pigpaws
You are confusing the last 50 years with the last 5000 years.
Seriously people, get over yourselves.
If they can carry in their overly restrictive states, why can't the electorate? don't they have the same rights? No? because political elitism.
Even in that bastion of fascism, NJ: http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/lawmaker_let_nj...
'raising awareness' does nothing as the snowden incident showed us. 1984 is the SOP now.
You as a human being will make sure your children/family are fed first, before you give to someone else, right? How is that any different as a nation?
TL;DR: chipped cards are not as secure as swiped cards. Also, CC processing is expensive.
you may be thinking about a 'Republic', in which the rights of the minority are protected, but THIS is democracy in ACTION.
Civil war sucks, but sometimes, you have to let the people fight. Few, if any country in the world exists today because it's people wouldn't fight for it (take a hint, Iraq).
we definitely need term limits.
also, much like Soylent Green, companies are now 'people'...
How is this a test of "intelligence"? Biology, metabolism and food drive maybe, but "intelligence"?
"If their food and basic necessities are taken care of, they'll have more money to put towards housing and education to get out of the 'hood."
where does that money come from? where does it end?
a better idea (IMO): No taxes on the first $25k. That would be up to $25,000 tax free for everyone... high enough to help people in low-paying jobs, low enough for us not to care if someone games the system by make $24k and deferring $2k.
any arguments against?
they're called 'slippery slopes' for a reason.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-most...
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/24/suicides-acc...
Yet another inconvenient truth no one wants to talk about or even accept.
An 'unofficial' pole here on HN shows most people are in favor of 'death with dignity' or "self-determination", but apparently as long as it doesn't involve a loud noise and a mess.
Part of that is that 'domestic terrorist' has not been defined. As we can see with the IRS, whether you agree or disagree, the fact is that they specifically targeted companies with names thought to be associated with a specific political bent. They had 'responsibilities' and 'oversight', but the people in charge of that either didn't care or purposefully broke the 'rules'. Does 'the State' then designate those 503c orgs as 'terrorists'?
If you start defining terrorism the same way the State department does: "the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims."
then that opens the flood gates of every agency who has armed agents to be defined as a 'terrorist' organization. Why does the EPA/IRS/Dept. of Ed have armed agents? Hell, try not paying your property tax and see what the local Sheriff's dept. does... This country is based on taxation by threat of violence...
The differences being that the guns are usually legally purchased by the assailant (aside from Adam Lanza) and that the victims are (in the majority) Caucasian.
HA! they're gonna do it whether we 'allow' them access or not... As if 'We' had any say in it...
Airplanes crash killing hundreds at a time, its STILL the safest mode of transport... Also, why aren't the 'gun grabbers' complaining about Chicago where this happens EVERY WEEKEND? Are 'gun grabbers' racist?
Violent crime is on the decrease. an 'inconvenient truth' that 'grabbers' don't like to talk about. https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/...
There are people in prison and on trial who are 'forced' to take medication to make them well enough to stand trial. Also, the number of 'depressed' police officers and those currently in military service who are fighting depression is staggering.
The problem is, once you draw 'a' line, it will always slide. Hence, you see people up in arms (get it?) over their rights. Far too many people are worried about the immediate dangers than about the bigger picture as a whole. They're too worried about their own lives to see what is affecting the whole community, state, region, or country.
also - unsurprisingly, the article mentions nothing of the events that happen daily that guns are used to protect people - which put together, would equal the prevention of mass shooting, weekly, if not daily. Being the NYT, it doesn't fit their narrative.
First they came for the AR's. and I said nothing because I didn't own an AR.... where does that 'line' start, worse, where does it end?