Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Nuclear Unicorn
Nuclear Unicorn's Journal
Nuclear Unicorn's Journal
February 19, 2015
OK, let's suss this out.
Why? Who are you, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me when I am to make myself vulnerable to violent criminals?
DTR has never been universal, so the premise is incorrect on its face. Even then, peaceable people do not have a duty to retreat, criminals do. How many steps backwards must a woman take before she is lawfully allowed to defend herself?
"Sorry Mrs. Henderson. You shot that serial rapist after taking 2 steps backwards when the law specifically says you had to take three. I'm afraid we must sentence you to life in prison with a minimum of 25 years before you are eligible for parole and your children will be remanded to the state."
OK. Make it available to private sellers as well.
Why? Unless a gun is being used criminally why feed the PIC? Glad you admit, though, that the laws you do want aren't being enforced. Maybe you should start there before passing more useless laws that probably won't be enforced.
Congratulations. You just invalidated your credibility. You're obviously not up on current events and since gun violence is on a multi-decade decline the stated reason for your diktats has been invalidated.
People are facing decades in jail for trivial offenses, i.e. having an unloaded antique flintlock pistol in the glove box of their car. If your regimes are so absolutely devoid of common sense and basic decency why should you be trusted with yet more power especially since you refuse to affirm the basic human right of self-defense?
Why this can't be openly debated is beyond me.
Maybe the proponents don't want to debate in an open and free society and would, instead, prefer to dictate terms.
How the right-wing gun lobby attempts to frame arguments, or "How the NRA/ALEC gun-pushers use lies and half-truths to sell guns."
The number one argument the gun nuts use to counter calls for gun control is: "there are too many guns in the hands of Americans to ban or confiscate, so nothing can be done." What they are actually saying is: "The Democrats want to take away your guns, and we will protect your rights to keep them." Clever ad campaign, and a clever play on emotions on the part of the right-wingers, and those who apologize for them.
The correct answer to this lie is: "We don't want to take away your guns, or ban and confiscate them. We want to regulate your use of guns, and get them off of our streets and back into your homes and safely stored, where they belong." You want to go to a range or go hunting? Fine, you can do that provided you follow the laws and rules governing target shooting and hunting, and the transport of weapons to and from those venues. You want to carry a concealed weapon? The answer is no, unless you can show good cause and a judge agrees, and then only for a specified period.
Stand-your-ground laws should be repealed in the public venue, and the "duty to retreat" common sense principle of law should be reinstated. A universal background check system should be implemented, and all gun sales and transfers should be subject to the UBC system. Existing gun control regulations should be strictly enforced, and in most cases the penalties increased.
These are the root problems which need to be addressed in order to reduce our gun violence epidemic. No, we don't want to confiscate your legally purchased guns because it is neither feasible nor practical. We do, however, want to make gun owners more responsible for their guns, and regulate their use in the public venue.
Support a gun control organization and those Democratic politicians who will stand up to the right-wing gun lobby in any way that you can.
The number one argument the gun nuts use to counter calls for gun control is: "there are too many guns in the hands of Americans to ban or confiscate, so nothing can be done." What they are actually saying is: "The Democrats want to take away your guns, and we will protect your rights to keep them." Clever ad campaign, and a clever play on emotions on the part of the right-wingers, and those who apologize for them.
The correct answer to this lie is: "We don't want to take away your guns, or ban and confiscate them. We want to regulate your use of guns, and get them off of our streets and back into your homes and safely stored, where they belong." You want to go to a range or go hunting? Fine, you can do that provided you follow the laws and rules governing target shooting and hunting, and the transport of weapons to and from those venues. You want to carry a concealed weapon? The answer is no, unless you can show good cause and a judge agrees, and then only for a specified period.
Stand-your-ground laws should be repealed in the public venue, and the "duty to retreat" common sense principle of law should be reinstated. A universal background check system should be implemented, and all gun sales and transfers should be subject to the UBC system. Existing gun control regulations should be strictly enforced, and in most cases the penalties increased.
These are the root problems which need to be addressed in order to reduce our gun violence epidemic. No, we don't want to confiscate your legally purchased guns because it is neither feasible nor practical. We do, however, want to make gun owners more responsible for their guns, and regulate their use in the public venue.
Support a gun control organization and those Democratic politicians who will stand up to the right-wing gun lobby in any way that you can.
OK, let's suss this out.
You want to carry a concealed weapon? The answer is no, unless you can show good cause and a judge agrees, and then only for a specified period.
Why? Who are you, or anyone else for that matter, to tell me when I am to make myself vulnerable to violent criminals?
Stand-your-ground laws should be repealed in the public venue, and the "duty to retreat" common sense principle of law should be reinstated.
DTR has never been universal, so the premise is incorrect on its face. Even then, peaceable people do not have a duty to retreat, criminals do. How many steps backwards must a woman take before she is lawfully allowed to defend herself?
"Sorry Mrs. Henderson. You shot that serial rapist after taking 2 steps backwards when the law specifically says you had to take three. I'm afraid we must sentence you to life in prison with a minimum of 25 years before you are eligible for parole and your children will be remanded to the state."
A universal background check system should be implemented, and all gun sales and transfers should be subject to the UBC system.
OK. Make it available to private sellers as well.
Existing gun control regulations should be strictly enforced, and in most cases the penalties increased.
Why? Unless a gun is being used criminally why feed the PIC? Glad you admit, though, that the laws you do want aren't being enforced. Maybe you should start there before passing more useless laws that probably won't be enforced.
These are the root problems which need to be addressed in order to reduce our gun violence epidemic.
Congratulations. You just invalidated your credibility. You're obviously not up on current events and since gun violence is on a multi-decade decline the stated reason for your diktats has been invalidated.
We do, however, want to make gun owners more responsible for their guns, and regulate their use in the public venue.
People are facing decades in jail for trivial offenses, i.e. having an unloaded antique flintlock pistol in the glove box of their car. If your regimes are so absolutely devoid of common sense and basic decency why should you be trusted with yet more power especially since you refuse to affirm the basic human right of self-defense?
February 18, 2015
dipwad
Ron Paul: US didn't really want to catch Bin Laden
Ron Paul: U.S. Didn’t Really Want To Catch Bin Laden Because They Needed An Excuse To Invade The Middle East
Former Republican presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul says he doesn’t believe the United States government wanted to catch Osama Bin Laden because they needed him as an excuse to build up the military and invade Middle Eastern countries.
“Matter of fact, can’t you just see the difference that might have occurred. Ya know, they knew where Bin Laden was. I don’t think they really wanted to catch him because he was used as the excuse for us, you know, invading various countries and building up the military,” Paul said on Scott Horton’s radio program.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/ron-paul-us-didnt-want-to-catch-bin-laden-because-they-neede#.gp9BQyrja5
Former Republican presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul says he doesn’t believe the United States government wanted to catch Osama Bin Laden because they needed him as an excuse to build up the military and invade Middle Eastern countries.
“Matter of fact, can’t you just see the difference that might have occurred. Ya know, they knew where Bin Laden was. I don’t think they really wanted to catch him because he was used as the excuse for us, you know, invading various countries and building up the military,” Paul said on Scott Horton’s radio program.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/ron-paul-us-didnt-want-to-catch-bin-laden-because-they-neede#.gp9BQyrja5
dipwad
February 17, 2015
Police: Muslim man stabs two after discussion about religious beliefs
Police: Muslim man stabs two after discussion about religious beliefs
A Detroit man stabbed two people at a suburban bus stop after asking his victims whether or not they were Muslim, according to police. Federal authorities are now looking at the case as a potential hate crime, police said on Tuesday.
Both of the victims were standing at the bus stop outside of Detroit with the suspect on Saturday, Southfield Police Chief Eric Hawkins said. Several people there “engaged in conversation” until the suspect, identified by Hawkins as 39-year-old Terrence Lavaron Thomas, “asked some of the folks there if they were Muslims.”
Two of them answered, the chief told The Post on Tuesday: They were not Muslims.
“(Thomas) was not not (sic) happy with that answer,” Hawkins said. Shortly after, “without provocation,” Thomas pulled out a 3-inch folding knife “and attacked one of them,” Hawkins said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/17/man-stabs-two-at-a-bus-stop-after-asking-them-if-theyre-muslim/?tid=sm_tw
A Detroit man stabbed two people at a suburban bus stop after asking his victims whether or not they were Muslim, according to police. Federal authorities are now looking at the case as a potential hate crime, police said on Tuesday.
Both of the victims were standing at the bus stop outside of Detroit with the suspect on Saturday, Southfield Police Chief Eric Hawkins said. Several people there “engaged in conversation” until the suspect, identified by Hawkins as 39-year-old Terrence Lavaron Thomas, “asked some of the folks there if they were Muslims.”
Two of them answered, the chief told The Post on Tuesday: They were not Muslims.
“(Thomas) was not not (sic) happy with that answer,” Hawkins said. Shortly after, “without provocation,” Thomas pulled out a 3-inch folding knife “and attacked one of them,” Hawkins said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/17/man-stabs-two-at-a-bus-stop-after-asking-them-if-theyre-muslim/?tid=sm_tw
February 16, 2015
I'm totally in agreement ISIS does not represent Islam. So, what name/label would fit?
I don't even want to use the current alternative, "jihadist."
Let's come up with another way of referring to these murderous bastards that denies them the association with Islam that they would prefer -- and if it's a mocking name, so much the better.
Acronyms are always good.
February 13, 2015
Shirley MacLaine asks: Were Holocaust victims paying for sins in past lives?
Outrage as Shirley MacLaine asks: Were Holocaust victims paying for sins in past lives? (and did 'her friend' Stephen Hawking bring his devastating disease on himself?)
Her bizarre New Age views on topics such as reincarnation and UFOs have often left the public baffled.
Now Shirley MacLaine has provoked widespread fury by claiming the victims of the Holocaust may have brought their fate upon themselves.
The veteran Hollywood actress suggests the six million Jews and millions of others systematically murdered in Hitler’s death camps in the 1940s were ‘balancing their karma’ for crimes committed in past lives.
She also suggests that cosmologist Professor Stephen Hawking may have subconsciously given himself his debilitating motor neurone disease.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2951513/Outcry-Shirley-MacLaine-asks-Holocaust-victims-paying-sins-past-lives-Comments-attacked-offensive-wrong-Jewish-campaigners.html#ixzz3Rff4ScVw
Her bizarre New Age views on topics such as reincarnation and UFOs have often left the public baffled.
Now Shirley MacLaine has provoked widespread fury by claiming the victims of the Holocaust may have brought their fate upon themselves.
The veteran Hollywood actress suggests the six million Jews and millions of others systematically murdered in Hitler’s death camps in the 1940s were ‘balancing their karma’ for crimes committed in past lives.
She also suggests that cosmologist Professor Stephen Hawking may have subconsciously given himself his debilitating motor neurone disease.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2951513/Outcry-Shirley-MacLaine-asks-Holocaust-victims-paying-sins-past-lives-Comments-attacked-offensive-wrong-Jewish-campaigners.html#ixzz3Rff4ScVw
February 11, 2015
ISIS hacker targets military spouses
ISIS hacker targets military spouses
Hackers claiming to be part of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) apparently hacked into the Twitter account of a military spouse Tuesday, threatening military spouses and their children.
The hackers, calling themselves the "Cyber Caliphate," say they are waging a "Cyber Jihad."
"While your president and your husband are killing our brothers in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan we're coming for you," said one message that was posted to the account.
"You think you're safe but the IS is already here, CyberCaliphate got into your PC and smartphone," it continues, using an acronym for the Islamic State.
"We know everything about you, your husband and your children and we're much closer than you can even imagine. You'll see no mercy infidel!"
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/232286-isis-hacker-targets-military-spouses
Hackers claiming to be part of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) apparently hacked into the Twitter account of a military spouse Tuesday, threatening military spouses and their children.
The hackers, calling themselves the "Cyber Caliphate," say they are waging a "Cyber Jihad."
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, #CyberCaliphate continues its CyberJihad #cyb3rc.com
— MSoS (@MSoStrength) February 10, 2015
"While your president and your husband are killing our brothers in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan we're coming for you," said one message that was posted to the account.
"You think you're safe but the IS is already here, CyberCaliphate got into your PC and smartphone," it continues, using an acronym for the Islamic State.
"We know everything about you, your husband and your children and we're much closer than you can even imagine. You'll see no mercy infidel!"
http://thehill.com/policy/defense/232286-isis-hacker-targets-military-spouses
February 10, 2015
Here's the video (stick with it to the end or don't watch at all, just sayin') --
Quite the vocal range, huh?
She'll probably never even be a contender for a Grammy and if she is it will more than likely be one of the niche categories. She'll never have the big stage sets and the massively choreographed dance numbers. Yeah, those take talent and hard work but they get the most support because they make the most money -- as you well know.
Maria will never get to sit with the cool kids. She'll probably see her entire career pigeonholed because her music isn't the right kind of music. Her ability to compose, write lyrics, perform, sing and convey a message will be ignored because she's not with the right groups of people.
Is that fair?
Yo Kanye, I'm happy for you and I'm going to let you finish but I have to say
Beyoncé isn't the only talented entertainer but she has gained far more notoriety than many of the other talented women in the music world.
This is Maria Brink --
She sings for the band In This Moment. She is an absolute vocal powerhouse, writes her own music and plays the piano. She's also a single mother. Her music is soulful, even as it is soul-shattering. It tears you open and leaves you bare, raw, exposed. It's as disturbing as it is beautiful. It's meant to be jarring and push people to look deeper at themselves.
This is what she had to say about her 2014 single, "Whore" (yes, you read that right) --
“It's really just about taking the power back from the word...
Here's the video (stick with it to the end or don't watch at all, just sayin') --
Quite the vocal range, huh?
She'll probably never even be a contender for a Grammy and if she is it will more than likely be one of the niche categories. She'll never have the big stage sets and the massively choreographed dance numbers. Yeah, those take talent and hard work but they get the most support because they make the most money -- as you well know.
Maria will never get to sit with the cool kids. She'll probably see her entire career pigeonholed because her music isn't the right kind of music. Her ability to compose, write lyrics, perform, sing and convey a message will be ignored because she's not with the right groups of people.
Is that fair?
February 9, 2015
Thank you to my kind benefactor. nt
February 7, 2015
I know some will accuse me of trying to start a flame war or to titillate but watching this video all I could do was be impressed by the talent these young women possess.
Art comes in many forms.
Why can't SI focus on women for their athletic prowess instead of sexiness?
It should be about the grace, athleticism, strength and ability, right?
I know some will accuse me of trying to start a flame war or to titillate but watching this video all I could do was be impressed by the talent these young women possess.
Art comes in many forms.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Sep 16, 2009, 07:33 PMNumber of posts: 19,497