Does the Left oppose guns and love racism to distract us from recognizing their intellectual inferiority?

They trusted and believed in Palin just like the Democrats believe and trust the dishonest mainstream media.

Palin hasn't betrayed their trust like the media has
How many people not in the news/politics business has time, and is given time, to prepare? Not many, probably about the same % as news people who are prepared to discuss Scouting or the Depression of the 1930s in depth without a heads-up. If you're in one business or endeavor in depth you probably don't have time to discuss someone else's area of expertise at their level. I've been a serious gardener for 50+ years, news professionals would not be able to have a conversation with me about that without embarrassing themselves because it takes time to get deep into the weeds, and they only have time to become experts in what they make their living doing, plus maybe one serious hobby. Gardening at my level requires time actually doing it. This principle applies across the board. To be really successful in any field you need to forego time in other things, especially hobbies. Business magnates, Hollywood big shots, professional sportsman, musicians, other people who are intensely into something that takes a lot of time, or who travel a lot can't be gardeners because it takes a lot of time. They can buy services if they want a nice garden, but they can't talk the talk.

Nobody in the news business shows interviews done at the opposition's Town Hall meetings; -those people have everything at the tip of their tongue, and you can safely bet what their position on issues will be. News people sell what they want to sell, and only that, which is why nobody trusts them.
 
Werbung:
I am a liberal. I do not believe in any progress on the gun issue at the moment. Guns are more like flags and symbols. It is not actually the function of the weapons that drives the debate. That makes it hard,

I'm still waiting for a gun grabber to explain how increasing gun grabs will disarm thugs while simultaneously disarming their potential victims.

View attachment 10018
I want to see how and who is going door to door to steal them . My MY I hope its Boris and lug nut and The bird boy .
 
I'm still waiting for a gun grabber to explain how increasing gun grabs will disarm thugs while simultaneously disarming their potential victims.

View attachment 10018




We compared gun policy across the country, scoring every state on the strength of its gun laws and comparing it with its rate of gun violence. In states where elected officials have taken action to pass gun safety laws, fewer people die by gun violence. Choose a state to see how it stacks up on 50 key policies, or explore a policy to see how much of the country has adopted it.


Specifically, there is supportive evidence that child-access prevention laws reduce firearm self-injuries (including suicides), firearm homicides or assault injuries, and unintentional firearm injuries and deaths among youth. In addition, we found supportive evidence that stand-your-ground laws increase firearm homicides and supportive evidence that shall-issue concealed carry laws increase total and firearm homicides.

 
We compared gun policy across the country, scoring every state on the strength of its gun laws and comparing it with its rate of gun violence. In states where elected officials have taken action to pass gun safety laws, fewer people die by gun violence. Choose a state to see how it stacks up on 50 key policies, or explore a policy to see how much of the country has adopted it.


Specifically, there is supportive evidence that child-access prevention laws reduce firearm self-injuries (including suicides), firearm homicides or assault injuries, and unintentional firearm injuries and deaths among youth. In addition, we found supportive evidence that stand-your-ground laws increase firearm homicides and supportive evidence that shall-issue concealed carry laws increase total and firearm homicides.

The problem with statistics like those above is they intentionally ignore who uses guns for criminal purposes. The vast majority of gun victims are due to criminals with illegal guns. They also choose carefully what stat to contrast with what stat. The states with the highest populations also have high populations not living where the crime problems are worsened in big cities by Dem "control". For example, Detroit is 10 miles south of where I live. It has one of the highest murder rates in the US. Call a cop there and they'll come when they can. Driving thru the city you see very few cop cars. Cops are very visible where I live, you call them and they will be on your doorstep, PDQ.

If the 1st chart above listed cities instead of states the true story would jump out in your face: the gun violence rate in the big cities is huge, is almost all done with illegal handguns, and the perps are almost all people with criminal records. The gun violence rate in the countryside is miniscule. The % of people who own legal guns in the countryside own rifles, and in either place who use them for illegal purposes is miniscule if for no other reason than a high % of guns purchased in recent years are now registered to the owner and if they are suspected in an event will have to surrender them for inspection by the police.

The reason they use terms like "guns" instead of "illegal guns" is they want to conflate all legal owners with all criminals as though there is no difference between the two groups. If you are not a criminal, are you comfortable with being conflated with them? Are you convinced that you should be unarmed when it's just you and the bad guy in that single moment in time when the police are mear minutes away? The highest rate of gun sales right now is handguns by black women. We good guys say, bravo! We are not endangered by them because of who and what we are, law-abiding citizens.

While I'm at it, superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over a map of crime violence and you'll see a perfect match. Superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over and map of high black populations and you'll see a perfect match. Superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over a map of high Hispanic and you'll see a perfect match. Why don't we see a bar graph comparison of crime by race? We all know where the problem is: we need to incarcerate more criminals who commit very few crimes in prison. There is 5% of the population of all colors who commit 95% of all the crime. Remove them from society and bingo! For this to happen, big city Dem Prosecutors need to charge all criminals, black juries need to convict black criminals, and judges need to be harsh. Most criminals are under 50 years old. By that time the fear of going to jail is pretty vivid in memories of those that live that long. The crime rate for above 50 years old is a lot more tolerable.

The solution to any problem begins with addressing the problem. Brooms are rarely useful.
 
The problem with statistics like those above is they intentionally ignore who uses guns for criminal purposes. The vast majority of gun victims are due to criminals with illegal guns. They also choose carefully what stat to contrast with what stat. The states with the highest populations also have high populations not living where the crime problems are worsened in big cities by Dem "control". For example, Detroit is 10 miles south of where I live. It has one of the highest murder rates in the US. Call a cop there and they'll come when they can. Driving thru the city you see very few cop cars. Cops are very visible where I live, you call them and they will be on your doorstep, PDQ.

If the 1st chart above listed cities instead of states the true story would jump out in your face: the gun violence rate in the big cities is huge, is almost all done with illegal handguns, and the perps are almost all people with criminal records. The gun violence rate in the countryside is miniscule. The % of people who own legal guns in the countryside own rifles, and in either place who use them for illegal purposes is miniscule if for no other reason than a high % of guns purchased in recent years are now registered to the owner and if they are suspected in an event will have to surrender them for inspection by the police.

The reason they use terms like "guns" instead of "illegal guns" is they want to conflate all legal owners with all criminals as though there is no difference between the two groups. If you are not a criminal, are you comfortable with being conflated with them? Are you convinced that you should be unarmed when it's just you and the bad guy in that single moment in time when the police are mear minutes away? The highest rate of gun sales right now is handguns by black women. We good guys say, bravo! We are not endangered by them because of who and what we are, law-abiding citizens.

While I'm at it, superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over a map of crime violence and you'll see a perfect match. Superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over and map of high black populations and you'll see a perfect match. Superimpose a US map of voting districts that go for Dems over a map of high Hispanic and you'll see a perfect match. Why don't we see a bar graph comparison of crime by race? We all know where the problem is: we need to incarcerate more criminals who commit very few crimes in prison. There is 5% of the population of all colors who commit 95% of all the crime. Remove them from society and bingo! For this to happen, big city Dem Prosecutors need to charge all criminals, black juries need to convict black criminals, and judges need to be harsh. Most criminals are under 50 years old. By that time the fear of going to jail is pretty vivid in memories of those that live that long. The crime rate for above 50 years old is a lot more tolerable.

The solution to any problem begins with addressing the problem. Brooms are rarely useful.

i'd trust your post more if it came from someone with creedibilty
 
I want to see how and who is going door to door to steal them . My MY I hope its Boris and lug nut and The bird boy .
Democrats pass gun-grabbing laws that Democrats have proven in their coverup of Hunter's violation of gun laws that they do not intend to apply to lawless leftists, only to conservative Americans.
 
We compared gun policy across the country, scoring every state on the strength of its gun laws and comparing it with its rate of gun violence. In states where elected officials have taken action to pass gun safety laws, fewer people die by gun violence. Choose a state to see how it stacks up on 50 key policies, or explore a policy to see how much of the country has adopted it.


Specifically, there is supportive evidence that child-access prevention laws reduce firearm self-injuries (including suicides), firearm homicides or assault injuries, and unintentional firearm injuries and deaths among youth. In addition, we found supportive evidence that stand-your-ground laws increase firearm homicides and supportive evidence that shall-issue concealed carry laws increase total and firearm homicides.

Name an oppressed communist nation where the people benefited from government gun grabs.
 
I don't think you read the Link before you posted it. Most of the contained sub-Links were dead (from 2008). I'm a fan of Sarah so maybe I interpret things differently, but the budget shortfall was the result of losing an eminent domain case started in her administration, the property involved was to be used for a sports complex, which I assume was a popular addition to the community. I'm guessing that she probably made the decision to move forward with that land acquisition at the advice of counsel. The hit-piece article doesn't say one way or the other who advised her. I think that's germane, don't you? Cutting property taxes is a positive to conservatives, so that, too, doesn't jibe with doing a bad job as mayor or not being a fiscal conservative. Increasing sales taxes is one way to increase revenue to the city that taxes outsiders shopping in the city who don’t pay other taxes that support the existence of the city. In a place like Alaska where the cities are small and the surrounding area large, that sounds like the lesser of two evils to me, and probably other conservatives. We do acknowledge that cities need operating funds.

“Audiotapes released last month reveal that aides to the 44-year-old governor pressured Safety Director Walter Monegan to dismiss Trooper Mike Wooten, after Wooten allegedly threatened Palin’s father during a messy child custody fight with the governor’s sister Molly.” Another surprise, surprise, everyone needs to be careful about who they irritate within their chain of command.

“Palin, who when she became governor sold Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski’s state-owned jet and canceled Republican Senator Stevens’ much-maligned “bridge to nowhere,” was also a vocal critic of oil field services giant Veco, a major player in Alaska politics that’s now accused of improper relationships with Stevens and Young.” What’s not to like here?

Add to above, “According to an Anchorage Daily News clip e-mailed to reporters, Palin accepted $5,000 in contributions from company executives and their wives during her failed 2002 lieutenant governor’s bid — which represented about 10 percent of her minuscule war chest that year.” They couldn’t or at least didn’t buy her with 10% of her war chest. Seems pretty admirable to me?

"She’s also clashed with McCain over Arctic drilling — she wants drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which he has continued to oppose." That's another reason to like her! “— Palin didn’t back McCain in the primary. She stayed neutral in Alaska’s January primary — perhaps on account of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR. “ The Lady has guts and stands her ground! I never, ever liked John McCain. I respected that he spent a long time as a VC captive, but I didn't like his politics which were genuine RINO. She was put on the ticket to mollify conservatives and did so. If you don't like her, that's fine, it's your vote and your privilege.

Again, I would point out that anyone who puts a "supporting" Link here needs to ask themselves, "Who is going to be convinced" by this Link? This one is a resounding, nobody on the right; very few shallows down the middle who probably are not frequenters of these kinds of websites; and everyone on the left. That makes these kinds of Links just noise.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top