Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Pariah]

I hope the left realizes that the next time there's a leftwing march, Right Wingers will do this, and likely worse. We need to improve our discourse, and poo is not going to do that.

 

This article illustrates how attacked both sides feel, and I thought it was well thought out.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/they-want-revenge/

 

There's a lot of good information in that article. Thanks for the link.

[Joe Walsh]

A great deal of this country's problems could be solved by getting back to the lower levels of economic inequality we had in the decades immediately following WWII, but including everyone this time.

[Pattern Ghost]

 Turd Reich: San Francisco dog owners lay minefield of poo for rightwing rally

 

You know what they say . . .

 

 

Turd about's fair play!   

 

 

I should probably point out that I don't condone the idiocy in the article, and that I was mocking it. And that I can't resist a bad pun.

[Ranxerox]

What Moderates Believe

 

This article does a really good job encapsulating my political beliefs.

[wcw43921]

I should probably point out that I don't condone the idiocy in the article, and that I was mocking it.

 

Well, you know what they also say--if an idiotic plan works, it ain't idiotic.

 

Far Right Rally In San Francisco Cancelled

[Michael Hopcroft]

What I'm afraid of right now? Literal flash mobs -- people getting together on a few hours notice at most, without even bothering with permits and other niceties, and wreaking havoc.

[Michael Hopcroft]

You'll jhasve to pardon me for backing out of this thread for a while. Recent events, especially events today, have taken me to a very dark place, and it may take a bit for me to recover my poise (if I do).

[Hermit]

Take a mental health break man, some days we need those badly

[Old Man]

Or you could just go mad, like the voices in my head and I.

[Pariah]

To quote Douglas Adams, "Why drive yourself mad trying to keep from going mad? Just go mad now, and save your sanity for when you really need it."

[Xavier Onassiss]

To quote Douglas Adams, "Why drive yourself mad trying to keep from going mad? Just go mad now, and save your sanity for when you really need it."

 

Some co-workers joked about driving me insane tonight. I told them they were too late.

So they threatened to drive me sane instead. I wasn't having it. "You do that, I'll have to go find a real job!"

 

 

Speaking of going to find a real job, I have no idea what WTF he did at the White House, but Sebastian Gorka resigned today.

[megaplayboy]

Some co-workers joked about driving me insane tonight. I told them they were too late.

So they threatened to drive me sane instead. I wasn't having it. "You do that, I'll have to go find a real job!"

 

 

Speaking of going to find a real job, I have no idea what WTF he did at the White House, but Sebastian Gorka resigned today.

I believe he was in charge of pompous prejudicial pontification.  

[Old Man]

Yes, as a Category 4 hurricane made landfall in Texas, the strongest such storm to hit the U.S. mainland in twelve years, The Donald reacted by pardoning Joe Arpaio and firing Sebastian Gorka. 

 

On the other hand, he did approve the emergency funding requests made by Texas senators who voted against emergency funding for Hurricane Katrina. And firm plans are being drawn up for him to rubbleneck next week.  So it's not like he's doing nothing.

 

edit: Oh, and he banned trans recruits from the military, because that was a serious crisis for the nation.

[Lord Liaden]

I don't know why so many people act like they've just discovered Donald Trump's narcissism. Is that really a surprise to anyone? The man has always displayed his name in giant letters on everything he owns or licenses.

 

He's like Tony Stark, without the genius, wit, or charisma.

[Pattern Ghost]

 

Well, you know what they also say--if an idiotic plan works, it ain't idiotic.

 

Far Right Rally In San Francisco Cancelled

 

Perhaps "childish" would have been the better word.

 

When our politics is one step short of monkeys flinging poo at each other, I worry a bit for our future.

[Sociotard]

I wonder if we can talk about Oregon Senate Bill 719? It just passed. It allows the state to seize guns if a judge can be persuaded there is a risk of immediate violence (including suicide), even when there is no crime.

 

My reflex is to support it, but I am compelled to oppose it for due process reasons, the same ones that lead me to oppose the no fly list and civil asset forfeiture. I suspect it will be overturned with the first case that comes against it.

[megaplayboy]

I wonder if we can talk about Oregon Senate Bill 719? It just passed. It allows the state to seize guns if a judge can be persuaded there is a risk of immediate violence (including suicide), even when there is no crime.

 

My reflex is to support it, but I am compelled to oppose it for due process reasons, the same ones that lead me to oppose the no fly list and civil asset forfeiture. I suspect it will be overturned with the first case that comes against it.

Is there a post facto process for appealing and seeking return of the firearms?  

 

I think if someone was obviously "casing" a bank or grocery store, carrying a concealed weapon, the law already provides for search and arrest.  

[wcw43921]

I'm not sure how this law would affect things differently than the current procedures.  If someone had a gun in their hand and the barrel pointed at their head or in their mouth, and the first responder managed to talk that person into giving up the weapon, the authorities would be entirely justified under the law in not returning it right away, or even at all.  That's my understanding of it, anyway.

[Sociotard]

There is.

 

(5)(a) The petitioner [person claiming the gun should be taken away] has the burden of proof at the ex parte hearing.

(9)(a)  Within  30  days  after  an  extreme  risk  protection  order  is  served  on  the  respondent under  this  section,  the  respondent  may  request  a  court  hearing  using  a  form  prescribed  by the  State  Court  Administrator.

[megaplayboy]

There is.

So, the essential problem is that the respondent is unrepresented at the ex parte proceeding.  OTOH, there are circumstances where this is permissible, usually for getting a warrant for surveillance of the subject of a criminal investigation.  However, this isn't a search, it's a seizure. Bare minimum, I'd expect the standards to be met to be equally robust.  

[Lord Liaden]

Perhaps "childish" would have been the better word.

 

When our politics is one step short of monkeys flinging poo at each other, I worry a bit for our future.

 

At least we're not at this point... yet.

 

 

[Doc Democracy]

I wonder if we can talk about Oregon Senate Bill 719? It just passed. It allows the state to seize guns if a judge can be persuaded there is a risk of immediate violence (including suicide), even when there is no crime.

 

My reflex is to support it, but I am compelled to oppose it for due process reasons, the same ones that lead me to oppose the no fly list and civil asset forfeiture. I suspect it will be overturned with the first case that comes against it.

I would say that the whole thing probably rests on whether you consider the ownership of weapons to be a right (as in the US) or a state sanctioned privilege (as in the UK).

 

Rights should not be breached trivially, privileges get trumped by rights (such as people's right to keep breathing).

 

Even here though it is a judicial process, it seems acceptable for there to be a judicial process to balance rights.

[Old Man]

At least we're not at this point... yet.

 

I wonder if that wouldn't actually improve Congress.  Certainly it would help weed out some of the obsolete old fossils that otherwise can't be gotten rid of.

[Pattern Ghost]

I'm not sure how this law would affect things differently than the current procedures.  If someone had a gun in their hand and the barrel pointed at their head or in their mouth, and the first responder managed to talk that person into giving up the weapon, the authorities would be entirely justified under the law in not returning it right away, or even at all.  That's my understanding of it, anyway.

 

This law is more about family members and others being able to have firearms removed from unstable individuals. In theory, it could save lives, but the drawback is that it could open to abuse.

 

Section 2 (4) of the bill has a list of factors the court should consider, which seems reasonable. The PDF is here. I'm not sure if "shall consider" is the same as "must meet one of the following conditions," though. Granted, the latter is too strict, but could be worded to allow for some discretion on the court's part, I think.

 

Wife's bugging me, no time to read the entire thing. It certainly seems like a good idea and well-intentioned, but also worth serious vetting.

[Tech priest support]

The (incredibly vile obscenities withheld) NRA will kill this tiny act of sanity.

 

Speaking of insanity, do you think people who advocate for non heterosexuals to be murdered should be detained and subjected to psychological examination to see if they are homophobic to such a degree that they are dangerously insane? If you are not an american how would you country react to people like this? I am curious.

 

https://youtu.be/mCq8jxzyW18