search results matching tag: 1994

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (445)     Sift Talk (10)     Blogs (7)     Comments (334)   

Grifaffe

TX law & tattoos

Anom212325 says...

Lol again with the fake news. Are you pretending to be Trump or whats going on here ?

The Holocaust – between 4 and 17 million deaths (racial motivation)
Holodomor and Soviet famine – between 2.5 and 8 million deaths (political motivation)
European colonisation of the Americas – between 2 and 100 million deaths
Nigerian Civil War – 1 to 3 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Cambodian Genocide – 1 to 3 million deaths (Communist ideological motivation)
Rwandan genocide of 1994 – 500k to 1 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Expulsion of Germans after WW2 – 500k to 3 million deaths (ethnic motivation)
Zunghar Genocide – 480 to 600 thousand deaths (ethnic motivation)
Circassian Genocide – 400k to 1.5 million deaths (political and ethnic motivation)
Armenian Genocide – 1.5 million deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Decossackisation – 300 to 500 thousand deaths (political and ethnic motivation)
Assyrian genocide – 275 to 750 thousand deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Utashe Genocide (aka The Holocaust in Croatia) – 270 to 655 thousand deaths (racial motivation)
Greek Genocide – 200k to 1 million deaths (ethnic and religious (against the Christian minority) motivation)
Darfur Conflict – 178 to 400 thousand deaths (ethnic motivation).

These are the top 15 genocides according to death toll and of these. Christian minorities were actually on the receiving end of three of these genocides.

Another list. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll

And another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll


But hey. Facts don't matter for your kind of hate driven keyboard warriors.

newtboy said:

No, they absolutely are not.
Christians have murdered more people in the name of their religion than any other groups for any other reasons.
Duh.

Let's talk about Mitch McConnell's great fiction...

Doc Rivers

Mordhaus says...

I would go hunting for the videos, but Biden has already stated that he fully plans to empower Beto to be his gun control 'czar'. Beto has already said that he absolutely is coming for "our" guns. He plans a forced turn in or buyback of all assault style weapons, presumably those also covered by laws that allow them under federal tax stamps (full auto).

In addition, Biden lists the following on his website as his plans:

1. Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection. (Only this is misleading. Do shoe manufacturers get sued if you kick someone in the face? Do knife manufacturers get sued if you stab someone? Do car manufacturers get sued when you get into an accident? No and neither do most other manufacturers. Putting this in place means that any time a gun is used in a crime, they can try to sue the manufacturer of that gun into non-existence. It doesn't even have to be an 'assault' weapon, any gun manufacturer is at risk. The only thing that wouldn't count is blackpowder guns since they aren't classed as firearms.)

2. Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. (So this would be a perma ban on assault weapons and would also anticipate changes to circumvent the law. This would be the assault ban of 1994 on steroids.)

3. Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. (So even if he doesn't get Beto to push through a buy back, he can force owners of assault rifles to be subject to the EXTREMELY restrictive NFA. Not only that, but it's expensive and would be a tax on gun owners yearly.)

4. Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act. (Covered this already. But if this does go through, you likely won't be seeing me on here anymore as it will be a cold day in hell before I surrender my guns or pay the government to be allowed to own them.)

5. Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one. (Once you get this through, it is far easier to get legislation passed to cap how many guns a person can own total. Fuck that.)

6. Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone. (I can deal with this, just means you need to go through an FFL.)

7. Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. (Not 100% on this one, but it isn't a deal breaker)

8. Enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm. (Felony yes, but that already exists. Misdemeanor, fuck no.)

9. Close the “Charleston loophole.” (yeah, no problem with this one)

10. End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. (So if I want to build another AR15 I can't? Fuck that. You still have to get the primary receiver through or shipped to an FFL. Which means a background check every single time.)

11. Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. (I would be for this if it wasn't for the fact that it is one step away from the government outlawing guns. Once this mechanism is in place at a federal level, all that means is you are one vote away from having your guns seized.)

12. Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. (Sounds good, but nobody is willing to state the guidelines that the family or LEO will have to follow. That means that it is completely up to family members and LEO's to decide what constitutes a 'crisis'. Bet you a lot of LEO's in protest states would red flag most protesters immediately if this law existed now in all states.)

13. Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. (This is above and beyond the federal checks. This would mean any gun owner or potential owner would have to maintain and pay for a separate gun license. Also, it allows states and locales to decide what constitutes the requirements for the gun license. There are already some states doing this and you have to get permission to even own a gun from the sheriff or other official. Fuck that.)

14. Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. (Are you fucking kidding me? What if the battery runs out, what if it gets hacked, or what if the government decides to flip a switch and shut them all down? I'll never agree to this.)

15. Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes. (IE, locked in a safe or partially disassembled, possibly a combination of both. Why bother having a gun for home defense if it can't be used without spending 5-10 minutes to make it available/functional?)

16. Stop “ghost guns.” (This is just stupid. 3d printed guns might be able to fire a few shots before reaching a critical failure. You can't 3d print a lower or upper receiver that matches a stock one. Yes, they made lowers for the original m-16s, but they swapped from those because they were shit. They broke constantly. And those weren't printed, they were molded from a tougher plastic. A 3d printed one is not nearly as strong. Either way, I don't care too much about this because it is a buzzword for non-gun people. Just like bumpstocks. You can still bump-fire a regular ar-15, the bumpstocks were just training wheels for idiots.)

Now he has a shitload more laws he wants to pass, but most of them I don't care too much about. I won't bother covering all of them. In any case, he is going to go after guns on a scale unseen to this point. If the dems get control of both houses, he will get these laws passed. Then the only hope is that SCOTUS votes them down as unconstitutional.

I won't vote for Trump, but I will be doing my part to maintain a split congress. Which means straight republican ticket other than Trump.

newtboy said:

What anti gun legislation do you mean? All I know of is closing a few loopholes that allow people legally banned from gun ownership to obtain them anyway without background checks. I disagree that that is anti gun legislation, and across the board background checks are something a vast majority think is proper.

There's plenty of misinformation on this topic floating about. Is there other actual legislation in the works, or just rumors of other legislation the left will enact....and only according to the right?

Joe Biden's Crime Bill In his own words.

newtboy says...

The way it's presented here, yes, his own words are edited and selected with other words/statements omitted to create right wing propaganda. Where are the parts where he admits he was wrong and apologized over and over?

How about Trump's own words, and Trump's own position then. He said the Clinton/Biden crime bill was way too soft and lenient. Here's a taste from Trump's book....

"The perpetrator is never a victim. He’s nothing more than a predator. (pages 93-94).

A life is a life, and if you criminally take an innocent life, you’d better be prepared to forfeit your own. My only complaint is that lethal injection is too comfortable a way to go. (pages 102-103).

Criminals are often returned to society because of forgiving judges. This has to stop. We need to hold judges more accountable… The rest of us need to rethink prisons and punishment. The next time you hear someone saying there are too many people in prison, ask them how many thugs they’re willing to relocate to their neighborhood. The answer: None. (pages 106-107)."

If that doesn’t sound like support for mass incarceration and the death penalty with little chance for criminal justice reform in sentencing, I’m not sure what does.

https://observer.com/2019/06/trump-crime-2000-book-biden-1994-crime-bill/

How about the Central Park 5? Trump paid for adds calling for the death penalty for these wrongly accused boys. Despite DNA evidence and a confession by the real rapist and restitution from the state in the $40000000 range Trump STILL insists they're guilty of something (he doesn't know what they did, but they're definitely guilty) and deserve the death penalty.....clearly forgetting he's bragged about doing what they were wrongly accused of....sexual assault.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/what-trump-has-said-central-park-five/1501321001/

Biden has admitted his position was wrong, and repeatedly apologized. Trump has NEVER done that, even about calling for the death penalty for the proven innocent.

*facepalm. You still don't understand that some people have a longer memory than a gnat, and we can recall that no matter the topic, Trump's position was worse than Democrats at the time, and his current position is worse than their current position.
*D'Oh*

bobknight33 said:

Blind Tools like you I don't car about.

These are his own words, not mine.

So Joe words are right wring propaganda? Well isn't that a MF switch. Joe gone full right wing. So Trump can dump Pence and pick up Finger banging Joe as VP?

Newt - give it up you a troll for the hardest of the leftest. Radical Anti cop, ANTIFA friend. Take that chip off you shoulder and you might just see America IS great.

C-note (Member Profile)

Joe Biden response towards Tara Reade allegations

JiggaJonson says...

Just fyi

The supposed sexual assault happeend in the middle of 1993 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

Isn't it a bit odd that the person who passed the Violence Against Women Act in 1994 (so he was lobbying to get it passed and the bill was introduced in January 1993), am I the only person who thinks its odd that he passed this bill:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act
see also https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/senate-bill/11 for the full text

So you mean to tell me
While he was co-sponsoring/writing/passing THAT PARTICULAR LAW that created the following:

--- established annual $1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women

---codified sex crimes to make them Federal crimes

---imposed automatic and mandatory penalties on those convicted

---allowed civil cases to be brought in cases prosecutors chose to leave un-prosecuted

---created confidentiality protections for victims

---created a training program for judges to encourage them to prosecute sexual assault crimes against women


So WHILE he's making it easier to sue and bring charges against former employers and creates mandatory minimums for those found guilty and if the prosecutors don't want to do it, created a pathway for civil lawsuits to be brought - you're telling me that WHILE he's doing that, he sexually assaults one of his employees from his offices WHILE he's doing that?

That doesn't make any fucking sense.
That doesn't make any fucking sense.
That doesn't make any fucking sense.
That doesn't make any fucking sense.
That doesn't make any fucking sense.
That doesn't make any fucking sense.


That the best you got you little bitch?

bobknight33 said:

Finger banging Joe 2020


Well this will sink his 2020 chances.
Hillary at the dugout warming up.

Trump talked about grabbing by the P.

Joe actually did.

Defending the ant nest from intruders | Ant Attack | BBC

Dice duel God of Gamblers Du shen 1989

Science Moms

navlasop says...

I agree that the GMO hysteria is way overblown, and the science on it causing any ill effects are nill. Tough non-GMO supporters tend to say that there's no long enough studies.

True enough, if you want a lifetime study you'll have to wait a great deal longer, since GMO foods only went commercial in 1994, tough i'm sure the studies were going on for ages before that.

In any case, what concerns me is the patent of crops, and while today as far as i know, the strain is patented for 20 years (atleast in the US) After that they become public domain as far as its makeup\modification is concerned. Fair enough.

The only issue i fear (which is not logical ), is that if\when GMO's become the "norm", and non modified crops are basically not grown anywhere, the rulebook goes out the window, some politicians gets alot richer, and the corporations now own all the plants\seeds. Forever.

I know it's extremely unlikely, but i dare anyone not to nod and think "yep, corporations would do that in a second if they could get away with it".

Denzel Washington speaks out: Where are the Fathers

C-note says...

Denzel says "the system is rigged..."

John Ehrlichman in 1994 stated "... the drug war was simply a way to vilify African Americans and the anti-war left."

So it is clear that the people in power directed the nations institutions and resources by the creation of laws and policies which resulted in millions of people being incarcerated. Then as Denzel clearly explains generations of young black males ended up fatherless and the cycle repeats itself.

How IBM quietly pushed out 20,000 older workers

ulysses1904 says...

i grew up near Kingston, NY where IBM was the main employer for the mid-Hudson Valley and we all studied hard to get a job there. They closed operations in 1994 and the area will never recover.

Man saws his AR15 in half in support of gun control

spawnflagger says...

The intent of the 2nd amendment was so that The People could rise up against a tyrannical government and overthrow it, should the need arise. That was practical back then, when both sides were just a bunch of dudes with muskets.
Nowadays, it would be impossible to rise up and overthrow the military (and militarized police), even with the best assault rifles. So an overthrow-by-violence just isn't practical.

I think it would be OK for active military or SWAT police to own and practice with AR-15, but I support a ban for everyone else (similar to what was in place 1994-2004). I like your idea about allowing them at shooting ranges too, where they are rented, not owned.

Some AR-15 owners say they use them to hunt coyotes, but give me a break- you can use any rifle for that.

cloudballoon said:

Respect. I live in Canada. So my perspective is probably warped or highly misinformed and ignorant of the USA's gun control, 2nd amendment argument. But my thought is, what's wrong with not being able to own anything that exists? Assault weapons shouldn't be made available to the public, it should be restricted to the military. Period. It's just incredible how these mass murdering weapons were even allowed to be owned in the first place. Even if the argument is that it's enshrined in the 2nd amendment, then the political discussion should be about changing/more narrowly define the amendment. How old is the 2nd amendment? How applicable is it to modern needs?

Even only allowing regulated shooting ranges to have these assault weapons just for on-site shooting is good thing. It allows gun lovers to hold them in hand, try them for target practice, have some fun but not allow anyone to take them out of the shooting range. Take the private ownership part out of the equation.

I love fighter jets, tanks, rockets & lots of high tech military stuff. Not crazy about guns, but I do appreciate their beauty. Still, I don't need to own them to appreciates them.

Society (not just the USA) really need to away from the assault weapon-ownership mentality... yes, that means asking gun owners to give up that particular rights. But there's virtue in doing it for the society...

Just can't believe the cowardice of those "nothing we can do about it" Republicans like Rubio. It's part of a big, sick symptom of government under the choke-hold of the NRA, Big Business, Big Banks, lobbyists instead of the constituents. Just feel sad for the People.

Smashing Pumpkins - Starla (live in Chicago)

Nephelimdream says...

Takes me back. Saw them at a Lollapalooza in 1994(?) after Siamese Dream was released if memory serves. Billy kept making fun of the Beastie Boys cause they wouldn't tune their own instruments. *promote

Vox explains bump stocks

greatgooglymoogly says...

Before this I would have said that having 2 guns or 20 makes no difference how lethal you are, but this does show that to be wrong(he would have overheated his barrel with only 2-3 rifles). I think it's also an extreme outlier case, something we shouldn't necessarily legislate specifically for.

The 1994 AWB was totally useless, mostly concerned with scary looking cosmetic features like a pistol grip and a flash hider(!) that have no impact on lethality.

Of course anybody can bump fire an AR15 by hooking their thumb in a belt loop. Full auto firing is inaccurate, so firing from the hip isn't going to be too much worse.

And lastly but probably most important. 80% of gun deaths are from handguns. Focusing efforts there are worth so much more than trying to stop the next lunatic trying to kill 50 people.

Mordhaus said:

There is simply no need to have that many semi-automatic rifles in one's possession. We need to re-enact the AWB from 1994, we need to set a cap limit on how many semi-automatic rifles a person can own, and we need to clearly state that ANY modification that can simulate automatic fire is illegal.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon