Republicans are revving up for a D.C. smackdown
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Why would you possibly object to the assisted suicide law? How does it affect you if I decide I don't want to live with a terminal illness? |
Anonymous
+1 it's a troll pretending to be a democrat... And repeatedly not commenting on the risk of losing abortion/contraception rights for women in DC with GOP control. Nope, not a democrat. |
Anonymous
What Democrat calls themself a "Dem?" I've only ever heard MAGA trolls use "Dem" |
Anonymous
Off yourself someplace else. DC health services can’t keep our kids healthy and so shouldn’t divert the funds to this stuff |
Anonymous
We won’t lose the rights don’t worry. But stand to gain no ATVs no corruption no ANC no pot smell no income tax etc |
Anonymous
Trump 'DC' takeover? Absolutely yes they would add restriction to abortion rights. You think they would stop at Death with Dignity? You must be smoking pot. 100% you are a republican troll and falsely claiming to be a democrat. |
Anonymous
I didn't intend these comments to be a Rorschach test, but the only issue I thought Republicans should run on of the four listed is the non-citizen voting. The rest just seem stupid and petty to focus on, especially with the crime and real estate situation. |
Anonymous
They already have done that every chance they get, as this "lifelong Dem" should know. https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-metropolitan-washington-dc/stories/reproductive-rights-and-dc-statehood-how-the-precarious-state-of-abortion-access-in-our-capital-impacts-patients |
Anonymous
I don't think it's very expensive, it just makes it legal to prescribe lethal doses. The city isn't paying for the drugs. |
Anonymous
Well it's a stupidity tax |
Anonymous
|
Okay with automated traffic camera, but why no turn on red? It is said that when the Council passed this in the Barry administration, the mayor already had a contract with a cony for making and posting no turn on red signs all over the city.
As a result, there are in fact very few places in DC where you can now do a right on red, so what necessitates a ban? In my view right on red is a great thing and puts us on par with our neighboring states, indeed with almost all of the states. Why is DC so special that we can't have right turn on red? |
Anonymous
| ^^crony, not cony |
Anonymous
| It’s not expensive but the red tape is. It’s a massive profit margin business. Dignitad and the like would love to get their hands on more people |
Anonymous
| I love right turn on red. It’s how I express my constitutional rights. |
Anonymous
Right on red is a disproportionately dangerous maneuver, especially in an urban area. While it doesn't produce a ton of fatalities, it produces tons of injuries for pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers. Almost every vehicle has to stick its front into a crosswalk to see oncoming traffic. Drivers looking in one direction for cars often miss people on the sidewalk going the other direction. Right on Red may have made sense once upon a time, but things have changed too much in urban areas for it to make sense anymore. When people had small cars with clear glass, and there wasn't always an illegally parked car blocking your view, maybe it was safe enough to pull off. Now, good luck seeing through/around that blacked-out Suburban in the lane next to you and the blacked-out Range Rover illegally parked on the corner. Now when you pull into the crosswalk with your F-150, you're also hitting pedestrians in the head/torso instead of legs. This is just one way drivers have essentially worked against their collective interests, while focusing on their own individual interests. If you make cars more dangerous to those outside them, then the law has to rebalance the total risk budget to get injuries lower. |