Swipe to go to another post.
Trump needs to be in a padded room. You don't need to be a mental health professional to see that he isn't playing with a full deck.
By accepting the gun lobby's bribes and lies this government has become complacent in the destruction of our lives.
We do need lobbying reform. Unfortunately, the legislature is both the avenue to and the beneficiaries of ignoring such reform. I'm ignorant as to whether there could conceivably be remedy through the courts, though I believe that to largely be a moot point for several reasons: standing, affordability, most cases take years to wend their way through, and SCOTUS' track record.
I am also far less concerned about the gun lobby than about other industries. In the first place, guns are a volatile subject and the gun lobby probably receives more media coverage than any other (and the majority of that being the critical left wing media). Secondly, while everyone has the potential to be touched by gun violence, few actually are. On the other hand, there are three industries that affect virtually everyone, have dizzying revolving doors between their companies and the agencies that regulate (and I use that word very loosely) them, and it is the rare consumer that knows just how loosely that actually is, often effectively regulating themselves. I am referring to Big Pharma, Big Ag (which includes agrochemicals and biologicals), and Big Chem. The vast majority of us will be vacinated and take perscription drugs at some point, and a great many do so daily, some for their entire lives. Everyone must have sustenance. And no matter how careful we are, it is impossible not to encounter chemicals which may be inhaled, absorbed, injected, or injested on a daily basis.
Some examples of issues I have with these industries follow. Just as an example of the impact of Big Pharma, properly prescribed Rxs account for more deaths than overdoses from Rxs and heroin by an estimated factor of nearly five. In the five years Vioxx was on the market there were some 60,000 deaths from just that one Rx alone. A 2014 Harvard article pegged Rx deaths as tied for the forth leading cause of death. Oh and btw, the FDA receives funding from Big Pharma...a rather incestuous relationship for a government regulatory agency to have with the industry it regulates. Many countries have or are working to ban GM crops and the glysophate they depend upon, but we cannot even get a law passed to label GM foods. Finally, the EPA actually tests a miniscule fraction of the chemicals we are exposed to daily. These things impact each and every one of us on a daily basis and, unlike guns and the gun lobby, receive little to no coverage from the MSM.
By pushing its own agenda to curb freedom of the press and stifle the free expression of our athletes and our spokespeople it has become destructive of our liberty.
First off, the MSM has been complicit in working with the government since at least the 50s. Google "Operation Mockingbird". Second, the government actually has a database and standard form for reporting leaks to the press, it has a section to indicate whether the leak was authorized, unauthorized, or to be determined, and another regarding the accuracy of the information leaked. Trump has not been able to stop the leaks, hell, he cannot even keep leaks from coming out of the WH. Finally, while he may have banned certain outlets from some press briefings, our press is essentially owned by six companies...and they share between them. Google "6 companies own the press" and "the press agrees YouTube".
Trump may have stirred up one huge shit pot as regards the NFL players kneeling, but he has not stifled the free expression of the players. No one is entitled to free speech or the right to protest SJ issues on company time. If the boss doesn't mind, cool, but if it begins to affect the bottom line, the boss is going to care. In this case, it has adversely affected the NFL's bottom line. Why? Because the fans exercised their right to free speech and protest. The players are still free to exercise their 1st Amendment rights...on their own time...and due to their celebrity, they'll still get a prominent platform to do so, unlike us regular folk. That's precisely how it's supposed to work. So no, no one, neither the press nor the players have been silenced.
We hold these truths to be self-evident that when any government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right and Duty of the People to alter or to abolish it. Impeach Trump before it is too late.
I agree that it is indeed our right and duty...so did the FFs, hence the 2nd Amendment that "shall not be infringed".
"Too late"? In what way? You're all upset over imaginary infringements on the 1st Amendment under Trump, but the real constitutional infringements happened under Bush and Obama...the PATRIOT Act, Homeland Security Act, warrantless searches, extraordinary rendition, indefinite detention, sweeping data collections, hiding their crimes and usurpations behind the magic phrase "matter of national security", illegal wars, etc.
The only area that I truly have grave concerns about with Trump is war. He has grown hawkish since taking office, and despite leftist claims of being against war, the left side of the aisle, the MSM, and even his detractors on this site supported him when he was dropping bombs. Many of them would also fully support nuking North Korea, some would add Russia and Iran, too. War concerns me. Nuclear war really concerns me...celebrity athletes that make millions having to wait until they are off work to protest...not so much. I'm funny that way.
The Second Amendment provides U.S. citizens the right to bear arms. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That means even if Vic and the Kardashians don't like it.
Your athletes are free to express themselves - just not in the workplace if it violates employers rules - same as everyone else. No special privileges - not even for the black athletes.
A well regulated militia , being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
And if the state should become despotic and oppressive, to whom is this well-regulated militia supposed to belong, according to the Founders?
The despotic state?
Or the oppressed people?
Clearly, what the "Founders" meant exactly, has and will be open to interpretation by whomever reads the amendment.
Of course, but only the Supreme Court has the final say.
'But Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., who wrote the opinion for the court's dominant conservatives, said: "It is clear that the Framers . . . counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty." '
And that decision was not the first time the Supreme Court affirmed an individual's right to keep and bear arms.
P.S. What is your opinion of what the Founders meant?
There IS that well regulated part in there. I do not think that the right to bear arms has ever been under any real threat. Most people agree about having a right to own gun(s), at least.
Which kinds and how and when they have a right to "bear" them will continue to be in question and disputed.
I do not know exactly what they meant. Things sure have changed a bit since 1791. I figure if a jack-booted SWAT team invades my home or property and kills my dog, and I shoot back, I'll likely be either dead or screwed by the law in some way . No matter that they had the wrong suspect or address. No matter the fire power of my gun, either.
Yes, you probably would, acting as an individual. But what if you were part of a well-regulated militia?
Which brings us back to the question of what the Founders meant by that phrase. If you don't know exactly what they meant, do you have an approximate idea?
Anyone with any sense at all knows Trump is mentally unstable. By suppressing the press, he's turning into a dictator.....he needs to go, and go fast before he blows up our world.
Ah Vic you do know that the "Gun Lobby" has been around for much much longer than Trump has been president right. And that during the 8 years of the last administration more guns were purchased by private citizens than at any other time in our nations history.
I knew I was forgetting something I had wanted to include. Lol
True. Since the early '90s gun ownership per capita has increased slightly more than 50%, while gun homicides have decreased just under 50%. Setting aside any argument for causation, the correlation is striking.
That's right thanks for pointing that out.
I recently read that something like 80% of guns are owned by 3% of the population.
Don't know how accurate that is but it might also be a contributing factor in the graphic
Estimates vary somewhat, but it is pretty widely reported that about 3% own ~1/2 of the guns, with ~25-30% of the population being gun owners. Now it is also estimated that ~38% of households have guns...so figure that one out.
Guns are tools, and different jobs require different tools. I know folks who don't even own a single hammer, while I have several claw hammers, various sized ball peens, one each of brass, plastic, and rubber mallets, at least three chipping hammers, and a variety of BFHs.
I don't buy that 3% own 80% of the guns or even 50%. That's saying that 3% of the gun owners own 320 million guns.... since many estimates say there are about 400 million guns in the US. The math just doesn't add up.
More liberal fabrication because they like to lie using big numbers.
I stated that it "is pretty widely reported that about 3% own ~1/2 of the guns", which is true, it is pretty widely reported. Did you catch the rest of my statement? "...with ~25-30% of the population being gun owners. Now it is also estimated that ~38% of households have guns...so figure that one out." The reported numbers make no sense. If only 25-30% own guns, how do 38% of households have guns?
Did you look at the chart I posted?
Yes. I guess I am not seeing the point you are trying to make, Jim. These numbers are all estimates. The estimated number of guns varies widely, too. Going with your number, if 3% own half, that is ~20.5/per. Not an outrageous number for a collector. If 22-27%own the other half, that is 2-3/per. Who knows what the actual numbers are. Change one number and all the others change, too.
The point I am making is that in separate polls, the numbers are way different. In other words, nobody knows, and that's the way it should be. People just make up numbers to fit their agendas.
Actually it is like saying:
out of every 300 people you can find 9 that each own 32 guns.
I know several people that own more than 20.
Not as far fetched as it sounds when you do the math.
217 million people (Of age to own a gun) x 3% = 6.51 million people
80% of estimated guns in US is 320 million guns (400 million x .80 )
320 million divided by 6.5 million = 49.23 guns
So what you are saying is that 6.5 million people have 49 + guns in their homes.
At a very conservative price of 400 a gun, that would mean 6,500,000 individuals have about $20,000 in guns at their homes.
That’s plain ridiculous to believe
Hard to believe, unless you consider that 3% of Americans own 54% of the wealth. And that there are many examples of people being found with hundreds of guns stored in bunkers.
You are right that these numbers are a total guess and we will never know the truth - but the numbers are not so ridiculous as to be without merit.
"Many" examples of people found with hundreds of guns stored in bunkers? Please enlighten me.... are you saying 4 or 5 constitutes "many" out of the hundreds of millions? Where is your data saying specifically who and how many? Even if they did, are they breaking the law?
If I was part of that 3% that you claim own 54% of the wealth, I'd have my own armed body guards. Are you saying people like Bill Gates have arsenals of weapons at home?
When you fail miserably in presenting numbers that aren't true, why do you always bring up the fact that there are rich people out there..... like it's a crime and they should give all their wealth to those who haven't earned it. The top 10% of wealthy people also pay 84% of the total income taxes. When people want more and more "free stuff", it isn't free, and the people who are paying for most of it are the ones that those receiving the freebies, complain about.
If it wasn't for the "wealthy", this country would never have grown or developed. If Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell and others hadn't developed computer technology as we know it today where would we be? If the wealthy 3% had not had the wealth and the vision to develop auto companies, aircraft companies, communications companies, building companies, manufacturing companies, and everything else that touches our lives, where would we be?
Silly conversation because it is meaningless and I am not even sure of your point.
Is the data unlikely? yes
Is the data ridiculously unlikely? no
Does anyone think it is the rich people with all the guns? No
Are 4 or 5 examples many? yes
Do 97% of gun owners own less than 5 guns? probably
Do I care how many guns people have or who owns them? not in the least.
You said- "The point I am making is that in separate polls, the numbers are way different. In other words, nobody knows, and that's the way it should be. People just make up numbers to fit their agendas." Do I agree? 100%
Do I think it is possible that 3% of the people own 80% of the guns? I do think it's possible
Do I care? Not in the least bit, it is their right.
Vic do the math on those numbers. and you'll see that that is flat out wrong.
Which is why I don't believe it
Ah, It didn't appear that you were in disagreement with what you had posted.
Hence the question marks.
Vic not try to be a pain but there are no question marks.
Might be an Amirite glitch.
Oops my bad. Wrong post.
Anyway the numbers did sound absurd. "Don't know how accurate it is" was the clue.
I do. I also heard a lot of call for impeachment and overthrowing the previous administration. What goes around comes around I guess.
So...we are on a downward spiral? Oh goodie.
I heard a lot of people complain endlessly about Obama, myself included, and there were several die-hard birthers, but I have never heard such things as I have with Trump...the thousands who openly called/call for his assassination, for example. In all fairness, the man sets himself up for both criticism and ridicule, but it turns out the "Love Trumps Hate" crowd is chronically dyslexic.
Impeachment yes, overthrowing not so sure of. of course as crazy as all of this has gotten I'm sure there were those on the "right" who said BS like that.
The “Gun Lobby” is “We the People”. I’ll leave it at that. :)
what a LOAD OF GODDAMN ****
McCabe Was Involved in Russian Bribery Scheme AND Hillary’s Exoneration Statement
Who Let Hillary Clinton Keep Computer Server Nearly Two Years After Leaving State Dept?
WTH? Attorney General Sessions Says Rosenstein Can Investigate HIMSELF in Uranium One Criminal Probe
that's right stay focused on trump
that'll make everything rite...right?
and inother news:
Why are you blaming Trump?Economy is going good,unemployment has gone
The german economy was doing good under hitler. Tyrannical leadership and economic results two different topics. I my desire to live in a country that suppressed freedom cannot be purchased with a booming stock market.
I feel Obama has brought us to this point.He did nothing for this country.
For help please contact us here.
You're using the touch version of Amirite, you can switch to the full site.
© amirite.com 2017. Icons by DryIcons.