New Mexico Governor's unConstitutional power grab

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear GOP, note how most Democrats also say the NM Governor is overreaching?

IOW, no one is trying to take your guns away.

Because Democrats are terrified of their own ignorance of the constitution.

You say that while believing Twitter owes you 1A protection? Sure, pal. Sure.

DP.
No, we believe that our government officials should NOT be able to instruct Twitter when to delete accounts or censor posts because they run counter to the narrative the government is pushing.
That is what happened.

So you are fine with foreign proagandists using social media to push literally fake stories into the mainstream discussion to the point that it divides our country and, in the case of COVID, literally cost people's lives. MMMokay then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans: What is your proposal to end gun violence in America, and to get all of the illegal guns off of the streets and out of the hands of criminals?

If you say "more guns" then that's what's already been done for decades, and it hasn't worked.

How about an ACTUAL proposal?

And if you don't have an actual proposal, then maybe you should STFU and sit down.

So let's hear it.... give me a serious proposal, or STFU and sit down.

Enforce the laws on the books? Go after straw purchasers? Hire more cops to go after straw purchasers? Penalize any straw purchasers whose purchase results in a shooting?

Extra policing in areas that have large numbers of gun crimes? More foot patrols? Funding for metal detectors in entrances to shops and private buildings to alert others that you may be carrying?

Stop and frisk (has its own legal problems, but works)?

Its a social justice issue that people of color are hurt more by lax enforcement than other communities, so place the focus on those who need the help the most.

https://www.bradyunited.org/issue/gun-violence-is-a-racial-justice-issue

Kind of hard to go after straw purchasers when there is no persistent data or searchable database to work with.

And maybe you haven't been paying attention but the social justice issue isn't "lax enforcement" - police are overpolicing in all the wrong ways - pulling over and harrassing innocent people, engaging in unwarranted brutality while the violence continues unabated without any serious effort to actually root out the core causes of it.

Many left leaning groups, consider it a social justice issue because black bodies are disporportionate victims.

That Brady (the gun control group) link says

"Black Americans are twice as likely as white Americans to die from gun violence and 14 times more likely than white Americans to be wounded. A documented 4,084 Black people were lynched in 73 years; 93,262 were shot dead in 14. Like lynching, gun violence is a racial justice issue." and

"Gun homicide (mass shootings, so-called “everyday” violence, and police-involved shootings) is a universal American threat. But Black Americans are 10 times more likely than White Americans to die from it. "

We must instead consider how public policy has made it so that Black people are more likely to face conditions that facilitate gun violence than white people. So then it is a fair question. Does "over policing" reduce violence against black and brown bodies? Given New York's past policies of overpolicing black and brown bodies, the answer is "Yes it does". It is however at a cost of civil rights.

So the policy discussion should be, is it worth overpolicing to save lives?

The straw purchasing issue can be solved thorugh other means without a registry. Create agreements to reduce some punishments if straw purchasers are ratted out. If wives, girlfriends, buddies etc get thrown in jail then word gets out pretty quickly that its not worth doing.

The problem is that the black community doesn't trust the police. To them, the police isn't much better than another violent street gang, except with badges and immunity. That needs to change.

For some reason, black people feel they can commit crimes and not be held accountable

Pretty rich statement given the lack of punishment for white collar crime, crimes committed by white law enforcement officials, much less the crimes committed by most of the GOP leadership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans: What is your proposal to end gun violence in America, and to get all of the illegal guns off of the streets and out of the hands of criminals?

If you say "more guns" then that's what's already been done for decades, and it hasn't worked.

How about an ACTUAL proposal?

And if you don't have an actual proposal, then maybe you should STFU and sit down.

So let's hear it.... give me a serious proposal, or STFU and sit down.

Enforce the laws on the books? Go after straw purchasers? Hire more cops to go after straw purchasers? Penalize any straw purchasers whose purchase results in a shooting?

Extra policing in areas that have large numbers of gun crimes? More foot patrols? Funding for metal detectors in entrances to shops and private buildings to alert others that you may be carrying?

Stop and frisk (has its own legal problems, but works)?

Its a social justice issue that people of color are hurt more by lax enforcement than other communities, so place the focus on those who need the help the most.

https://www.bradyunited.org/issue/gun-violence-is-a-racial-justice-issue

Kind of hard to go after straw purchasers when there is no persistent data or searchable database to work with.

And maybe you haven't been paying attention but the social justice issue isn't "lax enforcement" - police are overpolicing in all the wrong ways - pulling over and harrassing innocent people, engaging in unwarranted brutality while the violence continues unabated without any serious effort to actually root out the core causes of it.

Many left leaning groups, consider it a social justice issue because black bodies are disporportionate victims.

That Brady (the gun control group) link says

"Black Americans are twice as likely as white Americans to die from gun violence and 14 times more likely than white Americans to be wounded. A documented 4,084 Black people were lynched in 73 years; 93,262 were shot dead in 14. Like lynching, gun violence is a racial justice issue." and

"Gun homicide (mass shootings, so-called “everyday” violence, and police-involved shootings) is a universal American threat. But Black Americans are 10 times more likely than White Americans to die from it. "

We must instead consider how public policy has made it so that Black people are more likely to face conditions that facilitate gun violence than white people. So then it is a fair question. Does "over policing" reduce violence against black and brown bodies? Given New York's past policies of overpolicing black and brown bodies, the answer is "Yes it does". It is however at a cost of civil rights.

So the policy discussion should be, is it worth overpolicing to save lives?

The straw purchasing issue can be solved thorugh other means without a registry. Create agreements to reduce some punishments if straw purchasers are ratted out. If wives, girlfriends, buddies etc get thrown in jail then word gets out pretty quickly that its not worth doing.

Stop and Frisk was not actually that effective. NYC's violent crime rate didn't actually show any major shift as a result of implementing it. Stop and Frisk ended in 2013, because it was found to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. And even after Stop and Frisk ended, the violent crime rate continued to drop. The data shows that Stop and Frisk had very little to do with the reduction in violent crime. There are numerous papers that show this:

MacDonald J, Fagan J, Geller A (2016) The Effects of Local Police Surges on Crime and Arrests in New York City. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0157223. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157223

Weisburd D, Wooditch A, Weisburd S, Yang SM. Do Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices Deter Crime?Criminology & Public Policy. 2015 Nov 1.

Meanwhile you have folks like Giuliani and Trump exaggerating its success, claiming it made NYC one of the safest cities in the country - yet again the numbers disagree - for example, here it's ranked 113 out of 182 cities. https://wallethub.com/edu/safest-cities-in-america/41926

The problem with conservatives and gun rights advocates is that they never look at the data and instead cling to debunked and disproven talking points.

Funny you talk about data when you are using 2022 data for a policy that ended nearly a decade earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bernalillo County Sheriff will not enforce the Governor's illicit mandate. Good. GOOD.

https://twitter.com/BCSONM/status/1700630632408478043?t=WLFqjTqcBANDu8kgn51EvA&s=19

Can the governor not dismiss the sheriff? Isn't that what Desantis saying of dismissing elected officials?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow.
Women lose a constitutional right held for a generation, and people shrug and wonder if it will matter in the voting booth next year.
Gun nuts have to leave their guns at home for a month, and LOSE THEIR MINDS!!!!

Abortion is not a constitutional right. It’s not in the constitution.

What you do with your own body is a right.

[Anonymous]

This derives from the COVID power grab and associated health emergencies. Authoritarians will be trying this more and more. Scary stuff. This person is a tyrant. We have them here too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bernalillo County Sheriff will not enforce the Governor's illicit mandate. Good. GOOD.

https://twitter.com/BCSONM/status/1700630632408478043?t=WLFqjTqcBANDu8kgn51EvA&s=19

Can the governor not dismiss the sheriff? Isn't that what Desantis saying of dismissing elected officials?

The D mayor of Albuquerque and D Albuquerque DA (appointed by the governor last year or early this year) also said they would not enforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans: What is your proposal to end gun violence in America, and to get all of the illegal guns off of the streets and out of the hands of criminals?

If you say "more guns" then that's what's already been done for decades, and it hasn't worked.

How about an ACTUAL proposal?

And if you don't have an actual proposal, then maybe you should STFU and sit down.

So let's hear it.... give me a serious proposal, or STFU and sit down.

Enforce the laws on the books? Go after straw purchasers? Hire more cops to go after straw purchasers? Penalize any straw purchasers whose purchase results in a shooting?

Extra policing in areas that have large numbers of gun crimes? More foot patrols? Funding for metal detectors in entrances to shops and private buildings to alert others that you may be carrying?

Stop and frisk (has its own legal problems, but works)?

Its a social justice issue that people of color are hurt more by lax enforcement than other communities, so place the focus on those who need the help the most.

https://www.bradyunited.org/issue/gun-violence-is-a-racial-justice-issue

Kind of hard to go after straw purchasers when there is no persistent data or searchable database to work with.

And maybe you haven't been paying attention but the social justice issue isn't "lax enforcement" - police are overpolicing in all the wrong ways - pulling over and harrassing innocent people, engaging in unwarranted brutality while the violence continues unabated without any serious effort to actually root out the core causes of it.

Many left leaning groups, consider it a social justice issue because black bodies are disporportionate victims.

That Brady (the gun control group) link says

"Black Americans are twice as likely as white Americans to die from gun violence and 14 times more likely than white Americans to be wounded. A documented 4,084 Black people were lynched in 73 years; 93,262 were shot dead in 14. Like lynching, gun violence is a racial justice issue." and

"Gun homicide (mass shootings, so-called “everyday” violence, and police-involved shootings) is a universal American threat. But Black Americans are 10 times more likely than White Americans to die from it. "

We must instead consider how public policy has made it so that Black people are more likely to face conditions that facilitate gun violence than white people. So then it is a fair question. Does "over policing" reduce violence against black and brown bodies? Given New York's past policies of overpolicing black and brown bodies, the answer is "Yes it does". It is however at a cost of civil rights.

So the policy discussion should be, is it worth overpolicing to save lives?

The straw purchasing issue can be solved thorugh other means without a registry. Create agreements to reduce some punishments if straw purchasers are ratted out. If wives, girlfriends, buddies etc get thrown in jail then word gets out pretty quickly that its not worth doing.

Stop and Frisk was not actually that effective. NYC's violent crime rate didn't actually show any major shift as a result of implementing it. Stop and Frisk ended in 2013, because it was found to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL. And even after Stop and Frisk ended, the violent crime rate continued to drop. The data shows that Stop and Frisk had very little to do with the reduction in violent crime. There are numerous papers that show this:

MacDonald J, Fagan J, Geller A (2016) The Effects of Local Police Surges on Crime and Arrests in New York City. PLoS ONE 11(6): e0157223. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0157223

Weisburd D, Wooditch A, Weisburd S, Yang SM. Do Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices Deter Crime?Criminology & Public Policy. 2015 Nov 1.

Meanwhile you have folks like Giuliani and Trump exaggerating its success, claiming it made NYC one of the safest cities in the country - yet again the numbers disagree - for example, here it's ranked 113 out of 182 cities. https://wallethub.com/edu/safest-cities-in-america/41926

The problem with conservatives and gun rights advocates is that they never look at the data and instead cling to debunked and disproven talking points.

Funny you talk about data when you are using 2022 data for a policy that ended nearly a decade earlier.

You need some data literacy... Doesn't matter when the data COVERS THE ENTIRE TIMESPAN IN QUESTION. There are no meaningful inflection points in crime rate relative to when Stop and Frisk was in force versus when it wasn't. That is what the data shows, period. And the two papers are two among many which do a deeper analysis, also coming to the same conclusion, that Stop and Frisk did not work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This derives from the COVID power grab and associated health emergencies. Authoritarians will be trying this more and more. Scary stuff. This person is a tyrant. We have them here too.

Next thing you know, you idiots will also be defying shelter-in-place orders for natural disasters, screaming "AUTHORITARIANS!" as you get swept out to sea in your car by a hurricane storm surge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This derives from the COVID power grab and associated health emergencies. Authoritarians will be trying this more and more. Scary stuff. This person is a tyrant. We have them here too.

Next thing you know, you idiots will also be defying shelter-in-place orders for natural disasters, screaming "AUTHORITARIANS!" as you get swept out to sea in your car by a hurricane storm surge.

Sure. Go with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This derives from the COVID power grab and associated health emergencies. Authoritarians will be trying this more and more. Scary stuff. This person is a tyrant. We have them here too.

Next thing you know, you idiots will also be defying shelter-in-place orders for natural disasters, screaming "AUTHORITARIANS!" as you get swept out to sea in your car by a hurricane storm surge.

Sure. Go with that.

It's basically what you already did with a public health emergency that killed over a million Americans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elections are coming up, time to test the emergency orders again. Make everyone mask up, take away law abiding citizens rights.

Is it going to work again this time?

Your freedom to swing your fists ends at someone else's nose.

Your freedoms end at the point where they put someone else at risk. When your freedoms end up taking away someone else's freedom (and especially, when your freedoms take away someone's greatest and most important freedom - their life) that is when controls need to come in.

The Governor took an oath to uphold the state constitution, not just the parts she likes but all of it. She is no longer doing so, and should be impeached.

If you don’t like the constitution then go through the process to change it. If the government is not going to arrest criminals, prosecute them, and if convicted lock them away, then citizens have no choice but to act to protect themselves.

I'm sure by now, after this long thread, you all know the sherriff who won't enforce the order is a left leaning Democrat who bleeds blue?


The Sheriffs took oaths to protect and serve yet gun violence has surged. So they are no longer protecting and serving, and should be impeached.

[Anonymous]

I'm sure by now, after this long thread, you all know the sherriff who won't enforce the order is a left leaning Democrat who bleeds blue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure by now, after this long thread, you all know the sherriff who won't enforce the order is a left leaning Democrat who bleeds blue?

What difference would that make in your warped little mind? If the Sheriff isn't upholding the law, they should be impeached, regardless of their politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dear GOP, note how most Democrats also say the NM Governor is overreaching?

IOW, no one is trying to take your guns away.

Because Democrats are terrified of their own ignorance of the constitution.

You say that while believing Twitter owes you 1A protection? Sure, pal. Sure.

DP.
No, we believe that our government officials should NOT be able to instruct Twitter when to delete accounts or censor posts because they run counter to the narrative the government is pushing.
That is what happened.

No. That’s not true. The drum beating about 1A infringement by Twitter started long before any of that happened. Try again.