Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:while I don't disagree with the general sentiment above, there are 2 factual errors
#1 Republicans took control of Congress in 1995, the first midterm of Clinton's Presidency
#2 2022 was still a Dem Congress overall...that said, Manchin and Sinema in the Senate refuse to axe the filibuster, so nothing of substance can happen in the Senate that D's want
It’s not a sentiment, it’s facts. Your nitpicking is merely semantics.
Anonymous wrote:while I don't disagree with the general sentiment above, there are 2 factual errors
#1 Republicans took control of Congress in 1995, the first midterm of Clinton's Presidency
#2 2022 was still a Dem Congress overall...that said, Manchin and Sinema in the Senate refuse to axe the filibuster, so nothing of substance can happen in the Senate that D's want
Anonymous wrote:When are the democrats going to get serious about passing gun legislation? They blame the Republicans, but the democrats are in power and are not using it to pass gun control. Why?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When are the democrats going to get serious about passing gun legislation? They blame the Republicans, but the democrats are in power and are not using it to pass gun control. Why?
Where? What?
Seriously, I mean, why can't the Democrats pass legislation? It's their fault for every one of these senseless acts. It couldn't be the unified opposition against ANY measures to pass gun safety legislation by the House (which is of course controlled by the Republicans). It couldn't be the filibuster proof Republican minority in the Senate that would block ANY gun control measures, right? So maybe, let's focus at the state level. Let's see...just this week, we have multiple mass shootings in...Texas, Mississippi. Yep, it's the gosh darned Democrats holding things back again at the state level. I mean, why can't they just ban AR-15 like they did in Illinois? Oh, they don't control any levers of power? You don't say? GTFO of here with ignorant comments like the above.
We need NATIONAL legislation because if it's at the state level, the criminals will find the states with the weakest laws and use them for their gun pipelines. That's already what happens - Chicago guns come from next door in Indiana, because Indiana's gun laws are weak.
This post is worth less than what people paid to read it, congrats on spreading lies.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“Reducing funding” as far as I understand it (and I sat through a 3 hour candidate forum yesterday afternoon where this came up) is more about trying to involve mental health professionals in the huge percentage of calls where that is what is needed vs police coming in to arrest people.
Crime is escalating out of control. We don't have enough mental health professionals in the world to contain the problem. This is not a viable plan and EVERYONE knows that.
No one said cut all police funding. It is more about trying to balance funding a little.
Rs love to talk about mental health yet put no dollars behind it
You're right, no one said that, so why are you saying that?
We should not be reducing police funding for some quixotic attempt at using therapists to solve the issues in our communities. One, because we don't have enough of them, and two, because this is experimental and hasn't been done anywhere at the scale being attempted here.
We need to use proven policing strategies and get this back in order. We aren't safe anymore.
We aren't safe because way too many people have guns.
Find a country on the planet that has as many gun deaths as we do. You can't.
Why? Because NO OTHER COUNTRY LETS ANYONE GET GUNS.
Too many guns makes no one safe. Period.
Anonymous wrote:Suspect was captured a while ago. Who is he? Not identified.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When are the democrats going to get serious about passing gun legislation? They blame the Republicans, but the democrats are in power and are not using it to pass gun control. Why?
Where? What?
Seriously, I mean, why can't the Democrats pass legislation? It's their fault for every one of these senseless acts. It couldn't be the unified opposition against ANY measures to pass gun safety legislation by the House (which is of course controlled by the Republicans). It couldn't be the filibuster proof Republican minority in the Senate that would block ANY gun control measures, right? So maybe, let's focus at the state level. Let's see...just this week, we have multiple mass shootings in...Texas, Mississippi. Yep, it's the gosh darned Democrats holding things back again at the state level. I mean, why can't they just ban AR-15 like they did in Illinois? Oh, they don't control any levers of power? You don't say? GTFO of here with ignorant comments like the above.
If the democrats can't pass legislation to get stricter gun control in this environment, then they either aren't trying or aren't capable. Have they even introduced any legislation to reduce gun violence at all?
They don't control the House, and the GOP won't touch the issue, so what do you suggest?
Anonymous wrote:Another mass shooting in a red Southern state. I know they happen all over the country but it seems like more happen in places with laxer gun laws and with gun culture.
Anonymous wrote:I guess Republicanism is working how they want it? They want guns. They love Russia, who helps bring guns to the forefront through the NRA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:When are the democrats going to get serious about passing gun legislation? They blame the Republicans, but the democrats are in power and are not using it to pass gun control. Why?
Where? What?
Seriously, I mean, why can't the Democrats pass legislation? It's their fault for every one of these senseless acts. It couldn't be the unified opposition against ANY measures to pass gun safety legislation by the House (which is of course controlled by the Republicans). It couldn't be the filibuster proof Republican minority in the Senate that would block ANY gun control measures, right? So maybe, let's focus at the state level. Let's see...just this week, we have multiple mass shootings in...Texas, Mississippi. Yep, it's the gosh darned Democrats holding things back again at the state level. I mean, why can't they just ban AR-15 like they did in Illinois? Oh, they don't control any levers of power? You don't say? GTFO of here with ignorant comments like the above.
We need NATIONAL legislation because if it's at the state level, the criminals will find the states with the weakest laws and use them for their gun pipelines. That's already what happens - Chicago guns come from next door in Indiana, because Indiana's gun laws are weak.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“Reducing funding” as far as I understand it (and I sat through a 3 hour candidate forum yesterday afternoon where this came up) is more about trying to involve mental health professionals in the huge percentage of calls where that is what is needed vs police coming in to arrest people.
Crime is escalating out of control. We don't have enough mental health professionals in the world to contain the problem. This is not a viable plan and EVERYONE knows that.
No one said cut all police funding. It is more about trying to balance funding a little.
Rs love to talk about mental health yet put no dollars behind it
You're right, no one said that, so why are you saying that?
We should not be reducing police funding for some quixotic attempt at using therapists to solve the issues in our communities. One, because we don't have enough of them, and two, because this is experimental and hasn't been done anywhere at the scale being attempted here.
We need to use proven policing strategies and get this back in order. We aren't safe anymore.
We aren't safe because way too many people have guns.
Find a country on the planet that has as many gun deaths as we do. You can't.
Why? Because NO OTHER COUNTRY LETS ANYONE GET GUNS.
Too many guns makes no one safe. Period.
Then they should he introducing legislation or taking actions toward that goal. They literally quit trying. Pathetic. If the democrats won't try to pass gun control, who will?
Anonymous wrote:It’s gang related, so this thread will die off now…
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“Reducing funding” as far as I understand it (and I sat through a 3 hour candidate forum yesterday afternoon where this came up) is more about trying to involve mental health professionals in the huge percentage of calls where that is what is needed vs police coming in to arrest people.
Crime is escalating out of control. We don't have enough mental health professionals in the world to contain the problem. This is not a viable plan and EVERYONE knows that.
No one said cut all police funding. It is more about trying to balance funding a little.
Rs love to talk about mental health yet put no dollars behind it
You're right, no one said that, so why are you saying that?
We should not be reducing police funding for some quixotic attempt at using therapists to solve the issues in our communities. One, because we don't have enough of them, and two, because this is experimental and hasn't been done anywhere at the scale being attempted here.
We need to use proven policing strategies and get this back in order. We aren't safe anymore.
We aren't safe because way too many people have guns.
Find a country on the planet that has as many gun deaths as we do. You can't.
Why? Because NO OTHER COUNTRY LETS ANYONE GET GUNS.
Too many guns makes no one safe. Period.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:“Reducing funding” as far as I understand it (and I sat through a 3 hour candidate forum yesterday afternoon where this came up) is more about trying to involve mental health professionals in the huge percentage of calls where that is what is needed vs police coming in to arrest people.
Crime is escalating out of control. We don't have enough mental health professionals in the world to contain the problem. This is not a viable plan and EVERYONE knows that.
No one said cut all police funding. It is more about trying to balance funding a little.
Rs love to talk about mental health yet put no dollars behind it
You're right, no one said that, so why are you saying that?
We should not be reducing police funding for some quixotic attempt at using therapists to solve the issues in our communities. One, because we don't have enough of them, and two, because this is experimental and hasn't been done anywhere at the scale being attempted here.
We need to use proven policing strategies and get this back in order. We aren't safe anymore.