top of the heap to third world status in one generation

[Gypsy Nirvana]

No matter what - some nut-job hell-bent on hurting people is going to find some way of using a weapon - whether it be a firearm, bladed or blunt instrument - yeah, even a vehicle has enormous capability to do extreme damage - and so its not the tools that are used to create the carnage, 'cos they will always be around - ITS THE PSYCHO's and NUTTERS who abuse them - somehow we have to try and avoid these people, but seems like they are ever more prevalent within our societies than ever - if you are to believe the official crime stats.

 

[acridlab]

^^ they are everywhere now,, especially any cities.
it the ssri's and the meth and the cocaine. I've had 3 different neighbors get murdered now. s hits getn real

 

[armedoldhippy]

instructions are available on-line for numerous explosives you can easily make at home. Marathon bombers did that, using a pressure cooker to contain the reaction. people have killed each other with everything from bare hand & feet to nuclear weapons. that will not stop, ever. nor can you pass a law preventing that, it is not possible. laws/proposed bills pertaining to firearms posing as "solutions" are but pablum fed to the innocent by the guilty. are there folks that should not own firearms? you bet! but there is no way to tell who they are, really, until it is too late lots of time. trying to control those few by punishing the incredibly numerous "others" is immoral in my eyes.

 

[St. Phatty]

instructions are available on-line for numerous explosives you can easily make at home. Marathon bombers did that, using a pressure cooker to contain the reaction.

Not so easy.

Much of the study of explosives is also the study of history.

For example, nitro-cellulose ... a cotton handkerchief soaked in nitric acid, air dried. One spark and it was a flat bomb shape, behaving as bombs do. 100's of years ago.

If you have the safety skills & equipment, I encourage you to try & repeat that experiment. As explosives go, it's relatively safe.


But ... explosive materials can be purchased on-line, as easy as shopping at Amazon.

 

[Zeez]

Totally true. People with this mindset, wanting to do harm, look at our infrastructure in a totally different light. Our setup is totally vulnerable to them.

instructions are available on-line for numerous explosives you can easily make at home. Marathon bombers did that, using a pressure cooker to contain the reaction. people have killed each other with everything from bare hand & feet to nuclear weapons. that will not stop, ever. nor can you pass a law preventing that, it is not possible. laws/proposed bills pertaining to firearms posing as "solutions" are but pablum fed to the innocent by the guilty. are there folks that should not own firearms? you bet! but there is no way to tell who they are, really, until it is too late lots of time. trying to control those few by punishing the incredibly numerous "others" is immoral in my eyes.

 

[Gry]

Never a shortage of damaged souls who enjoy the detail of misery.

 

[Elmer Bud]

No.

James Mattis, quit in December with a scathing letter pointing out his disagreements with the President.

For now, the department is led by an acting secretary of defense, and Mr Trump also has an acting chief of staff, an acting interior secretary and an acting attorney-general, the country's highest-ranking legal official.

Given the influence that all those jobs wield, this is a highly unusual situation,

Response ?

 

[vta]

Yeah, I meant handguns are used in more murders than rifles.

Gotcha !

 

[vta]

and Mr Trump

It's President Trump. You got it right in the first sentence. So good for you !

 

[Elmer Bud]

It's President Trump. You got it right in the first sentence. So good for you !

G `day V

Yeah that`s the rules of grammar .
Once you have stated his position , you can identify him by name .

It`s actually a copy paste . So I can`t claim credit for its composition . It was written by a journalist from the Australian Broadcasting Commission .

Asking for a response to the temp positions was my idea .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

 

[White Beard]

The database is where we will disagree. My thought is if the right to privacy guarantees the right to an abortion. Why would the right to own a firearm without having to be on a database be based in a right to privacy.

I don't think it's paranoid to want privacy.

Believe it or not, Pack, I agree with you about privacy, so bear with me on this next part: in the UNITED STATES, there *IS* *NO* *RIGHT* *TO* *PRIVACY*

A matter of fairly recent history: despite what you might have heard, what borked Robert Bork’s nomination to SCOTUS was his legal opinion that the Constitution, including the bill of rights, contains NO right to privacy, full stop. Apparently, this only bothered liberals (real liberals, that is, not the made up boogie man of “conservative” radio shouters), the GOP loved that about him - that and his firing of Archibald Cox, lead investigator of the Watergate mess.

I know, it seems not just unreasonable but unAmerican, but there it is. From my view, if there is no right to privacy then the fifth and fourth amendments are meaningless: they *depend* upon a general expectation of privacy, especially from agents of the government, or they simply make no sense.

Not even as an example case of the ninth amendment could Bork find ‘grounds’ for a privacy right. The so-called right has been pushing the remaining expectations of privacy further and further from considerations both legal and legislative ever since. That’s more than 30 years now.

Hope you and the missus are doing well.

Oh, to bring the matter up to date? Ever since then, GOP has done *everything* possible to conceal the personal opinions and prior judicial histories of their SCOTUS nominees, and that has never worked better than in the case of Kavanaugh, the tabula rasa now making SCOTUS a solid, dissent-proof “conservative” majority.

(The reason I put “conservative” in quotes is not to be cute; GOP has not been a conservative body, nor a body of conservatives, *real* conservatives, since Eisenhower. They are and have been radical in the extreme, hewing to the radical ‘principle’ that only the wealthy should rule, and that participation by “the people” in politics, law, and government was a threat to their aims and should be curtailed at every opportunity. We should, in other words, shut up and be ruled.)

 

[vta]

Right again gry...third world insanity in .gov.

I present the making of a Shithole....


https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1093007267329462272

 

[vta]

G `day V

Yeah that`s the rules of grammar .
Once you have stated his position , you can identify him by name .

It`s actually a copy paste . So I can`t claim credit for its composition . It was written by a journalist from the Australian Broadcasting Commission .

Asking for a response to the temp positions was my idea .

Thanks for sharin

EB .

Ahhh...so you copied and pasted some drab...to help form your statement/question.

Cool. I do not hold the disrespect it showed towards my President against you. Now that sum bitch in Oz however...

On to your persistent need to get an answer out of me. Sorry. I have told you before, I don't like the way you troll. The tiny, little bridge you live under doesn't fit into my route. I rather choose to engage with those of some sort of knowledge, or self interest to the topic at hand. You offer neither. You seem to just pop up and stir up the shit with your condescending remarks.

 

[vta]

Back to the topic...

How America has turned into a Third Wold Shithole...

 

[Elmer Bud]

 

[armedoldhippy]

Back to the topic...

How America has turned into a Third Wold Shithole...


View Image

not as an elective procedure if the child is healthy. fewer than 1% of abortions are 3rd trimester, and nearly ALL of those are to save the mothers life or in the sad case of a severely malformed child or even one that will be stillborn. you are repeating misrepresentations of the facts without knowing the facts. educate yourself...

 

[Gry]

The extent that America has deteriorated, one can credit fully to corporate republicans such as Regan that loved capitalism far more than they loved America. They shipped our jobs to China.
Giving China the booming economy and surging middle class that we had here.

 

[Growcephus]

The extent that America has deteriorated, one can credit fully to corporate politicians such as every last damn one of them post WW II that loved capitalism far more than they loved America. They shipped our jobs to China.
Giving China the booming economy and surging middle class that we had here.

FTFY

 

[Gry]

FTFY

The name was Regan, for the younger ones, and the record,
much as you might wish it otherwise.

 

[packerfan79]

Believe it or not, Pack, I agree with you about privacy, so bear with me on this next part: in the UNITED STATES, there *IS* *NO* *RIGHT* *TO* *PRIVACY*

A matter of fairly recent history: despite what you might have heard, what borked Robert Bork’s nomination to SCOTUS was his legal opinion that the Constitution, including the bill of rights, contains NO right to privacy, full stop. Apparently, this only bothered liberals (real liberals, that is, not the made up boogie man of “conservative” radio shouters), the GOP loved that about him - that and his firing of Archibald Cox, lead investigator of the Watergate mess.

I know, it seems not just unreasonable but unAmerican, but there it is. From my view, if there is no right to privacy then the fifth and fourth amendments are meaningless: they *depend* upon a general expectation of privacy, especially from agents of the government, or they simply make no sense.

Not even as an example case of the ninth amendment could Bork find ‘grounds’ for a privacy right. The so-called right has been pushing the remaining expectations of privacy further and further from considerations both legal and legislative ever since. That’s more than 30 years now.

Hope you and the missus are doing well.

Oh, to bring the matter up to date? Ever since then, GOP has done *everything* possible to conceal the personal opinions and prior judicial histories of their SCOTUS nominees, and that has never worked better than in the case of Kavanaugh, the tabula rasa now making SCOTUS a solid, dissent-proof “conservative” majority.

(The reason I put “conservative” in quotes is not to be cute; GOP has not been a conservative body, nor a body of conservatives, *real* conservatives, since Eisenhower. They are and have been radical in the extreme, hewing to the radical ‘principle’ that only the wealthy should rule, and that participation by “the people” in politics, law, and government was a threat to their aims and should be curtailed at every opportunity. We should, in other words, shut up and be ruled.)

I support the right to privacy. I don't think the right to privacy gives you the right to abortion. Your rights don't allow others to be harmed. Now, that the democratic platform is any abortion at anytime for any reason, the truth about abortion is out in the open.

I can understand why you might say fiscally speaking the GOP has utterly failed to uphold conservative principles.I basically agree with you Outside of that, I have to disagree. Religious freedom, individual rights, abortion, and many other conservative policies are firmly in place. It seems that you are focused on the financial aspects.

It's not that conservative judges conceal their beliefs. It's that they are attacked for even mostly normal views. The Democrats have routinely argued that just believing in religion should be a disqualifying issue. Leftism is essentially a religion of government worship, yet it is perfectly acceptable.