@BreakingNAlertsBREAKING: Unconfirmed reports say a man with an AK-47 has opened fire in the parking lot/building of Cielo Vista Mall in El Paso, Texas.
I haven't learned of any confirmed deaths yet, but local media reported that at least 18 people have been shot and that there may be multiple shooters.
Unconfirmed reports say a man with an AK-47
Since it's still an active scene, it's far too early for anyone to speculate.
I think they are, not sure nor really care what you think about it, or why you are attempting to argue something CLEARLY not in dispute--unless you think cops are NOT "good guys"?????
Pretty damn weird that you think THIS:
Lets hope the "good guys with guns" that are all over Texas are not shooting at each other.
refers to cops, though.
If you ever DO "get it", get back with me, mmmkay?
Quite seriously, curing this evil may take divine intervention. There are literally hundreds of millions of guns in America and they aint going anywhere soon.
Expecting there will be no more mass shootings would be like expecting that apples will stop falling out of trees.
This is like the 3rd or 4th mass shooting in the past week.
It's really easy to shout "do something!" It's a lot harder to do something that will actually make a difference.
And by the way, "thoughts and prayers" aren't intended to do something to stop violence. They are intended as a compassionate, human response of emotional support to people who are suffering. Apparently some people think that has no value or is a thing worth mocking.
As a people, we are past the 'compassionate human response and emotional support stage' —we're numb. We have no hope left. The only thing we can be sure of is more innocent citizens will die from weapons of mass destruction gunfire. We do not know when, where, but we do know how.
Now begins the 'grin and bear it stage.' —The mock phase.
With the number of gun deaths happening in the USA one would think that the necessary amount of "Thoughts and Prayers" would make the USA the most religious country in the world.
One might think the decrease in people that consider themselves religious correlates to the decreased murder rate in this country. Over the last forty years our murder rate has decreased by about fifty percent.
It's odd and unsettling that when we hear of a mass shooting in America not too many people immediately think of Islamic terrorists anymore. I guess the horrible truth is settling in. We are killing ourselves.
NBC just showed a video of dozens of people being herded out of a department store by swat teams, all with their hands up on police orders. These people are terrified. Sad times for America when you cant go shopping on a Saturday afternoon without fearing for your life.
WHY is it always the responsibility of those with money to secure YOU?
Why can't we just live in a society where we can go to a fucking wal-mart, church, concert, movie, etc. without having to constantly look over our shoulders?
Lets put two and together. White guy from Dallas goes hundreds of miles to ElPaso and goes to a WALMART frequented by hispanics and starts shooting randomly.
The left is complicit in this, because of all their ongoing support of illegal immigration, and disregard for American citizens.
How in the hell can you be so ridiculous at a time like this?
You wanna point a finger? Point it at yourdamnself for supporting the creep that started all of this. This didn't become a problem until Trump convinced people like you that there is a problem. What makes it more pathetic, is that he started this BS as a diversionary tactic to mask other filthy shenanigans in which he was, and still is, involved. He demanded billions, he shut down a segment of the government AT CHRISTMAS because he was throwing a tantrum, and guess what? Not one freaking inch of wall has been constructed. What does that tell you? So yeah, look in a mirror and point your finger in the right direction.
If true, it's an isolated case, as they all turn out to be.
Isolated: adjective - single; exceptional
How do you go from "isolated" to " they all turn out to be", basically admitting there are many, in the same sentence. Only someone working as hard as they can to twist logic and defend the indefensible would throw that line out there.
"the ADL released a report finding that attackers with ties to right-wing extremist movements killed at least 50 people in 2018 . That was close to the total number of Americans killed by domestic extremists, meaning that the far right had an almost absolute monopoly on lethal terrorism in the United States last year."
" From 2009 through 2018, right-wing extremists accounted for 73 percent of such killings"
The left is complicit in this, because of all their ongoing support of illegal immigration
Wow. To blame the immigrants and those who come to their defense for such a senseless vicious attack, as if that justifies this right wing piece of shits actions. It is just beyond disgusting. I've no doubt these right wing extremists made similar comments themselves in defense of worthless right wing white supremacists just before they wrote their own manifestos and then did what all those who cling to such garbage ideology dream about daily, gunning down those they have been taught to hate by religious conservatives and right wing websites like Stormfront and the Daily Stormer and blame those minority Americans for all their own miserable failings as human beings.
Trump is doing such a good job keeping us safe..../s
250 mass shootings this year alone yet we continue to hear the President tell his base that Democrats and the MSM are the "enemy of the people" and that "they want to destroy America". No wonder the nuttiest of his followers are picking up weapons and killing in such an intentionally divided nation.
The left is complicit in this, because of all their ongoing support of illegal immigration, and disregard for American citizens.
You mean leftist elected officials and judges defying American law & the President to allow and encourage rampant illegal immigration might just be contributing to an extreme reaction? Yup!
No...the, the hate and divisiveness started on the left. It started when Trump came down the escalator, and has continued unabated for two and half years. It is the left wing who supports, aids, and abets illegal immigration to the detriment of the whole country. You can't wiggle out of it. The Democrats own this whole mess and the after effects it produces...like this shooting.
Don't forget all the murders, rapes, hit and runs, trafficking in women, kids, and drugs, and all the other crimes committed by the criminals and gang members who arrive with the illegals, both past and present. Don't try to deny it exists.
Addressing reporters in Morristown, New Jersey, Trump promised "we're going to take care" of the problem. He said he's been speaking to the attorney general, FBI director and members of Congress and will be making an additional statement Monday morning.
Trump pointed to a mental illness problem in the U.S., calling the shooters "really very seriously mentally ill." https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-declares-hate-has-no-place-in-our-country-as-dems-demand-recall-of-congress
Why don't you review the relevant bills that Obama signed into law to edify yourself Tex?
Gee, Dulay--BOTH of them, all by myself?
Must not have been very effective or you damn sure wouldn't be bitching about Trump so much.
Or would you?
https://www.thoughtco.com/obama-gun-laws-passed-by-congress-3367595During his first term Obama didn't call for any major new restriction on guns or gun owners. Instead he urged authorities to enforce the state and federal laws already on the books. In fact, Obama signed only two major laws that address how guns are carried in America, and both actually expand the rights of gun owners.
Well, I know this is rhetorical comment, because a conservative wants no such gun restraints attached to weapons of mass destruction (aka: assault weapons). On the other hand, it is Donald Trump who recently directed all government agencies to give him data on the citizenship status of the people in this country. So, what is lacking in here is not ability but spirit. Irony of ironies, Donald Trump has directly proved a conservative point: When the government has information on Americans - a leader can direct his or her agencies to amassed data in a central storehouse to carry out any number of activities—nefarious and questionable activities too.
(Note: Not saying that I want any of what you suggest to happen, but let's not pretend Trump is incapable of thinking about it.)
My guns haven't snuck out by themselves and killed anyone for over 50 years. They're good little guns. They know not to go out without me in tow. I'll spank their grips if they do.
Oh. This is an attempt to 'back-door' a way into tired, haggarded, outdated, rhetoric on guns. I am not interested in it. People are dead; "bare hands" did not do this crisis; bullets did.
Stop enabling mass murder with rhetoric. If one is not part of the solution; maybe, one is partial to the problem.
Something to think about huh. ? On the other hand, if your guns were sentient beings, you would have to treat them better. And on top of that, you would not like your guns if they could think!
No, what I am partial to is innocent: little children, adolescents, young adults, and aged men and women not having bullets in their bodies for having done nothing than being alive, warm flesh, and out and about on a street in America.
I have a problem with boys and men I don't know and have never met pointing a weapon of mass destruction in my direction, shooting into dark crowded spaces, and mowing down screaming men, women, and children randomly. That bothers me, because I am partial to my skin and the skin of my relatives.
So. None of us want that. But it has NOTHING to do with the FACT that 99.999% of gun owners never harm an innocent person with their firearms. And you and others on the left want to take away our right of self defense
What you want but are actually too timid to acknowledge is that you are willing to sacrifice the Constitutional Rights of the 99.9995% of people that don't use guns illegally for the .0005% that do.
Constitutional rights don't mean a damn when rigor mortis is setting in. The Constitution falls silent when you can't plead your case. The Constitution can't pump life through a dead heart. The Constitution can't comfort a grieving mother, father, or child. 'Laying on' of the Constitution won't regenerate flesh.
As for bare hands. We are not talking about strangulation, bludgeoning, slapping to death, or punching to death. This is "dispersive" killing with a defined weapon of mass destruction. "X" marks the distinction!
I have a problem with boys and men I don't know and have never met pointing a weapon of mass destruction in my direction
There are already "LAWS" against doing such a thing.
Will a "New LAW" make it any better ?
"As for bare hands. We are not talking about strangulation, bludgeoning, slapping to death, or punching to death. This is "dispersive" killing. "X" marks the distinction!"
"Dispersive" Killing still requires the "BARE HAND" to accomplish !
That also includes an arm, the entire body, and a "Brain" too.
By CRIMINALS! One has already received justice and will never harm anyone again. The other will be tried, convicted, and executed for his horrific crime
thats how our system works in a nation that supposedly values liberty. Your totalitarian utopia would ban the right of self defense in the name of the supposed “collective good” by simply enslaving everyone to the state. It’s never worked and never will work. You aren’t God and can’t eliminate evil by simplistic and dangerous state control over our lives by taking away our right of self defense
Untrue. Guns are a problem: 32,000 gun deaths testify to it.
And, what part of your tired, haggarded, trite, NRA talking points I don't want to waste time on confuses you?
Incidentally, since you obviously can not empathize or live vicariously through the sufferings of others; point blank:
Do you know anyone who has perished in a mass shooting in this country? Do you know anybody who has experienced a stranger's bullets 'parting' their hair?
Enough, LFOD! "Totalitarian utopia" - "Bobalisarian tusopio." No one wants your guns used for private self-defense. But really that is not what is at 'work' here in this discussion is it?
Now those armaments you and your so-called "millions" of ex-army friends, associates,and family have in storage - the government authorities may want to ask you what offensive is planned. Just because you shout words of "liberty" and"freedom," won't make murder any less painful, destructive, or against the law. I'm just saying. . . .
Indeed, Democrats have vowed to take our guns. Dem candidates like Warren, Harris, Booker, DeBlasio, Buttigieg and this from Dem Congressman Salwell
November 2018
Rep. Eric Swalwell, California Democrat, warned gun owners Friday that any fight over firearms would be “a short one,” because the federal government has an extensive cache of nuclear weapons.
After Joe Biggs tweeted that Mr. Swalwell “wants a war” over the Second Amendment, Mr. Swalwell responded, “And it would be a short war my friend.”
We have self defense, not offense as you continue to lie about your fellow Americans
as our founders and even very liberal Democrats in the past have stated, our firearms are to protect us from two threats, criminal andd potential government tyranny
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788
"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible." -- Hubert H. Humphrey Liberal Democratic Senator, 22 October 1959
O goodness. Spare me. For the record, only a foolish person would suggest taking away any person's right and ability to defend him/her —self, family, and hearth. This discussion is about an active shooter. Active shooter. Active shooter.
Okay. Now that that is clear. Stop this pretext of engaging an active shooter discussion with NRA talking points.
We have self defense, not offense as you continue to lie about your fellow Americans. as our founders and even very liberal Democrats in the past have stated, our firearms are to protect us from two threats, criminal andd . . .government tyranny
CHOMP! I'll bite: Please give me your perspective of what government tyranny is.
When appropriate, law enforcement should confiscate weapons.
make a list of gun owners
Why not?
get between family members passing down their property (GUNS) from generation to generation.
Nope. My mother in law gave me a Ruger 6 shot revolver and a Hi-Standard HD Military as a present. On the other hand, I wouldn't give my bat shit brother in law a sling shot...
Must not have been very effective or you damn sure wouldn't be bitching about Trump so much.
What does Obama's record have to do with Trump's inaction? Trump made promises after Parkland and he hasn't done shit. That's not bitching, that's citing a FACT.
What does Obama's record have to do with Trump's inaction? Trump made promises after Parkland and he hasn't done shit. That's not bitching, that's citing a FACT.
Look, it is quite evident you don't like Trump, but even Trump can't pass a law---even if he does have a pen and a phone.
The ONLY reason I brought Obama up was to hold him up as an example of what you accepted cheerfully from him, and yet condemn Trump for.
I am not surprised that you can't be objective when it comes to Trump.
My evaluation of Trump is completely objective. I take him at his word and deed.
What exactly do you expect him to do?
Well gee Tex, since he ran to be the leader of the free world, I expect him the LEAD.
What have you done?
Voted, ensured that my representatives from BOTH parties are aware of how I feel about the issue, SAFELY store the firearms I own and train with them regularly to ensure that I hit my target at a higher percentage than most LEOs.
Wow--you might have a career in politics--the way you keep missing any point you don;t like!
Tex, you admitted that your ONLY reason you brought up Obama was whataboutism.
My evaluation of Trump is completely objective. I take him at his word and deed.
Please do tell how you managed to type that with a straight face!
Well gee Tex, since he ran to be the leader of the free world, I expect him the LEAD.
Well, gee, Dulay, just because he hs a pen and a phone doesn't mean he can stop mass shootings.
Voted, ensured that my representatives from BOTH parties are aware of how I feel about the issue, SAFELY store the firearms I own and train with them regularly to ensure that I hit my target at a higher percentage than most LEOs.
Really? Funny, I damn sure don't recall you bitching when Obama was President about HIM not stopping mass shootings. Did I miss it, or did it never happen?
Tex, you admitted that your ONLY reason you brought up Obama was whataboutism.
Damn right I admitted it---in a vain attempt to get you to recognize your own hypocrisy.
I find in general that so called voter obstruction occurs very seldom and certainly we aren’t fighting against tyranny by the courts or legislation that does that.
however I have long advocated that no one be allowed to vote in Federal elections who cannot pass a basic Constitution civics test.
too many ignorant voters across the political spectrum
add to this that there is no Constitutional right to vote. Election methods as we discussed previously are under the purview of the states
I feel safe but then again I don't rely on the President to keep me safe.
So the President of the United States has NO responsibility at all to keep the citizens safe? Then what's that stupid fucking wall for? I thought he was protecting us from rapists and murderers? No? Perhaps he should disband the Coast Guard and save us some money? I mean, not his responsibility to keep us safe...
He does not care, Mr.Frost. LFOD is a purist libertarian. I highly suspect he takes exception of FDR requiring lights in houses/homes. And, exception to personal computers too. —Wait computers?!!
Election methods as we discussed previously are under the purview of the states
Do you approve of states changing voter methods? Assuming you do: Why do you rule it is acceptable for states to control voting methods and no other set of methods and functions in your list?
Does any change by a state/s of vote methods constitute vote/r "infringement," in your opinion?
FDR provided rural electrification to farms and homes as a federal program. It was a big deal in 1932. However, it was de facto an inherent duty and responsibility of our presidential leader to keep this country competitive with other nations on the world (for all sorts of good purposes and benefits). Some so-called, "constitutionalists" disapproved of FDR stated actions, and in time they enlisted the help of rural folks to try and stop "progress." As you can tell - the strategy failed. Eureka! We have lighted homes and pervasive electrification for nearly a century now.
Personal computers? Well, I thought it would disturb, because of the public utility functions of collective regulated services
Just for giggles. You continue to engage in name-calling propaganda will your dogged interjection of labels. No one should buy into that—I certainly won't! This notion that this great nation could impact the world as leader without any participation, national growth and development, or drawing out of the world's people resources, etceteras is utter nonsense.
Without a federal authority structure in place and functioning, this would be a collection of individual states trekking on 'mixed' paths and ends. The 'product' being a retarded, misshapen, and malformed union. Certainly, not the envy of the world as this nation is today.
Really? Funny, I damn sure don't recall you bitching when Obama was President about HIM not stopping mass shootings. Did I miss it, or did it never happen?
You asked me what I have done Tex. I told you.
BTFW, I've only been here since just before NV shut down. What mass shooting from Oct 2016 to Jan 2017 was I supposed to bitch about?
Damn right I admitted it---in a vain attempt to get you to recognize your own hypocrisy.
Those are not the right to vote. Those are prohibitions against state limitations on voting
there is NO affirmative wording on voting in the Constitution
The amendments only prohibit efforts to limit or otherwise restrict voting. A fact noted by some on the left
Americans are so terribly ignorant about the Constitution. THERE IS NO RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CONSTITUTION. This fact has been observed by some on the left in the past few years.
“The Bill of Rights, as the name implies, lists a wide variety of privileges of citizenship that cannot be taken from Americans without due process. You have the right to free speech, you have the right to bear arms, you have the right to a fair trial, etc. The right to vote, however, isn’t mentioned.
By Steve Benen, Producer of Rachel Maddow Show
Matt Yglesias had a good piece on this yesterday.
When the constitution was enacted it did not include a right to vote for the simple reason that the Founders didn’t think most people should vote. Voting laws, at the time, mostly favored white, male property-holders, and the rules varied sharply from state to state. But over the first half of the nineteenth century, the idea of popular democracy took root across the land. Property qualifications were universally abolished, and the franchise became the key marker of white male political equality. Subsequent activists sought to further expand the franchise, by barring discrimination on the basis of race (the 15th Amendment) and gender (the 19th) — establishing the norm that all citizens should have the right to vote.
But this norm is just a norm. There is no actual constitutional provision stating that all citizens have the right to vote, only that voting rights cannot be dispensed on the basis of race or gender discrimination. A law requiring you to cut your hair short before voting, or dye it blue, or say “pretty please let me vote,” all might pass muster. And so might a voter ID requirement.
The legality of these kinds of laws hinge on whether they violate the Constitution’s protections against race and gender discrimination, not on whether they prevent citizens from voting. As Harvard Law professor Lani Guinier has written, this “leaves one of the fundamental elements of democratic citizenship tethered to the whims of local officials.”
All of which leads to the question about a constitutional amendment, making the affirmative right of an adult American citizen to cast a ballot explicit within our constitutional system.
For some in Congress, this isn’t just an academic exercise. TPM had this report back in May.
A pair of Democratic congressmen is pushing an amendment that would place an affirmative right to vote in the U.S. Constitution. According to Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), who is sponsoring the legislation along with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the amendment would protect voters from what he described as a “systematic” push to “restrict voting access” through voter ID laws, shorter early voting deadlines, and other measures that are being proposed in many states.
“Most people believe that there already is something in the Constitution that gives people the right to vote, but unfortunately … there is no affirmative right to vote in the Constitution. We have a number of amendments that protect against discrimination in voting, but we don’t have an affirmative right,” Pocan told TPM last week. “Especially in an era … you know, in the last decade especially we’ve just seen a number of these measures to restrict access to voting rights in so many states. … There’s just so many of these that are out there, that it shows the real need that we have.”
“The Missing Right: A Constitutional Right to Vote
Put simply—and this is surprising to many people—there is no constitutional guarantee of the right to vote. Qualifications to vote in House and Senate elections are decided by each state, and the Supreme Court affirmed in Bush v. Gore that “[t]he individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.”
FDR’s UnConstitutional New Deal was His implementation of Italian Fascism which he greatly admired. I oppose all of FDR’s Marxist fascist domestic programs. He was also a traitor for working against America by agreeing to give Stalin Eastern Europe
“Hey, FDR Was a Fascist Too!
by Jacob G. Hornberger
March 10, 2016
But in their attacks on Trump, those on the left conveniently forget a discomforting fact: Their hero and icon — the man they (as well as conservatives) have extolled and glorified for some 80 years — President Franklin D. Roosevelt — was himself a fascist.
Oh, sure, it’s true that much of FDR’s New Deal was socialist, such as the federal pension plan — Social Security — that he permanently foisted onto the American people.
But let’s not omit the other half of the story: Roosevelt also embraced economic fascism, especially in his efforts to get America out of the Great Depression.
The best example was FDR’s National Industrial Recovery Act, a fascist program that would have fit perfectly in Mussolini’s fascist Italy. Under the NIRA, federal officials organized private American businesses, industries, and corporations into giant cartels that established “codes of fair competition,” which set prices, wages, and production in their particular sectors, all enforced by federal force. More than 500 codes of “fair practice” were developed.
Not surprisingly, FDR put a military man, retired Hugh Johnson, to run this fascist program. Johnson had graduated from West Point, made the military his career, and ultimately reached the rank of General. According to Wikipedia,
One author claims Johnson looked on Italian Fascist corporatism as a kind of model. He distributed copies of a fascist tract called “The Corporate State” by one of Mussolini’s favorite economists, including giving one to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins and asking her to give copies to her Cabinet.
To encourage compliance with the NIRA, FDR and Johnson adopted a symbol that could have come straight out of Mussolini’s playbook: the “Blue Eagle.” In what is undoubtedly one of the creepiest federal campaigns in U.S. history — one that would have made Mussolini proud, U.S. officials “encouraged” U.S. businessmen to post the Blue Eagle symbol in their storefront windows in a show of solidarity with the federal government. Any business that refused to do so was immediately denounced and ostracized for its lack of “patriotism.”
In 1935, thanks to justices who were still fighting to retain America’s founding constitutional principles, the U.S. Supreme Court declared FDR’s NIRA unconstitutional. They rightfully pointed out that such a scheme had no place in America’s constitutional order.
Let’s not forget Hitler: He led Germany out of the Great Depression with a fascist program based on massive spending on public works, government-business partnerships, government management of the economy, and building up Germany’s military-industrial complex.
Sound familiar? It should because that was FDR’s economic program too.
While we are on the subject of Nazi Germany, perhaps it would be instructive to post the following planks from the Nazi Party platform and ask whether any of the presidential candidates, Democrat or Republican, disagree with them.
We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: an end to the power of the financial interests. We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand … the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education…. We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents…. The government must undertake the improvement of public health — by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor — by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth. We combat the … materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of “The Common Good Before the Individual Good.”
Perhaps we should also remind ourselves of the letter that Hitler sent Roosevelt through U.S. Ambassador Thomas Dodd:
The Reich chancellor requests Mr. Dodd to present his greetings to President Roosevelt. He congratulates the president upon his heroic effort in the interest of the American people. The president’s successful struggle against economic distress is being followed by the entire German people with interest and admiration. The Reich chancellor is in accord with the president that the virtues of sense of duty, readiness for sacrifice, and discipline must be the supreme rule of the whole nation. This moral demand, which the president is addressing to every single citizen, is only the quintessence of German philosophy of the state, expressed in the motto “The public weal before the private gain.”
For anyone who would like to further explore the parallels between FDR’s New Deal and Mussolini’s fascism and, for that matter, with Hitler’s national socialism, I highly recommend a book entitled Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt’s America, Mussolini’s Italy, and Hitler’s Germany, 1933-1939 by Wolfgang Schivelbusch.
Let’s face it: Fascism has a glorious history among both Democrats and Republicans, so long as it’s called “reforming” or “saving” free enterprise. All the hubbub over Donald Trump’s fascism is personal, not ideological.”
LFOD is talking out of his hat! More on this coming up. Actually, let's just deal with the obvious. Karri, what if I told you, you have no right to vote in 2020. Do not try to participate in the franchise for there will be officers stationed at the voting polls to stop your progress. What might you tell me? See: 19th amendment - which currently is a section in the whole of The Constitution (One complete document.)
“The Bill of Rights, as the name implies, lists a wide variety of privileges of citizenship that cannot be taken from Americans without due process. You have the right to free speech, you have the right to bear arms, you have the right to a fair trial, etc. The right to vote, however, isn’t mentioned.
Okay, let me try again. Lost what I had through a fluke!
There is only one constitution in this country. Thus, the "Bill of Rights" and the additional amendments are all one whole Constitution. You can not pull the document apart or fragment it!
As a result, the 19th modification granting the right to vote in the constitution is an equal article of our constitution as the 2nd modification granting the right to bear arms. Neither right grants us complete independence from due process of the state or federal government. For example, an arrested man or woman has no AUTHORITY vested by the Constitution to demand his or her gun/s be given them in jail, prison, or while in an asylum. Furthermore, it is a myth that local and federal authorities can not place constraints on guns. Else surely there would be no need for an on-going debate!
But this norm is just a norm. There is no actual constitutional provision stating that all citizens have the right to vote, only that voting rights cannot be dispensed on the basis of race or gender discrimination. A law requiring you to cut your hair short before voting, or dye it blue, or say “pretty please let me vote,” all might pass muster. And so might a voter ID requirement.
Remarkable. Okay:
1. Do White men have a constitutional right to vote? (Original document.) 2. Do People of Color have a constitutional right to vote? (15th amendment.) 3. Do Women have a constitutional right to vote? (19 amendment.) 4. Do 18 year olds and Above have a constitutional right to vote (24th amendment.)
5. Do children 18 years and under have constitutional rights to vote? No!
There is your listing of people authorized to vote in the United States. Of course states can have statutes—even stupid and irresponsible ones at that. Indeed, the devil is in the details.
Riddle me this, LFOD:
In 1 - 4 above, which category is prohibited by law from voting at all?
A pair of Democratic congressmen is pushing an amendment that would place an affirmative right to vote in the U.S. Constitution. According to Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), who is sponsoring the legislation along with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the amendment would protect voters from what he described as a “systematic” push to “restrict voting access” through voter ID laws, shorter early voting deadlines, and other measures that are being proposed in many states.
Such a law would not grant anybody new the right to vote! It simply would stop local "shenanigans" during election cycles done by secretary of states. It is interested how 'bloc-granted' the rights of voters has come together up to now. People have interfered with the franchise up and down the 'row.' Quite sad actually. Children must wonder what is wrong with the adults in charge of the franchise—why can't they get it together once and for all
“The Missing Right: A Constitutional Right to Vote Put simply—and this is surprising to many people—there is no constitutional guarantee of the right to vote. Qualifications to vote in House and Senate elections are decided by each state, and the Supreme Court affirmed in Bush v. Gore that “[t]he individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.
The Electoral College is not relevant to our discussion. The 'electors' have there very own right in the Constitution.
Patrick Crusius was identified as the suspect in the shooting at Walmart near Cielo Vista Mall in El Paso, Texas by the Washington Examiner . Crusius, 21, is from the Dallas/Fort Worth area and is currently in police custody.
NBC News reports there were at least 19 people killed in the August 3 shooting with a further 40 injured. The exact number of injuries and deceased victims has not been officially confirmed.
Police scanner traffic from the area suggested that Crusius was taken into custody at around noon local time. The shooting began at around 10 a.m., officials said. The FBI and ATF had responded to the scene, alongside the El Paso Police Department.
Statements from government officials quickly poured in on Twitter following the attack.
“In El Paso, the Texas Dept. of Public Safety is assisting local law enforcement & federal authorities to bring this tragedy to the swiftest & safest possible conclusion,” Texas Governor Greg Abbott wrote. “We thank all First Responders for their courageous response & urge all area residents to remain safe.”
Beto O’Rourke also wrote about the shooting on Twitter.
“Truly heartbreaking. Stay safe, El Paso,” he wrote. “Please follow all directions of emergency personnel as we continue to get more updates.”
Here’s what you need to know:
1. Crusius Was Taken Into Custody ‘Without Incident’
The suspect was driving a grey vehicle, according to police scanner chatter. Early reports indicated the suspect had an AK47. That information was not immediately confirmed by police. Local reported Mills Hayes tweeted that the suspect was taken into custody “without incident” and that officers did not fire any shots during the arrest.
Police discussed recovering the weapon on the scanner but did not specify what type of weapon it was. At about 12:40 p.m., scanner traffic indicated that the police had recovered the weapon as well as the suspect’s car.
Scanner chatter was focused on Walmart at the Cielo Visa mall. Police also said on the scanner they were sending officers in to complete “tactical searches” in the mall.
2. Crusius Once Wrote on LinkedIn That He Was Not Motivated to Do Anything Other Than to Get By
Crusius wrote on his LinkedIn page in 2015 that he was not motivated to do anything other than enough to get by. Shortly after the shooting on August 3, that page was deleted. Crusius said on that page that he attended Plano High School.
He wrote in the About section of the page, “I’m not really motivated to do anything more than what’s necessary to get by,” he wrote on the page. “Working in general sucks, but I guess a career in Software Development suits me well. I spend about 8 hours every day on the computer so that counts as technology experience I guess. Pretty much gonna see what technology careers present themselves; go with the wind.”
When writing about his life in high school, Crusius said that he did not participate in extracurricular activities because of “lack of freedom.” A Facebook page that shows the suspect’s face as the profile image shows no biographical information or recent postings. On that page, Crusius has three visible friends.
CBS Dallas/Fort Worth’s J.D. Miles reports that the suspect “possibly graduated” from Liberty High School in Frisco, Texas.
3. A Manifesto Purporting to Be From the Shooter Has Been Circulating on 8Chan
Reporter Scott Stedman has tweeted that he had told the FBI that a manifesto which was purported to be from the suspect had been circulating on 8Chan. Stedman said that the FBI is treating the manifesto seriously. 8Chan is a controversial message board that has been described as “the home of the most vitriolic content on the internet” by Vox.
That manifesto, which has been seen by Heavy.com but not verified as belonging to the suspect, makes negative references to Hispanic immigration into the U.S., criticizes both major political parties in the U.S. but the writer stresses that he supports some in the Republican Party in terms of immigration policies, the writer also makes reference to alleged Christchurch mosque shooter, Brenton Tarrant.
4. Crusius’ Last Known Address Was in Allen, Texas
Public records show Crusius’ last known address was his family’s home in Allen, Texas, about 30 minutes outside of Dallas and more than 9 hours away from El Paso. It is not clear if he has any connections to the El Paso area. Crusius appeared to have lived with his parents and also has a twin sister and older brother, according to public records. Crusius’ family has not commented about the shooting.
Getty El Paso Police Department Sgt. Enrique Carillo briefs media on the shooting.
The exact number of victims was not immediately confirmed. Some reports indicated there were 18 to 20 deceased victims. Reports indicated local hospitals were flooded with victims. The El Paso Police Department issued a plea via Twitter for blood donations in the wake of the shooting saying, “Blood needed urgently. Multiple injured transported to various hospitals. Blood donation centers Vitalent Blood Services at 424 s Mesa Hills and 133 N Zaragoza.”
The number of victims was described as “shocking” by Rep. Veronica Escobar.
“Rep. Veronica Escobar on CNN says she won’t confirm the number of fatalities from the mass shooting in El Paso, but that the number is ‘shocking,'” Reporter Sandra Gonzalez wrote on Twitter.
5. A Second Person Was Been Taken Into Custody at the Scene
NBC News reports that a second person was taken into custody at the scene of the shooting. It is unclear what that person had been arrested for. Throughout the day there had been erroneous reports on social media of multiple shooters and of multiple shooting scenes. Police later said that following the arrest of Crusius, there was no further threat.
Whether it's a lone lunatic killing a dozen at once or a dozen gangbangers killing one at a time, it's all tragic. We have a violence problem at the fringes of our culture. It's obviously not the majority of gun owners nor just people, but it doesn't take many lunatics to disrupt society. If we can, I believe we need to get at the reasons behind this violence and do what we can to reduce it. That's not as sexy or quick as more gun legislation, but I think it's an approach that would be more effective in the long term.
The rationale for having the public armed 24/7 , for example at the shopping mall, is so that they will be able to stop mass killings as soon as they start. It didnt pan out in this case but maybe next time.
The rationale for having the public armed 24/7 , for example at the shopping mall, is so that they will be able to stop mass killings as soon as they start.
It didn't make it worse, either, so I don't see your point. Your comment makes it sound like we shouldn't have fire extinguishers because there was a fire and no one used one.
The rationale for having the public armed 24/7 , for example at the shopping mall, is so that they will be able to stop mass killings as soon as they start. It didnt pan out in this case but maybe next time.
Sorry to burst your bubble , but that is not always true, personally IF I choose to carry, it is strictly for my own protection from harm or death, not anyone elses . I am under no obligation to anyone else either legally or morally.
A person that is going to carry legally , will have to decide for themselves if and when they will use deadly force, and as I have stated , I wouldn't use it for anyone elses protection except myself and immediate family, you could be getting your head bashed in with a brick and I wouldn't do a thing until the threat is directed at me .
About the only rational about everyone being armed goes for concealed carry is simply a deterrence, those inclined to commit crimes could( not would) be deterred from committing those crimes if they thought there was a chance they couldn't get away alive or whole with what they wanted to do, and deterrents don't always work.
Take a look at where a good majority of these shootings are taking place , in places designated as gun free zones , usually at the behest of the property owner . nowadays I hear gun free zone , I think sitting duck shooting gallery, a soft target that someone that is going to ignore that status has no one that could defend themselves even IF they had an inclination to do so.
About the last thing I want is a bunch of wannabe heroes trying to shoot the "right" bad guy with a gun in a crowded store or mall, when it's easy to assume that every armed person is a "bad guy with a gun". It's a recipe for more fatalities.
No sarc tag , besides the only thing close to being sarcastic is his last 10 words of what was copied . the rest of it after having in the past seen him say it I think he truly believes , that some people that carry want to be some sort of john Wayne-esque person in a gun fight .
If you assume everyone carrying a gun is a bad guy , then I pity the off duty cops that in some places by law and because of self preservation due to their jobs have to carry24/7/365 , or the retired cop that carries .
I am fortunate enough to live in a state that allows both open and concealed carry, and as a state resident , don't even have to have a permit for either though the state offers permits for reciprocy purposes. and the nature of where I live , I don't freak out when I see someone that decides to have a firearm with them in public .
The real recipe for disaster is assuming everyone with a gun is doing so for nefarious reasons.
some people that carry want to be some sort of john Wayne-esque person in a gun fight .
Some people seem to think that having everybody armed will be a deterrent. It's not. If it were, we wouldn't have so many shootings. That is the reason for John's sarcasm. He rightly believes that having the public armed does not stop mass shootings. Texas is an open-carry state. This guy still killed 20 people and wounded 26 more. The shooter in Dayton was brought down within 1 minute by police, and still managed to kill 9 people and injure 26 more.
Where did I personally assume that everybody carrying a gun is a bad guy? I'm saying that during a shooting there is often no way to tell the good guys from the bad guys, so everybody is a potential "bad" (note the scare quotes) gun with a gun, when there are multiple people shooting. Can you tell the difference? Based on what, exactly?
when it's easy to assume that every armed person is a "bad guy with a gun".
That's where I got your assumption.
And having some people that no one knows is armed is a deterrent for some , just not to all. Anyone that thinks its a solution to stop all things negative are living in a dream world and not reality.
Locks are a deterrent to burglars , but they don't always work either , locks actually only deter honest people that can be tempted. they keep them honest.
I'm saying that during a shooting there is often no way to tell the good guys from the bad guys, so everybody is a potential "bad" (note the scare quotes) gun with a gun, when there are multiple people shooting. Can you tell the difference? Based on what, exactly?
You just hit on the reason why I wont use my firearm if carrying to assist someone else , I have no way of knowing if the person getting their head caved in isn't the bad guy themselves. Only way I am going to know that is if the threat is directed at me or mine, and then 3 preconditions have to be met , those would be intent , capability , and opportunity, and everyone has different levels of all 3 of those things that must be met. after those 3 preconditions are met to a persons satisfaction that if questioned it stands up to the laws of self defense, I would have no problem aquitting someone .
Which is why I said , never assume just because I might carry a firearm , its there for anyone elses protection , its not and never will be . I have no obligation to provide anyone outside my immediate circles protection, how someone else decides to protect themselves or what steps they take to do so is entirely up to them, choose accordingly.
I used scare quotes to denote that I don't actually think every armed person is a bad guy with a gun. It's a pretty common use of quotation marks.
I have no way of knowing if the person getting their head caved in isn't the bad guy themselves.
Yet another reason that arming the public 24/7 isn't a good idea. Some, like you, might show restraint. And some will just start shooting. And some become targets themselves, of either other armed civilians, or of LEO.
Some, like you, might show restraint. And some will just start shooting. And some become targets themselves, of either other armed civilians, or of LEO.
Thanks for recognizing I MIGHT show some restraint , it has come from a number of years of training , observation , and practical application in different situations .
just because a law says I can do something doesn't mean I HAVE to, frankly I haven't had that gut instinct tell me that I should carry in public in almost a decade now, its called situational awareness. That doesn't mean I haven't carried when out fixing fence , or tending livestock for someone. But in those cases its simply a tool for use against rattlers and 4 legged predators .
The lament I see is "where were all the supposed good guys with guns that would have stopped this?"
Maybe there were none there, just because someone can doesn't mean they will, maybe as you said they didn't want to become targets for others that were armed or the LEO, maybe they thought as I do , it doesn't get drawn unless there is a direct personal threat presented to themselves and those in their family.
Could be any number of reasons , someone who could have acted didn't.
Take a look at where a good majority of these shootings are taking place , in places designated as gun free zones , usually at the behest of the property owner . nowadays I hear gun free zone , I think sitting duck shooting gallery, a soft target that someone that is going to ignore that status has no one that could defend themselves even IF they had an inclination to do so.
Neither Dayton or El Paso are 'gun free zones'. The people in Dayton were killed/wounded on the street outside of a bar in an open carry state and Walmart has an open carry policy in ALL of their stores.
Well I cant speak for where you live , but most places , it is illegal to have a firearm in a place that serves booze, though that is not always true.
Looking at this logically , if a person is in a nightclub /bar district , such as in Dayton , it would be a reasonable assumption that most of those people are there to visit those establishments , and if they are visiting them they would have to be un armed . again no guarentee though, but the likelyhood is better and the odds are better that they are mostly non armed individuals. GF or disarmed zone , a soft ,very soft target.
I worked for wally world part time for a bit , their actual policy for customers is that they will conform to and allow whatever state law is for customers, for employees , it is not allowed and you can be fired for it.
Texas may be an open carry state by law , all that means is that people are free to choose if they will or if they wont carry. so its individual choice if they will or wont.
You then run into the problem of no one that carries a firearm is obligated to provide protection for you the unarmed.
It is like you and I being in the same store ,you are un armed , I am armed , you get shot , I don't but you find out i was armed and decide to sue me for NOT using my firearm. i simply explain to the judge the conditions i would draw and use my firearm and you lose your suit. after being told you should have had your own firearm .
Mark, excuse my intrusion, but I have noticed you mentioning this scenario one or twice now. Are you aware of "Good Samaritan laws" across the country and what they detail? In addition, there is the reciprocation policy: If you were say incapacitated and unable to get your firearm out in a violent crisis, would you expect others to leave you, or a love one besides, to the discretion of a heartless killer? If not, then why read out here as heartless yourself?
What I read from you comes off as stating-you would not lift a finger to help another person you are not legally beholden to or have personal interest in. Flatly, where is the common humanity in that?
usually they entail that a person cannot be sued if they take an action to assist someone and even though that assistance is given injury or death occurs , here is a little known thing with those "good Samaritan laws " .
Once a person decides to render aide they must continue to give that aide until competent authority arrives , if they stop rendering aide at any point before that, and the person they are aiding is injured or expires the good Samaritan law protection against suit or litigation is null and void.
Under that understanding of the law I simply refuse to render aide , in this case protection via my use of my firearm in the first place . If i am incapacitated and cannot use it , i would not expect someone that sees it to not use it to protect themselves .
There is no part of any good Samaritan law ,anywhere, that states a person MUST render aide in any given situation , they are merely protections if one decides to but it also restricts that the peron must continue in some cases.
Your right , when it comes to carrying a firearm , it is there for MY personal protection, no one elses , it is a choice i made and will continue to make for myself , at my own discretion of under what situations i would have to use it. As i stated already those situations are limited to impending danger of injury of death to myself , or a loved one , with the 3 preconditions of intent , capability , and opertunity of the assailent being able to do all 3 being met .
Just look at the way you have already been speaking about gun control, people are against many things , but the second someone finds that hey they are in a situation they actually need to protect themselves and theydo not have the means to do so, they demand on grounds of HUMANITY, that those that can or has the capability to defend themselves also put themselves in physical legal and financial jepardy to render aide to them.
Sorry wont happen with me, you and those self same people have the exact same choices to arm themselves as i do according to the law or to choose not to , that is your right. i simply am exersizing my rights , same as anyone else, if you or anyone else dont like how i choose to legally use my rights , then maybe y'all should rethink your own postions and stances on personal protection and carry.
And IF the LEO cant be sued for not providing even implied protection , I doubt the courts would agree i could be for doing nothing.
, end result of that case , even the cops have no obligation to provide individual protection .
Looking at this logically , if a person is in a nightclub /bar district , such as in Dayton , it would be a reasonable assumption that most of those people are there to visit those establishments , and if they are visiting them they would have to be un armed .
As with my state, anyone with a license to carry CAN carry a firearm into a bar.
You might want to check out Ohio's law on open carry of a rifle in a bar too. It's comical as hell.
Well they can not here, nor anywhere in New England I grew up , so it seems both Wyoming and those New England states as are a number of other states are a little smarter about mixing firearms and booze. I even think most reasonable people wouldn't do that even if they could.
My turn now CB I have a few personal question if you choose to answer.
Have you ever been shot at with the shooter intending to kill you?
Have you ever shot AT someone with the intent to kill them?
Have you ever taken another persons life?
I can answer yes to all 3 of those questions .
I have also after shooting , after making sure the scene was safe and secured , went into the exact opposite mode and watched as the persons life faded while trying to stop that from happening.
Until you can answer yes to all 3 of those questions , you don't have standing to judge how I deem I would use my weapon , or if the criteria for me to use it is right or wrong , all that matters is it is what I have deemed to be right for myself for my own reasoning. Is that harsh? yes it is , unchristian? definitely , but I am not a Christian so I don't trouble myself with Christian morals.
Just look at the way you have already been speaking about gun control, people are against many things , but the second someone finds that hey they are in a situation they actually need to protect themselves and they do not have the means to do so, they demand on grounds of HUMANITY, that those that can or has the capability to defend themselves also put themselves in physical legal and financial jepardy to render aide to them.
You can do what you wish, I suppose. Hard as it is to hear and accept the level of lack of bowels of compassion and care.
Now then, let me add this for thought-sake. If you, Mark, were to be found choking and a nearby someone is trained in the Heimlich Maneuver; the technique serves as a tool in the 'carry-around' of that person's mind. Are you plainly stating you would rather turn blue and die, or dislodge the choking hazard yourself?
The sum of human experiences involves lessons with the message not one of us can survive as an 'island in a sea of other people. That said, you, I guess are free to try and survive as such a one. Were one of us to succumb to injuries out in an open-field, it is rare for anybody not to want someone to 'cover' what's left in a makeshift grave. Most of us want cover for our beds in sleep.
Mark, the answer to your questions is simply, "NO."
As you can tell by the timestamp @16.2.17 I wrote it before seeing this comment. My opening statement there is to the effect I don't judge you. I can't understand it, but I will get over it. I always do. It is how I am 'cut.'
Now then all the above stated. I can wonder about a great many things ahead of time. And Mark, I will. I have no choice. It is my character 'make-up' to turn-to in a moment of crisis. I will help "the shooter" if given a chance to render 'service,' only to wish him or her to be prosecuted to the highest degree in the law at trial.
Note: Open and honest discussion. Mark, it gets no better than this! I mean that.
So instead they should not express sympathy to people who are suffering? Or perhaps you think legislators have a magic wand they can wave that stops all violent crime.
It is pathetic. Grown people sitting around praying and having 'thoughts' on the subject; God has given people the power to legislate, and the institutional wealth to fix what is broken in these shooters. But, some Conservatives-in-charge won't do it and won't get out of the way so others can act.
Well I've given up caring about it. I reason that one day I too may be going about my business and be shot down like a dog by someone firing a weapon of mass destruction.
I guess I will never understand how sitting in an empty room talking to yourself will ever do any good at all CB. Just makes no sense at all. Especially since the bible says that prayer without action is completely worthless.
The believer accepts their is a Higher Being who communicates in spirit. I won't delve deeper in this right now, except to state the aforementioned is so. 'Part 2' of you comment seems more accurately to go: "Faith without works is dead." It's in James. The portion of scripture you more align with is the 'authority of rulers and administrations (Romans 13). The power is in the Earth already and waiting, people simply have to reach out and use it. And, they will not. And so people continue to perish.
Greg, do send the usual crate full of thoughts and prayers and continue about your business. I am jaded about the whole thing and talking points are so yesterday.
"People are asking me, "What can I do to help?", and I keep telling them...to pray...".
Gov. Greg Abbot.
Yep, just pray, seems to be working really well at stopping the mass shootings.
Do you think that when people ask what they can do to help, they mean "how can I go back in time to stop something that already happened?" Do you really think that prayer is meant to stop the shooting that already happened? What exactly is the problem with ordinary folks expressing sympathy and moral support? Remember, we're just talking about regular folks.
In 2015, Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas tweeted that he was “ embarrassed ” that his state was ranked second (behind California) in requests to buy new guns, albeit still with one million requests. “Let’s pick up the pace Texans,” he wrote. Abbott apparently believes, along with the N.R.A., that more guns make a society more safe, but statistics dispute that. Abbott should look at those charts.
Greg Abbott
@GregAbbott_TX
I'm EMBARRASSED: Texas #2 in nation for new gun purchases, behind CALIFORNIA. Let's pick up the pace Texans. @NRA 10:53 AM - 28 Oct 2015
Do you think this will finally get him to protect the American people and not the lobbyists? (yeah -- /sarc/)
Unfortunately, there are two sides to the gun debate. You need to convince a lot of Americans and develop a congressional consensus to change the 2nd Amendment. Politicizing every one of these tragedies might just do it. You at least have the liberal media fighting for ya!
Politicizing every one of these tragedies might just do it.
Funny story about those lying in hospital beds and those awaiting death. As they lay there. . . . the Devil comes by for a sit-down visit. The spirit sits at the foot of the hospital bed and strikes up a conversation I'd imagine goes something like this:
"Well 'cuz,' How are you doing right now? You came close today. Almost got you. Will be seeing you soon. I am glad you didn't take seriously all the other opportunities to fix anything about guns. Now look at you. All shot up; cut up; stitched up; and soon 'caught up' with Me.
Damn fool! You should not have been listening to me as I 'played' and distracted you all those years. You could have gotten the point of all this when I wiped out the Sandy Hook kids—nope, you didn't. You thought I was like you.Well cuz, I am nothing like you. You're a damn fool to trust that I care about petty patriotic nonsense. All I care about is leading you to this moment in time. So here we are having this discussion. So fool! How do you feel now laying here at your 'exit' interview? Whatever gave you the impression that I truly cared about your life anyway?"
This is the manifesto that law enforcement now believes was written by the man who killed 20 people in El Paso today.
-----
The manifesto of Patrick Crusius
### begin text ###
The Inconvenient Truth
About Me
In general, I support the Christchurch shooter and his manifesto. This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas. They are the instigators, not me. I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion. Some people will think this statement is hypocritical because of the nearly complete ethnic and cultural destruction brought to the Native Americans by our Europeans ancestors, but this just reinforces my point. The natives didn't take the invasion of Europeans seriously, and now what's left is just a shadow of what was. My motive for this attack are not at all personal. Actually the Hispanic community was not my target before I read The Great Replacement. This manifesto will cover the political and economic reason behind the attack, my gear, my expectations of what response this will generate and my personal motivations and thoughts.
Political Reasons
In short, America is rotting from the inside out, and peaceful means to stop this seem to be nearly impossible. The inconvenient truth is that our leaders, both Democrat AND Republican, have been failing us for decades. They are either complacent for involved in one of the biggest betrayals of the American public in our history. The takeover of the United States government by uncheckd corporations. I could write a ten page essay on all the damage these corporations have caused, but here is what is important. Due to the death of the baby boomers, the increasingly anti-immigrant rhetoric of the right and the ever increasing Hispanic population, America will soon become a one party state. The Democratic party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic Debate. They intend to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters. With policies like these, the Hispanic support for Democrats will likely become nearly unanimous in the future. The heavy Hispanic population in Texas will make us a Democratic stronghold. Losing Texas and a few other states with heavy Hispanic population to the Democrats is all it would take for them to win nearly every presidential election. Although the Republican Party is also terrible. Many factions within the Republican Party are pro-corporations. Pro-corporations = pro-immigration. But some factions within the Republican Party don't prioritize corporations over our future. So the Democrats are nearly unanimous with thier support of immigration while the Republicans are divided over it. At least with Republicans, the process of mass immigration and citizenship can be greatly reduced.
Economic Reasons
In short, immigration can only be detrimental to the future of America. Continued immigration will make one of the biggest issues of our time, automation, so much worse. Some sources say that under two decades, half of American jobs will be lost to it. Of course some people will be retrained, but most will not. So it makes no sense to keep on letting millions of illegal or legal immigrants flood into the United States, and to keep the tens of millions that are already here. Invades who also have close to the highest birthrate of all ethnicity in America. In the near future, America will have to initiate a basic universal income to prevent widespread poverty and civil unrest as people lose their jobs. Joblessness itself is a source of civil unrest. The less dependents on a government welfare system, the better. The lower the unemployment rate, the better. Achieving ambitious social projects like universal healthcare and UBI would become far more likely to succeed if tens of millions of dependents are removed.
Even though new migrants do the dirty work, their kids typically don't. They want to live the American Dream which is why they get college degrees and fill higher-paying skilled positions. This is why corporations lobby for even more illegal immigration even after decades of it happening. They need to keep replenishing the low-skilled labor pool. Even as migrant children flood skilled jobs, Corporations make this worse by lobbying for even more work visas to be issued for skilled foreign workers to come here. Recently, the senate under a REPUBLICAN administration has greatly increased the number of foreign workers that will take American jobs. Remember that both Democrats and Republicans support immigration and work visas. corporations need to keep replenishing the labor pool for both skilled and unskilled jobs to keep wages down. So Automation is a good thing as it will eliminate the need for new migrants to fill unskilled jobs. Jobs that Americans can't survive on anyway. Automation can and would replace millions of low-skilled jobs if immigrants were deported. This source of competition of skilled labor from immigrants and visa holders around the world has made a very difficult situation even worse for natives as they compete in the skilled job market. To compete, people have to get better credentials by spending more time in college. It used to be that a high school degree was worth something. Now a bachelors degree is what's recommended to be competitive in the job market. The cost of college degrees as exploded as their value has plummeted. This has led to a generation of indebted overqualified students filling menial, low paying and unfurling jobs. Of course these migrants and their children have contributed to the problem, but are not the sole case of it.
The American lifestyle affords our citizens an incredible quality of life. However, our lifestyle is destroying the environment of our country. The decimation of environment is creating a massive burden for future generations. Corporations are heading the destruction of our environment by shamelessly over harvesting resources. This has been a problem for decades. For example, this phenomenon is brilliantly portrayed in the decades of old class "The Lorax". Water sheds around the country, especially in agricultural areas, are being depleted. Fresh water is being polluted from farming and oil drilling operations. Consume culture is creating thousands of tons of unnecessary plastic wastes and electronic waste, and recycling to help slow this down is almost non-existent. Urban sprawl creates inefficient cities which unnecessarily destroys millions of acres of land. We even used god know how many trees worth of paper towels just wipe water off our hand. Everything I have seen and heard in my short life has led me to believe that the average American isn't willing to change their lifestyle, even if the changes only causes a slight inconvenience. The government is unwilling to tackle these issues beyond empty promises since they are owned by corporations. Corporations that also like immigration because more people means a bigger market for their products. I just want to say that I love the people of this country, but god damn most of y'all are just too stubborn to change your lifestyle. So the next logical step is to decrease the number of people in America using resources. If we can rid enough people, then our way of life can become more sustainable.
Gear
*** removed ***
Reaction
Statistically, millions of migrants have returned to their home countries to reunite with the family they have lost contact with when they moved to America. They come here as economic immigrants, not for asylum reasons. This is an encouraging sign that the Hispanic population is willing to return to their home countries if given the right incentive. An incentive that myself and many other patriotic Americans will provide. This will remove the threat of the Hispanic voting bloc which will make up the loss of millions of baby boomers. This will also make the elites that run corporations realize that it's not in their interest to continue piss off Americans. Corporate America doesn't need to be destroyed, but just show that they are on the wrong side of history. That if they don't bend, they will break.
Personal Reasons and Thoughts
My whole life I have been preparing for a future that currently doesn't exist. The job of my dreams will likely be automated. Hispanics will take control of the local and state government of my beloved Texas, changing policy to better suit their needs. They will turn Texas into an instrument of a political coup which will hasten the destruction of our country. The environment is getting worse by the year. If you take nothing else from this document, remember this: INACTION IS A CHOICE. I can no longer bear the shame of inaction knowing that our founding fathers have endowed me with the rights needed to save our country from the brink of destruction. our European comrades don't have the gun rights needed to repel the millions of invaders that plague their country. They have no choice by to sit by and watch their countries burn.
America can only be destroyed from the inside-out. If our country falls, it will be the fault of traitors. This is why I see my actions as faultless. Because this isn't an act of imperialism but an act of preservation. America is full of hypocrites who will blast my actions as the sole result of racism and hatred of other countries, despite the extensive evidence of all the problems these invaders cause and will cause. People who are hypocrites because they support imperialistic wars that have caused the loss of tens of thousands of American lives and untold numbers of civilian lives. The argument that mass murder is okay when it is state sanctioned is absurd. Our government has killed a whole lot more people for a whole lot less.
Even if other non-immigrant targets would have a great impact. I can't bring myself to kill my fellow Americans. Even the Americans that seem hell-bent on destroying our country. Even if they are shameless race mixers, massive polluters, haters of our collective values, etc. One day they will see error of their ways. Either when American patriots fail to reform our country and it collapses or when we save it. But they will see the error of their ways. I promises y'all that.
I am against race mixing because it destroys genetic diversity and creates identity problems. Also because it's completely unnecessary and selfish. Second and third generation Hispanics form interracial unions at much higher rates than average. Yet another reason to send them back. Cultural and racial diversity is largely temporary. Cultural diversity diminishes as stronger and/or more appealing cultures overtake weaker and/or undesirable ones. Racial diversity will disappear as either race mixing or genocide will take place. But the idea of deporting or murdering all non-white Americans is horrific. Many have been here at least as long as the whites, and have done as much to build our country. The best solution to this for now would be to divide America into a confederacy of territories with at least 1 territory for each race. The physical separation would nearly eliminate race mixing and improve social unity by granting each race self-determination within their respective territory(s).
My death is like inevitable. If I'm not killed by the poilce, then I'll probably be gunned down by one of the invaders. Capture in this case is far worse than dying during the shooting because I'll get the death penalty anyway. Worse still is that I would live knowing that my family despises me. This is why I'm ot going to surrender even if I run out of ammo. If I'm captured, it will be because I was subdued somehow.
Remember: it is not cowardly to pick low hanging fruit. AKA Don't attack heavily guarded areas to fulfill your super soldier COD fantasy. Attack low security targets. Even though you might out gun a security guard or police man, they likely beat you in armor, training, and numbers. Do not throw away your life on an unnecessary dangerous target. If a target seems too hot, live to fight another day.
My ideology has not changed for several years. My opinions on automation, immigration, and the rest predate Trump and his campaign for president. I'm putting this here because some people will blame the President or certain presidential candidates for the attack. This is not the case. I know that the media will probably call me a white supremacist anyway and blame Trump's rhetoric. The media is infamous for fake news. Their reaction to this attack will likely just confirm that.
Many people think that the fight for America is already lost. They couldn't be more wrong. This is just the beginning of the fight for America and Europe. I'm honored to head the fight to reclaim my country from destruction.
He sounds like a radicalized tree hugger. He is concerned about corporations influence on government, the environmental impacts of consumerism and environmental harms of increasing population.
What he sounds like is a child trying to carry the weight of the world on his underdeveloped shoulders. All he has accomplished is to make life worse. Worse still, he is still alive! Should he be allowed to live, one day he will hate himself for being a young, dumb, fool who shot down innocent, unarmed, people who were in part, members of the hopes and dreams he wanted for himself! He is a 'sad-case' and I won't pity him ever.
Worse than the thought of my own life possibly one day being taken by an anonymous loser with a weapon of mass destruction in public is the thought of someone whom I love giving their last breath to a foolish boy-young man- man who had he known what it means to get older in our world, would come to realize that problems fix themselves through collective efforts of all Americans. He did not have to act this way, he did not have to injury, he did not have to murder. He just was too lazy to do the hard work of not decrying the life of himself and innocent people hopeless, nevertheless.
To be fair, he hates both parties, but his reason for this shooting was because he is radicalized against Mexicans. That's obvious.
The right keeps saying that the left is for open borders, so reasonably sure he isn't a "tree hugger". As far as environmental concerns? Most people have those concerns.
And when I read that part I thought of LFOD and his 'rants' about the constitution and freedom(!) from tyranny. Plus, others ("Don't tread on me." "Blood and soil.") Then, I realized he is just a mixed up 'kid' trying to speak to something that can't be solved with a gun or a standing army!
The Democratic party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic Debate. They intend to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters. With policies like these, the Hispanic support for Democrats will likely become nearly unanimous in the future. The heavy Hispanic population in Texas will make us a Democratic stronghold. Losing Texas and a few other states with heavy Hispanic population to the Democrats is all it would take for them to win nearly every presidential election. Although the Republican Party is also terrible. Many factions within the Republican Party are pro-corporations. Pro-corporations = pro-immigration. But some factions within the Republican Party don't prioritize corporations over our future. So the Democrats are nearly unanimous with thier support of immigration while the Republicans are divided over it. At least with Republicans, the process of mass immigration and citizenship can be greatly reduced.
It sounds like he was as fed up with the Republicans as much as the democrats. Sure doesn't sound much like a white nationalist. Did he even mention Trump. But it does seem that the democrats are pandering to the illegals for some of the reasons above.
My ideology has not changed for several years. My opinions on automation, immigration, and the rest predate Trump and his campaign for president. I'm putting this here because some people will blame the President or certain presidential candidates for the attack. This is not the case. I know that the media will probably call me a white supremacist anyway and blame Trump's rhetoric. The media is infamous for fake news. Their reaction to this attack will likely just confirm that.
He certainly doesn't sound like a Trump kind of guy....sorry JR!
This attack is a response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas. They are the instigators, not me. I am simply defending my country from cultural and ethnic replacement brought on by an invasion.
Wow, almost like he copied a trump speech word for word.
That is what is so sad about it. Some people imagine the green Earth (dirt) belongs to them specifically. They own it; they have been told and convinced of it. When, all life demands of us is that we find life in the land . . . and make the most of it! Each of us, considering the age of this planet, are only here a brief expanse of time; and, we return to the 'dirt' displaying no control over anything.
I am against race mixing because it destroys genetic diversity and creates identity problems. Also because it's completely unnecessary and selfish. Second and third generation Hispanics form interracial unions at much higher rates than average. Yet another reason to send them back.
Wanting to preserve racial (ethnic) purity is always one of the time worn signs of white supremacy. Most people welcome interracial unions as a sign of growing tolerance. The racist objects to it.
Emphatically. Crazy mixed up 'kid.' So mixed up - so acted out! His parents will love and despise him simultaneously. He will be a cause of great pain to them from now on. And, as long as he continues to live . . . .
I have shot one a few times. It's not made for hunting anything but humans. The general public has literally no need to own this weapon for any reason at all.
Where can you run and hide from that kind of firepower? I had someone I love/d tell me that about a superbike: I had asked him for a reason why he rode so fast and at least once hid from a police officer trying to ticket him. "It's the power."He said. He got brain-damaged, maybe even finally dead, in a motorcycle accident in the 80s.
Sometimes, I wonder if it is 'the power'coupled with the 'witness and testimony' that pushes these young men over the edge.
Fuck no, if anything it should be expanded to include language preventing the federal government from regulating firearms in any fashion. No age limit, nothing barring the mentally ill or felons from purchasing weapons, and absolutely no limitations on the types of weapons that can be purchased.
If a mentally unstable felon wants to go buy a couple fully automatic AK 47s and all the ammunition they can carry, they should be 100% free to do so. Who gives a fuck at this point anyhow?
Our laws do not go nearly far enough, end of story. But hey, America deserves every single one of these. As long as refuse to take the types of steps every other advance nation has taken, we deserve every single incident and every single death.
I have said it before but I will reiterate it. A blanket ban on ALL semiautomatic and automatic weapons, no exceptions. All weapons must be registered with the federal government. If your weapon is stolen and used in the commission of a crime and you don't report it, 5 years prison time. If your weapon is not secured and someone is injured or killed with it, 5 years prison time. Again, no exceptions. All felons are banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Anyone with a history of mental illness is banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Those with a history of domestic assault or otherwise have a history of violence are banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Any purchase of a firearm comes with a 30 day waiting period and a full background check. Anyone seeking to purchase a firearm must attend a firearms safety course annually, and obtain a permit to own a firearm.
Firearms were created to kill, no other purpose. As such they should not be widely or easily available and those who are able to obtain them should be kept on a very short leash.
You'd be surprised at what people believe. Only a few can create a lot of noise. One sentence posing as an article generated over 200 comments! Lot's & lots of TDS out there. WE WILL DEFEAT THEM AGAIN!
Er' tell that to the dead. One day ago "many people" had a lifetime of freedom to look forward to. Today, only a cold freezer and soon the stillness of a grave. Freedom is overstated when one is stiff with rigor-mortis.
Yet 'carry on,' - feel the power of freedom coursing through your veins - do it for those people you do not know who no longer feel anything!
If they stay locked up at all times; do you just admire them from 'afar'? Speaking of hyperbole not being a strong argument. My apologies, I know you were not addressing me-but, it was right there "twinkling" at me. (Smile.) Here is your opp to clarify your point and what your use of guns have to do with the overall "gun sickness" in this country.
How many rounds could you get off on a rifle when the Constitution was signed, in one minute? 1? 2 if you were good. 232 years later? 400 pounds of high velocity ammo in a minute isn't unheard of or impossible. So saying guns are constant is a flat out lie. Guns have changed plenty over the years and their availability? Almost as easy to get coffee from Starbucks.
"Residents were volunteering to give blood to the injured in response to a police tweet that donations were "needed urgently," while police and military members were trying to help people who were looking for missing loved ones."
President Trump initially tweeted that there had been "Terrible shootings in ElPaso, Texas. Reports are very bad, many killed. Working with State and Local authorities, and Law Enforcement. Spoke to Governor to pledge total support of Federal Government. God be with you all!"
Hours later, Trump tweeted that the shooting "was not only tragic, it was an act of cowardice. I know that I stand with everyone in this Country to condemn today’s hateful act. There are no reasons or excuses that will ever justify killing innocent people. [First lady] Melania and I send our heartfelt thoughts and prayers to the great people of Texas."
Thanks to the first responders, the people of El Paso and the President who was clear and decisive in his comments.
poke to Governor to pledge total support of Federal Government.
And what good will that do? Those people are already dead, fat ass's useless "support" is already waaaaaaaayyyyy too late. Fuck his utterly pointless comments.
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
So you are just going to call it a hate crime and try to justify some kind of difference?
He has professed his support for trump and posted a picture of guns spelling out trumps name.
If the manifesto happens to be his, it is about immigration which trump decries as the worst thing to ever happen to this country.
The lengths some will go to in order to defend the piece of shit in the Oval office is getting beyond ridiculous at this point.
George P. Bush, the grandson of former President George H. W. Bush, called out "white terrorism," describing it as a "real and present threat" after the Saturday mass shooting in El Paso, Texas, which left 20 people dead and 26 others wounded. Newsweek
Hell even the Bush clan can call it what it is.
Hours after the mass shooting in El Paso on Saturday, which left 20 dead and at least 26 others injured, former FBI assistant director Frank Figliuzzi accused President Donald Trump and his administration of "facilitating and enabling" American youth to commit acts of domestic "terrorism" by failing to explicitly condemn hate against immigrants. Newsweek
Hell even the Attorney General of Texas is going to charge with Domestic Terrorism and you want to wait and see....
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
Yup, that is the definition of terrorism.
So you are just going to call it a hate crime and try to justify some kind of difference?
It's one or the other! A hate crime IS different. There is no political aim, it is simply based on hate for a group. If you look at the comments here some are declaring this was a hate crime.
Hell even the Bush clan can call it what it is.
Now your'e quoting George W Bush. He called it "white terrorism - against whites? I think he's had one too many Dr Peppers. Tell him for me, no matter what he says, the hateful left still hates him. Always!
Hell even the Attorney General of Texas is going to charge with Domestic Terrorism and you want to wait and see....
Yup, I think you finally got it. The one who does the charging is the one who counts!
The sad thing is, you think you are making some kind of point when you are not.
Denial is strong in some.
Also, where did I quote George W. Bush? Reading is fundamental. So you are going to act like you don't know what 'white terrorism' is? Even the FBI has said most domestic terrorism cases are caused by white supremacist people. You can deny it all you want, try to twist the meaning of words all you want...it doesn't change actual facts. In fact, it almost makes it look like you support such things.
Yup, I think you finally got it.
So the TX Atty. General is going to charge with domestic terrorism. I would say yes...I do have it right.
The sad thing is, you think you are making some kind of point when you are not.
Actually I am. This so called "article", which is one sentence long is whatever the seeder, he didn't really author anything, wanted it to be. That seems to be what you are pushing - "white terror."
Denial is strong in some.
Never stronger than in the leftists who hate this country.
Even the FBI has said most domestic terrorism cases are caused by white supremacist people.
That is often quoted. How about you donate to the group. Please post the actual statement by the FBI, so that we can have it on record.
You can deny it all you want, try to twist the meaning of words all you want...it doesn't change actual facts.
I'm not the one who categorized this act - YOU DID! I'm only trying to ascertain which it is - a hate crime or an act of domestic terrorism?
In fact, it almost makes it look like you support such things.
That's called skirting the Coc. I won't flag it because because for some strange reason I'd get a ticket too. I'll just let everyone see what you are calling me. Too bad you can't support your positions without demonizing someone!
The only thing you have accomplished is what I call revers-ism.
In order to defend trump you are willing to deny FBI reports of actual crimes, basically deny the white supremacist threat, that is all to real and deny that trump and his hateful rhetoric has any impact on society at large.
You can say the 'leftists' hate this country yet it is not the leftist people that seem to have no grip on reality.
Demonizing you? Hahaha Maybe if one feels demonized, they should rethink their position instead of doubling down.
I don't blame ya, you'll still be here calling somebody something.
The only thing you have accomplished is what I call revers-ism.
I call it projection (Like you say Reading is fundamental) and it's what hateful liberals do. Thus the terms "Clingers" & "deplorables" and "typical white people."
In order to defend trump you are willing to deny FBI reports of actual crimes, basically deny the white supremacist threat, that is all to real and deny that trump and his hateful rhetoric has any impact on society at large.
I haven't made any such argument. Thus far I only tried to establish what this individual is going to be charged with and I only tried to point out that he gets charged with domestic terror OR a hate crime. I asked you for the FBI report which makes the assertion. From that you have called me a sympathizer!
You can say the 'leftists' hate this country yet it is not the leftist people that seem to have no grip on reality.
Yes I can and I always will.
Maybe if one feels demonized, they should rethink their position instead of doubling down.
That sounds like the philosophy of Joe McCarthy. Doubling down must be your definition of defending oneself from smearing!
So I would be here calling people something? What in the hell does that even mean?
If you think I call people names here, I would like to see it. If one is going to accuse people of something at least have the facts to back it up.
It is almost comical that you accuse others of doing exactly what you yourself are doing.
Calling people the hateful left is being, well, hateful.
That you cannot see that you are only adding to the hateful rhetoric, adding to the divide in this country, saying that your own countrymen must be defeated...
TDS is alive and well...in those that have a blind allegiance.
Yes I can and I always will.
Have no grip on reality?
As far as the statements from the FBI, one need only to have heard the testimony from Wray to congress.
For politicizing a tragedy in order to attack the President, the 2nd Amendment and white America in general. The one sentence article has produced nothing but shameless and disgusting comments. 243 comments from a single sentence. You must feel pretty good having all the haters come out.
This article was a breaking NEWS story. At the time I seeded it no one knew that the shooter was a white nationalist, at that time it could have been ISIS or Al-Qaida for all anyone knew.
Also, a tweet from a news source is an acceptable basis for an article on Newstalkers.
This article and the comments simply grew out of the news that developed yesterday.
Your team didnt come of this smelling too good so you are a little miffed. Too bad.
No, I think the point really is that Trump should stop demonizing some of us before he inspires more of his rabid supporters to commit even more acts of homegrown white nationalist domestic terrorism...
I’m sure some of you will vehemently disagree, but I addressed these tragic and barbarous shootings as my sermon today.
Today we join in grieving with those who have lost loved ones, those who were injured, and the communities that have been traumatized by these most recent senseless acts of barbarism. Our hearts share empathy in their brokenness and indescribable pain Too often the politicians and media try to shape our reactions through the lens of their own political bias, both right and left. Their suggested identifications of both the cause and solutions fail. They fail because they are not addressing the root cause. It is not natural even within ideological identification to engage so coldly and randomly in this kind of violence. Christians who are faithful to God’s Word know that it tells us that these are actions driven by spiritual evil. And no amount of laws will ever prevent evil.
“Our fight is not with people. It is against the leaders and the powers and the spirits of darkness in this world. It is against the demon world that works in the heavens.” Ephesians 6:12
Jesus told the disciples that as we approach the end of things that these destructions would get increasingly worse. So is it hopeless? Are there any real solutions? The ONLY true solution until Jesus returns and establishes His rule is to see people come to Christ. You cannot love God and be filled with His love and engage in evil. We know by His Word that evil will never leave us until the final judgment when Satan and his demons are cast into hell. But believers are given two commands until then
1 “Then Jesus came close to them and said, “All the authority of the universe has been given to me. Now go in my authority and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And teach them to faithfully follow all that I have commanded you. And never forget that I am with you every day, even to the completion of this age.” Matthew 28:18-20 Passion Translation
2 “Now my beloved ones, I have saved these most important truths for last: Be supernaturally infused with strength through your life-union with the Lord Jesus. Stand victorious with the force of his explosive power flowing in and through you. Put on God’s complete set of armor provided for us, so that you will be protected as you fight against the evil strategies of the accuser! Put on truth as a belt to strengthen you to stand in triumph. Put on holiness as the protective armor that covers your heart. Stand on your feet alert, then you’ll always be ready to share the blessings of peace. In every battle, take faith as your wrap-around shield, for it is able to extinguish the blazing arrows coming at you from the Evil One! Embrace the power of salvation’s full deliverance, like a helmet to protect your thoughts from lies. And take the mighty razor-sharp Spirit-sword of the spoken Word of God. Pray passionately in the Spirit, as you constantly intercede with every form of prayer at all times. Pray the blessings of God upon all his believers.” Ephesians 6:10-11,14-17 Passion Translation
I pray the comfort and mercy of God will be upon every family impacted by these evil events
Shooter at Walmart parking lot. There are injuries/deaths.
I haven't learned of any confirmed deaths yet, but local media reported that at least 18 people have been shot and that there may be multiple shooters.
Since it's still an active scene, it's far too early for anyone to speculate.
Lets hope the "good guys with guns" that are all over Texas are not shooting at each other.
Texas state representative told NBC news that there are multiple fatalities.
It is 20 dead.
Hes a Donald Rump supporter. Color me not surprised
Someone almost always says that crap whenever there is a mass shooting.
Can you name even one time where anyone other than the mass shooter has just fired indiscriminately and killed or injured multiple people?
Study on police accuracy show that they need a LOT more training...
Yes, I know. Thanks. When I posted my comment yesterday, reports had confirmed at least 18.
Nice, but completely irrelevant to innocent BYSTANDERS shooting indiscriminately.
You do know THAT is what John and I were referring to, right?
So you don't consider cops 'good guys with guns'. Got ya.
Nonsense. Had you truly "gotten it", you would never post that tripe.
Or would you?
So are cops good guys with gun or not Tex?
I think they are, not sure nor really care what you think about it, or why you are attempting to argue something CLEARLY not in dispute--unless you think cops are NOT "good guys"?????
Pretty damn weird that you think THIS:
refers to cops, though.
If you ever DO "get it", get back with me, mmmkay?
Otherwise, please, please, please, don't bother.
This should produce some interesting conspiracies online. El Paso is near/at the border.
Yea I poked my nose in on Fox News*.. Mostly, "it's a liberal", "it's an illegal", etc.. Anything but a Christian, Republican or Conservative.
Internet rumor has it as a white supremacist who objects to hispanic immigration. Once it is confirmed, or not, we can post it here.
So just like the CA. shooter.
Quite seriously, curing this evil may take divine intervention. There are literally hundreds of millions of guns in America and they aint going anywhere soon.
Expecting there will be no more mass shootings would be like expecting that apples will stop falling out of trees.
This is like the 3rd or 4th mass shooting in the past week.
But John, the right says that more guns means less crime... Are you suggesting they are wrong? (I am)
Twitter reports say at least 15 people have been shot.
By that logic we should be the safest country in the world. Why aren't we?
That's exactly my point.
Doing nothing seems to be working just fine right Wally?
Because nobody want's to discuss or do something about the real problem.
It's really easy to shout "do something!" It's a lot harder to do something that will actually make a difference.
And by the way, "thoughts and prayers" aren't intended to do something to stop violence. They are intended as a compassionate, human response of emotional support to people who are suffering. Apparently some people think that has no value or is a thing worth mocking.
As a people, we are past the 'compassionate human response and emotional support stage' —we're numb. We have no hope left. The only thing we can be sure of is more innocent citizens will die from weapons of mass destruction gunfire. We do not know when, where, but we do know how.
Now begins the 'grin and bear it stage.' —The mock phase.
Maybe you are, but you don't speak for everybody. Many people still care about the human heart. Compassion and action are not mutually exclusive.
"Care" "Bear." Please spare me this display of emotional outreach.
With the number of gun deaths happening in the USA one would think that the necessary amount of "Thoughts and Prayers" would make the USA the most religious country in the world.
Based on the LACK of action by 2A stalwarts, it seems that they are.
One might think the decrease in people that consider themselves religious correlates to the decreased murder rate in this country. Over the last forty years our murder rate has decreased by about fifty percent.
What makes you think any were present?
Well, this means that there will not be a National Pizza Party, again, this week...
It's odd and unsettling that when we hear of a mass shooting in America not too many people immediately think of Islamic terrorists anymore. I guess the horrible truth is settling in. We are killing ourselves.
Mayor of El Paso stated that there are, "multiple fatalities". Which for all we know, could be 2.
Texas state rep says there are 18 people dead. Lets hope he is confused.
Hopefully the lawsuits will separate those asswipes who own WM from their money.
I read 18 injuries, not 18 fatalities.
Sad that we're hoping for 18 injuries as the better outcome.
NBC just showed a video of dozens of people being herded out of a department store by swat teams, all with their hands up on police orders. These people are terrified. Sad times for America when you cant go shopping on a Saturday afternoon without fearing for your life.
Or go to church, in case we have forgotten...
Why can't we just live in a society where we can go to a fucking wal-mart, church, concert, movie, etc. without having to constantly look over our shoulders?
There's over 20 fatalities
Police report 3 people in custody. "Multiple fatalities". The scene is no longer considered active.
The police presser said one in custody, but even he said he isn't sure.
Shooter is a 21 year old white man.
There is a manifesto that was posted online. If it is confirmed as real it will be explosive. (It is related to the immigration issues.)
A law enforcement official in El Paso told me the Walmart shooter is in custody. Patrick Crusius of Dallas. Just turned 21 years old this week .
Why would a guy from Dallas travel to El Paso to commit his mass murder? Thats a long way. Hmmm.
Lets put two and together. White guy from Dallas goes hundreds of miles to ElPaso and goes to a WALMART frequented by hispanics and starts shooting randomly.
NBC News is reporting that law enforcement believes the manifesto is legitimate.
This is white supremacist domestic terrorism folks.
If true, it's an isolated case, as they all turn out to be.
The left is complicit in this, because of all their ongoing support of illegal immigration, and disregard for American citizens.
That is pretty fucking low, Greg.
That's all he's got
Yea, the right that opposes ANY gun legislation at all??? Not complicit at all? Are you kidding me?
How in the hell can you be so ridiculous at a time like this?
You wanna point a finger? Point it at yourdamnself for supporting the creep that started all of this. This didn't become a problem until Trump convinced people like you that there is a problem. What makes it more pathetic, is that he started this BS as a diversionary tactic to mask other filthy shenanigans in which he was, and still is, involved. He demanded billions, he shut down a segment of the government AT CHRISTMAS because he was throwing a tantrum, and guess what? Not one freaking inch of wall has been constructed. What does that tell you? So yeah, look in a mirror and point your finger in the right direction.
You justify mindless killing by saying the left is complicit? Can't wait to meet you in hell.
Isolated: adjective - single; exceptional
How do you go from "isolated" to " they all turn out to be", basically admitting there are many, in the same sentence. Only someone working as hard as they can to twist logic and defend the indefensible would throw that line out there.
"the ADL released a report finding that attackers with ties to right-wing extremist movements killed at least 50 people in 2018 . That was close to the total number of Americans killed by domestic extremists, meaning that the far right had an almost absolute monopoly on lethal terrorism in the United States last year."
" From 2009 through 2018, right-wing extremists accounted for 73 percent of such killings"
Wow. To blame the immigrants and those who come to their defense for such a senseless vicious attack, as if that justifies this right wing piece of shits actions. It is just beyond disgusting. I've no doubt these right wing extremists made similar comments themselves in defense of worthless right wing white supremacists just before they wrote their own manifestos and then did what all those who cling to such garbage ideology dream about daily, gunning down those they have been taught to hate by religious conservatives and right wing websites like Stormfront and the Daily Stormer and blame those minority Americans for all their own miserable failings as human beings.
And now there’s been another mass shooting in Dayton Ohio in the Oregon district in or near a bar with 16 wounded and 10 dead including the shooter.
Trump is doing such a good job keeping us safe..../s
250 mass shootings this year alone yet we continue to hear the President tell his base that Democrats and the MSM are the "enemy of the people" and that "they want to destroy America". No wonder the nuttiest of his followers are picking up weapons and killing in such an intentionally divided nation.
Couldn't find a reliable source?
You mean leftist elected officials and judges defying American law & the President to allow and encourage rampant illegal immigration might just be contributing to an extreme reaction? Yup!
Could have used fox news.... Oh wait, they aren't even classified as a news station.
No...the, the hate and divisiveness started on the left. It started when Trump came down the escalator, and has continued unabated for two and half years. It is the left wing who supports, aids, and abets illegal immigration to the detriment of the whole country. You can't wiggle out of it. The Democrats own this whole mess and the after effects it produces...like this shooting.
Quit being a denier.
Don't forget all the murders, rapes, hit and runs, trafficking in women, kids, and drugs, and all the other crimes committed by the criminals and gang members who arrive with the illegals, both past and present. Don't try to deny it exists.
You should take your own advice before giving it to someone else.
And I would have ask the same question.
Addressing reporters in Morristown, New Jersey, Trump promised "we're going to take care" of the problem. He said he's been speaking to the attorney general, FBI director and members of Congress and will be making an additional statement Monday morning.
DAYTON, OHIO, SHOOTING THAT LEFT 9 DEAD, 27 HURT HALTED 'IN UNDER A MINUTE' BY COPS WHO SHOT SUSPECT: MAYOR
Trump pointed to a mental illness problem in the U.S., calling the shooters "really very seriously mentally ill." https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-declares-hate-has-no-place-in-our-country-as-dems-demand-recall-of-congress
Trump said the same shit after Parkland and Charlottesville. Still hasn't done shit....
Wow...puts Trump in the rather rarified air that Obama breathes!
Or did Obama do anything?
Hell, if a Democrat gets a hangnail nowadays, it is Trump's fault!
Why don't you review the relevant bills that Obama signed into law to edify yourself Tex?
My comment doesn't make me think that at all, especially since I know better.
Perhaps you'd like to comment on the CONTENT of my now.
WHAT has Trump done?
Gee, Dulay--BOTH of them, all by myself?
Must not have been very effective or you damn sure wouldn't be bitching about Trump so much.
Or would you?
Well, I know this is rhetorical comment, because a conservative wants no such gun restraints attached to weapons of mass destruction (aka: assault weapons). On the other hand, it is Donald Trump who recently directed all government agencies to give him data on the citizenship status of the people in this country. So, what is lacking in here is not ability but spirit. Irony of ironies, Donald Trump has directly proved a conservative point: When the government has information on Americans - a leader can direct his or her agencies to amassed data in a central storehouse to carry out any number of activities—nefarious and questionable activities too.
(Note: Not saying that I want any of what you suggest to happen, but let's not pretend Trump is incapable of thinking about it.)
Anything used to murder, is considered an "Assault Weapon" …. except the actual "Person" that is !
I hear one can kill with bare hands....
Wait a minute
.....don't you need "Bare hands" in order to fire a gun ?
Something to think about huh.
The operative word is, "gun." Beyond that I have no clue what else you mean.
Which STILL requires a "Bare Hand" to operate.
My guns haven't snuck out by themselves and killed anyone for over 50 years. They're good little guns. They know not to go out without me in tow. I'll spank their grips if they do.
Oh. This is an attempt to 'back-door' a way into tired, haggarded, outdated, rhetoric on guns. I am not interested in it. People are dead; "bare hands" did not do this crisis; bullets did.
Stop enabling mass murder with rhetoric. If one is not part of the solution; maybe, one is partial to the problem.
Who knew "Guns" were now "sentient beings".
Are we on a break thru finding a new "Life Form" ?
Something to think about huh.
? On the other hand, if your guns were sentient beings, you would have to treat them better. And on top of that, you would not like your guns if they could think!
No, what I am partial to is innocent: little children, adolescents, young adults, and aged men and women not having bullets in their bodies for having done nothing than being alive, warm flesh, and out and about on a street in America.
I have a problem with boys and men I don't know and have never met pointing a weapon of mass destruction in my direction, shooting into dark crowded spaces, and mowing down screaming men, women, and children randomly. That bothers me, because I am partial to my skin and the skin of my relatives.
So. None of us want that. But it has NOTHING to do with the FACT that 99.999% of gun owners never harm an innocent person with their firearms. And you and others on the left want to take away our right of self defense
Mine stay happy "Objects". I make sure they are ready to go, if NEEDED ! I don't just put them on the shelf and forget about them.
Constitutional rights don't mean a damn when rigor mortis is setting in. The Constitution falls silent when you can't plead your case. The Constitution can't pump life through a dead heart. The Constitution can't comfort a grieving mother, father, or child. 'Laying on' of the Constitution won't regenerate flesh.
As for bare hands. We are not talking about strangulation, bludgeoning, slapping to death, or punching to death. This is "dispersive" killing with a defined weapon of mass destruction. "X" marks the distinction!
There are already "LAWS" against doing such a thing.
Will a "New LAW" make it any better ?
"As for bare hands. We are not talking about strangulation, bludgeoning, slapping to death, or punching to death. This is "dispersive" killing. "X" marks the distinction!"
"Dispersive" Killing still requires the "BARE HAND" to accomplish !
That also includes an arm, the entire body, and a "Brain" too.
By CRIMINALS! One has already received justice and will never harm anyone again. The other will be tried, convicted, and executed for his horrific crime
thats how our system works in a nation that supposedly values liberty. Your totalitarian utopia would ban the right of self defense in the name of the supposed “collective good” by simply enslaving everyone to the state. It’s never worked and never will work. You aren’t God and can’t eliminate evil by simplistic and dangerous state control over our lives by taking away our right of self defense
Untrue. Guns are a problem: 32,000 gun deaths testify to it.
And, what part of your tired, haggarded, trite, NRA talking points I don't want to waste time on confuses you?
Incidentally, since you obviously can not empathize or live vicariously through the sufferings of others; point blank:
Do you know anyone who has perished in a mass shooting in this country? Do you know anybody who has experienced a stranger's bullets 'parting' their hair?
Enough, LFOD! "Totalitarian utopia" - "Bobalisarian tusopio." No one wants your guns used for private self-defense. But really that is not what is at 'work' here in this discussion is it?
Now those armaments you and your so-called "millions" of ex-army friends, associates,and family have in storage - the government authorities may want to ask you what offensive is planned. Just because you shout words of "liberty" and"freedom," won't make murder any less painful, destructive, or against the law. I'm just saying. . . .
Indeed, Democrats have vowed to take our guns. Dem candidates like Warren, Harris, Booker, DeBlasio, Buttigieg and this from Dem Congressman Salwell
November 2018
Rep. Eric Swalwell, California Democrat, warned gun owners Friday that any fight over firearms would be “a short one,” because the federal government has an extensive cache of nuclear weapons.
After Joe Biggs tweeted that Mr. Swalwell “wants a war” over the Second Amendment, Mr. Swalwell responded, “And it would be a short war my friend.”
We have self defense, not offense as you continue to lie about your fellow Americans
as our founders and even very liberal Democrats in the past have stated, our firearms are to protect us from two threats, criminal andd potential government tyranny
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824
“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788
"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution
"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible." -- Hubert H. Humphrey Liberal Democratic Senator, 22 October 1959
O goodness. Spare me. For the record, only a foolish person would suggest taking away any person's right and ability to defend him/her —self, family, and hearth. This discussion is about an active shooter. Active shooter. Active shooter.
Okay. Now that that is clear. Stop this pretext of engaging an active shooter discussion with NRA talking points.
CHOMP! I'll bite: Please give me your perspective of what government tyranny is.
When appropriate, law enforcement should confiscate weapons.
Why not?
Nope. My mother in law gave me a Ruger 6 shot revolver and a Hi-Standard HD Military as a present. On the other hand, I wouldn't give my bat shit brother in law a sling shot...
What does Obama's record have to do with Trump's inaction? Trump made promises after Parkland and he hasn't done shit. That's not bitching, that's citing a FACT.
Look, it is quite evident you don't like Trump, but even Trump can't pass a law---even if he does have a pen and a phone.
The ONLY reason I brought Obama up was to hold him up as an example of what you accepted cheerfully from him, and yet condemn Trump for.
What's to like, he's disgusting.
I didn't ask what law has he passed, I asked what has Trump DONE.
Yes Tex, I recognized your whataboutism right away.
I am not surprised that you can't be objective when it comes to Trump.
What exactly do you expect him to do? What have you done?
Wow--you might have a career in politics--the way you keep missing any point you don;t like!
My evaluation of Trump is completely objective. I take him at his word and deed.
Well gee Tex, since he ran to be the leader of the free world, I expect him the LEAD.
Voted, ensured that my representatives from BOTH parties are aware of how I feel about the issue, SAFELY store the firearms I own and train with them regularly to ensure that I hit my target at a higher percentage than most LEOs.
Tex, you admitted that your ONLY reason you brought up Obama was whataboutism.
Please do tell how you managed to type that with a straight face!
Well, gee, Dulay, just because he hs a pen and a phone doesn't mean he can stop mass shootings.
Really? Funny, I damn sure don't recall you bitching when Obama was President about HIM not stopping mass shootings. Did I miss it, or did it never happen?
Damn right I admitted it---in a vain attempt to get you to recognize your own hypocrisy.
1. Infringement and/restrictions on our rights and liberties, ie gun control, campaign election laws, censorship, etc
2. Control and manipulation of our freedom of enterprise
3. Laws on drugs, prostitution, and other private personal choices
4. Controlling marriage and divorce
5. Requiring licenses to practice a profession
6. Requiring licenses to hunt or fish
7. Controlling water usage on private land (as Obama did but was overruled by the Courts)
8. Government control and restrictions on home building on your own property
9. FDA, FTC, DEA, ATF are all statist thuggery to control the citizens
those are just a few
Okay, how about voter obstruction? Where is that ranked in your list?
I find in general that so called voter obstruction occurs very seldom and certainly we aren’t fighting against tyranny by the courts or legislation that does that.
however I have long advocated that no one be allowed to vote in Federal elections who cannot pass a basic Constitution civics test.
too many ignorant voters across the political spectrum
add to this that there is no Constitutional right to vote. Election methods as we discussed previously are under the purview of the states
So the President of the United States has NO responsibility at all to keep the citizens safe? Then what's that stupid fucking wall for? I thought he was protecting us from rapists and murderers? No? Perhaps he should disband the Coast Guard and save us some money? I mean, not his responsibility to keep us safe...
[eye roll]
How? Where is the government telling you who you can marry? I mean it used to, but now, not so much.
Your entire list is BS, but i'll take a shot at one more, just for you.
That license is what pays for the people to protect those areas where people hunt and fish.
He does not care, Mr.Frost. LFOD is a purist libertarian. I highly suspect he takes exception of FDR requiring lights in houses/homes. And, exception to personal computers too. —Wait computers?!!
Government should have NO involvement in marriage or divorce, that includes marriage licenses and divorce courts
We don’t need people “protecting” us when we hunt and fish. Plus mostly what they do is write tickets and/or arrest people for not having a license
[delete]
Why should government be able to dictate what kind of lighting if any you have in your home?
why would any libertarian object to having a computer? What does that have to do with limited government?
I want to sound you out on the 14th, 19th, and 24th, and 26th amendments. No constitutional rights? Please proceed. . . .
Do you approve of states changing voter methods? Assuming you do: Why do you rule it is acceptable for states to control voting methods and no other set of methods and functions in your list?
Does any change by a state/s of vote methods constitute vote/r "infringement," in your opinion?
FDR provided rural electrification to farms and homes as a federal program. It was a big deal in 1932. However, it was de facto an inherent duty and responsibility of our presidential leader to keep this country competitive with other nations on the world (for all sorts of good purposes and benefits). Some so-called, "constitutionalists" disapproved of FDR stated actions, and in time they enlisted the help of rural folks to try and stop "progress." As you can tell - the strategy failed. Eureka! We have lighted homes and pervasive electrification for nearly a century now.
Personal computers? Well, I thought it would disturb, because of the public utility functions of collective regulated services
Just for giggles. You continue to engage in name-calling propaganda will your dogged interjection of labels. No one should buy into that—I certainly won't! This notion that this great nation could impact the world as leader without any participation, national growth and development, or drawing out of the world's people resources, etceteras is utter nonsense.
Without a federal authority structure in place and functioning, this would be a collection of individual states trekking on 'mixed' paths and ends. The 'product' being a retarded, misshapen, and malformed union. Certainly, not the envy of the world as this nation is today.
You asked me what I have done Tex. I told you.
BTFW, I've only been here since just before NV shut down. What mass shooting from Oct 2016 to Jan 2017 was I supposed to bitch about?
What hypocrisy is that Tex?
Those are not the right to vote. Those are prohibitions against state limitations on voting
there is NO affirmative wording on voting in the Constitution
The amendments only prohibit efforts to limit or otherwise restrict voting. A fact noted by some on the left
Americans are so terribly ignorant about the Constitution. THERE IS NO RIGHT TO VOTE IN THE CONSTITUTION. This fact has been observed by some on the left in the past few years.
“The Bill of Rights, as the name implies, lists a wide variety of privileges of citizenship that cannot be taken from Americans without due process. You have the right to free speech, you have the right to bear arms, you have the right to a fair trial, etc. The right to vote, however, isn’t mentioned.
By Steve Benen, Producer of Rachel Maddow Show
Matt Yglesias had a good piece on this yesterday.
When the constitution was enacted it did not include a right to vote for the simple reason that the Founders didn’t think most people should vote. Voting laws, at the time, mostly favored white, male property-holders, and the rules varied sharply from state to state. But over the first half of the nineteenth century, the idea of popular democracy took root across the land. Property qualifications were universally abolished, and the franchise became the key marker of white male political equality. Subsequent activists sought to further expand the franchise, by barring discrimination on the basis of race (the 15th Amendment) and gender (the 19th) — establishing the norm that all citizens should have the right to vote.
But this norm is just a norm. There is no actual constitutional provision stating that all citizens have the right to vote, only that voting rights cannot be dispensed on the basis of race or gender discrimination. A law requiring you to cut your hair short before voting, or dye it blue, or say “pretty please let me vote,” all might pass muster. And so might a voter ID requirement.
The legality of these kinds of laws hinge on whether they violate the Constitution’s protections against race and gender discrimination, not on whether they prevent citizens from voting. As Harvard Law professor Lani Guinier has written, this “leaves one of the fundamental elements of democratic citizenship tethered to the whims of local officials.”
All of which leads to the question about a constitutional amendment, making the affirmative right of an adult American citizen to cast a ballot explicit within our constitutional system.
For some in Congress, this isn’t just an academic exercise. TPM had this report back in May.
A pair of Democratic congressmen is pushing an amendment that would place an affirmative right to vote in the U.S. Constitution. According to Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI), who is sponsoring the legislation along with Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the amendment would protect voters from what he described as a “systematic” push to “restrict voting access” through voter ID laws, shorter early voting deadlines, and other measures that are being proposed in many states.
“Most people believe that there already is something in the Constitution that gives people the right to vote, but unfortunately … there is no affirmative right to vote in the Constitution. We have a number of amendments that protect against discrimination in voting, but we don’t have an affirmative right,” Pocan told TPM last week. “Especially in an era … you know, in the last decade especially we’ve just seen a number of these measures to restrict access to voting rights in so many states. … There’s just so many of these that are out there, that it shows the real need that we have.”
“The Missing Right: A Constitutional Right to Vote
Put simply—and this is surprising to many people—there is no constitutional guarantee of the right to vote. Qualifications to vote in House and Senate elections are decided by each state, and the Supreme Court affirmed in Bush v. Gore that “[t]he individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.”
FDR’s UnConstitutional New Deal was His implementation of Italian Fascism which he greatly admired. I oppose all of FDR’s Marxist fascist domestic programs. He was also a traitor for working against America by agreeing to give Stalin Eastern Europe
“Hey, FDR Was a Fascist Too!
by Jacob G. Hornberger
March 10, 2016
But in their attacks on Trump, those on the left conveniently forget a discomforting fact: Their hero and icon — the man they (as well as conservatives) have extolled and glorified for some 80 years — President Franklin D. Roosevelt — was himself a fascist.
Oh, sure, it’s true that much of FDR’s New Deal was socialist, such as the federal pension plan — Social Security — that he permanently foisted onto the American people.
But let’s not omit the other half of the story: Roosevelt also embraced economic fascism, especially in his efforts to get America out of the Great Depression.
The best example was FDR’s National Industrial Recovery Act, a fascist program that would have fit perfectly in Mussolini’s fascist Italy. Under the NIRA, federal officials organized private American businesses, industries, and corporations into giant cartels that established “codes of fair competition,” which set prices, wages, and production in their particular sectors, all enforced by federal force. More than 500 codes of “fair practice” were developed.
Not surprisingly, FDR put a military man, retired Hugh Johnson, to run this fascist program. Johnson had graduated from West Point, made the military his career, and ultimately reached the rank of General. According to Wikipedia,
One author claims Johnson looked on Italian Fascist corporatism as a kind of model. He distributed copies of a fascist tract called “The Corporate State” by one of Mussolini’s favorite economists, including giving one to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins and asking her to give copies to her Cabinet.
To encourage compliance with the NIRA, FDR and Johnson adopted a symbol that could have come straight out of Mussolini’s playbook: the “Blue Eagle.” In what is undoubtedly one of the creepiest federal campaigns in U.S. history — one that would have made Mussolini proud, U.S. officials “encouraged” U.S. businessmen to post the Blue Eagle symbol in their storefront windows in a show of solidarity with the federal government. Any business that refused to do so was immediately denounced and ostracized for its lack of “patriotism.”
In 1935, thanks to justices who were still fighting to retain America’s founding constitutional principles, the U.S. Supreme Court declared FDR’s NIRA unconstitutional. They rightfully pointed out that such a scheme had no place in America’s constitutional order.
Let’s not forget Hitler: He led Germany out of the Great Depression with a fascist program based on massive spending on public works, government-business partnerships, government management of the economy, and building up Germany’s military-industrial complex.
Sound familiar? It should because that was FDR’s economic program too.
While we are on the subject of Nazi Germany, perhaps it would be instructive to post the following planks from the Nazi Party platform and ask whether any of the presidential candidates, Democrat or Republican, disagree with them.
We ask that the government undertake the obligation above all of providing citizens with adequate opportunity for employment and earning a living. The activities of the individual must not be allowed to clash with the interests of the community, but must take place within its confines and be for the good of all. Therefore, we demand: an end to the power of the financial interests. We demand profit sharing in big business. We demand a broad extension of care for the aged. We demand … the greatest possible consideration of small business in the purchases of the national, state, and municipal governments. In order to make possible to every capable and industrious [citizen] the attainment of higher education and thus the achievement of a post of leadership, the government must provide an all-around enlargement of our system of public education…. We demand the education at government expense of gifted children of poor parents…. The government must undertake the improvement of public health — by protecting mother and child, by prohibiting child labor — by the greatest possible support for all clubs concerned with the physical education of youth. We combat the … materialistic spirit within and without us, and are convinced that a permanent recovery of our people can only proceed from within on the foundation of “The Common Good Before the Individual Good.”
Perhaps we should also remind ourselves of the letter that Hitler sent Roosevelt through U.S. Ambassador Thomas Dodd:
The Reich chancellor requests Mr. Dodd to present his greetings to President Roosevelt. He congratulates the president upon his heroic effort in the interest of the American people. The president’s successful struggle against economic distress is being followed by the entire German people with interest and admiration. The Reich chancellor is in accord with the president that the virtues of sense of duty, readiness for sacrifice, and discipline must be the supreme rule of the whole nation. This moral demand, which the president is addressing to every single citizen, is only the quintessence of German philosophy of the state, expressed in the motto “The public weal before the private gain.”
For anyone who would like to further explore the parallels between FDR’s New Deal and Mussolini’s fascism and, for that matter, with Hitler’s national socialism, I highly recommend a book entitled Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt’s America, Mussolini’s Italy, and Hitler’s Germany, 1933-1939 by Wolfgang Schivelbusch.
Let’s face it: Fascism has a glorious history among both Democrats and Republicans, so long as it’s called “reforming” or “saving” free enterprise. All the hubbub over Donald Trump’s fascism is personal, not ideological.”
LFOD is talking out of his hat! More on this coming up. Actually, let's just deal with the obvious. Karri, what if I told you, you have no right to vote in 2020. Do not try to participate in the franchise for there will be officers stationed at the voting polls to stop your progress. What might you tell me? See: 19th amendment - which currently is a section in the whole of The Constitution (One complete document.)
Okay, let me try again. Lost what I had through a fluke!
There is only one constitution in this country. Thus, the "Bill of Rights" and the additional amendments are all one whole Constitution. You can not pull the document apart or fragment it!
As a result, the 19th modification granting the right to vote in the constitution is an equal article of our constitution as the 2nd modification granting the right to bear arms. Neither right grants us complete independence from due process of the state or federal government. For example, an arrested man or woman has no AUTHORITY vested by the Constitution to demand his or her gun/s be given them in jail, prison, or while in an asylum. Furthermore, it is a myth that local and federal authorities can not place constraints on guns. Else surely there would be no need for an on-going debate!
Remarkable. Okay:
1. Do White men have a constitutional right to vote? (Original document.)
2. Do People of Color have a constitutional right to vote? (15th amendment.)
3. Do Women have a constitutional right to vote? (19 amendment.)
4. Do 18 year olds and Above have a constitutional right to vote (24th amendment.)
5. Do children 18 years and under have constitutional rights to vote? No!
There is your listing of people authorized to vote in the United States. Of course states can have statutes—even stupid and irresponsible ones at that. Indeed, the devil is in the details.
Riddle me this, LFOD:
In 1 - 4 above, which category is prohibited by law from voting at all?
Such a law would not grant anybody new the right to vote! It simply would stop local "shenanigans" during election cycles done by secretary of states. It is interested how 'bloc-granted' the rights of voters has come together up to now. People have interfered with the franchise up and down the 'row.' Quite sad actually. Children must wonder what is wrong with the adults in charge of the franchise—why can't they get it together once and for all
The Electoral College is not relevant to our discussion. The 'electors' have there very own right in the Constitution.
Yeah. (Dryly.) I am not reading all of that. You and your. . .preferences. . . too cute.
At least 18 dead. One additional unidentified person in custody.
Now 19.
Now 20. One died at the hospital.
Patrick Crusius: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know
Facebook
Patrick Crusius was identified as the suspect in the shooting at Walmart near Cielo Vista Mall in El Paso, Texas by the Washington Examiner . Crusius, 21, is from the Dallas/Fort Worth area and is currently in police custody.
NBC News reports there were at least 19 people killed in the August 3 shooting with a further 40 injured. The exact number of injuries and deceased victims has not been officially confirmed.
Police scanner traffic from the area suggested that Crusius was taken into custody at around noon local time. The shooting began at around 10 a.m., officials said. The FBI and ATF had responded to the scene, alongside the El Paso Police Department.
Statements from government officials quickly poured in on Twitter following the attack.
“In El Paso, the Texas Dept. of Public Safety is assisting local law enforcement & federal authorities to bring this tragedy to the swiftest & safest possible conclusion,” Texas Governor Greg Abbott wrote. “We thank all First Responders for their courageous response & urge all area residents to remain safe.”
Beto O’Rourke also wrote about the shooting on Twitter.
“Truly heartbreaking. Stay safe, El Paso,” he wrote. “Please follow all directions of emergency personnel as we continue to get more updates.”
Here’s what you need to know:
1. Crusius Was Taken Into Custody ‘Without Incident’
The suspect was driving a grey vehicle, according to police scanner chatter. Early reports indicated the suspect had an AK47. That information was not immediately confirmed by police. Local reported Mills Hayes tweeted that the suspect was taken into custody “without incident” and that officers did not fire any shots during the arrest.
Police discussed recovering the weapon on the scanner but did not specify what type of weapon it was. At about 12:40 p.m., scanner traffic indicated that the police had recovered the weapon as well as the suspect’s car.
Scanner chatter was focused on Walmart at the Cielo Visa mall. Police also said on the scanner they were sending officers in to complete “tactical searches” in the mall.
2. Crusius Once Wrote on LinkedIn That He Was Not Motivated to Do Anything Other Than to Get By
Crusius wrote on his LinkedIn page in 2015 that he was not motivated to do anything other than enough to get by. Shortly after the shooting on August 3, that page was deleted. Crusius said on that page that he attended Plano High School.
He wrote in the About section of the page, “I’m not really motivated to do anything more than what’s necessary to get by,” he wrote on the page. “Working in general sucks, but I guess a career in Software Development suits me well. I spend about 8 hours every day on the computer so that counts as technology experience I guess. Pretty much gonna see what technology careers present themselves; go with the wind.”
When writing about his life in high school, Crusius said that he did not participate in extracurricular activities because of “lack of freedom.” A Facebook page that shows the suspect’s face as the profile image shows no biographical information or recent postings. On that page, Crusius has three visible friends.
CBS Dallas/Fort Worth’s J.D. Miles reports that the suspect “possibly graduated” from Liberty High School in Frisco, Texas.
3. A Manifesto Purporting to Be From the Shooter Has Been Circulating on 8Chan
Reporter Scott Stedman has tweeted that he had told the FBI that a manifesto which was purported to be from the suspect had been circulating on 8Chan. Stedman said that the FBI is treating the manifesto seriously. 8Chan is a controversial message board that has been described as “the home of the most vitriolic content on the internet” by Vox.
That manifesto, which has been seen by Heavy.com but not verified as belonging to the suspect, makes negative references to Hispanic immigration into the U.S., criticizes both major political parties in the U.S. but the writer stresses that he supports some in the Republican Party in terms of immigration policies, the writer also makes reference to alleged Christchurch mosque shooter, Brenton Tarrant.
4. Crusius’ Last Known Address Was in Allen, Texas
Public records show Crusius’ last known address was his family’s home in Allen, Texas, about 30 minutes outside of Dallas and more than 9 hours away from El Paso. It is not clear if he has any connections to the El Paso area. Crusius appeared to have lived with his parents and also has a twin sister and older brother, according to public records. Crusius’ family has not commented about the shooting.
Getty El Paso Police Department Sgt. Enrique Carillo briefs media on the shooting.
The exact number of victims was not immediately confirmed. Some reports indicated there were 18 to 20 deceased victims. Reports indicated local hospitals were flooded with victims. The El Paso Police Department issued a plea via Twitter for blood donations in the wake of the shooting saying, “Blood needed urgently. Multiple injured transported to various hospitals. Blood donation centers Vitalent Blood Services at 424 s Mesa Hills and 133 N Zaragoza.”
The number of victims was described as “shocking” by Rep. Veronica Escobar.
“Rep. Veronica Escobar on CNN says she won’t confirm the number of fatalities from the mass shooting in El Paso, but that the number is ‘shocking,'” Reporter Sandra Gonzalez wrote on Twitter.
5. A Second Person Was Been Taken Into Custody at the Scene
Getty
NBC News reports that a second person was taken into custody at the scene of the shooting. It is unclear what that person had been arrested for. Throughout the day there had been erroneous reports on social media of multiple shooters and of multiple shooting scenes. Police later said that following the arrest of Crusius, there was no further threat.
Patrick Crusius: 5 Fast Facts You only want you talking about.
Whether it's a lone lunatic killing a dozen at once or a dozen gangbangers killing one at a time, it's all tragic. We have a violence problem at the fringes of our culture. It's obviously not the majority of gun owners nor just people, but it doesn't take many lunatics to disrupt society. If we can, I believe we need to get at the reasons behind this violence and do what we can to reduce it. That's not as sexy or quick as more gun legislation, but I think it's an approach that would be more effective in the long term.
Why didnt any good guys with guns stop this before many people were hurt or killed?
The killer could have walked up to that Walmart with his ak47 in plain sight and he might not have been breaking the law.
So much for open carry saving any lives in this case.
What a smart question! /s
Why don't cops stop all crime before it happens? Why don't firefighters stop all wildfires before they start? [Removed]
The rationale for having the public armed 24/7 , for example at the shopping mall, is so that they will be able to stop mass killings as soon as they start. It didnt pan out in this case but maybe next time.
It didn't make it worse, either, so I don't see your point. Your comment makes it sound like we shouldn't have fire extinguishers because there was a fire and no one used one.
Sorry to burst your bubble , but that is not always true, personally IF I choose to carry, it is strictly for my own protection from harm or death, not anyone elses . I am under no obligation to anyone else either legally or morally.
A person that is going to carry legally , will have to decide for themselves if and when they will use deadly force, and as I have stated , I wouldn't use it for anyone elses protection except myself and immediate family, you could be getting your head bashed in with a brick and I wouldn't do a thing until the threat is directed at me .
About the only rational about everyone being armed goes for concealed carry is simply a deterrence, those inclined to commit crimes could( not would) be deterred from committing those crimes if they thought there was a chance they couldn't get away alive or whole with what they wanted to do, and deterrents don't always work.
Take a look at where a good majority of these shootings are taking place , in places designated as gun free zones , usually at the behest of the property owner . nowadays I hear gun free zone , I think sitting duck shooting gallery, a soft target that someone that is going to ignore that status has no one that could defend themselves even IF they had an inclination to do so.
John was being sarcastic.
About the last thing I want is a bunch of wannabe heroes trying to shoot the "right" bad guy with a gun in a crowded store or mall, when it's easy to assume that every armed person is a "bad guy with a gun". It's a recipe for more fatalities.
No sarc tag , besides the only thing close to being sarcastic is his last 10 words of what was copied . the rest of it after having in the past seen him say it I think he truly believes , that some people that carry want to be some sort of john Wayne-esque person in a gun fight .
If you assume everyone carrying a gun is a bad guy , then I pity the off duty cops that in some places by law and because of self preservation due to their jobs have to carry24/7/365 , or the retired cop that carries .
I am fortunate enough to live in a state that allows both open and concealed carry, and as a state resident , don't even have to have a permit for either though the state offers permits for reciprocy purposes. and the nature of where I live , I don't freak out when I see someone that decides to have a firearm with them in public .
The real recipe for disaster is assuming everyone with a gun is doing so for nefarious reasons.
Some people seem to think that having everybody armed will be a deterrent. It's not. If it were, we wouldn't have so many shootings. That is the reason for John's sarcasm. He rightly believes that having the public armed does not stop mass shootings. Texas is an open-carry state. This guy still killed 20 people and wounded 26 more. The shooter in Dayton was brought down within 1 minute by police, and still managed to kill 9 people and injure 26 more.
Where did I personally assume that everybody carrying a gun is a bad guy? I'm saying that during a shooting there is often no way to tell the good guys from the bad guys, so everybody is a potential "bad" (note the scare quotes) gun with a gun, when there are multiple people shooting. Can you tell the difference? Based on what, exactly?
That's where I got your assumption.
And having some people that no one knows is armed is a deterrent for some , just not to all. Anyone that thinks its a solution to stop all things negative are living in a dream world and not reality.
Locks are a deterrent to burglars , but they don't always work either , locks actually only deter honest people that can be tempted. they keep them honest.
I'm saying that during a shooting there is often no way to tell the good guys from the bad guys, so everybody is a potential "bad" (note the scare quotes) gun with a gun, when there are multiple people shooting. Can you tell the difference? Based on what, exactly?
You just hit on the reason why I wont use my firearm if carrying to assist someone else , I have no way of knowing if the person getting their head caved in isn't the bad guy themselves. Only way I am going to know that is if the threat is directed at me or mine, and then 3 preconditions have to be met , those would be intent , capability , and opportunity, and everyone has different levels of all 3 of those things that must be met. after those 3 preconditions are met to a persons satisfaction that if questioned it stands up to the laws of self defense, I would have no problem aquitting someone .
Which is why I said , never assume just because I might carry a firearm , its there for anyone elses protection , its not and never will be . I have no obligation to provide anyone outside my immediate circles protection, how someone else decides to protect themselves or what steps they take to do so is entirely up to them, choose accordingly.
I used scare quotes to denote that I don't actually think every armed person is a bad guy with a gun. It's a pretty common use of quotation marks.
Yet another reason that arming the public 24/7 isn't a good idea. Some, like you, might show restraint. And some will just start shooting. And some become targets themselves, of either other armed civilians, or of LEO.
Thanks for recognizing I MIGHT show some restraint , it has come from a number of years of training , observation , and practical application in different situations .
just because a law says I can do something doesn't mean I HAVE to, frankly I haven't had that gut instinct tell me that I should carry in public in almost a decade now, its called situational awareness. That doesn't mean I haven't carried when out fixing fence , or tending livestock for someone. But in those cases its simply a tool for use against rattlers and 4 legged predators .
The lament I see is "where were all the supposed good guys with guns that would have stopped this?"
Maybe there were none there, just because someone can doesn't mean they will, maybe as you said they didn't want to become targets for others that were armed or the LEO, maybe they thought as I do , it doesn't get drawn unless there is a direct personal threat presented to themselves and those in their family.
Could be any number of reasons , someone who could have acted didn't.
Neither Dayton or El Paso are 'gun free zones'. The people in Dayton were killed/wounded on the street outside of a bar in an open carry state and Walmart has an open carry policy in ALL of their stores.
Well I cant speak for where you live , but most places , it is illegal to have a firearm in a place that serves booze, though that is not always true.
Looking at this logically , if a person is in a nightclub /bar district , such as in Dayton , it would be a reasonable assumption that most of those people are there to visit those establishments , and if they are visiting them they would have to be un armed . again no guarentee though, but the likelyhood is better and the odds are better that they are mostly non armed individuals. GF or disarmed zone , a soft ,very soft target.
I worked for wally world part time for a bit , their actual policy for customers is that they will conform to and allow whatever state law is for customers, for employees , it is not allowed and you can be fired for it.
Texas may be an open carry state by law , all that means is that people are free to choose if they will or if they wont carry. so its individual choice if they will or wont.
You then run into the problem of no one that carries a firearm is obligated to provide protection for you the unarmed.
It is like you and I being in the same store ,you are un armed , I am armed , you get shot , I don't but you find out i was armed and decide to sue me for NOT using my firearm. i simply explain to the judge the conditions i would draw and use my firearm and you lose your suit. after being told you should have had your own firearm .
Mark, excuse my intrusion, but I have noticed you mentioning this scenario one or twice now. Are you aware of "Good Samaritan laws" across the country and what they detail? In addition, there is the reciprocation policy: If you were say incapacitated and unable to get your firearm out in a violent crisis, would you expect others to leave you, or a love one besides, to the discretion of a heartless killer? If not, then why read out here as heartless yourself?
What I read from you comes off as stating-you would not lift a finger to help another person you are not legally beholden to or have personal interest in. Flatly, where is the common humanity in that?
Yes I know what they are ,
usually they entail that a person cannot be sued if they take an action to assist someone and even though that assistance is given injury or death occurs , here is a little known thing with those "good Samaritan laws " .
Once a person decides to render aide they must continue to give that aide until competent authority arrives , if they stop rendering aide at any point before that, and the person they are aiding is injured or expires the good Samaritan law protection against suit or litigation is null and void.
Under that understanding of the law I simply refuse to render aide , in this case protection via my use of my firearm in the first place . If i am incapacitated and cannot use it , i would not expect someone that sees it to not use it to protect themselves .
There is no part of any good Samaritan law ,anywhere, that states a person MUST render aide in any given situation , they are merely protections if one decides to but it also restricts that the peron must continue in some cases.
Your right , when it comes to carrying a firearm , it is there for MY personal protection, no one elses , it is a choice i made and will continue to make for myself , at my own discretion of under what situations i would have to use it. As i stated already those situations are limited to impending danger of injury of death to myself , or a loved one , with the 3 preconditions of intent , capability , and opertunity of the assailent being able to do all 3 being met .
Just look at the way you have already been speaking about gun control, people are against many things , but the second someone finds that hey they are in a situation they actually need to protect themselves and theydo not have the means to do so, they demand on grounds of HUMANITY, that those that can or has the capability to defend themselves also put themselves in physical legal and financial jepardy to render aide to them.
Sorry wont happen with me, you and those self same people have the exact same choices to arm themselves as i do according to the law or to choose not to , that is your right. i simply am exersizing my rights , same as anyone else, if you or anyone else dont like how i choose to legally use my rights , then maybe y'all should rethink your own postions and stances on personal protection and carry.
And IF the LEO cant be sued for not providing even implied protection , I doubt the courts would agree i could be for doing nothing.
, end result of that case , even the cops have no obligation to provide individual protection .
As with my state, anyone with a license to carry CAN carry a firearm into a bar.
You might want to check out Ohio's law on open carry of a rifle in a bar too. It's comical as hell.
The rest of you post is just prattle.
Well they can not here, nor anywhere in New England I grew up , so it seems both Wyoming and those New England states as are a number of other states are a little smarter about mixing firearms and booze. I even think most reasonable people wouldn't do that even if they could.
My turn now CB I have a few personal question if you choose to answer.
Have you ever been shot at with the shooter intending to kill you?
Have you ever shot AT someone with the intent to kill them?
Have you ever taken another persons life?
I can answer yes to all 3 of those questions .
I have also after shooting , after making sure the scene was safe and secured , went into the exact opposite mode and watched as the persons life faded while trying to stop that from happening.
Until you can answer yes to all 3 of those questions , you don't have standing to judge how I deem I would use my weapon , or if the criteria for me to use it is right or wrong , all that matters is it is what I have deemed to be right for myself for my own reasoning. Is that harsh? yes it is , unchristian? definitely , but I am not a Christian so I don't trouble myself with Christian morals.
You can do what you wish, I suppose. Hard as it is to hear and accept the level of lack of bowels of compassion and care.
Now then, let me add this for thought-sake. If you, Mark, were to be found choking and a nearby someone is trained in the Heimlich Maneuver; the technique serves as a tool in the 'carry-around' of that person's mind. Are you plainly stating you would rather turn blue and die, or dislodge the choking hazard yourself?
The sum of human experiences involves lessons with the message not one of us can survive as an 'island in a sea of other people. That said, you, I guess are free to try and survive as such a one. Were one of us to succumb to injuries out in an open-field, it is rare for anybody not to want someone to 'cover' what's left in a makeshift grave. Most of us want cover for our beds in sleep.
Mark, the answer to your questions is simply, "NO."
As you can tell by the timestamp @16.2.17 I wrote it before seeing this comment. My opening statement there is to the effect I don't judge you. I can't understand it, but I will get over it. I always do. It is how I am 'cut.'
Now then all the above stated. I can wonder about a great many things ahead of time. And Mark, I will. I have no choice. It is my character 'make-up' to turn-to in a moment of crisis. I will help "the shooter" if given a chance to render 'service,' only to wish him or her to be prosecuted to the highest degree in the law at trial.
Note: Open and honest discussion. Mark, it gets no better than this! I mean that.
Oh well, the gun lobby, Moscow Mitch, some conservatives, and our so-called "President" sent the usual:
Another instance of Weapons of Mass Destruction use on the streets of 'America.'
So instead they should not express sympathy to people who are suffering? Or perhaps you think legislators have a magic wand they can wave that stops all violent crime.
We have nothing to discuss Tacos! Carry on with what you do . . . .
With the amount of murders happening in the USA you Americans would be expressing sympathy and being in mourning 7 days a week.
We don't even lower the flag anymore for these things Buzz.
Are you saying that rights sometimes conflict with each other?
And there ya have it folks...
"People are asking me, "What can I do to help?", and I keep telling them...to pray...".
Gov. Greg Abbot.
Yep, just pray, seems to be working really well at stopping the mass shootings.
Pathetic.
He is a strange one, he spoke like he thinks he is a televangelist.
This was whilte nationalist domestic terrorism. It would be nice if the Texas authorities acknowledged that.
It is pathetic. Grown people sitting around praying and having 'thoughts' on the subject; God has given people the power to legislate, and the institutional wealth to fix what is broken in these shooters. But, some Conservatives-in-charge won't do it and won't get out of the way so others can act.
Well I've given up caring about it. I reason that one day I too may be going about my business and be shot down like a dog by someone firing a weapon of mass destruction.
I guess I will never understand how sitting in an empty room talking to yourself will ever do any good at all CB. Just makes no sense at all. Especially since the bible says that prayer without action is completely worthless.
But, some Conservatives-in-charge won't do it and won't get out of the way so others can act.
Who might those conservatives be? What kind of legislation do you propose? What actions would those 'others' take?
Solutions are always so simple, aren't they.
The believer accepts their is a Higher Being who communicates in spirit. I won't delve deeper in this right now, except to state the aforementioned is so. 'Part 2' of you comment seems more accurately to go: "Faith without works is dead." It's in James. The portion of scripture you more align with is the 'authority of rulers and administrations (Romans 13). The power is in the Earth already and waiting, people simply have to reach out and use it. And, they will not. And so people continue to perish.
Greg, do send the usual crate full of thoughts and prayers and continue about your business. I am jaded about the whole thing and talking points are so yesterday.
How do you propose we do that?
After watching the children of Sandy Hook die in vain over gun violence; I no longer give advice for free on this topic. So, . . . .
Whatever you say. Dennis Smith knows best!
Enjoy a picture worth a thousand words on me.
H.R.8 - Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, passed the House 2/27/19
H.R.1112 - Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019, passed the House 2/28/19
H.R.1585 - Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019, passed the House 4/4/19
Who is in charge of bringing bills to the floor of the Senate? Why haven't any of those bills been brought to the Senate floor?
Not as simple as pretending that there are no solutions in order to uphold the status quo.
Do you think that when people ask what they can do to help, they mean "how can I go back in time to stop something that already happened?" Do you really think that prayer is meant to stop the shooting that already happened? What exactly is the problem with ordinary folks expressing sympathy and moral support? Remember, we're just talking about regular folks.
Have no fear, as soon as the House dems get back from their "break" we will see another gun control bill - My prediction - You heard it here first!
Yet we will see another.
but Moscow Mitch will not bring it to the Senate.
Harry Reid was a good teacher.
Do you think this will finally get him to protect the American people and not the lobbyists? (yeah -- /sarc/)
Unfortunately, there are two sides to the gun debate. You need to convince a lot of Americans and develop a congressional consensus to change the 2nd Amendment. Politicizing every one of these tragedies might just do it. You at least have the liberal media fighting for ya!
Funny story about those lying in hospital beds and those awaiting death. As they lay there. . . . the Devil comes by for a sit-down visit. The spirit sits at the foot of the hospital bed and strikes up a conversation I'd imagine goes something like this:
"Well 'cuz,' How are you doing right now? You came close today. Almost got you. Will be seeing you soon. I am glad you didn't take seriously all the other opportunities to fix anything about guns. Now look at you. All shot up; cut up; stitched up; and soon 'caught up' with Me.
Damn fool! You should not have been listening to me as I 'played' and distracted you all those years. You could have gotten the point of all this when I wiped out the Sandy Hook kids—nope, you didn't. You thought I was like you. Well cuz, I am nothing like you. You're a damn fool to trust that I care about petty patriotic nonsense. All I care about is leading you to this moment in time. So here we are having this discussion. So fool! How do you feel now laying here at your 'exit' interview? Whatever gave you the impression that I truly cared about your life anyway?"
What's in the bill that will 'protect' the people.
People need to protect themselves.
Remember....when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
This is the manifesto that law enforcement now believes was written by the man who killed 20 people in El Paso today.
-----
He sounds like a radicalized tree hugger. He is concerned about corporations influence on government, the environmental impacts of consumerism and environmental harms of increasing population.
What he sounds like is a child trying to carry the weight of the world on his underdeveloped shoulders. All he has accomplished is to make life worse. Worse still, he is still alive! Should he be allowed to live, one day he will hate himself for being a young, dumb, fool who shot down innocent, unarmed, people who were in part, members of the hopes and dreams he wanted for himself! He is a 'sad-case' and I won't pity him ever.
Worse than the thought of my own life possibly one day being taken by an anonymous loser with a weapon of mass destruction in public is the thought of someone whom I love giving their last breath to a foolish boy-young man- man who had he known what it means to get older in our world, would come to realize that problems fix themselves through collective efforts of all Americans. He did not have to act this way, he did not have to injury, he did not have to murder. He just was too lazy to do the hard work of not decrying the life of himself and innocent people hopeless, nevertheless.
Texas is a death penalty state. I doubt he'll be allowed to live.
Probably one of the things I seem to disagree with my friends on the left on... Death penalty...I am all for it.
this is as deserving as it gets
I actually oppose the death penalty. I was just stating reality - he'll face the death penalty.
I have to say, I can't really work up too much pity for him.
To be fair, he hates both parties, but his reason for this shooting was because he is radicalized against Mexicans. That's obvious.
The right keeps saying that the left is for open borders, so reasonably sure he isn't a "tree hugger". As far as environmental concerns? Most people have those concerns.
And when I read that part I thought of LFOD and his 'rants' about the constitution and freedom(!) from tyranny. Plus, others ("Don't tread on me." "Blood and soil.") Then, I realized he is just a mixed up 'kid' trying to speak to something that can't be solved with a gun or a standing army!
The Democratic party will own America and they know it. They have already begun the transition by pandering heavily to the Hispanic voting bloc in the 1st Democratic Debate. They intend to use open borders, free healthcare for illegals, citizenship and more to enact a political coup by importing and then legalizing millions of new voters. With policies like these, the Hispanic support for Democrats will likely become nearly unanimous in the future. The heavy Hispanic population in Texas will make us a Democratic stronghold. Losing Texas and a few other states with heavy Hispanic population to the Democrats is all it would take for them to win nearly every presidential election. Although the Republican Party is also terrible. Many factions within the Republican Party are pro-corporations. Pro-corporations = pro-immigration. But some factions within the Republican Party don't prioritize corporations over our future. So the Democrats are nearly unanimous with thier support of immigration while the Republicans are divided over it. At least with Republicans, the process of mass immigration and citizenship can be greatly reduced.
It sounds like he was as fed up with the Republicans as much as the democrats. Sure doesn't sound much like a white nationalist. Did he even mention Trump. But it does seem that the democrats are pandering to the illegals for some of the reasons above.
He certainly doesn't sound like a Trump kind of guy....sorry JR!
Your point?
Wow, almost like he copied a trump speech word for word.
That is what is so sad about it. Some people imagine the green Earth (dirt) belongs to them specifically. They own it; they have been told and convinced of it. When, all life demands of us is that we find life in the land . . . and make the most of it! Each of us, considering the age of this planet, are only here a brief expanse of time; and, we return to the 'dirt' displaying no control over anything.
Well said CB, 100% true.
Wanting to preserve racial (ethnic) purity is always one of the time worn signs of white supremacy. Most people welcome interracial unions as a sign of growing tolerance. The racist objects to it.
Emphatically. Crazy mixed up 'kid.' So mixed up - so acted out! His parents will love and despise him simultaneously. He will be a cause of great pain to them from now on. And, as long as he continues to live . . . .
It has been suggested that the weapon of mass destruction in use AK-47: (Educational purposes only.)
Firing an AK-47
I have shot one a few times. It's not made for hunting anything but humans. The general public has literally no need to own this weapon for any reason at all.
Where can you run and hide from that kind of firepower? I had someone I love/d tell me that about a superbike: I had asked him for a reason why he rode so fast and at least once hid from a police officer trying to ticket him. "It's the power." He said. He got brain-damaged, maybe even finally dead, in a motorcycle accident in the 80s.
Sometimes, I wonder if it is 'the power' coupled with the 'witness and testimony' that pushes these young men over the edge.
But but but, second amendment or some such shit!
Fuck no, if anything it should be expanded to include language preventing the federal government from regulating firearms in any fashion. No age limit, nothing barring the mentally ill or felons from purchasing weapons, and absolutely no limitations on the types of weapons that can be purchased.
If a mentally unstable felon wants to go buy a couple fully automatic AK 47s and all the ammunition they can carry, they should be 100% free to do so. Who gives a fuck at this point anyhow?
I don't measure my freedom based on my ability to buy something to make me feel better about the size of my dick.
Public safety be damned!
Our laws do not go nearly far enough, end of story. But hey, America deserves every single one of these. As long as refuse to take the types of steps every other advance nation has taken, we deserve every single incident and every single death.
I have said it before but I will reiterate it. A blanket ban on ALL semiautomatic and automatic weapons, no exceptions. All weapons must be registered with the federal government. If your weapon is stolen and used in the commission of a crime and you don't report it, 5 years prison time. If your weapon is not secured and someone is injured or killed with it, 5 years prison time. Again, no exceptions. All felons are banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Anyone with a history of mental illness is banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Those with a history of domestic assault or otherwise have a history of violence are banned from owning a firearm, no exceptions. Any purchase of a firearm comes with a 30 day waiting period and a full background check. Anyone seeking to purchase a firearm must attend a firearms safety course annually, and obtain a permit to own a firearm.
Firearms were created to kill, no other purpose. As such they should not be widely or easily available and those who are able to obtain them should be kept on a very short leash.
So you are willing to sacrifice American lives JUST so you can have your toys?
Sad.
Funny, I bet the El Paso shooter said the exact same thing.
You'd be surprised at what people believe. Only a few can create a lot of noise. One sentence posing as an article generated over 200 comments! Lot's & lots of TDS out there. WE WILL DEFEAT THEM AGAIN!
Er' tell that to the dead. One day ago "many people" had a lifetime of freedom to look forward to. Today, only a cold freezer and soon the stillness of a grave. Freedom is overstated when one is stiff with rigor-mortis.
Yet 'carry on,' - feel the power of freedom coursing through your veins - do it for those people you do not know who no longer feel anything!
If they stay locked up at all times; do you just admire them from 'afar'? Speaking of hyperbole not being a strong argument. My apologies, I know you were not addressing me-but, it was right there "twinkling" at me. (Smile.) Here is your opp to clarify your point and what your use of guns have to do with the overall "gun sickness" in this country.
Do you realize how stupid all these suggestions sound?
Have you forgotten....'when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns'
How many rounds could you get off on a rifle when the Constitution was signed, in one minute? 1? 2 if you were good. 232 years later? 400 pounds of high velocity ammo in a minute isn't unheard of or impossible. So saying guns are constant is a flat out lie. Guns have changed plenty over the years and their availability? Almost as easy to get coffee from Starbucks.
Another terror attack carried out by a white supremacist.
I mean another tragedy committed by a very confused and disturbed young man, he isn't dark enough to be a terrorist.
It is true, young white males are the biggest threat to my family's safety. They are the ones I am watching most closely whenever I go out in public.
Damn you John, was going to post that myself. From the shooters FB page.
It looks like the photo has been floating around the internet since January of 2017 a tineye reverse image search shows.
And the shooter retweeted it on his timeline.
I was at a baseball stadium with a friend last night.
All I can parrot back is what I heard on the radio.
There were at that time 20 dead and 26 wounded.
There was a suspect taken into custody.
I am about 1,000 miles from Texas.
I cannot confirm or deny the veracity, or the current status of this tragedy.
Can anyone provide an update?
Thanks.
P&AB.
Enoch.
Your numbers are up-to-date.
There was also another mass shooting in Dayton, Ohio. Nine victims and the shooter are dead, at least 16 injured.
Dear Friend Sandy: So I am hearing.
When does all this end?
Why did it begin?
There are those, I am one of them who must be there for those who lost and have to deal with the after effects of this perfectly unnecessary carnage.
On a one on one basis, I can do what I am able to work with those help pick up the pieces of their shattered lives and put them back together.
Hatred in the heart is no way to live.
The prejudice and bigotry must go, now!
It never ends well, never.
On a societal level more and better used programs to address the mental hygiene component of the problem.
Cultural change to last comes more slowly.
Every person of good will can go one on one and make the case for safe and sane so the least of us need not live in fear.
Peace and Abundant Blessings to One and All.
Enoch.
Enoch, you're a bright spot in a world where I'm having trouble seeing light. Thank you for being you.
Dear Friend Sandy: Thanks.
E.
Dear Friend r.t.b...: Thanks.
E.
"Residents were volunteering to give blood to the injured in response to a police tweet that donations were "needed urgently," while police and military members were trying to help people who were looking for missing loved ones."
President Trump initially tweeted that there had been "Terrible shootings in ElPaso, Texas. Reports are very bad, many killed. Working with State and Local authorities, and Law Enforcement. Spoke to Governor to pledge total support of Federal Government. God be with you all!"
Hours later, Trump tweeted that the shooting "was not only tragic, it was an act of cowardice. I know that I stand with everyone in this Country to condemn today’s hateful act. There are no reasons or excuses that will ever justify killing innocent people. [First lady] Melania and I send our heartfelt thoughts and prayers to the great people of Texas."
Thanks to the first responders, the people of El Paso and the President who was clear and decisive in his comments.
And what good will that do? Those people are already dead, fat ass's useless "support" is already waaaaaaaayyyyy too late. Fuck his utterly pointless comments.
In other words whatever the President says or does he's wrong! I've already noticed.
He could have called it what it is. Domestic terrorism.
Is it domestic terrorism or a hate crime? There is a difference. Shouldn't the President wait for the call to be made?
Yup, that is the definition of terrorism.
So you are just going to call it a hate crime and try to justify some kind of difference?
It's one or the other! A hate crime IS different. There is no political aim, it is simply based on hate for a group. If you look at the comments here some are declaring this was a hate crime.
Hell even the Bush clan can call it what it is.
Now your'e quoting George W Bush. He called it "white terrorism - against whites? I think he's had one too many Dr Peppers. Tell him for me, no matter what he says, the hateful left still hates him. Always!
Hell even the Attorney General of Texas is going to charge with Domestic Terrorism and you want to wait and see....
Yup, I think you finally got it. The one who does the charging is the one who counts!
The sad thing is, you think you are making some kind of point when you are not.
Denial is strong in some.
Also, where did I quote George W. Bush? Reading is fundamental. So you are going to act like you don't know what 'white terrorism' is? Even the FBI has said most domestic terrorism cases are caused by white supremacist people. You can deny it all you want, try to twist the meaning of words all you want...it doesn't change actual facts. In fact, it almost makes it look like you support such things.
So the TX Atty. General is going to charge with domestic terrorism. I would say yes...I do have it right.
Actually I am. This so called "article", which is one sentence long is whatever the seeder, he didn't really author anything, wanted it to be. That seems to be what you are pushing - "white terror."
Denial is strong in some.
Never stronger than in the leftists who hate this country.
Even the FBI has said most domestic terrorism cases are caused by white supremacist people.
That is often quoted. How about you donate to the group. Please post the actual statement by the FBI, so that we can have it on record.
You can deny it all you want, try to twist the meaning of words all you want...it doesn't change actual facts.
I'm not the one who categorized this act - YOU DID! I'm only trying to ascertain which it is - a hate crime or an act of domestic terrorism?
In fact, it almost makes it look like you support such things.
That's called skirting the Coc. I won't flag it because because for some strange reason I'd get a ticket too. I'll just let everyone see what you are calling me. Too bad you can't support your positions without demonizing someone!
Flag away. I don't give a fuck.
The only thing you have accomplished is what I call revers-ism.
In order to defend trump you are willing to deny FBI reports of actual crimes, basically deny the white supremacist threat, that is all to real and deny that trump and his hateful rhetoric has any impact on society at large.
You can say the 'leftists' hate this country yet it is not the leftist people that seem to have no grip on reality.
Demonizing you? Hahaha Maybe if one feels demonized, they should rethink their position instead of doubling down.
I don't blame ya, you'll still be here calling somebody something.
The only thing you have accomplished is what I call revers-ism.
I call it projection (Like you say Reading is fundamental) and it's what hateful liberals do. Thus the terms "Clingers" & "deplorables" and "typical white people."
In order to defend trump you are willing to deny FBI reports of actual crimes, basically deny the white supremacist threat, that is all to real and deny that trump and his hateful rhetoric has any impact on society at large.
I haven't made any such argument. Thus far I only tried to establish what this individual is going to be charged with and I only tried to point out that he gets charged with domestic terror OR a hate crime. I asked you for the FBI report which makes the assertion. From that you have called me a sympathizer!
You can say the 'leftists' hate this country yet it is not the leftist people that seem to have no grip on reality.
Yes I can and I always will.
Maybe if one feels demonized, they should rethink their position instead of doubling down.
That sounds like the philosophy of Joe McCarthy. Doubling down must be your definition of defending oneself from smearing!
So I would be here calling people something? What in the hell does that even mean?
If you think I call people names here, I would like to see it. If one is going to accuse people of something at least have the facts to back it up.
It is almost comical that you accuse others of doing exactly what you yourself are doing.
Calling people the hateful left is being, well, hateful.
That you cannot see that you are only adding to the hateful rhetoric, adding to the divide in this country, saying that your own countrymen must be defeated...
TDS is alive and well...in those that have a blind allegiance.
Have no grip on reality?
As far as the statements from the FBI, one need only to have heard the testimony from Wray to congress.
But Obama couldn't call Islamic terrorism for what it was. Nope, it was 'work place violence'
Butt, butt....Now there is a compelling argument.
Except that is not who he was talking about and you know it.
I request that this so-called article be moved to meta.
For what? You dont like the subject matter?
For politicizing a tragedy in order to attack the President, the 2nd Amendment and white America in general. The one sentence article has produced nothing but shameless and disgusting comments. 243 comments from a single sentence. You must feel pretty good having all the haters come out.
Vic, you can stop whining.
This article was a breaking NEWS story. At the time I seeded it no one knew that the shooter was a white nationalist, at that time it could have been ISIS or Al-Qaida for all anyone knew.
Also, a tweet from a news source is an acceptable basis for an article on Newstalkers.
This article and the comments simply grew out of the news that developed yesterday.
Your team didnt come of this smelling too good so you are a little miffed. Too bad.
My team is winning! Like the Mescalero Apache, we are always one step ahead of you!
No, I think the point really is that Trump should stop demonizing some of us before he inspires more of his rabid supporters to commit even more acts of homegrown white nationalist domestic terrorism...
Yes, just going by the raw body count your team is definitely winning...
Who did he demonize?
I know of one person who calls for attacks on people ….
Wow. It's really sad that someone would count a shooting as points.
It's nothing new.
Are you fucking kidding me?
I’m sure some of you will vehemently disagree, but I addressed these tragic and barbarous shootings as my sermon today.
Today we join in grieving with those who have lost loved ones, those who were injured, and the communities that have been traumatized by these most recent senseless acts of barbarism. Our hearts share empathy in their brokenness and indescribable pain
Too often the politicians and media try to shape our reactions through the lens of their own political bias, both right and left. Their suggested identifications of both the cause and solutions fail. They fail because they are not addressing the root cause. It is not natural even within ideological identification to engage so coldly and randomly in this kind of violence.
Christians who are faithful to God’s Word know that it tells us that these are actions driven by spiritual evil. And no amount of laws will ever prevent evil.
“Our fight is not with people. It is against the leaders and the powers and the spirits of darkness in this world. It is against the demon world that works in the heavens.” Ephesians 6:12
Jesus told the disciples that as we approach the end of things that these destructions would get increasingly worse.
So is it hopeless? Are there any real solutions? The ONLY true solution until Jesus returns and establishes His rule is to see people come to Christ. You cannot love God and be filled with His love and engage in evil. We know by His Word that evil will never leave us until the final judgment when Satan and his demons are cast into hell. But believers are given two commands until then
1 “Then Jesus came close to them and said, “All the authority of the universe has been given to me. Now go in my authority and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And teach them to faithfully follow all that I have commanded you. And never forget that I am with you every day, even to the completion of this age.”
Matthew 28:18-20 Passion Translation
2 “Now my beloved ones, I have saved these most important truths for last: Be supernaturally infused with strength through your life-union with the Lord Jesus. Stand victorious with the force of his explosive power flowing in and through you. Put on God’s complete set of armor provided for us, so that you will be protected as you fight against the evil strategies of the accuser!
Put on truth as a belt to strengthen you to stand in triumph. Put on holiness as the protective armor that covers your heart. Stand on your feet alert, then you’ll always be ready to share the blessings of peace. In every battle, take faith as your wrap-around shield, for it is able to extinguish the blazing arrows coming at you from the Evil One! Embrace the power of salvation’s full deliverance, like a helmet to protect your thoughts from lies. And take the mighty razor-sharp Spirit-sword of the spoken Word of God. Pray passionately in the Spirit, as you constantly intercede with every form of prayer at all times. Pray the blessings of God upon all his believers.” Ephesians 6:10-11,14-17 Passion Translation
I pray the comfort and mercy of God will be upon every family impacted by these evil events
@18.5.3 please.