At 1/23/13 03:23 AM, LemonCrush wrote:
Brandishing weapons at a polling place...especially racially motivated, is kind of a big deal
Sure, and I'm not defending them or condoning their philosophy, but unless you know names of people who were intimidated by them that day at the polling station, the DOJ did all it legally could given the evidence available.
He pleaded guilty to what? And how? Is making uploading an anti (insert religion) video even a triable crime? The money grabbing scheme, btw, is Obamacare, where it is now LAW to give your hard earned money, to insurance moguls. Remember when Obama was gonna put an end to that? I do. He ran on it. Twice.
He was arrested because he made the video, he pleaded guilty to four counts of parole violation from when he was arrested in 2010 for check fraud.
Bargains and politics do not solve problems, especially one like this.
What do you mean so? Whether you like it or not this is a highly political issue, and there is going to be an enormous amount of politics at play here. I wish that wasn't the case either, but you can't just wish it away. Obama posturing on the AWB is no different than Republicans saying (for years now) that Obama and the U.N. are going to take away your guns. Politicians aint worth shit without their base, and this kind of stuff excites the base. Having the AWB negotiated away is great for the GOP base, because they fucking hate it. Obama is just simply not going to reach a deal with the GOP on this issue by flat out saying what he wants and leaving it at that, he's going to shoot high and shoot low and see where the negotiations go from there. You may think it's a ridiculous process and transparently full of shit, I do too, but I doubt Obama would disagree with you as well.
Then why bother? I know why. It's posturing.
Yes, it is! It also puts him in a better position to get done what the both of us want to happen with regards to research, for example.
I'm not saying it's specifically flouride, or anything specific. I'm just speaking of GMO's and hormones in general. You have food and drug industry CEOs sitting on the FDA....I don't trust them to fully disclose negative side effects.
Well, I agree to an extent, but I like the idea of the FDA, because I don't trust medical companies to police themselves. On the other hand, there have been a number of scandals involving pharmaceutical companies influencing the FDA to speed line their application process through key contacts in the organization, and there have also been claims that certain firms managed to convince the FDA to stonewall potential substitute drugs from competitors in order for them to have a de facto monopoly on it (and also that international drugs have been historically stonewalled by the FDA as a pseudo-protectionist measure for US pharmaceutical firms). It's not like the current FDA is a perfect protectionist system, both in terms of allowance of viable drugs and trying to ensure fair market play (by not creating barriers to entry through their own corruption). It's not as horrible as many anti-FDA blowhards make it it to be, but it isn't great, either. I certainly don't pretend that the current system is perfect, but the answer is not to relax rules or throw away the whole system.
To get back on topic, I'd take the FDA's word on anything compared to the word of any gun lobbyist group on any issue.
At 1/22/13 01:24 PM, TheMason wrote:
1) The UT-Austin shooting involved civilians coming with their own firearms and aiding an overwhelmed police force in stopping the shooter.
Yet he still managed to kill 14 people at the school and injured 32 people. It's worth mentioning that the good samaritan who helped the three officers take him down accidentally shot his rifle which blew their cover, and one officer immediately shot all 6 bullets from his revolver at Whitman from a distance of 50 feet, and they all missed. This is why having teachers with guns is such a monumentally stupid idea. Nobody has perfect accuracy, especially under pressure in tense situations. The more bullets you have flying around, the more accidents there can be.
2) Over the past 20 years these kind of mass shooters have quadrupled. This includes the 10 year period that an AWB was in effect. Some of the things they correlate to are: lyme disease, lead concentrations in paint and the atmosphere from leaded gasoline (before you point out that leaded gasoline went bye-bye circa late 1980s...know that lead levels are not effeciently processed by the body and therefore can remain in one's system for decades), and the school reforms of Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. :)
Interestingly, Whitman had a cancerous growth pressing up against his amygdala. Before his rampage, he mentioned in a later that he wanted his body to be autopsied to see if there was âEUoea physical cause for his mental anguish." When the autopsy was performed, the region of his amygdala had a a walnut sized tumor. This tumor was compressing his amygdala, causing it to be stimulated at all times. It's assumed to have significantly contributed to his psychosis, since he was apparently a pretty normal guy growing up.
In order to address the issue of mass shooters, you want to investigate things that you say correlate, like lyme disease and lead concentrations. Have you looked into Internet Explorer?