaced, because if you look at the statistics, African American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans,” McConnell said.
www.theguardian.com
“The concern is misplaced, because if you look at the statistics, African American voters are voting in just as high a percentage as Americans,” McConnell said.
Mitch McConnell’s viral Black voter comments cause widespread furor
Republican Senate minority leader’s comments came after party members blocked voting rights bill and changes to filibuster rule
www.theguardian.com
What a strange political environment we live in when school board meetings have to address things like, no, they do not have litter boxes for students who identify as furry.
How a group of senators in 1975 came up with a rule that changed the chamber forever
The 60-vote threshold to overcome the filibuster and pass legislation in the Senate seems as immovable as ever. But that threshold is relatively new. It was established after an epic fight in the 1970s, an era that today seems like something from an alternate universe.
The history of the filibuster and how the 60 votes to overcome is relatively new. Started around 1975.
The filibuster used to be rarely used, and required someone to speak for days or months on end to stall passing of a bill. Now they just ask for a vote to see if they have the numbers to override a filibuster. No filibuster actually takes place. Also, with how polarized we are today, it seems like it's being used by republicans for any legislation created by the democrats for no reason other than to just obstruct it.
ThedaCare asks court to temporarily stop 7 stroke, trauma employees from moving to Ascension
The temporary injunction would halt the employees' move to Ascension for 90 days to give ThedaCare time to look for replacement staff.
www.postcrescent.com
Wow, just wow.
From my understanding based on discussion of this story elsewhere, the judge did indeed issue the temporary injunction they were asking for. Because the 13th amendment prevents them from forcing the employees to work for ThedaCare, all the injunction amounts too is these employees can't work elsewhere at other hospitals or medical facilities for 90 days.
The general consensus is "If I were one of those employees, I would not be showing up to work at Thedacare on Monday".
WI is a at will employment state. ThedaCare could have laid them of at any time for any reason and employees can leave for any reason as well.
Sooooo we are going to get kids to join the ranks of healthcare workers by barring them from leaving one job for a better job somewhere else? Right now, healthcare professionals on reddit are freaking out that they could be stopped from perusing better opportunities somewhere else. I'm healthcare adjacent and I'm sweating a bit by this. The judge does invoke the 13th amendment, but I still think this is akin to slavery.ThedaCare asks court to temporarily stop 7 stroke, trauma employees from moving to Ascension
The temporary injunction would halt the employees' move to Ascension for 90 days to give ThedaCare time to look for replacement staff.www.postcrescent.com
Wow, just wow.
From my understanding based on discussion of this story elsewhere, the judge did indeed issue the temporary injunction they were asking for. Because the 13th amendment prevents them from forcing the employees to work for ThedaCare, all the injunction amounts too is these employees can't work elsewhere at other hospitals or medical facilities for 90 days.
The general consensus is "If I were one of those employees, I would not be showing up to work at Thedacare on Monday".
WI is a at will employment state. ThedaCare could have laid them of at any time for any reason and employees can leave for any reason as well.
While I try to avoid reveling in other's misfortune, he had it coming:
A federal court on Friday banned convicted fraudster Martin Shkreli from ever working in the pharmaceutical industry again in any capacity and ordered him to pay back $64.6 million in profits from his infamous scheme that raised the price of the life-saving drug Daraprim more than 4,000 percent.
US District Judge Denise Cote issued the lifetime ban after finding that Shkreli engaged in anticompetitive practices to protect the monopoly profits of Daraprim.
Daraprim is a cheap, decades-old anti-parasitic drug used to treat toxoplasmosis, which often sickens people with compromised immune systems (such as AIDS patients) and can be deadly to newborns. Shkreli and Mulleady allegedly set up a complex scheme that kept the drug out of the hands of competitors, restricted suppliers from selling critical drug ingredients to competitors, and blocked the release of sales data that would reveal the market size to competitors.
Meanwhile, Shkreli and Mulleady abruptly hiked the list price of Daraprim by more than 4,000 percent, from $17.50 to $750 per tablet.
Friday's ruling follows a settlement announced last month in which Vyera and its parent company, Phoenixus, agreed to pay up to $40 million to victims of the Daraprim scheme. The settlement also required the companies to make Daraprim available to competitors at cost and barred them from entering into any similar scheme for 10 years. Mulleady was banned from the pharmaceutical industry for seven years.
Shkreli is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence from a 2017 securities fraud conviction related to two hedge funds he ran prior to the Daraprim scheme. Following his fraud conviction, he was ordered to forfeit $7.36 million in assets, including the sole copy of the Wu-Tang album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, which he bought in 2015 at auction from Wu-Tang member RZA for $2 million.
arstechnica.com
And if I were a patient that was harmed by this, I would file a civil suit for restitution.
A federal court on Friday banned convicted fraudster Martin Shkreli from ever working in the pharmaceutical industry again in any capacity and ordered him to pay back $64.6 million in profits from his infamous scheme that raised the price of the life-saving drug Daraprim more than 4,000 percent.
US District Judge Denise Cote issued the lifetime ban after finding that Shkreli engaged in anticompetitive practices to protect the monopoly profits of Daraprim.
Daraprim is a cheap, decades-old anti-parasitic drug used to treat toxoplasmosis, which often sickens people with compromised immune systems (such as AIDS patients) and can be deadly to newborns. Shkreli and Mulleady allegedly set up a complex scheme that kept the drug out of the hands of competitors, restricted suppliers from selling critical drug ingredients to competitors, and blocked the release of sales data that would reveal the market size to competitors.
Meanwhile, Shkreli and Mulleady abruptly hiked the list price of Daraprim by more than 4,000 percent, from $17.50 to $750 per tablet.
Friday's ruling follows a settlement announced last month in which Vyera and its parent company, Phoenixus, agreed to pay up to $40 million to victims of the Daraprim scheme. The settlement also required the companies to make Daraprim available to competitors at cost and barred them from entering into any similar scheme for 10 years. Mulleady was banned from the pharmaceutical industry for seven years.
Shkreli is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence from a 2017 securities fraud conviction related to two hedge funds he ran prior to the Daraprim scheme. Following his fraud conviction, he was ordered to forfeit $7.36 million in assets, including the sole copy of the Wu-Tang album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, which he bought in 2015 at auction from Wu-Tang member RZA for $2 million.
Shkreli’s infamous 4,000% price hike gets him a lifetime pharma ban
New York's attorney general celebrated with Wu-Tang Clan references.
arstechnica.com
And if I were a patient that was harmed by this, I would file a civil suit for restitution.
Supreme Court to consider landmark challenge to Harvard and UNC affirmative action policies
The Supreme Court announced Monday it will reconsider race-based affirmative action in college admissions, a move that could eliminate campus practices that have widely benefitted Black and Hispanic students.
Affirmative action policies may be the next big thing the conservative court tears down.
Apparently the judge that issued this injunction has a iffy track record. People have dug into him and found that he once issued a 42 day jailing for contempt when someone rolled their eyes in the courtroom.
Court Watch: 42 Days in Jail for Rolling His Eyes
Judge puts defendant in jail for alleged bad attitude. Appeals court overturns decision.
urbanmilwaukee.com
Also
Reviewer recommends Judge Mark McGinnis no longer serve on truancy court
"The district should request that Judge McGinnis should no longer have the truancy court responsibility."
www.postcrescent.com
There is hope that this injunction will be overturned and wont set a president. But I fear the damage may have already been done to the employees affected by it.
Man, it still surprises me every day how petty and divided our politicians are.
The bottom line with all of this is that they are attempting to use the 14th amendment to label Trump as an insurrectionist and under that amendment, he can never run for or hold office. This was something they did after the civil war to prevent Confederate government participants from participating in any more government.
And I think that it's this language "insurrectionist" that is causing a lot of the crazy. Dems have to make a strong case that this was more than a riot, this was an insurrection. Add in Liz Cheney wanting to keep Trump away (because he often targeted her and would say she wasn't a "real conservative"), and you've got people from the GOP and the entire democrat party wanting to paint this a certain way because if Trump comes back, he could and would kill their careers as politicians. I realize that what Trump and his croneys did was terrible, but if democrats think that the only way for them to win 2024 is to ban Trump from running instead of putting up a candidate that people want to vote for that runs on populist platforms of already well received issues, we've already lost folks. I guess if you can't beat 'em, ban 'em.
Update
debianlinux
Well-Known Member
The thing about Trump is that his ego overrides absolutely everything. A semi valid supporting point many of his voters bring up is that he is beholden to no one and does his own thing. That is not entirely true but the idea has some merit. He is entirely beholden to his ego and by extension anyone stroking it. The corporate oligarchy of the US doesn't really operate under the ego principle and is more about monetary leverages and concentration of leverage powers. So, while Trump could be useful, he doesn't actually fit the overarching power system and is ultimately unpredictable and dangerous. If he had like, I don't know, actual scruples, he might actually be what we all need. Because the unstated position of banning Trump is that the two party system wishes to ensure only placing candidates that fit the monetary leverages power system without the unpredictability of narcissistic ego that Trump brings to the table.
The GQP absolutely perpetrated an insurrection. The 1/6 commission is actually shedding light on some of the actual evil doers and complicitors. If it had been all Trump by himself there would be no hesitation at this point to call it insurrection and maybe even go for a public hanging. As it is, there's enough vested powers implicated that it becomes necessary to either avoid the insurrection terminology or at least buy time to reposition the system such that those fully implicated can go ahead and take the fall when it can no longer be denied.
The GQP absolutely perpetrated an insurrection. The 1/6 commission is actually shedding light on some of the actual evil doers and complicitors. If it had been all Trump by himself there would be no hesitation at this point to call it insurrection and maybe even go for a public hanging. As it is, there's enough vested powers implicated that it becomes necessary to either avoid the insurrection terminology or at least buy time to reposition the system such that those fully implicated can go ahead and take the fall when it can no longer be denied.
Yeah, there was going to be a revolt of healthcare workers if this didn't happen.
The monetary leverages power system requires much less unpredictable narcissists for office. We should be clear that they are all narcissists.