All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[Iron Maiden]

oops duplicate post

[Tami]

48 Environmental Rules on the Way Out Under Trump

Since taking office in January, President Trump has made eliminating federal regulations a priority. His administration — with help from Republicans in Congress — has often targeted environmental rules it sees as overly burdensome to the fossil fuel industry, including major Obama-era policies aimed at fighting climate change.

To date, the the Trump administration has sought to reverse nearly 50 environmental rules, according to an analysis by The New York Times.

[Tami]

Keep an eye out for Hurricane Nate

[InvincibleDom]

Obama changed that, and Trump already undid that change.

Hillary would not have.

Are you simply the sum of your liberal parts? Or can you think and operate beyond just what is, "looks cool for the person you like". Obama SAID he was cracking down on militarization focusing on: grenade launchers, weaponized vehicles, and bayonets. This was in May 2015. So, we have been fight in two wars for over a decade and all these police departments were getting surplus military equipment and gear and Obama freezes "bayonets and grenade launchers" (see: do nothing to fix the problem)

One year later July 2016, the Obama Administration announced that it would revisit the 2015 ban on some types of military equipment for police forces, and begin a process of case-by-case review.

So he stepped back on it while he was in office one year later. But the military equipment already went out for a long time before it. What evidence do you present on Hilary that she would have stopped it when Obama changed his tune already?

[WestPhillyPunisher]

So I guess my question is what about an assault rifle don't you like or feel a citizen should not own one? The range? The length? It looks more scary than a pistol? I am not being difficult I just want to understand why no assault rifles as opposed to a pistol which can be converted into a carbine or made auto just as easy.

Tendrin beat me to the punch (I was at lunch) on an answer. Appearances of the weapons are wholly irrelevant, ridiculous even, what worries me about assault rifles are the sheer power they possess along with large capacity magazines which allows for more killing and destruction. Once again, I see no practical need for civilians to own the damn things, I mean, what do they do with them, head out to the neighborhood firing range and spend an afternoon shooting a few mags into water barrels? Big whoop! Does that count as entertainment? Male fulfillment? Living out an action hero fantasy? I was in the military (Navy: 1976-1996) and got to fire M-14's in boot camp and, frankly speaking, I was unimpressed by the experience. I remember our company commander telling us at the range that guns were tools, and that they should be used as such, not fawned over like a high class hooker in a low cut dress (his words, not mine). And I've taken those words to heart which I follow to this day.

I guess I'm a bit more extreme. I'd repeal the 2nd amendment entirely. It's the only way to be sure. Australia can do it. Most of Europe also. We're like the crazy savages.

Crazy savages? Yeah, that's as good a description as they come. I don't get worked up over the Second Amendment and wouldn't cry any tears if it were repealed, because this nation's wild west fetish has gone way too far for way too long.

[Tami]

'Gunsplaining' and conspiracy theories: how rightwing pundits saw the Las Vegas shooting

But the second amendment – virtually unrestricted access to guns – is sacrosanct. Across the spectrum of rightwing opinion, from libertarians to the Christian right, pretty much everyone agrees that Americans’ unique access to firearms should continue. We can put this down to any number of things, from the country’s history of frontier settler violence to the influence of the NRA. But there it is.

When a massacre happens, rightwing pundits have work to do: they need to convince any waverers that easy access to semi-automatic weapons has nothing to do with mass-casualty shootings. They also need Republican legislators to remain aware that any moves to restrict access to guns will ruin their career.

Accordingly, rightwing pundits have evolved a series of standard responses to mass murder. Today we’ll look at five of them, all of which have been in evidence this week.

[InvincibleDom]

...the killing power? An assault rifle has more of it. The AR-15 is the weapon of choice for mass spree killers for a reason.

https://www.wired.com/2016/06/ar-15-can-human-body/

I can't argue that the 5.56 is less dangerous than the standard pistol round. Something to fairly consider.

[PaulBullion]

Are you simply the sum of your liberal parts? Or can you think and operate beyond just what is, "looks cool for the person you like". Obama SAID he was cracking down on militarization focusing on: grenade launchers, weaponized vehicles, and bayonets. This was in May 2015. So, we have been fight in two wars for over a decade and all these police departments were getting surplus military equipment and gear and Obama freezes "bayonets and grenade launchers" (see: do nothing to fix the problem)

One year later July 2016, the Obama Administration announced that it would revisit the 2015 ban on some types of military equipment for police forces, and begin a process of case-by-case review.

So he stepped back on it while he was in office one year later. But the military equipment already went out for a long time before it. What evidence do you present on Hilary that she would have stopped it when Obama changed his tune already?

You're twisting it around.

Under Hillary, this would not have happened:

Trump to lift military gear ban for local police

The Trump administration will unveil a new plan Monday to roll back limits on a controversial program that provides local law enforcement agencies with surplus military gear, marking the end of a policy implemented during the Obama administration.

President Barack Obama issued an executive order in 2015 prohibiting the transfer of a host of equipment, including armored vehicles, grenade launchers, high-caliber weapons and camouflage uniforms following controversy over the "militarization" of the police response to unrest in Ferguson, Missouri.

[Tazirai]

Every single one of these are great but do nothing to stop what just happened from happening again. Maybe stop assault weapons, but the old ban had so many loopholes that it still would not stop what happened from happening again.

Yeah they actually work. Especially in countries where they did this. Americans are cowards who just give up.

We got regulations and lower instances of MANY things we didn't have on them before.
Cars.
Medicine.
Cigarettes.
Planes.
etc.
Each of those industries told people there's nothing you can do to stop XYZ, but they MITIGATED them.

[Dalak]

Anyone correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I can tell only one person in this thread is discussing taking all guns away rather than limiting further purchases and trying to set up registration, etc.

There is no way to stop crime, violence, or people spreading hate and that fact should never stop anyone trying to lessen them. Just because something could not have outright stopped Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, or any specific disaster doesn't mean any suggested legislation is not useful or shouldn't be advanced. The only reason I can see not to advance such stuff is that there's no hope the cowards in office beholden to the NRA and the base they've brainwashed into thinking any gun control is a 'War on Guns' or 'Taking our Guns' will shut it down or prevent it even coming to a vote. I'd say even then the vote is useful, but it's not like any of their votes against the American people have really come back to bite the conservatives on capitol hill.

[Tazirai]

Im not a Starbucks person, mainly because I dont drink coffee

they do have decent cookies though, Dunkin used to have cookies, then they got rid of them, then they bought them back, and got rid of them again

If you're from Jersey, Delaware or Philly Dunkin is our Starbucks lol.

[Jack Dracula]

Like what? What's the solution here?

I'm surprised by how often this question gets answered and yet people still keep asking.
It's almost as if they don't want to listen.

[Surf]

There are unfortunate situations and then there is guns and Americans. I'm not so fortunate to believe we will ever come back from this cliff dive in regards to mass shootings. We have to do the best we can to brace ourselves honestly, more will come as they have thus far. If any positive discourse emanates and no, I do not feel that will ever happen, the issue must be understood by all regardless of political ideology or feelings of federal prohibition.

There is control- via enforcement of new laws, existing ones and/or modifications of those laws that exist. Checks and balances by a largely broken criminal justice system we have in place now. Then there is proliferation, which is the biggest hurdle. Does any body know the shelf life of a firearm? If they stopped making JUST military grade weapons to the general public TONIGHT, we'd still have enough firearms and accessories out there for everybody in the US to own a brand new one. Work on one end you have to deal with the other, the fuse is laid and lit.

The last major shift in altering of American thoughts and ideals was the Civil Rights Act of 1964. How we all doing with that? By we I mean black folks because there are probably still, conservatively speaking numbers wise, I'd say in the low 10's of millions of American's who felt that Act was a mistake even this many years later. Hopefully my statistical accounting deviation of American held bigotry belief index is not that same number in the millions (my life interactions in Indiana may not reflect the same as my brothas down South, or in Iowa or in New York which is in of itself a hurdle people are not willing to admit to). People being assaulted at lunch counters didn't mean **** to a whole lot of them in the 1960s nor did seeing Eric Garner be killed by the NYPD for selling loose cigarettes a couple years ago. That was over CIVILITY treatment of American citizens, not perceived God given rights by way of the Constitution to own firearms. Paradigm shifts in American perception don't happen that often and I can't see it happening now. Love the thread and the discussion here but that's real talk right?

You can't be in possession of a firearm until you are 18 in the US and that is outside of rifles which there is no federal age limit. Every single school shooter who inflicted at least 1 casualty in the country since we've began having school shooters were all committed by persons under 18.

[Surf]

There is no way to stop crime, violence, or people spreading hate and that fact should never stop anyone trying to lessen them. Just because something could not have outright stopped Las Vegas, Sandy Hook, or any specific disaster doesn't mean any suggested legislation is not useful or shouldn't be advanced. The only reason I can see not to advance such stuff is that there's no hope the cowards in office beholden to the NRA and the base they've brainwashed into thinking any gun control is a 'War on Guns' or 'Taking our Guns' will shut it down or prevent it even coming to a vote. I'd say even then the vote is useful, but it's not like any of their votes against the American people have really come back to bite the conservatives on capitol hill.

Agreed but I don't feel a situation dire enough, even with a Sandy Hook, Las Vegas and hundreds of school shooters, has come up yet that the coming together on any attempt at resolution has happened, woefully sad as it seems.

[TheInvisibleMan]

If you're from Jersey, Delaware or Philly Dunkin is our Starbucks lol.

same with CT, Mass, and RI

yeah we have Starbucks around here, but its mostly peopled by basics, soccer moms, and the like

most the normal folks go to dunkin